[Federal Register: July 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 135)]
[Notices]
[Page 40407-40409]
[DOCID:fr14jy08-132]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58114; File No. SR-NASD-2007-041]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc.); Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2 to Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Minimum Price-Improvement Standards Set Forth in NASD
Interpretive Material (IM) 2110-2

July 7, 2008.
    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 June 26, 2008, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) \3\ filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') Amendment No. 2 to SR-NASD-2007-041 as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been
substantially prepared by FINRA.\4\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 2, from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ On July 26, 2007, the Commission approved a proposed rule
change filed by the NASD to amend the NASD's Certificate of
Incorporation to reflect its name change to Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc., or FINRA, in connection with the
consolidation of the member firm regulatory functions of NASD and
NYSE Regulation, Inc. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56146
(July 26, 2007), 72 FR 42190 (August 1, 2007) (SR-NASD-2007-053).
    \4\ FINRA filed the original proposed rule change on June 27,
2007. FINRA filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on May
20, 2008. Amendment No. 2 supersedes and replaces Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA proposes to amend the proposed rule change to address an
inconsistency in the application of the proposed minimum price-
improvements standards. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on FINRA's Web site (http://www.finra.org), at FINRA's
principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of the
Proposed Rule Change

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

1. Purpose
    On June 27, 2007, FINRA filed with the Commission SR-NASD-2007-041,
proposing amendments to the minimum price-improvement provisions in IM-
2110-2 (``original proposal''). On August 28, 2007, the Commission
published for comment the proposed rule change in the Federal
Register.\5\ The Commission received one commenter letter on the
proposed rule change.\6\ On November 1, 2007, FINRA submitted a
response letter to the Commission.\7\ On May 20, 2008, FINRA filed with
the Commission Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. FINRA is
filing this Amendment No. 2, which replaces and supersedes Amendment
No. 1 to SR-NASD-2007-041, to amend the proposed rule change to address
an inconsistency in the application of the proposed minimum price
improvement standards as discussed herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56297 (August 21,
2007), 72 FR 49337 (August 28, 2007) (notice of filing of SR-NASD-
2007-041).
    \6\ See Letter to Secretary, Commission, from Jess Haberman,
Compliance Director, Fidessa Corp., dated September 5, 2007.
    \7\ See Letter from Andrea Orr, FINRA, to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Commission, dated November 1, 2007 (``FINRA Response
Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 26, 2007, the Commission approved SR-NASD-2005-146,
which, among other things, expanded the scope of IM-2110-2 \8\ to apply
to over-the-counter (``OTC'') equity securities and amended the minimum
level of price-improvement that a member must provide to trade ahead of
an unexecuted customer limit order (``price-improvement standards'').
The rule changes in SR-NASD-2005-146 were initially scheduled to become
effective on July 26, 2007.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Currently, IM-2110-2 generally prohibits a member from
trading for its own account in an exchange-listed security at a
price that is equal to or better than an unexecuted customer limit
order in that security, unless the member immediately thereafter
executes the customer limit order at the price at which it traded
for its own account or better.
    \9\ See NASD Notice to Members 07-19 (April 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following Commission approval of SR-NASD-2005-146, several firms
raised concerns regarding the timing of the implementation of the
proposed rule change and the application of the approved minimum price-
improvement standards. In response to these concerns, FINRA filed a
proposed rule change to delay the effective date of the changes in SR-
NASD-2005-146 pending its review of the amended price-improvement
standards.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56103 (July 19,
2007), 72 FR 40918 (July 25, 2007) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of SR-NASD-2007-039). See also See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 56822 (November 20, 2007), 72 FR 67326 (November 28,
2007) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of SR-FINRA-
2007-023); and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57133 (January
11, 2008), 73 FR 3500 (January 18, 2008) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness of SR-FINRA-2007-038).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequently, FINRA filed SR-NASD-2007-041 with the Commission to
further amend the price-improvement standards in IM-2110-2 based on new
tiered standards that varied according to the price of the customer
limit order. In response to the publication of the proposed rule change
in the Federal Register, the Commission received one comment letter on
the proposal.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As further detailed in the FINRA Response Letter, the commenter
noted an inconsistency in the application of proposed minimum price-
improvement standards in low-priced securities when the customer limit
order and the proprietary trade fall into different minimum price
improvement tiers (e.g., a customer limit order to sell is priced

at $1.00 and the proprietary trade is at $.998). For example, assume
the best inside market for an NMS stock is $.996 to $1.00 and a firm is
holding customer limit orders to sell at prices of $.998 and $1.00. If
the firm sells for its own account at $.996, only customer limit orders
to sell priced below $.998 and from $1.00 up to, but not including,
$1.006 would be protected due to the firm's $.996 triggering
proprietary trade. As a result, the firm would not have an obligation
under IM-2110-2 to protect the more aggressively priced $.998 customer
limit order to sell (i.e., the minimum price improvement standard
applicable to that order is the lesser of $.01 or one-half (\1/2\) of
the current inside spread ($.002 (\1/2\ of $.004)), such that the $.996
proprietary trade would only trigger customer limit orders priced less
than $.998), but would have an obligation to protect the $1.00 customer
limit order to sell (i.e., the minimum price improvement standard
applicable to that order is $.01 such that a $.996 proprietary trade
would trigger customer limit orders priced at $1.00 up to, but not
including, $1.006).
    In the FINRA Response Letter, FINRA indicated that firms may choose
to voluntarily protect those more aggressively priced customer limit
orders that fall within the gaps, which would not be an unreasonable
policy or procedure and would be consistent with the principles
underlying IM-2110-2 and the duty of best execution. However, upon
further reflection, FINRA believes that it is important that the more
aggressively priced customer limit orders also receive protection and
that any potential ``gaps'' be eliminated. Therefore, FINRA is now
proposing to require, and codify as part of IM-2110-2, that any more
aggressively priced customer limit orders also receive protection. In
other words, once a customer limit order is triggered under the Rule,
firms would be required to protect any more aggressively priced
customer limit orders, even if those limit orders were not directly
triggered by the minimum price improvement standards of IM-2110-2.
FINRA is not, however, mandating any particular order handling
procedures or execution priorities among protected orders. A firm may
choose any reasonable methodology for the way in which it executes
multiple orders triggered by the Interpretive Material, but the firm
must ensure that such methodology is applied consistently and complies
with applicable rules and regulations.
    Using the example above, once the limit order priced at $1.00 is
activated upon the execution of the firm's trade at $.996 (i.e., it is
activated because it is within .01 of the price of the firm's trade), a
firm may implement a methodology that executes all more aggressively
priced customer limit orders first (i.e., the limit order priced at
$.998) before executing the limit order priced at $1.00. The proposed
requirements would only apply in the limited circumstance where a firm
has a limit order that is protected by IM-2110-2, but more aggressively
priced customer limit orders are not protected. Therefore, in the above
example, if the firm was only holding a customer limit order to sell of
$.998 (and not a customer limit order of $1.00), the $.998 order would
not be triggered by the proposed requirements.
    As noted above, FINRA proposes to implement the proposed rule
change on the final implementation date of SR-NASD-2005-146, which will
be 60 days after Commission approval of this filing.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\12\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change better
reflects trading in low-priced securities and the application of IM-
2110-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is 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

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register and the SEC received one commenter letter, which was
previously summarized and responded to in the FINRA Response Letter and
therefore is not being included as part of this Amendment No. 2.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-NASD-2007-041 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-041. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying 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 FINRA. 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-NASD-2007-041 and should be submitted on or before
August 4, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-15889 Filed 7-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


Fluorochemical Decomposition Processes  April 4,2001 David A. Dixon Theory, Modeling, and Simulation, William R. Wiley Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland WA Overview This document describes results on potential degradation pathways for fluorochemicals in incineration processes based on modeling of the thermodynamics of the processes. The primary goal of this work is to evaluate if perfluoroalkyl sulfonates, or potential precursors of these compounds, are likely emission products of the incineration of perfluoroalkyl sulfonates or of monomers or polymers containing perfluoroalkyl sulfonamides. Ab initio electronic structure theory was used to predict the thermodynamics of various degradation pathways for model sulfonamides. Key conclusions from this work include:

1. If the temperature in the incineration process (e. g. incinerator, cement kiln, etc.) is high enough, the fluorocarbon will completely decompose. Thus, the engineering aspects of the incineration system in terms of mixing and residence time will be the dominant issue in minimizing by product formation as long as the incineration temperature is high enough. One must also have the proper fluorocarbodfuel ratio.

2. If CF4, the most stable perfluoroalkyl compound, were added as a tracer to the incineration system, its complete destruction would show that the incineration conditions should fully destroy all other perfluoroalkyl compounds.

Thermal Decomposition Processes In an incineration system as well as in a cement kiln, the waste material is heated to a high temperature (temperatures up to 3000" F  1650' C  1925 K based on a burner flame temperature of 3500 to 4000 ' F) in an air stream that provides 0 2 as the oxidizing agent together with a hydrocarbon fuel. Typical residence times are 3 sec at temperatures between 2000' and 3000' F and 8 sec at temperatures above 1500 ' F and below 2000'. Combustion can then occur leading to the destruction of the starting material and under the proper conditions, the formation of products with low or zero environmental impact.

The material can either burn as a solid which tends to be a slower process (and even this is often dominated by vaporization) or it can be vaporized leading to a faster process. We have focused on the vapor phase reactions of the materials of interest as these are likely to be the dominant processes at high temperature. Once vaporized, the compound can start to decompose and react with oxygen (or with other radicals generated by the fuel that is present). The decomposition reactions usually occur by bond scission (2 center) or by a 3 center or 4 center elimination process and continue via a radical chain mechanism. If bond breaking is the initial reaction, one must determine the bond that breaks first. Different bonds with different strengths will have different dependencies on the temperature. The weakest bond will break at the lowest temperature 1 BACK TO MAIN and at very high temperatures there will be less dependence on the bond strengths and a broader distribution of radicals species can be formed.

The compounds of interest to the present study are predominantly sulfonamides of the form RfS02NRR" where Rf= n CsF17 or other normal or branched perfluoro alkyl chains, R' = CH3 or C2H5, and R" is CH2CH20H or it is often a very complex organic linked to the N by a (N) CH2CH20 C( 0) 1 linker group. We show, based on high level ab initio electronic structure calculations at the density hnctional theory and molecular orbital theory levels, that the most likely bond to break in compounds of the form RfS02R' is the C S bond. We focus on the differences in the bond energies of the C S and the C C bonds in the Rf fragment. We used Rf = n C3F7 and CF3 in our model studies and examined R' = OH, F, NH2, and 0. In all cases where a neutral, nonradical compound was studied, we find that the average C S bond energy was  64 kcal/ mol and the average C C bond energy was 85 kcal/ mol. This is the energy required for breaking the CrC( S02) R' bond. (C F bond energies are much higher, near 120 kcal/ mol.) The average bond energies of C C bonds in the perfluoroalkyl fragment further from the SO2 group are likely to be on the order of 95 kcal/ mol based on other studies of perfluorocarbon bond energies. Bond energies of simple unsubstituted hydrocarbon alkane substituents are expected to be on the order of 85 to 90 kcal/ mol. Substituents that can stabilize radical carbon centers will clearly lead to lower C C bond energies.

If a C C or a C S bond breaks, the decomposition chemistry of the perfluoroalkane radical formed in the process will follow the mechanism described below. If 0 2 intercepts the radical (a likely process), then a peroxy radical ROO. is formed which quickly decomposes to an alkoxy radical ROO. The R@* radical will undergo a p scission process as shown in Reaction (1) to form carbonyl fluoride COF2 and a one carbon shorter perfluoroalkyl radical. The chain decomposition will then continue, as above, until CF3 is formed.

Rf` CF203Rf` + F2C( O) (1) The =CF3 can react with 0 2 to eventually give the alkoxide CF3O. which usually abstracts a hydrogen atom from the hydrocarbon fuel that is present to form the alcohol CF30H. The alcohol can undergo 4 center HF elimination to form carbonyl fluoride COF2 again. Thus the main products from the decomposition of the fluorocarbon chain should be COF2 and HF. The COF2 will react with any water present and decompose to C02 and HF and, of course, as in all combustion processes with hydrocarbons present, some H20 will be formed. As in all incineration processes, the completeness of the reaction will depend on the temperature and residence time. CF4 is probably the most difficult fluorinated compound to decompose in a normal incineration system. ' In order to detect whether incomplete incineration is occurring for other fluorocarbon derived species, one can add a small amount of CF4 to the system. If no CF4 is present in the exit stream from the incineration furnace, it is likely that all of fluorinated material has been combusted.

We have used density functional theory (DFT) at the local and nonlocal levels as well as molecular orbital theory at the G3 and G3 MP2 levels2 to calculate the various bond energies. We used correction factors from the G3 and G3 MP2 levels to correct the non local DFT results. We obtain the following reaction energies.

2 BACK TO MAIN Bond Cleavage Products C3F7* + *S02NH2 C2F5* + *CF2S02NH2 C3F7* + SO2 C2F5* + CF2S02 (singlet)

C3F7* + SO3 (singlet) C2F5* + *CF2S03* (triplet)

C3F7* + *S02OH C2F5* + *CF2S020H C3F7* + *S02F C2F5. + aCF2S02F B. E.( kcal/ mol)

63 85 7 68 20 84 64 85 64 84 78 89 The conditions in most cement kiln incineration systems are very high temperatures (up to 1900 K). As the C S bonds are of the lowest energy, they will break first under these high temperatures and will be the first to break at the lower temperatures expected in the temperature ramp region in the incineration system. This will lead to formation of fluorocarbon radicals that will then decompose as discussed above. If the S02R' group is SO3, then the C S bond is extremely weak, 20 kcal/ mole, and the compound will readily decompose. The C C bond energy is still on the order of 85 kcal/ mole. Also note that this is dissociation to the singlet ground state of SO3. The triplet is calculated to be 44 kcal/ mole higher in energy than the singlet which places the S C bond energy in the same range as those of other compounds. (Our calculated singlet triplet energy difference is likely be too low.) The C C bond for CF$ F* CF$ 03 to form triplet CF2S03 is of a comparable energy to other C C bonds in this series. If the S R' bond breaks first, for example in RfS02N( CH3) C2H40R (however, see below for a discussion of this point), then the radical RrSO2 will be formed. If an RS02* fragment is formed, the C S bond is very weak, only 21 kcal/ mole in CH3S02 and an even lower 7 kcal/ mol for CF3S02. Cleavage of the C S bond in RfS02 will quickly lead to the fluorocarbon radical chain decomposition described above and SO2 formation. The C C bond energy in RfSO2 is again much higher than the C S bond energy although lower than other C C bond energies. If the S02R' group is SO3, then the C S bond is about 10 to 15 kcal/ mole stronger than in the other compounds noted above but still 10 kcal/ mole weaker than the C C bond.

We also have calculated S02 N bond anti N C bond energies in related model systems. These models were chosen to get higher accuracy without having to use additivity corrections. The N C bond strength in CH3NH2 is 85 kcal/ mol at 298 K based on the latest results from experiment and theory. For the model system CF3S02NH2, we obtain the following bond energies at the G3 MP2 Level:

3 BACK TO MAIN CF3S02NH2 + CF3. + *S02NH2 68.3 kcal/ mol 3 NH2. + .SO:? CF3 79.5 kcal/ mol The C S bond energy is consistent with the values shown above (slightly stronger as the CF3 radical is not as stabilizing as the C3F7 radical) and the S N bond energy is clearly stronger than the C S bond as expected. For the model system CF3S02NHCH3, we find the following at the G3 MP2 level:

CF3S02NHCH3 + CF3S02NH. + .CH3 94.3 kcal/ mol 3 CF3S02. + aNHCH3 78.4 kcal/ mol These results are consistent with those discussed above. The model systems might lead to changes of a few kcal/ mol due to remote substituent effects but no larger changes are expected.

The hydrocarbon amine decomposition chemistry and the alcohol amine decomposition chemistry can be worked out by similar methods as can the acrylate chemistry (e. g., polymers made by polymerizing RfS02N( CH3) C2H20C( O) CH= CH2 with methacrylates or other acrylates). As long as the fluorocarbon group degrades completely, it is likely that any of the other substituents bonded to the SO2 will also fully degrade, especially if they have a significant hydrocarbon component.

One must also consider the possibility that reactions with H or 0 atoms or the OH radical are occurring in the incineration regime. 'The likely radical chain carriers are H atoms and OH radicals. The H atom will usually abstract an F or an H depending on the position and the OH radical can abstract any hydrogens added to the fluorocarbon chains during the combustion process. One can also abstract other atoms depending on bond strengths. The other possibility that also must be considered is 3 center elimination of HF if H is added to a perfluorocarbon chain. This can be a lower energy process than bond breaking. However, one does not have to wisrry about 0 F bonds being formed as these are very weak. Based on the bond energies, the temperatures in incinerators and in cement kilns are high enough ( peak 1900 K for cement kilns) that most decomposition processes should readily take place. The concern about byproduct formation except for CF4 is not so much the temperature but the mixing conditions in the incinerator. Flow patterns that allow the fluorocarbons to bypass the flame zone and to have a short (4 s) contact time even at high temperatures can lead to the formation of unwanted byproducts if only partial combustion occurs. This is essentially an engineering problem, not a chemistry problem. In addition, we note that Tsang et. al. ' provide estimated temperatures to achieve destruction of 99.99% of a fluorocarbon compound in 1 sec based on unimolecular decomposition reactions. The highest temperature needed for a fluorocarbon system was 1715 K for CF4. For ii fluorocarbon radical such as C2F5, a temperature of 1200 K was needed (based on C C bond scission) and for C2F6, a temperature of 1200 K was needed. These results are consistent with our conclusions that the temperature is not the likely culprit in the formation of any byproducts but rather the amount of mixing and the residence time in the high temperature region. The 4 BACK TO MAIN temperature does however need to be well above lOOO° C. Lower temperatures can and will lead to the formation of undesired by products. Thus, cement kilns will need to be operated at as high a temperature as possible in order to guarantee complete decomposition of the fluorocarbons except for CF4 and at the highest operating temperatures even CF4 should decompose. An additional important concern is the fluorocarbodfiel ratio. If the amount of fluorinated material gets above a few percent, it is likely to also lead to more by product formation as there will not be as good mixing and less of the fluorinated material may pass through the high temperature combustion zone where efficient decomposition can take place.

Photolytic Processes For the model compound CF3S02NH2, we also calculated the ultraviolet visible (UV Vis) absorption spectra by using time dependent density functional theory (TD DFT). TD DFT is an approach with reasonable computational cost and reasonable accuracy for the calculation of the energies of excited states of molecules that we have been testing for use in the development of fluorinated resist materials for 157 nm photo resist^.^ We have previously shown that this a good level at which to calculate such values for a broad range of inorganic and organic compounds. The predicted values show that these types of compounds will not absorb visible light and decompose. If the primary perfluoroalkylsulfonamides get into the atmosphere, they would only decompose photolytically in the upper stratosphere. In other words, they are extremely stable in terms of photolysis.

TD DFT Calculated Excitation Energies of CFsS02NH2 Excitation Excitation Oscillator Energy (eV) Strength f ho 177 7.00 0.0008 161 7.69 0.0228 157 7.90 0.0066 156 7.93 0.005 1 Conclusions following conclusions may be drawn: Based on the above assessment of the thermal destruction of fluorochemicals, the 1. The C S bond should break first under high temperature conditions leaving the substituted S02R' or the Rf SO2 radicals and the Rfand R' radicals respectively.

2. The Rf radical will then follow normal fluorocarbon combustion pathways via C( O) F2 3. The S02R' radical will likely decompose to SO2 and R' with the R' radical following its normal decomposition path. to form C02 and HF.

5 BACK TO MAIN 4. If RfSO3 is formed, it will quickly decompose to Rf and SO3 at very low temperatures.

5. At the upper operating temperatures of cement kilns ( 1900 K), CF4 should be efficiently decomposed so that it can serve as a marker for complete decomposition. If CF4 was added a tracer gas and no CF4 is present at the outlet, it is unlikely that any significant fluorinated by products are generated.

6. The engineering aspects of the incineration system in terms of mixing and residence time will be the dominant issue in minimizing by product formation as long as the incineration temperature is high enough. One wants to have the longest possible contact time to ensure complete degradation. One must also have the proper fluorocarbodfuel ratio. In addition, it will be best if the cement kiln is run near the upper end of its operating temperature range.

References 1. Tsang, W. S.; Burgess, Jr., D. R.; Babushok, 17. Combust Sci and Tech. 1998, 139, 385.

2. Curtiss, L. A.; Raghavachari, K.; Redfern, P. C.; Pople, J. A. J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 103, 1063; Curtiss, L. A.; Raghavachari, K.; Redfern, P. C.; Pople, J. A. J. Chem. Phys. 1998, lU9,7764.

3. Matsuzawa, N. N.; Mori, S.; Yano, E.; Okazaki, S.; Ishitani, A.; Dixon, D. A. Proc. SPIE 2000, 3999, 375; Matsuzawa, N. N.; Ishitani, A.; Dixon, D. A.; Uda, T. J. Phys. Chem. A, in press (2001).

6 BACK TO MAIN


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 212 (Tuesday, November 3, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67647-67652]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27918]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2011-0034; FRL-9936-37-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Oklahoma

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to the Oklahoma State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Oklahoma designee.
The revisions are administrative in nature and modify redundant or
erroneous text within the SIP. The revisions also incorporate new
definitions and the current national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) for four criteria pollutants; delete a subchapter that
addresses motor vehicle pollution control devices; and add requirements
for certain incinerators.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 4, 2016 without further
notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment

by December 3, 2015. If EPA receives such comment, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
OAR-2011-0034, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.
     Email: Carrie Paige at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2011-0034. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which
is restricted by statute. Do not submit information through
www.regulations.gov or email, if you believe that it is CBI or
otherwise protected from disclosure. The www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means that EPA will not know
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body
of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment along with
any disk or CD-ROM submitted. 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. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters and any form of encryption and should be
free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's
public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 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 at either location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Paige,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment with her or Mr. Bill Deese at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' means the EPA.

I. Background

    Section 110 of the Act requires states to develop air pollution
regulations and control strategies to ensure that air quality meets the
EPA's NAAQS. These ambient standards are established under section 109
of the Act and they currently address six criteria pollutants: Carbon
monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur
dioxide. The state's air regulations are contained in its SIP, which is
basically a clean air plan. Each state is responsible for developing
SIPs to demonstrate how the NAAQS will be achieved, maintained, and
enforced. The SIP must be submitted to EPA for approval and any changes
a state makes to the approved SIP also must be submitted to the EPA for
approval.
    The Secretary of the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) submitted revisions for approval by EPA on July 16th and
December 27th of 2010, February 6, 2012, and January 18, 2013. The
revisions address air pollution regulations and control strategies
codified in the Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) under Title 252
(DEQ), Chapter 100 (Air Pollution Control). Three of the four
submittals include revisions that address air permitting and
incorporate by reference applicable provisions of Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (denoted 40 CFR). These revisions can be
evaluated independently (i.e., are severable) and will be evaluated in
separate actions. Further, we are not acting on submitted revisions to
the State's NOx rules because these revisions can be evaluated
independently and we will consider these rule revisions in a separate
action. Table C-1 in the Technical Support Document (TSD) lists the
four submittals and identifies which portions are evaluated in this
rulemaking action and which will be evaluated in separate actions.\1\
The revisions under evaluation in Section II of this action apply to
the following sections within Chapter 100: Subchapter 15 (Motor Vehicle
Pollution Control Devices); subchapter 17 (Incinerators); subchapter 19
(Control of Emission of Particulate Matter); subchapter 25 (Visible
Emissions and Particulates); appendices A and B within subchapter 17;
appendices C, D, and G within subchapter 19; and appendices E and F
within subchapter 3 (Air Quality Standards and Increments).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The TSD is provided in the docket for this rulemaking.
    \2\ The cover letter for the January 18, 2013 submittal lists
revisions to subchapter 31, but no such revisions were provided in
the submittal package; therefore, they are not before EPA for
consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The substantive revisions in the four submittals before us include
incorporation of new definitions; updating the SIP with the current
NAAQS for lead, ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulfur
dioxide (SO2); and adding specific requirements for certain
incinerators. The non-substantive revisions delete redundant
definitions; move certain definitions into other locations within the
SIP; and correct erroneous text.
    The criteria used to evaluate these SIP revisions are found
primarily in section 110 of the CAA. Section 110(l) requires that a SIP
revision submitted to EPA be adopted after reasonable notice and public
hearing and also requires that EPA not approve a SIP revision if the
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. Our TSD contains a detailed evaluation of the
revisions, describing how each revision meets the requirements for SIP
approval.

II. EPA's Evaluation of the Revisions

    A synopsis of the submitted revisions and our evaluation follows.

A. Subchapter 15, Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Devices

    The ODEQ removes subchapter 15 in its entirety. Subchapter 15 is
duplicative of section 203 of the CAA. Subchapter 15 was not ever
required to be in the Oklahoma SIP and did not supersede or otherwise
modify requirements for pollution control devices on motor vehicles.\3\
In addition, subchapter 15 was not used as a source of emission
reductions and did not contribute toward attainment in Oklahoma (see 45
FR 79051, November 28, 1980). The

State's annual motor vehicle inspection and emission anti-tampering
rules remain in the SIP (see 61 FR 7709, February 29, 1996). Removal of
subchapter 15 from the SIP does not constitute loss in emission
reductions because such rules are in place and enforceable at the
federal level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 203 of the CAA prohibits tampering with any device
or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor
vehicle engine in compliance with motor vehicle emission standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Subchapter 17, Incinerators

    Part 1 clarifies that incinerators used to generate useful heat
energy are subject to all applicable requirements of subchapter 17.
Part 3 adds specificity by identifying the applicable sources;
clarifying existing definitions and requirements; expanding incinerator
design requirements to include operation requirements; and adding
definitions for ``Particulate matter'' and ``Secondary combustion
chamber.'' Other revisions to parts 1 and 3 are non-substantive and
delete redundant text.
    A new part 4 addresses biomedical waste incinerators. The new terms
and definitions, design and operation, and emission limits are
consistent with EPA's Standards of Performance for New Stationary
Sources: Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators (see 74 FR
51368, October 6, 2009 and 40 CFR 60.51c), and EPA's Standards Of
Performance for Incinerators at 40 CFR 60, Subpart E.
    The ODEQ removes appendix B, renames appendix A, and moves the
appendix B formulas into A. A typographical error was corrected. There
were no changes to the allowable emission rates.

C. Subchapter 19, Control of Emissions of Particulate Matter

    The ODEQ submits new definitions for ``Condensable particulate
matter,'' ``Filterable particulate matter,'' and ``Total particulate
matter.'' They are consistent with the definitions addressing
particulate matter at 40 CFR 51.100. Other revisions to this subchapter
clarify that the particulate matter (PM) emission rates in this
subchapter refer to condensable and filterable PM.
    The submitted revisions also address appendices C, D and G within
subchapter 19. The revisions are confined to retitling the appendices,
such that each now includes ``particulate matter'' in its title.

D. Subchapter 25, Visible Emissions and Particulates

    The submitted revisions include a non-substantive edit to style and
the correction of an error in a citation at 100-25-3(b)(3). These
revisions to subchapter 25 provide consistency and accuracy.

E. Appendix E (Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards) and Appendix F
(Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards)

    The ODEQ revised appendices E and F for the 2008 NAAQS for ozone
\4\ and lead and the 2010 NAAQS for NO2 and SO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On October 1, 2015, the EPA announced its decision to
strengthen the ozone NAAQS, which does not obstruct our action here.
See [http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/ozonepollution/actions.html#sep2015]. Because Oklahoma elects to have its SIP refer
to specific iterations of the NAAQS, it will need to revise it from
time to time to reflect the current NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Consistency With Section 110(l) of the CAA

    The submitted revisions addressed in today's rulemaking provide
consistency with the NAAQS and EPA's rules regarding incinerators, and
provide clarity and accuracy, thus improving the Oklahoma SIP. These
revisions will not interfere with any applicable requirement regarding
attainment or any other applicable requirement of the CAA and are
consistent with section 110(l) of the Act.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving all or parts of four Oklahoma SIP submittals.
Specifically, we are approving the portions of the July 16, 2010
submittal that revise appendices C, D, E, F and G and subchapters 19
and 25. We are also approving in whole the December 27, 2010 submittal
that revises subchapter 15 and appendices E and F. We are also
approving the portion of the February 6, 2012 submittal that revises
appendix E. We are also approving the portion of the January 18, 2013
submittal that revises subchapter 17 and appendices A and B. The EPA is
approving these SIP revisions in accordance with the requirements of
the CAA.
    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we
view this as a non-controversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if relevant adverse
comments are received. This rule will be effective on January 4, 2016
without further notice unless we receive adverse comment by December 3,
2015. If we receive adverse comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute
a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so now. Please note that if we receive adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, we are finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1
CFR 51.4, we are finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
revisions to the Oklahoma regulations as described in the preceding
Final Action section. We have made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through www.regulation.gov
and/or in hard copy at the EPA Region 6 office.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or

safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

    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 CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 4, 2016. 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: October 20, 2015.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR part 52 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 LL --Oklahoma

0
2. In Sec.  52.1920, the table in paragraph (c) under the heading
entitled ``Chapter 100 (OAC 252:100). Air Pollution Control'' is
amended by:
0
a. Removing the heading entitled ``Subchapter 15. Motor Vehicle
Pollution Control Devices'' and the entries under this heading;
0
b. Revising entries for ``252:100-17-1'' and ``252:100-17-1.1'';
0
c. Removing the entry for ``252:100-17-1.2'';
0
d. Adding an entry for ``252:100-17-1.3'' in numerical order;
0
e. Revising entries for ``252:100-17-2'', ``252:100-17-2.1'',
``252:100-17-2.2'', ``252:100-17-4'', ``252:100-17-5'', ``252:100-17-
5.1'', and ``252:100-17-7'';
0
f. Adding the heading entitled ``Part 4. Biomedical Waste
Incinerators'' and entries for ``252:100-17-8'', ``252:100-17-9'',
``252:100-17-10'', and ``252:100-17-11'' in numerical order;
0
g. Revising entries for ``252:100-19-1.1'' and ``252:100-19-11'';
0
h. Revising the entry for ``252:100-25-3'';
0
i. Revising the entry for ``252:100, Appendix A'';
0
j. Removing the entry for ``252:100, Appendix B''; and
0
k. Revising entries for ``252:100, Appendix C'', ``252:100, Appendix
D'', ``252:100, Appendix E'', ``252:100, Appendix F'', and ``252:100,
Appendix G''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  52.1920  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA Approved Oklahoma Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           State
         State citation              Title/Subject    effective date   EPA Approval date        Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                CHAPTER 100 (OAC 252:100). AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Subchapter 17. Incinerators
                                           Part 1. General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
252:100-17-1....................  Purpose...........       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-1.1..................  Reference to 40          7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   CFR.                               [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-1.3..................  Incinerators and         7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   fuel-burning                       [Insert Federal
                                   equipment or                        Register citation]
                                   units.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Part 3. Incinerators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
252:100-17-2....................  Applicability.....       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]

252:100-17-2.1..................  Exemptions........       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-2.2..................  Definitions.......       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
252:100-17-4....................  Particulate matter       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-5....................  Incinerator design       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   and operation                      [Insert Federal
                                   requirements.                       Register citation]
252:100-17-5.1..................  Alternative              7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   incinerator                        [Insert Federal
                                   design                              Register citation]
                                   requirements.
252:100-17-7....................  Test methods......       7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Part 4. Biomedical Waste Incinerators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
252:100-17-8....................  Applicability.....        7/1/2011  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-9....................  Definitions.......        7/1/2011  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-10...................  Design and                7/1/2011  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   operation.                         [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
252:100-17-11...................  Emission limits...        7/1/2011  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Subchapter 19. Control of Emission of Particulate Matter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
252:100-19-1.1..................  Definitions.......        7/1/2009  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]

                                                  * * * * * * *
252:100-19-11...................  Allowable                 7/1/2009  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   particulate                        [Insert Federal
                                   matter emission                     Register citation]
                                   rates from
                                   combined wood
                                   fuel and fossil
                                   fuel fired steam
                                   generating units.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Subchapter 25. Visible Emissions and Particulates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
252:100-25-3....................  Opacity limit.....        7/1/2009  11/3/2015            .....................
                                                                      [Insert Federal
                                                                       Register citation]

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Appendices for OAC 252: Chapter 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
252:100, Appendix A.............  Allowable                7/11/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   Particulate                        [Insert Federal
                                   Matter Emission                     Register citation]
                                   Rate for
                                   Incinerators.
252:100, Appendix C.............  Allowable                 7/1/2009  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   Particulate                        [Insert Federal
                                   Matter Emission                     Register citation]
                                   Rates for
                                   Indirectly Fired
                                   Fuel-Burning
                                   Units.
252:100, Appendix D.............  Allowable                 7/1/2009  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   Particulate                        [Insert Federal
                                   Matter Emission                     Register citation]
                                   Rates for
                                   Indirectly Fired
                                   Wood Fuel-Burning
                                   Units.
252:100, Appendix E.............  Primary Ambient           7/1/2011  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   Air Quality                        [Insert Federal
                                   Standards.                          Register citation]
252:100, Appendix F.............  Secondary Ambient         7/1/2010  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   Air Quality                        [Insert Federal
                                   Standards.                          Register citation]
252:100, Appendix G.............  Allowable                 7/1/2009  11/3/2015            .....................
                                   Particulate                        [Insert Federal
                                   Matter Emission                     Register citation]
                                   Rates for
                                   Directly Fired
                                   Fuel-Burning
                                   Units and
                                   Industrial
                                   Process.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-27918 Filed 11-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


 [Federal Register: August 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 166)] [ Proposed Rules]                [Page 50256-50258] [DOCID:fr26au08-18]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0910; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-033-AD]

RIN 2120-AA64

  Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-200, A330-300, A340-

300, A340-500, and A340-600 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the

products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This

proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to

identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The

MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    An A330 operator reported a shroud box bottom panel missing

during a routine inspection. The same panel detached from an A330

aircraft during take-off, causing damage to the surrounding

structure and to the Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer (THS) tip

fairing.

    The inspection indicated the blind rivets used to attach the

panel worked loose causing fatigue damage with crack propagation

through the fastener line resulting in panel detachment * * *.

    * * * Three additional events of panel loss have been

experienced on in service aircraft already inspected in accordance

with the AD requirements * * *.* * *

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the

unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 25,

2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket

Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket

Operations, M-30, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory

evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street

address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is

in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket

shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,

International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)

227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or

arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address

listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0910;

Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-033-AD'' at the beginning of your

comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,

economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We

will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend

this proposed AD based on those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we

receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On April 4, 2007, we issued AD 2007-08-05, Amendment 39-15022 (72

FR 18563, April 13, 2007). That AD required actions intended to address

an unsafe condition on the products listed above.

    Since we issued AD 2007-08-05, we have received additional reports

of loss of the bottom panel of the shroud box on in-service airplanes

on which the one-time detailed inspection required by AD 2007-08-05 has

been done. Therefore, the requirements of AD 2007-08-05 do not

adequately address the identified unsafe condition of that AD. The

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent

for the Member States of the European Community, has issued

Airworthiness Directive 2008-0002, dated January 7, 2008 (referred to

after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the

specified products. The MCAI states:

    An A330 operator reported a shroud box bottom panel missing

during a routine inspection. The same panel detached from an A330

aircraft during take-off, causing damage to the surrounding

structure and to the Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer (THS) tip

fairing.

    The inspection indicated the blind rivets used to attach the

panel worked loose causing fatigue damage with crack propagation

through the fastener line resulting in panel detachment.

    To avoid potential injuries to persons on ground, Airworthiness

Directive (AD) 2006-0107 [which corresponds with FAA AD 2007-08-05]

mandated a one time detailed visual inspection of the shroud box

bottom panel.

    Further to issuance of AD 2006-0107, three additional events of

panel loss have been experienced on in service aircraft already

inspected in accordance with the AD requirements and no findings.

Thus, it has been decided to delete this one time detailed visual

inspection and to mandate a modification which prevents such unsafe

condition. Therefore, the present AD supersedes EASA AD 2006-0107

and mandates the installation of a bolted shroud box bottom panel

instead of blind riveted metallic design.

The modification includes doing all applicable related investigative

and corrective actions. The related investigative action is an

inspection to detect cracks of the shroud box hole. The corrective

action is repairing any cracked shroud box hole. The applicability of

the MCAI has been revised; certain airplanes have been removed and

others added. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI

in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued the following service bulletins:

     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3100, dated October 1,

2007;

     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4109, dated October 1,

2007; and

     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-5018, dated October 1,

2007.

The actions described in this service information are intended to

correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another

country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant

to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have

been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service

information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we

evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition

exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same

type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in

general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it

necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the

AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these

changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information

provided in the MCAI and related service information.

    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are

highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD

would affect about 34 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that

it would take about 20 work-hours per product to comply with the basic

requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per

work-hour. Required parts would cost about $990 per product. Where the

service information lists required parts costs that are covered under

warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs.

As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some

parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these

figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to

be $88,060, or $2,590 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to

issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the

authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: ``Aviation

Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's

authority.

    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General

requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing

regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator

finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within

the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition

that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this

rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism

implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not

have a substantial direct effect 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.

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed

regulation:

    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order

12866;

    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies

and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or

negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to

comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15022 (72 FR

18563, April 13, 2007) and adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2008-0910; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-

033-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by September 25, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) The proposed AD supersedes AD 2007-08-05, Amendment 39-

15022.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus airplanes identified in Table 1 of

this AD; certificated in any category.

                         Table 1--Applicability

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

                                                       Except for those

           For model--                On which--         airplanes on

                                                            which--

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

(1) A330-200, A330-300, and A340- Airbus              Airbus

 300 series, all certified         modification        Modification

 models, all serial numbers.       46077 has been      55568 has been

                                   embodied in         done in

                                   production.         production, or

                                                       Airbus Service

                                                       Bulletin A330-57-

                                                       3100 or Airbus

                                                       Service Bulletin

                                                       A340-57-4109 has

                                                       been embodied in

                                                       service.

(2) Airbus A340-500 and A340-600  None..............  Airbus

 series, all certified models,                         modification

 all serial numbers.                                   55568 has been

                                                       embodied in

                                                       production, or

                                                       Airbus Service

                                                       Bulletin A340-57-

                                                       5018 has been

                                                       embodied in

                                                       service.

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

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)

states:

    An A330 operator reported a shroud box bottom panel missing

during a routine inspection. The same panel detached from an A330

aircraft during take-off, causing damage to the surrounding

structure and to the Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer (THS) tip

fairing.

    The inspection indicated the blind rivets used to attach the

panel worked loose causing fatigue damage with crack propagation

through the fastener line resulting in panel detachment.

    To avoid potential injuries to persons on ground, Airworthiness

Directive (AD) 2006-0107 [which corresponds with FAA AD 2007-08-05]

mandated a one time detailed visual inspection of the shroud box

bottom panel.

    Further to issuance of AD 2006-0107, three additional events of

panel loss have been experienced on in service aircraft already

inspected in accordance with the AD requirements and no findings.

Thus, it has been decided to delete this one time detailed visual

inspection and to mandate a modification which prevents such unsafe

condition. Therefore, the present AD supersedes EASA AD 2006-0107

and mandates the installation of a bolted shroud box bottom panel

instead of blind riveted metallic design.

The modification includes doing all applicable related investigative

and corrective actions. The related investigative action is an

inspection to detect cracks of the shroud box hole. The corrective

action is repairing any cracked shroud box hole.

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done: Within 69 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the shroud box bottom skin panel on both

wings, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective

actions, by accomplishing all the actions in the applicable service

bulletins identified in Table 2 of this AD. Do all applicable

related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.

                       Table 2--Service Bulletins

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

          Service Bulletin--                         Dated--

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

Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3100..  October 1, 2007.

Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4109..  October 1, 2007.

Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-5018..  October 1, 2007.

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

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information

as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,

International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,

has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC

applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA

Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local

FSDO.

    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain

corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered

FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority

(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product

is airworthy before it is returned to service.

    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in

this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information

collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-

0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness

Directive 2008-0002, dated January 7, 2008; and the service

bulletins identified in Table 2 of this AD for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 18, 2008.

Ali Bahrami,

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification

Service.

[FR Doc. E8-19716 Filed 8-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 60)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 15613]
[DOCID:fr30mr10-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket ID FEMA[dash]2010[dash]0003; Internal Agency Docket No.
FEMA[dash]8123]

Suspension of Community Eligibility

Correction

    In rule document 2010-6632 beginning on page 14356 in the issue of
Thursday, March 25, 2010 make the following corrections:
    (1) The department docket number is corrected to read as set forth
above.
    (2) On page 14357, in the fourth column, under the heading
``Current effective map date'', the date should read April 5, 2010.

[FR Doc. C1-2010-6632 Filed 3-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register: March 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 57)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14815-14816]
[DOCID:fr24mr06-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006; A-1-FRL-8048-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maine; 15% and 5% Emission Reduction Plans, Inventories, and
Transportation Conformity Budgets for the Portland One and Eight Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Areas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of Maine. These revisions establish a 15% VOC
emission reduction plan, and revised 1990 base year emissions
inventory, for the Portland Maine one-hour ozone nonattainment area.
Additionally, these revisions establish a 5% increment of progress
emission reduction plan, 2002 base year inventory, and transportation
conformity budget for the Portland Maine eight-hour ozone nonattainment
area. The intended effect of this action is to approve these plans as
revisions to the Maine SIP. This action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on April 24, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006. All documents in the
docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed

in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Ecosystem

Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Copies of the documents relevant to this action are also available
for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at
the Bureau of Air Quality Control, Department of Environmental
Protection, First Floor of the Tyson Building, Augusta Mental Health
Institute Complex, Augusta, ME.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob McConnell, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. EPA Region 1, One Congress Street, Suite 1100-CAQ, Boston,
MA 02114-2023, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>,
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 5, 2006 (71 FR 569), EPA
published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Maine.
The NPR proposed approval of a 15% rate-of-progress (ROP) plan for the
Portland one-hour ozone nonattainment area, a 5% increment of progress
emission reduction plan for the Portland 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area, the associated base year emission inventories developed in
support of these plans, and transportation conformity budgets for 2007
established by the 5% increment of progress plan. The formal SIP
revisions were submitted by Maine on June 9, 13, and 14, 2005.
    The 15% plan demonstrates that between 1990 and 2005, VOC emissions
declined by 56 tons per summer day (tpsd) in the three southern Maine
counties that comprise the Portland one-hour nonattainment area. EPA
approved Maine's 1990 base year inventory for the Portland one-hour
area on February 28, 1997 (62 FR 9081). With this final rule we are
approving revisions to Maine's 1990 emissions inventory, as shown in
Table 1 below.

           Table 1.--Comparison of 1990 VOC Emission Estimates
                                 [tpsd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Revised
                                                  Originally   1990 VOC
                                                   approved    emissions
                 Source category                   1990 VOC      being
                                                   emissions   approved
                                                                 today
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source....................................        9.65        9.65
Area Source.....................................       31.8        33.43
Non-road Mobile.................................        7.4        18.08
On-Road Mobile..................................       49.87       63.31
Biogenic........................................      197.6       197.6
                                                 -----------------------
  Total.........................................      296.32      322.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the 5% increment of progress plan shows that between
2002 and 2007, VOC emissions will decline by 14.6 tpsd in the Portland
eight-hour ozone nonattainment area. We are approving the 2002 base
year emission inventory that the state of Maine submitted to EPA for
the Portland Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment, as shown in Table 2
below.

  Table 2.--2002 Emission Inventory for the Portland, Maine 8-hour Area
                                 [tpsd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     2002 VOC   2002 NOX
                  Source category                   emissions  emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source......................................       3.29      13.08
Area Source.......................................      23.65       1.89
On-road Mobile....................................      30.94      61.20
Off-Road Mobile...................................      16.59      13.23
Com. marine, rail, and aircraft...................       0.45       2.33
                                                   ---------------------
    Total.........................................      74.90      91.70
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 5% plan's estimate of 2007 on-road motor vehicle emissions will
establish VOC and NOX transportation conformity budgets for
the 55 towns within the Portland 8-hour nonattainment area. These
budgets are 20.115 tons per summer day for VOC, and 39.893 tons per
summer day for NOX.
    Other specific requirements of these SIP revisions and the
rationale for EPA's approval are explained in the NPR and will not be
restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR.
    Final Action: EPA is approving the 15% plan and revisions to the
1990 base year emissions inventory submitted by the State of Maine for
the Portland one-hour ozone nonattainment area as revisions to the
Maine SIP. Additionally, EPA is approving the 5% increment of progress
plan, 2002 base year inventory, and VOC and NOX
transportation conformity budgets for the Portland eight-hour ozone
nonattainment area as revisions to the state's SIP.

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), because it 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. section 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.
section 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 May 23, 2006. 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, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 15, 2006.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

0
Part 52 of 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 U--Maine

0
2. Section 52.1023 is amended by adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.1023  Control Strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (e) Approval. EPA is approving a revision to the State
Implementation Plan submitted by the Maine Department of Environmental
Protection on June 9 and 13, 2005. The revision is for purposes of
satisfying the rate of progress requirements of section 182(b)(1) of
the Clean Air Act for the Portland Maine one-hour ozone nonattainment
area.
    (f) Approval. EPA is approving a revision to the State
Implementation Plan submitted by the Maine Department of Environmental
Protection on June 9, 13, and 14, 2005. The revision is for purposes of
satisfying the 5 percent increment of progress requirement of 40 CFR
51.905(a)(1)(ii)(B) for the Portland Maine eight-hour ozone
nonattainment area. The revision establishes motor vehicle emissions
budgets for 2007 of 20.115 tons per summer day (tpsd) of volatile
organic compound (VOC) and 39.893 tpsd of nitrogen oxide
(NOX) to be used in transportation conformity in the
Portland Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.

0
3. Section 52.1036 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and adding
paragraph (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1036  Emission Inventories.

    (a) The Governor's designee for the State of Maine submitted 1990
base year emission inventories for the Knox and Lincoln Counties area,
the Lewiston and Auburn area, the Portland area, and the Hancock and
Waldo Counties area on July 25, 1995 as a revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP). An amendment to the 1990 base year emission
inventory for the Portland area was submitted on June 9, 2005. The 1990
base year emission inventory requirement of section 182(a)(1) of the
Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, has been satisfied for these areas.
* * * * *
    (f) The Governor's designee for the State of Maine submitted a 2002
base year emission inventory for Cumberland, Sagadahoc, and York
counties, to represent emissions for the Portland 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area on June 9, 2005, as a revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP). The 2002 base year emission inventory
requirement of 40 CFR 51.915 has been satisfied for this area.

[FR Doc. 06-2815 Filed 3-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P