[Federal Register: January 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 13)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 3389-3396]
[DOCID:fr18ja08-6]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-1079; FRL-8509-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Nevada; Washoe County 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
Washoe County portion of the Nevada State Implementation Plan.
Submitted by the State of Nevada on May 30, 2007, this plan revision
consists of a maintenance plan prepared for the purpose of providing
for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in Washoe County
through the year 2014 and thereby satisfying the related requirements
under section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act and EPA's phase 1 rule
implementing the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard.
EPA is taking this action pursuant to those provisions of the Clean Air
Act that obligate the Agency to take action on submittals of state
implementation plans and plan revisions.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 18, 2008 without further notice,
unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by February 19, 2008. 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 EPA-RO9-OAR-2007-1079,
by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Eleanor Kaplan at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
also send a copy by e-mail to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
     Fax: Eleanor Kaplan, Planning Office (AIR-2), at fax
number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail or deliver: Eleanor Kaplan, Air Planning Office,
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. Hand or courier deliveries are
accepted only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays except
for legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which

means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail

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 and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Planning Office (AIR-2),

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California 94105-3901. To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eleanor Kaplan, Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA. This supplementary information is
organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Summary of Action
II. Background
    A. Ozone Facts, Effects and Ambient Standard
    B. General Description of Washoe County, Nevada
    C. Regulatory Context
    D. Ambient Ozone Conditions
III. Evaluation of State's Submittal
    A. CAA Procedural Requirements
    B. Evaluation of Ozone Maintenance Plan
    1. Attainment Inventory
    2. Maintenance Demonstration
    3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
    4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    5. Contingency Plan
    6. Conclusion
IV. Final Action and Request for Comment
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Summary of Action

    On May 30, 2007, the Governor's designee, the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection (NDEP), submitted the Maintenance Plan for the
Washoe County 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Area (April 2007) (``Washoe
County Ozone Maintenance Plan'' or ``Ozone Maintenance Plan'') to EPA
for approval as a revision to the Washoe County portion of the Nevada
State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Washoe County Ozone Maintenance
Plan was developed by the Washoe County District Health Department, Air
Quality Management Division (Washoe County AQMD) and adopted by the
Washoe County District Board of Health (District Board of Health) on
April 26, 2007. Washoe County AQMD prepared the plan to provide for
continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) through 2014 and to thereby satisfy the requirements
of section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') and EPA's
phase 1 rule implementing the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The May 30, 2007 SIP
revision submittal includes the maintenance plan and related technical
appendices, as well as documentation of notice, public hearing, and
adoption by the District Board of Health.
    For the reasons set forth in this document, and pursuant to section
110(k) of the Act, we are approving the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance
Plan as a revision to the Washoe County portion of the Nevada SIP. In
so doing, we find that the submitted ozone

maintenance plan meets all of the applicable requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(1) and our phase 1 rule implementing the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.

II. Background

A. Ozone Facts, Effects, and Ambient Standard

    Ozone is a gas composed of three oxygen atoms. It is not usually
emitted directly into the air, but at ground level is created by a
chemical reaction between oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and
volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence of sunlight. Ozone has
the same chemical structure whether it occurs miles above the earth or
at ground-level and can be ``good'' or ``bad,'' depending on its
location in the atmosphere.
    In the earth's lower atmosphere, ground-level ozone is considered
``bad.'' Motor vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions, gasoline
vapors, and chemical solvents as well as natural sources emit
NOX and VOC that help form ozone. Ground-level ozone is the
primary constituent of smog. Sunlight and hot weather cause ground
level ozone to form in harmful concentrations in the air. As a result
it is known as a summertime air pollutant. Many urban areas tend to
have high levels of ``bad'' ozone, but even rural areas are also
subject to increased ozone levels because wind carries ozone and
pollutants that form it hundreds of miles away from their original
source. ``Good'' ozone occurs naturally in the stratosphere
approximately 10 to 30 miles above the earth's surface and forms a
layer that protects life on earth from the sun's harmful rays.
    Breathing ozone can trigger a variety of health problems including
chest pain, coughing, throat irritation, and congestion. It can worsen
bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma. Ground-level ozone also can reduce
lung function and inflame the linings of the lungs. Repeated exposure
may permanently scar lung tissue. People with lung disease, children,
older adults, and people who are active can be affected when ozone
levels are unhealthy.
    The CAA requires EPA to set national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare. EPA has
established a NAAQS for ozone at 0.08 parts per million (ppm), daily
maximum 8-hour average. The 8-hour ozone NAAQS is met at an ambient air
quality monitoring site when the three-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less
than or equal to 0.08 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.10 and appendix I.

B. General Description of Washoe County, Nevada

    Washoe County is located in the northwest portion of Nevada and is
bounded by California, Oregon, and the counties of Humboldt, Pershing,
Storey, Churchill, Lyon and Carson City. Washoe County is a long,
narrow strip, between 30 and 50 miles wide, 190 miles long north and
south, and encompasses a land area of 6,608 square miles.
    Population density in the county is concentrated for the most part
in the eight valleys adjacent to the Truckee River, in the southern
one-third of the county. The principal city, Reno (the county seat), is
situated in the southern part of the county and is the business and
transportation center for northern and western Nevada. Washoe County
has experienced rapid growth over the past several decades and has seen
its population roughly double since 1980 (from approximately 190,000 in
1980 to approximately 360,000 in 2002). The Washoe County AQMD is the
designated agency responsible for air quality management throughout the
entire county with the exception of certain types of power plants,
which are subject, under Nevada law, to the jurisdiction of NDEP.

C. Regulatory Context

    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended in 1970, EPA established
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for certain pervasive
air pollutants, such as photochemical oxidant, carbon monoxide, and
particulate matter. The NAAQS represent concentration levels below
which public health and welfare are protected. The 1970 Act also
required States to adopt and submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
to implement, maintain, and enforce the NAAQS. The original Nevada SIP
was submitted and approved by EPA in 1972. SIP revisions are required
from time-to-time to account for new or amended NAAQS or to meet other
changed circumstances.
    The CAA was significantly amended in 1977, and under the 1977
Amendments, EPA promulgated attainment status designations for all
areas of the country with respect to the NAAQS. The Truckee Meadows
portion of Washoe County (hydrographic area 87) was designated
as a nonattainment area for the NAAQS for photochemical oxidant. See 43
FR 8962, at 9012 (March 3, 1978). The Clean Air Act provides for
periodic review and revision of the NAAQS by EPA, and in 1979, EPA
established a new NAAQS for ozone of 0.12 ppm, one-hour average, to
replace the oxidant standard of 0.08 ppm. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8,
1979). Areas designated nonattainment for oxidant were considered to be
nonattainment for ozone as well, but States could request redesignation
to attainment if monitoring data showed that an area met the ozone
NAAQS.
    To satisfy the requirements for oxidant/ozone nonattainment areas
under the 1977 Amended Act, Washoe County District Board of Health
adopted five stationary source rules regulating emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC): Section 040.070 (``Storage of Petroleum
Products''), section 040.075 (``Gasoline Loading into Tank Trucks and
Trailers''), section 040.080 (``Gasoline Unloading from Tank Trucks and
Trailers into Storage Tanks''), section 040.085 (``Organic Solvents''),
and section 040.090 (Cut-back Asphalt''). On July 24, 1979, the State
of Nevada submitted these five rules to EPA as a revision to the Nevada
SIP. EPA approved them as such on April 14, 1981 (46 FR 21758).
Meanwhile, late in 1980, the State of Nevada requested that EPA
redesignate Truckee Meadows as an attainment area for the then-new
ozone NAAQS based on available ozone monitoring data, and in the
following year, EPA approved the redesignation of Truckee Meadows from
nonattainment for oxidant to attainment for the ozone NAAQS. See 46 FR
37896 (July 23, 1981).
    Congress significantly amended the Clean Air Act again in 1990, and
under the 1990 Act Amendments, because of an ozone episode in 1990, EPA
designated all of Washoe County as a ``marginal'' ozone nonattainment
area, effective January 6, 1992. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).
Under the CAA, as amended in 1990, States with marginal ozone
nonattainment areas were required to submit SIP revisions providing for
changes to the program for review of new major sources and major
modifications (``new source review'' or NSR), base year (1990)
inventories of ozone precursor emissions and periodic inventory
updates, rules requiring owners of larger stationary sources to submit
annual emissions statements, and rules establishing procedures for
determining conformity of certain types of projects to the SIP. See CAA
sections 182(a) and 176(c).
    NDEP has submitted various revisions to the Washoe County portion
of the Nevada SIP over the past 15 years to meet these requirements.
Specifically, NDEP submitted a SIP revision related to the Washoe
County NSR program on

April 7, 1994, SIP revisions related to ozone precursor emission
inventories on November 13, 1992 (year 1990 inventory), January 19,
1996 (year 1993), April 14, 1999 (year 1996), February 5, 2002 (year
1999), and February 3, 2005 (year 2002), a SIP revision related to
emission statements (Washoe County District Board of Health section
030.219) on November 13, 1992, and a SIP revision related to general
and transportation conformity on July 31, 1995.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The submittal of the attainment inventory (year 2002) in the
Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan supersedes all of the
previously-submitted ozone precursor inventories with the exception
of the February 3, 2005 inventory submittal, which provides
technical support and documentation for all of the source categories
listed in the Ozone Maintenance Plan for year 2002 with the
exception of nonroad and on-road vehicles. The NSR and conformity
submittals are no longer necessary for ozone purposes, but remain
relevant for the purposes of the carbon monoxide and particulate
matter (PM10) NAAQS in the Truckee Meadows area of Washoe
County. The State may withdraw the District's emission statements
rule because it is no longer an ``applicable requirement'' for the
Washoe County portion of the Nevada SIP given the county's
designation as ``unclassifiable/attainment'' for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS and the revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR
51.900(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Improvements to the State's vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/
M) program for the Truckee Meadows planning area to meet EPA's
``basic'' I/M performance standard, though adopted to meet CAA
nonattainment planning requirements for carbon monoxide rather than
ozone, also provide VOC emissions reductions.\2\ NDEP submitted the
upgraded I/M program on June 3, 1994 and submitted updated I/M-related
statutes and rules on May 11, 2007. We expect to take action on the I/M
submittals for Truckee Meadows in the near future in the context of
taking action on NDEP's request for redesignation of Truckee Meadows to
attainment for the carbon monoxide NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Marginal'' ozone nonattainment areas that had, or were
required to have, I/M programs in their ozone SIPs prior to the
passage of the 1990 CAAA were required to maintain and upgrade their
programs under CAA section 182(a). Nevada implemented an I/M program
in Truckee Meadows prior to the 1990 CAAA, but the EPA-approved
version of the program at that time did not include emissions
testing of hydrocarbons (i.e., the corresponding cutpoints in the
approved program had been deleted). As such, the pre-1990 I/M
program in Truckee Meadows is not considered a part of the ozone SIP
for that area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NDEP, on behalf of Washoe County, submitted a maintenance plan for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and a redesignation request to EPA on July 31,
1995. The Washoe County 1-hour ozone maintenance plan and redesignation
request was revised and re-submitted by NDEP on April 2, 1997 but
withdrawn from further consideration at the county's request on
September 12, 1997 in the wake of EPA's revision of the ozone NAAQS
during the summer of 1997.
    In July 1997, subsequent to a periodic review of the ozone NAAQS,
EPA established a new ozone NAAQS (0.08 ppm, eight-hour average) to
replace the 1-hour ozone standard. See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). In
1998, we found that Washoe County was attaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
based on 1994-1996 monitoring data and listed it as one of the areas in
the country where the 1-hour ozone NAAQS no longer applied. See 63 FR
31014, at 31065 (June 5, 1998). In 2000, in response to continuing
litigation over the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, we reinstated the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS in those areas in which we had found the standard to no longer
apply, such as Washoe County. See 65 FR 45182, at 45244 (July 20,
2000). In that 2000 action, we also reinstated Washoe County's
classification as a ``marginal'' nonattainment area for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS, effective January 16, 2001, see 65 FR 45829 (July 25,
2000). In 2005, we made a second finding of attainment for Washoe
County with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 70 FR 22803 (May 3,
2005). An attainment finding is but one of the criteria necessary to
qualify for redesignation to ``attainment.''
    Meanwhile, in 2004, following years of delay associated with court
challenges, EPA promulgated area designations for the new 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004). Washoe County was designated
as an ``unclassifiable/attainment'' area, effective June 15, 2004. See
69 FR 23858 at 23919-23920. In another EPA rule published on April 30,
2004 (69 FR 23951), which is referred to as the ``Phase 1 8-Hour Ozone
Implementation Rule'' or ``Phase 1 Rule,'' EPA revoked the one-hour
ozone NAAQS effective June 15, 2005 and established certain
requirements to prevent backsliding in those areas that were designated
as nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard (or that were
``attainment'' but subject to a maintenance plan) at the time of
designation for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA codified these
requirements at 40 CFR 51.905.
    Because Washoe County's designations as of June 15, 2004 (i.e., the
date of designation for the 8-hour NAAQS) were ``nonattainment'' for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and ``unclassifiable/attainment'' for 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, a maintenance plan was required for the area under CAA
section 110(a)(1) and the Phase 1 Rule. See 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3). States
were required to submit CAA section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plans
by June 15, 2007. WCAQMD prepared the Maintenance Plan for the Washoe
County 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Area (April 2007) to meet the
requirements of section 110(a)(1) and EPA's Phase 1 Rule. In today's
action, we are approving the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan as a
revision to the Washoe County portion of the Nevada SIP.

D. Ambient Ozone Conditions

    Generally, we will determine whether an area's air quality is
meeting the NAAQS based upon data gathered at established state and
local air monitoring stations (SLAMS) and national air monitoring sites
(NAMS) and entered into the Air Quality System (AQS) database. Data
entered into AQS has been determined to meet Federal monitoring
requirements (see 40 CFR 50.6; 40 CFR part 50, appendix J; 40 CFR part
53; 40 CFR part 58, appendices A and B) and may be used to determine
the attainment status of areas. Also, we also take into account data
from other air monitoring stations, such as Special Purpose Monitors
(SPMs), if the data is collected using a Federal reference method or
Federal equivalent method, unless the air monitoring agency
demonstrates that the data came from a particular period during which
EPA requirements concerning quality assurance, methods, or siting
criteria were not met in practice. See 71 FR 61236, at 61302 (October
17, 2006) and 40 CFR 58.20. All data are reviewed to determine the
area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix
I.
    Washoe County AQMD measures ambient ozone concentration at six
monitoring sites located in southern Washoe County, including Lemmon
Valley, downtown Reno, Sparks, south Reno, Toll Road (Geiger Grade),
and Incline Village. All of Washoe County AQMD's ozone monitoring sites
are NAMS or SLAMS except for Incline Village, which is a SPM for ozone.
    The current ozone NAAQS is met at an ambient air quality monitoring
site when the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour ozone concentration (also referred to as the ``design
value'') is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm, and the standard is met
within an air quality planning area when the standard is met at all of
the monitoring stations. A review of the data gathered at the various
ozone monitoring sites in Washoe County and entered into AQS confirms
that Washoe County is in attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Since
1999, the highest design value at any of the ozone monitoring sites is
0.075 ppm, a value

calculated for the Sparks monitor over the 2001-2003 period. For the
purposes of comparison, due to rounding conventions, no design values
less than 0.085 ppm violate the ozone NAAQS. More recently, the highest
design value for both 2003-2005 and 2004-2006 periods is 0.071 ppm, the
value calculated for the downtown Reno, south Reno, and Sparks
monitoring sites.

III. Evaluation of State's Submittal

    As noted above, EPA promulgated the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 1997 and
designated and classified areas for this standard in 2004. In 2004, we
also published the Phase 1 Ozone Implementation Rule. Code of Federal
Regulations, title 40, part 51, Sec.  51.905(a)(3) and (4), established
in that rulemaking, set forth requirements for anti-backsliding
purposes for areas designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour
standard. These provisions required States with such areas to submit
10-year maintenance plans under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA if these
areas were also nonattainment areas (or were attainment areas subject
to a CAA section 175A maintenance plan) under the 1-hour ozone
standard.\3\ Such plans are to be submitted as revisions to SIPs.
Washoe County AQMD prepared the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan in
response to these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ We provided guidance to States regarding section 110(a)(1)
ozone maintenance plans in a memorandum from Lydia N. Wegman,
Director, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, EPA Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, entitled, ``Maintenance Plan
Guidance Document for Certain 8-hour Ozone Areas Under Section
110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act,'' dated May 20, 2005. For the
contingency plan element of section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans, our
May 20, 2005 guidance cites an EPA policy memorandum from John
Calcagni, entitled, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' dated September 4, 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. CAA Procedural Requirements

    Under section 110 of the Act and EPA regulations (at 40 CFR part
51, subpart F), each State must provide reasonable notice and public
hearing prior to adoption of SIPs and SIP revisions for subsequent
submittal to EPA.
    On March 23, April 5, and April 20, 2007, the District Board of
Health published a notice in the Reno Gazette-Journal, a newspaper of
general circulation in the Reno area, of a public hearing to consider
the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan. A public hearing was held on
April 26, 2007 at District Health Department offices in Reno. On April
26, 2007, the District Board of Health adopted the maintenance plan and
forwarded the plan to NDEP. On May 30, 2007, in accordance with Nevada
law, the Administrator of NDEP submitted the Ozone Maintenance Plan to
EPA. NDEP's May 30, 2007 SIP submittal package includes evidence of
public notice, public hearing, and District Board of Health adoption as
described above. No public comments were received on the draft
maintenance plan. Based on review of these materials, we find that NDEP
and the District Board of Health have met the procedural requirements
of CAA section 110 and 40 CFR part 51, subpart F.

B. Evaluation of Ozone Maintenance Plan

    The 8-hour ozone 110(a)(1) maintenance plan must provide for
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area for 10
years from the effective date of the area's designation as
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. At a minimum, the
maintenance plan for such areas must include the five following
components: Attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, ambient
air quality monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and
contingency plan. As explained below, we find that the Washoe County
Ozone Maintenance Plan includes all five components, that each
component is acceptable, and that the overall plan provides for
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Washoe County
through 2014 (i.e., 10 years beyond 2004, the year of the county's
designation for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS).
1. Attainment Inventory
    The attainment inventory should be based on actual ``typical summer
day'' emissions of VOC and NOX. EPA's Phase 1 8-Hour Ozone
Implementation Rule provides that the 10-year maintenance period begins
as of the effective date of designation for the 8-hour ozone standard
for the area. For purposes of an attainment emissions inventory, the
State may use one of any of the three years on which the 8-hour
attainment designation was based (i.e., 2001, 2002, and 2003). The
inventory should be consistent with EPA's most recent emissions
inventory methods, models, and factors and should be based on the
latest planning assumptions regarding population, employment, and motor
vehicle activity.
    For the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan, Washoe County AQMD
prepared an attainment inventory of ``typical summer day'' VOC and
NOX emissions for year 2002. Washoe County AQMD's attainment
inventory is comprehensive and includes essentially all point, area,
mobile and biogenic sources within the county. Table 1 below summarizes
the plan's attainment inventory, as well as the plan's inventories for
projected VOC and NOX emissions for years 2010 and 2014.

                Table 1.--Washoe County Ozone Precursors Emission Inventory, 2002, 2010 and 2014
                                         [Pounds per typical summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Emissions (lb per summer day)
               Source category                           Pollutant           -----------------------------------
                                                                                2002        2010        2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC EMISSIONS:
    Point Sources...........................  VOC...........................       2,971       3,419       3,658
    Area Sources............................  VOC...........................      16,912      19,259      20,451
    Biogenic Sources........................  VOC...........................     104,618     104,618     104,618
    Nonroad Mobile..........................  VOC...........................      30,299      22,032      20,890
    On-road Mobile..........................  VOC...........................      31,244      29,645      15,471
    Buffer Zone Sources.....................  VOC...........................       1,480       1,703       1,822
                                                                             -----------------------------------
        Total--VOC..........................  VOC...........................     187,524     180,676     166,910
        Change Relative to 2002.............  VOC...........................           0      -6,848     -20,614
NOX EMISSIONS:
    Point Sources...........................  NOX...........................         231         266         284

    Area Sources............................  NOX...........................       3,576       4,109       4,393
    Biogenic Sources........................  NOX...........................      25,480      25,480      25,480
    Nonroad Mobile..........................  NOX...........................      27,404      24,847      22,312
    On-road Mobile..........................  NOX...........................      54,869      57,258      24,838
    Buffer Zone Sources.....................  NOX...........................      24,153      27,794      29,738
                                                                             -----------------------------------
        Total--NOX..........................  NOX...........................     135,713     139,754     107,045
        Change Relative to 2002.............  NOX...........................           0       4,041    -28,668
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--``Buffer zone'' refers to major sources within 25 miles of Washoe County.
Source: Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan (April 2007), tables 2, 3 and 4; EPA.

    On February 3, 2005, NDEP submitted Washoe County AQMD's emissions
inventories of VOC and NOX for year 2002 as the latest in a
series of periodic inventory updates that the county has prepared since
1990 to meet 1-hour ozone planning requirements. To develop the
attainment inventory for the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan,
Washoe County AQMD relied upon the previously-submitted inventory
information for year 2002 for point and area sources but updated
certain source categories, such as nonroad equipment and on-road motor
vehicles, for which new EPA emissions estimation models had become
available.
    As a general matter, for the point source portion of the attainment
inventory, Washoe County AQMD used data collected from permitted
sources during the annual permit renewal process or from emission
statements. For area sources, Washoe County AQMD used EPA emission
factor and methods or material balance calculations, except for
structural and automobile fires for which Washoe County AQMD used
emissions factors and methods developed by the California Air Resources
Board. Aircraft and railroad emissions were estimated using EPA
emissions factors and methods and local activity data provided by
Washoe County Airport Authority and Union Pacific Railroad,
respectively. Biogenic source emissions were determined using EPA's
Biogenic Emissions Inventory System, version 2.3 (BEIS2.3).
Documentation for the emissions developed for these various source
categories is provided in Washoe County AQMD's Washoe County, Nevada
Ozone Non-Attainment Area, 2002 Periodic Emissions Inventory of Ozone
Precursors (May 2004), and related appendices A, B, and C, submitted by
NDEP on February 3, 2005.
    As noted above, for nonroad vehicles and on-road motor vehicles,
Washoe County AQMD re-calculated the emissions that had previously been
calculated for 2002 to reflect updated EPA factors and models. For
nonroad vehicles, Washoe County AQMD re-calculated emissions for 2002
using the EPA model NONROAD2005, and for on-road motor vehicles, Washoe
County AQMD re-calculated emissions using the EPA model MOBILE6.2.03.
The on-road vehicle category incorporated the most recent planning
assumptions for the transportation network including vehicle miles
traveled and vehicle speeds. These planning assumptions were consistent
with those used by the metropolitan planning organization (MPO), which,
in Washoe County, is the Regional Transportation Commission.
Documentation for the emissions estimates for nonroad and on-road
vehicles is provided in appendices A, B, and C of the Washoe County
Ozone Maintenance Plan.
    As shown in table 1, above, biogenic sources represent the largest
source of VOC emissions during a typical summer day in Washoe County at
approximately 56 percent of the inventory. Among the anthropogenic
source categories, on-road and nonroad mobile sources contribute the
most to the overall VOC inventory at 17 and 16 percent, respectively.
With respect to NOX emissions, the largest contributing
sources are on-road and nonroad mobile sources at 40 percent and 20
percent, respectively.
    Based on our review of the documentation submitted with the 2002
periodic inventory and the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan, we
conclude that the attainment inventory has been developed for the
appropriate season of an acceptable attainment year, is comprehensive
and based on appropriate factors and methods, and thus is acceptable
for the purposes of a section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
    The key element of a section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan is a
demonstration of how the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard for the 10-year period following the effective date of
designation as unclassifiable/attainment. The end projection year is 10
years from the effective date of the attainment designation, which for
Washoe County was June 15, 2004. Therefore, this plan must demonstrate
attainment through 2014.
    The typical method that areas have used in the past to demonstrate
that an area will maintain the 1-hour ozone standard has been to
identify the level of ozone precursor emissions in the area which is
sufficient to attain the NAAQS and to show that future emissions of
ozone precursors will not exceed the attainment levels. To perform this
analysis, for the 8-hour maintenance plan, the State needs to develop
emission inventories for the attainment year and for the projection
year. Also, because the plan must demonstrate maintenance throughout
the applicable 10-year period, not just in the projection year, the
State should develop an emission inventory for an interim year between
the attainment inventory year and the projection inventory year to show
a trend analysis for maintenance of the standard.
    For its maintenance demonstration, the Washoe County Ozone
Maintenance Plan includes emissions inventories of ozone precursors in
an interim year (2010) and the projection year (2014). To develop the
emissions projections for these two future years, Washoe County AQMD
used several different methods to project data from year 2002 to the
years 2010 and 2014. For most point and area sources, Washoe County
AQMD used Washoe County's 2010 and

2014 population and employment forecasts adopted by the Truckee Meadows
Regional Planning Commission (which are consistent with those used by
the local MPO) to project emissions into the future. Population
forecasts were also used to project buffer zone source emissions and
locomotive emissions. Emissions from fires and biogenic sources were
assumed to remain constant over the 2002-2014 period. For nonroad
vehicles and on-road vehicles, Washoe County AQMD used EPA models,
NONROAD2005 and MOBILE6.2.03, respectively to project emissions for
2010 and 2014 using the latest vehicle activity projections used by the
local MPO. Aircraft emissions projections were based on aviation
activity forecasts provided by the local airport authority. We find
that the methods and assumptions used by Washoe County AQMD to project
emissions to 2010 and 2104 are acceptable.
    Table 1, above, summarizes the emissions projections for 2010 and
2014 developed by Washoe County AQMD for the Washoe County Ozone
Maintenance Plan and compares those estimates with the corresponding
estimates for the attainment year (2002). Washoe County AQMD concludes
in the Ozone Maintenance Plan, based on the comparison of emissions in
2014 with those in 2002, that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will be maintained
through the 10-year maintenance period. We agree with Washoe County
AQMD's conclusion for the reasons given below.
    As shown in table 1 above, decreases in VOC emissions from nonroad
and on-road vehicle categories (relative to 2002) are expected to more-
than-offset increases in the other source categories. With respect to
NOX, overall emissions are expected to increase through 2010
but then to decrease over the next four years as the benefits from new
EPA emissions and fuels standards for diesel vehicles begin to take
effect. We note, however, that the NOX emissions increase in
2010 is less in absolute terms than the VOC emissions decrease in that
same year. Thus, based on the inventory projections in the Washoe
County Ozone Maintenance Plan, we believe that maximum daily 8-hour
ozone concentrations in Washoe County through 2010 will most likely
remain similar to those monitored in the 2001-2003 period (during which
the area was in attainment of the standard) and then drop slightly
afterwards in rough proportion to the decrease in ozone precursor
emissions predicted from 2010 through 2014. As such, we find that the
Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan demonstrates continued attainment
of the 8-hour ozone standard through 2014.
3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
    The State should continue to operate air quality monitors in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to verify maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone standard in the area. In 2006, Washoe County AQMD operated six
ozone monitoring stations in southern Washoe County. In the maintenance
plan, Washoe County AQMD commits to the continued operation of an
appropriate ozone monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58
to verify the attainment status of the area. See page 9 of the Ozone
Maintenance Plan. This is acceptable.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    A section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan should indicate how the
State will track the progress of the maintenance plan. This is
necessary due to the fact that emissions projections made for the
maintenance demonstration depend on assumptions of point, area and
mobile source activity and turn-over rates. One option for tracking the
progress of the maintenance demonstration would be for the State to
periodically update the emissions inventory.
    To track the progress of the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan,
Washoe County AQMD has committed to prepare, and submit to EPA,
comprehensive periodic ozone emissions inventories on a triennial basis
through at least 2014. The plan's stated purpose for the triennial
inventory updates is to screen for significant increases in actual
ozone precursor emissions. See page 10 of the Ozone Maintenance Plan.
This is acceptable.
5. Contingency Plan
    EPA's Phase 1 8-Hour Ozone Implementation Rule requires section
110(a)(1) maintenance plans to include contingency provisions to
promptly correct any violation of the ozone NAAQS that occurs.
Generally, contingency plans should clearly identify the measures to be
adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and
a specific timeline for action by the State. Also, the State should
identify specific indicators or triggers, which will be used to
determine when the contingency measures need to be implemented.
    The Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan includes a contingency
plan that establishes a triggering mechanism, and identifies specific
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a specific timeline for action by the District
Board of Health. The triggering mechanism is a confirmed violation of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS at one of the air monitoring stations operated
by Washoe County AQMD.
    The Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan identifies a list of
potential contingency measures that are to be considered by the
District Board of Health for implementation in the event that the
triggering event occurs. The identified measures focus on the two of
the largest anthropogenic source categories of ozone precursor
emissions in Washoe County: On-road motor vehicles and nonroad
gasoline-powered vehicles. With respect to on-road motor vehicles, the
potential contingency measures include: (1) Increase the I/M waiver
repair rate, (2) establish/enhance trip reduction programs, and (3)
establish an early vehicle retirement program. With respect to nonroad
gasoline engines, the potential contingency measures include: (1)
Portable gas container emission controls, (2) construction fleet
modernization, and (3) establish a fund program to electrify existing
gasoline lawn and garden equipment. See page 12 of the Ozone
Maintenance Plan. The Ozone Maintenance Plan indicates that the list of
potential measures will be reviewed and updated at least once every
three years in coordination with the periodic ozone emissions inventory
update process.
    With regard to adoption and implementation of measures, the
contingency plan includes a commitment by Washoe County AQMD to make
recommendations to the Washoe County District Board of Health at their
next regularly scheduled meeting, but no later than 45 days after the
trigger has been reached. The contingency plan then indicates that the
District Board of Health's contingency measure adoption and
implementation schedule shall be as expeditious as practicable, but not
longer than 24 months.
    Given that the contingency plan included in the Washoe County Ozone
Maintenance Plan establishes a triggering mechanism, and identifies
specific measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption
and implementation, and a specific timeline for action, we find that
the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan includes contingency
provisions to promptly correct any violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
that occurs in Washoe County and thus is acceptable.

6. Conclusion
    Based on the review presented above of the various elements of the
submitted plan, we are approving the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance
Plan as a revision to the Washoe County portion of the Nevada SIP. In
so doing, we find that the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan,
adopted on April 26, 2007 by the Washoe County District Board of Health
and submitted to EPA by NDEP on May 30, 2007, satisfies the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and EPA's phase 1 rule
implementing the 8-hour ozone standard.

IV. Final Action and Request for Comment

    Under section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is approving a
revision to the Washoe County portion of the Nevada SIP that was
submitted to EPA on May 30, 2007 and that consists of the Maintenance
Plan for the Washoe County 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Area (April 2007)
(``Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan''). As described in more detail
above, we are approving the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan
because we find that it provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour
ozone standard in Washoe County through the year 2014 and thereby
satisfies the related requirements under section 110(a)(1) of the Clean
Air Act and EPA's phase 1 rule implementing the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Our
approval of the Washoe County Ozone Maintenance Plan as a revision to
the Nevada SIP makes the commitments included therein, such as those
related to ambient air quality monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and the contingency plan, federally enforceable.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we view
this as a non-controversial action 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 March 18, 2008 without
further notice unless we receive adverse comment by February 19, 2008.
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.

V. 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 a state plan as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state plan
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
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 CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
section 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 March 18, 2008. 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.

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

    Dated: November 29, 2007.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

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

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart DD--Nevada

0
2. Section 52.1470 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(65) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (65) The following plan was submitted on May 30, 2007 by the
Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Washoe County District Health Department, Air Quality
Management Division.
    (1) Maintenance Plan for the Washoe County 8-Hour Ozone Attainment
Area (April 2007), Washoe County District Health Department, excluding
appendices.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-743 Filed 1-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


 " Johnston, A. Todd" < ajohnston@ nma. org>

07/ 12/ 2006 08: 27 PM To Jason Burnett/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA cc Subject comments on Veranth Jason

We had Dr. Jonathan Borak critique one study that was reported to us as identified in an interagency briefing as supporting the proposition that rural soils are as toxic and harmful as urban coarse PM, and thus a reason for not following through with the proposed exclusion for mining and ag. The study was authored by Veranth et al.

His two page preliminary analysis is attached. Dr. Borak concludes as follows:

" This study raises interesting hypotheses that deserve study, but it provides no specific data of relevance to the proposed PM10 2.5 NAAQS. First, there is no general property of particulate  coarse or fine  that is described here. Second, it is unclear whether the exposure levels are biologically relevant to ambient exposures. Third, the actual exposures involved PM2.5, not coarse particulate."

We are in the process of looking at several other studies identified in various comments that purport to show a link between rural coarse PM and health effects and will forward the results as they become available.

If there are any other studies that have been identified as of concern, please let us know and we'll have Dr. Borak tale a look at them as well.

Todd Johnston National Mining Association 202 463 2668


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 147 (Wednesday, August 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50926-50927]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16403]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34967; 812-15472]

Polen Credit Opportunities Fund and Polen Capital Credit, LLC

July 27, 2023.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from sections
18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) of the Act, under sections 6(c) and 23(c) of
the Act for an exemption from rule 23c-3 under the Act, and for an
order pursuant to section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the
Act.

Summary of Application: Applicants request an order to permit certain
registered closed-end investment companies to issue multiple classes of
shares and to impose asset-based distribution and/or service fees and
early withdrawal charges.

Applicants: Polen Credit Opportunities Fund and Polen Capital Credit,
LLC.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on May 31, 2023 and amended on
July 10, 2023.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below. Hearing
requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on August
21, 2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the
Applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants: Lisa
Nosal, Esq., Kirkland & Ellis LLP, [email protected]; Nicole M.
Runyan, Esq., Kirkland & Ellis LLP, [email protected]; with a
copy to Joshua L. McCarthy, Esq., Polen Capital Credit, LLC,
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trace W. Rakestraw, Senior Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of Investment Management, Chief
Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and condition, please refer to Applicants' application, dated
July 10, 2023, which may be obtained via the Commission's website by
searching for the file number at the top of this document, or for an
Applicant using the Company name search field on the SEC's EDGAR
system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also call the
SEC's Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-16403 Filed 8-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 236 (Monday, December 10, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63397-63399]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26473]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0799; Product Identifier 2018-NM-117-AD; Amendment
39-19515; AD 2018-25-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership
(CSALP) (Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.)
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP) Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-
500-1A11 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of dislodged cargo
compartment blowout panels. This AD requires repetitive inspections for
any dislodged blow-out panel in the forward and aft cargo compartments,
reporting of the inspection findings, and reinstallation if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 14, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publication listed in this AD as of January 14,
2019.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0799.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0799; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darren Gassetto, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Admin Services Section, FAA, New York ACO
Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
516-228-7323; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain C Series Aircraft
Limited Partnership (CSALP) Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11
airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 19,
2018 (83 FR 47315). The NPRM was prompted by reports of dislodged cargo
compartment blowout panels. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive
inspections for any dislodged blow-out panel in the forward and aft
cargo compartments, reporting of the inspection findings, and
reinstallation if necessary.
    We are issuing this AD to address dislodged cargo compartment blow-
out panels, which could result in openings in the forward and aft cargo
compartments. In the event of a cargo compartment fire, these
unintended openings in the forward and aft cargo compartments would
provide a path for smoke, fire, and Halon to enter the adjacent
equipment bays, flight deck, and passenger cabin, which could delay
smoke detection in the forward and aft cargo compartments and result in
the forward and aft cargo compartments not being able to maintain the
Halon concentration required for fire suppression. The cargo
compartment fire may become uncontrollable if this condition is not
addressed, which could result in the loss of controllability of the
airplane.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2018-15, dated June 6,
2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for
certain C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP) Model BD-500-1A10
and BD-500-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Multiple events of dislodged cargo compartment blow-out panels
have been reported in-service. It was determined that these events
were caused by baggage impacting the cargo panel cage, or the cargo
compartment liner below the cargo panel cage, during baggage loading
and unloading on the ground, or during flight due to shifting
luggage.
    Dislodged cargo compartment blow-out panels create openings in
the forward and aft cargo compartments. In the event of a cargo
compartment fire, these unintended openings in the forward and aft
cargo compartments would provide a path for smoke, fire, and Halon
to enter the adjacent equipment bays, flight deck, and passenger
cabin, which could delay smoke detection in the forward and aft
cargo compartments and result in the forward and aft cargo
compartments not being able to maintain Halon concentration required
for fire suppression. The cargo compartment fire may become
uncontrollable if this condition is not corrected.
    This [TCCA] AD mandates repetitive [detailed] inspections of the
affected forward and aft cargo compartment blow-out panels, and
reporting of inspection findings where dislodged blow-out panels
have been found [and re-installation of dislodged blow-out panels].

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA 2018
0799.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this final rule. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the
determination of the cost to the public.

Change to Product Name

    The type certificate holder for Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11
airplanes has changed from ``Bombardier, Inc.,'' to ``C Series Aircraft
Limited Partnership (CSALP).'' We have revised this AD accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this final rule with the change
described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined
that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued C Series Data Module BD500-A-J50-10-01-01AAA-
310B-A, ``Forward and aft cargo compartment blow-out panels--Visual
check,'' Issue 002, dated May 16, 2018. This service information
describes procedures for an inspection for any dislodged blow-out panel
in the forward and aft cargo compartments.
    Bombardier has issued C Series Data Module BD500-A-J50-10-01-00AAA-
521A-A, ``Decompression panels dislodging--Return to basic
configuration,'' Issue 002, dated May 16, 2018. This service
information describes procedures for re-installation of dislodged
forward and aft cargo compartment blow-out panels.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this affects 21 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................              $0              $85           $1,785
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition
action that would be required based on the results of any required
actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need this on-condition action:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Cost per
                   Labor cost                     Parts cost    product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170..............         $0        $170
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the on-condition reporting requirement in this AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be
$85 per product.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will 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 that this AD:
    (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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2018-25-04 C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP) (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.): Amendment 39-
19515; Docket No. FAA-2018-0799; Product Identifier 2018-NM-117-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 14, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP)
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) airplanes,
certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and
(c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Model BD-500-1A10 airplanes, serial numbers 50001 and
subsequent, equipped with blow-out panel part number D762213-503,
D762216-505, or D762209-503.
    (2) Model BD-500-1A11 airplanes, serial numbers 55001 and
subsequent, equipped with blow-out panel part number D762213-503,
D762216-505, or D762209-503.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 50, Cargo and
accessory compartment.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of dislodged cargo compartment
blow-out panels. We are issuing this AD to address this condition,
which could result in openings in the forward and aft cargo
compartments. In the event of a cargo compartment fire, these
unintended openings in the forward and aft cargo compartments would
provide a path for smoke, fire, and Halon to enter the adjacent
equipment bays, flight deck, and passenger cabin, which could delay
smoke detection in the forward and aft cargo compartments and result
in the forward and aft cargo compartments not being able to maintain
the Halon concentration required for fire suppression. The cargo
compartment fire may become uncontrollable if this condition is not
addressed, which could result in the loss of controllability of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive Inspections of the Forward and Aft Cargo Compartment
Blow-Out Panels and Re-Installation

    Within 7 days or 50 flight cycles, whichever occurs first, after
the effective date of this AD, do a detailed inspection for any
dislodged blow-out panel in the forward and aft cargo compartments,
in accordance with C Series (Bombardier) Data Module BD500-A-J50-10-
01-01AAA-310B-A, ``Forward and aft cargo compartment blow-out
panels--Visual check,'' Issue 002, dated May 16, 2018. Re-install
all dislodged forward and aft cargo compartment blow-out panels
before further flight, in accordance with C Series (Bombardier) Data
Module BD500-A-J50-10-01-00AAA-521A-A, ``Decompression panels
dislodging--Return to basic configuration,'' Issue 002, dated May
16, 2018. Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 100 flight cycles,
repeat the detailed inspection for any dislodged blow-out panel in
the forward and aft cargo compartments.

(h) Reporting

    If any blow-out panel in the forward or aft cargo compartments
is found dislodged during any inspection required by paragraph (g)
of this AD, at the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or
(h)(2) of this AD, report findings to the Bombardier customer
response center (CRC) via email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Reportable findings include the airplane serial number on which any
dislodged blow-out panel was found, the date of inspection, and the
part number and location of each dislodged blow-out panel.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.

(i) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to
the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 1 hour per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or C Series
Aircraft Limited Partnership's (CSALP's) TCCA Design Approval
Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must
include the DAO-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2018-15, dated June 6, 2018, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2018-0799.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Darren Gassetto,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Admin Services Section,
FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) C Series (Bombardier) Data Module BD500-A-J50-10-01-00AAA-
521A-A, ``Decompression panels dislodging--Return to basic
configuration,'' Issue 002, dated May 16, 2018.
    (ii) C Series (Bombardier) Data Module BD500-A-J50-10-01-01AAA-
310B-A, ``Forward and aft cargo compartment blow-out panels--Visual
check,'' Issue 002, dated May 16, 2018.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on November 23, 2018.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-26473 Filed 12-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P