[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38284-38289]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16392]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0905; FRL 9929-90-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS58

Approval of Alabama's Request To Relax the Federal Reid Vapor
Pressure Gasoline Volatility Standard for Birmingham, Alabama

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a request from the state of Alabama for the EPA to
relax the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) standard applicable to gasoline
introduced into commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each year for
Jefferson and Shelby counties (``the Birmingham area''). Specifically,
the EPA is approving amendments to the regulations to change the RVP
standard for the Birmingham area from 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi)
to 9.0 psi for gasoline. The EPA has determined that this change to the
federal RVP regulation is consistent with the applicable provisions of
the Clean Air Act (CAA). Additionally, the EPA is responding to adverse
comments received for this action.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0905. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. 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, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patty Klavon, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood
Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of this preamble are listed in
the following outline:

I. General Information
II. Action Being Taken
III. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement
IV. The EPA's Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards in
Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as Attainment Areas
V. Alabama's Request To Relax the Federal RVP Requirement for the
Birmingham Area
VI. Response to Comments
VII. Final Action
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
IX. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions

    Effective date. Section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, generally provides that rules may not take
effect earlier than 30 days after they are published in the Federal
Register. The EPA is issuing this final rule under CAA section
307(d)(1). CAA section 307(d)(1) states: ``The provisions of section
553 through 557 . . . of Title 5 shall not, except as expressly
provided in this subsection, apply to actions to which this subsection
applies.'' Thus, section 553(d) of the APA does not apply to this rule.
The EPA is nevertheless acting consistently with the policies
underlying APA section 553(d) in making this rule effective on July 2,
2015. APA section 553(d) allows an effective date less than 30 days
after

publication for a rule ``that grants or recognizes an exemption or
relieves a restriction.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). This rule fits within
that exception because it lifts a restriction on the introduction into
commerce of gasoline with a RVP of greater than 7.8 psi sold in
Jefferson and Shelby counties, Alabama (``the Birmingham area'')
between June 1 and September 15 of each year. Because this action can
be considered to relieve a restriction that would otherwise prevent the
introduction into commerce of gasoline with an RVP of greater than 7.8
psi, the EPA is making this action effective on July 2, 2015.

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this rule are fuel producers and
distributors who do business in Alabama.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             NAICS \1\
       Examples of potentially regulated entities              Codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum refineries....................................          324110
Gasoline Marketers and Distributors.....................          424710
                                                                  424720
Gasoline Retail Stations................................          447110
Gasoline Transporters...................................          484220
                                                                  484230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System

    The above table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated
by this action. The table lists the types of entities of which the EPA
is aware that potentially could be affected by this rule. Other types
of entities not listed on the table could also be affected by this
rule. To determine whether your organization could be affected by this
rule, you should carefully examine the regulations in 40 CFR 80.27. If
you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

B. What is the EPA's authority for taking this action?

    The statutory authority for this action is granted to the EPA by
Sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended; 42 U.S.C.
7545(h) and 7601(a).

II. Action Being Taken

    This final rule approves a request from the state of Alabama to
change the summertime RVP standard for the Birmingham area from 7.8 psi
to 9.0 psi by amending the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). In
a previous rulemaking, the EPA approved a state implementation plan
(SIP) revision from the state of Alabama which provided a technical
demonstration that relaxing the federal RVP requirement from 7.8 psi to
9.0 psi for gasoline sold from June 1 to September 15 of each year in
the Birmingham area would not interfere with maintenance of the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the Birmingham area.
For more information on Alabama's SIP revision, please refer to the
April 17, 2015 rulemaking (80 FR 21170).
    The preamble for this rulemaking is organized as follows: Section
III. provides the history of the federal gasoline volatility
regulation. Section IV. describes the policy regarding relaxation of
volatility standards in ozone nonattainment areas that are redesignated
as attainment areas. Section V. provides information specific to
Alabama's request for the Birmingham area. Section VI. provides the
EPA's response to the adverse comments received on the May 7, 2015
notice of proposed rulemaking (80 FR 26212). Finally, Section VII.
presents the final action in response to Alabama's request.

III. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement

    On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), the EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide was becoming increasingly volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOC), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function, thereby aggravating asthma
and other respiratory conditions, increase susceptibility to
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people
with heart and lung disease.
    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under CAA section
211(c), the EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868)
that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the
regulatory control periods that were established on a state-by-state
basis in the final rule. The regulatory control periods addressed the
portion of the year when peak ozone concentrations were expected. These
regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase nationwide program,
which was designed to reduce the volatility of gasoline during the high
ozone season. On June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23658), the EPA promulgated more
stringent volatility controls as Phase II of the volatility control
program. These requirements established maximum RVP standards of 9.0
psi or 7.8 psi (depending on the state, the month, and the area's
initial ozone attainment designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS.)
    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section 211(h) to address
fuel volatility. CAA section 211(h) requires the EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone
season. CAA section 211(h) also prohibits the EPA from establishing a
volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area,
except that the EPA may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any
former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
    On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), the EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to be consistent with CAA section 211(h). The
modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP above
9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, effective January
13, 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658), which included the 7.8 psi ozone season limitation for
certain areas. As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility
controls and reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility
standards published in 1991, the EPA will rely on states to initiate
changes to their respective volatility programs. The EPA's policy for
approving such changes is described below in Section IV. of this
action.
    The state of Alabama initiated this change by requesting that the
EPA relax the 7.8 psi RVP standard to 9.0 psi for the Birmingham area,
which is subject to the 7.8 psi RVP requirement during the summertime
ozone season. Accordingly, the state of Alabama provided a technical
demonstration showing that relaxing the federal RVP requirement in the
Birmingham area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi would not interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the
CAA. See Section V. of this action for information specific to
Alabama's request for the Birmingham area.

IV. The EPA's Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards in
Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as Attainment Areas

    As stated in the preamble for the EPA's amended Phase II volatility
standards (56 FR 64706), any change in the volatility standard for a
nonattainment area that was subsequently redesignated as an attainment
area must be accomplished through a separate rulemaking that revises
the applicable standard for that area. Thus, for former 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas where the EPA mandated a Phase II volatility
standard of 7.8 psi RVP in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the
federal 7.8 psi RVP requirement remains in effect, even after such an
area is redesignated to attainment, until a separate rulemaking is
completed that relaxes the federal RVP standard in that area from 7.8
psi to 9.0 psi.
    As explained in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the EPA believes
that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard is best accomplished in
conjunction with the redesignation process. In order for an ozone
nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment area, CAA
section 107(d)(3) requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to CAA
section 175A, that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for
the ozone NAAQS for ten years. Depending on the area's circumstances,
this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the area is capable
of maintaining attainment for ten years without the more stringent
volatility standard or that the more stringent volatility standard may
be necessary for the area to maintain its attainment with the ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request for redesignation, the
EPA will not relax the volatility standard unless the state requests a
relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates to the satisfaction of
the EPA that the area will maintain attainment for ten years without
the need for the more stringent volatility standard.
    Alabama did not request relaxation of the federal RVP standard from
7.8 psi to 9.0 psi when the Birmingham area was redesignated to
attainment for either the 1-hour ozone NAAQS or the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
However, Alabama took a conservative approach in developing maintenance
plans associated with those redesignation requests by estimating
emissions using a federal RVP requirement of 9.0 psi.

V. Alabama's Request To Relax the Federal RVP Requirement for the
Birmingham Area

    In a May 12, 2006 final rule, the EPA approved the Birmingham
area's redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. See 71 FR 27631 (May 12, 2006).\2\ As required, the CAA section
175A maintenance plan provides for continued attainment and maintenance
of the 1997 ozone NAAQS for at least ten years from the effective date
of the Birmingham area's redesignation to attainment for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. This maintenance plan also includes components demonstrating how
the Birmingham area will continue to attain the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and
provides contingency measures should the Birmingham area violate that
NAAQS. The state of Alabama's ozone redesignation request and
maintenance plan for the Birmingham area did not remove the state-level
7.0 psi RVP requirement that was in place for the Birmingham area.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Birmingham area (i.e., Jefferson and Shelby counties)
was designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
effective July 20, 2012. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
    \3\ In 2001, the EPA approved a state fuel program that imposed
a more stringent 7.0 psi requirement for the Birmingham area, per
CAA section 211(c)(4)(C). The low-RVP fuel program required that all
gasoline sold during the summertime ozone season (June 1-September
15 of each year) in the Birmingham area contain a maximum RVP of 7.0
psi. See 66 FR 56218 (November 7, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 2, 2012, the state of Alabama, through the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), submitted a proposed
revision to Alabama's SIP removing the state-level RVP requirement to
use 7.0 psi RVP gasoline in the Birmingham area during the summertime
ozone season. The EPA approved the revision in an April 20, 2012 final
rule. See 77 FR 23619. The revision to the Alabama SIP resulted in the
federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi applying to the Birmingham area.
    On November 14, 2014, the state of Alabama submitted a proposed
revision to its SIP demonstrating that removal of the federal RVP
requirement of 7.8 psi for gasoline during the summer ozone season in
the Birmingham area would not interfere with maintenance of any NAAQS.
Specifically, the state provided a technical demonstration showing that
relaxing the federal RVP requirements in the Birmingham area from 7.8
psi to 9.0 psi would not interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS or
with any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
    The EPA evaluated and approved Alabama's November 14, 2014 SIP
revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject to public notice-
and-comment. The EPA received two comments on that rulemaking, and
those comments were addressed in the final rule for that rulemaking.
See 80 FR 21170 (April 17, 2015). The comments received can be found in
the docket for that rulemaking (EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0867).
    In this final action, the EPA is taking the second and final step
in the process to approve Alabama's request to relax the summertime
ozone season RVP standard for the Birmingham area from 7.8 psi to 9.0
psi. This final action to approve Alabama's request to relax the
summertime ozone season RVP standard for the Birmingham area from 7.8
psi to 9.0 psi is based on the EPA's April 18, 2015 approval of
Alabama's November 14, 2014 SIP revision, and the fact that the
Birmingham area is currently in attainment for all ozone NAAQS.

VI. Response to Comments

    On May 7, 2015, the EPA published a direct final rule to approve a
request from Alabama for the EPA to relax the RVP standard for the
Birmingham Area. See 80 FR 26191. The EPA published a parallel proposal
(See 80 FR 26212) in the event that adverse comments were received such
that the direct final rule would need to be withdrawn. In the direct
final rule, the EPA stated that the direct final rule would be
withdrawn and would not take effect if adverse comments were received
by June 8, 2015. The EPA further stated that the corresponding proposed
rule would remain in effect and that the EPA would respond to any
adverse comments received in a subsequent final rule provided the EPA
was able to address such comments.\4\ The EPA has received comments on
the rulemaking. Although, for the reasons discussed below, these
comments are outside of the scope of this action, the EPA is treating
these comments as adverse. Therefore, the EPA has withdrawn the direct
final rule in a separate Federal Register notice and is providing a
summary of comments received and the EPA's responses to the comments in
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The EPA also noted that an additional public comment period
would not be instituted for the action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: One commenter contends that fleet turnover cannot be used
to offset the emissions increases from RVP relaxation because ``fleet
turnover was already considered in the maintenance plan'' and its use
as an offset measure would therefore ``double count'' the associated
emissions decreases. The

commenter also believes that Alabama used inaccurate information in
calculating fleet turnover unless it used fleet emission data from the
actual fleet in 2015 in the area and that ``using inaccurate
information to make a decision to approve a SIP revision is arbitrary
and capricious.'' Additionally, the commenter states that the CAA
section ``110(l) analysis must include photochemical grid modeling to
determine if the increased emissions from weakening the RVP standard
adversely impacts 2008 ozone nonattainment areas including Metro-
Atlanta, Metro-Memphis, Metro-Knoxville and other nearby areas.''
    Response: These comments are beyond the scope of this action. CAA
section 110(l) applies to revisions to a SIP submitted by a state.
However, this rulemaking does not approve any SIP revisions. Rather, it
revises the federal regulations at 40 CFR part 80 applicable to
gasoline introduced into commerce in certain areas.
    The EPA evaluated the impacts of RVP relaxation in the Birmingham
area pursuant to CAA section 110(l) in a previous rulemaking. See 80 FR
21170 (April 17, 2015). The EPA's evaluation, including its analysis of
fleet turnover, was subject to public notice-and-comment. The EPA
received two comments on its proposed approval of the state's CAA
section 110(l) noninterference demonstration and responded to those
comments in the final rulemaking notice. The EPA's approval of the
noninterference demonstration into the SIP was effective on April 17,
2015. The opportunity for the commenter to express concerns regarding
the EPA's analyses of whether the change to the federal RVP
requirements for the Birmingham area would interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable CAA requirement was
during the earlier public notice-and-comment period. The EPA's
rulemaking to revise its regulations in 40 CFR part 80 did not reopen
the EPA's action on Alabama's CAA section 110(l) demonstration.
    Comment: The other commenter contends that the EPA should not relax
the RVP requirement in Birmingham because public health will suffer and
Alabama has acknowledged that air pollution will increase. The
commenter opines that the EPA should not relax the RVP limit because
the EPA has proposed to revise the ozone NAAQS. Finally, the commenter
asserts that the EPA is taking this action in order to accommodate the
ethanol industry and allow for increased ethanol use in the Birmingham
area.
    Response: These comments are beyond the scope of this action. The
EPA is taking this action to revise the RVP limit applicable to the
Birmingham area pursuant to a request from the state of Alabama. To
support its request for the RVP relaxation, Alabama submitted a
demonstration that the change would not interfere with the maintenance
of any applicable NAAQS. The EPA approved that demonstration through
notice-and comment rulemaking on April 17, 2015. See 80 FR 21170. The
opportunity for the commenter to express concerns regarding the EPA's
analyses of whether the change to the federal RVP requirements for the
Birmingham area would result in increased emissions and interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any applicable NAAQS or any other
applicable CAA requirement was during the earlier public notice-and-
comment period. The EPA's rulemaking to revise its regulations in 40
CFR part 80 did not reopen the EPA's action on Alabama's CAA section
110(l) demonstration.
    With regard to EPA's proposal to tighten the ozone NAAQS, the CAA
does not require that a state address a potential future NAAQS when
conducting a CAA section 110(l) analysis, and the EPA does not believe
that it is appropriate to delay action in response to a state's request
until a final decision is made on the ozone NAAQS. If the EPA revises
the ozone NAAQS and if the Birmingham area is eventually designated
nonattainment, the state will have the opportunity to submit a SIP that
contains control measures to bring the area into attainment as
expeditiously as practicable. This action does not remove any tools
available to the state for compliance with a future NAAQS.
    Finally, the EPA is approving this change to 40 CFR part 80 based
on a request from the state and because the EPA made a final
determination that the state made an adequate demonstration to show
that removal of this Federal requirement would not interfere with air
quality in the Birmingham area. Further, this final action is
consistent with CAA requirements. Based upon these factors alone, the
EPA is approving Alabama's request to relax the federal RVP gasoline
requirements in the Birmingham area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.

VII. Final Action

    The EPA is taking final action to approve the request from Alabama
for the EPA to relax the RVP applicable to gasoline introduced into
commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each year in the Birmingham
area. Specifically, this action amends the applicable RVP standard from
7.8 psi to 9.0 psi provided at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2) for the Birmingham
area.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563.
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., and therefore is not subject to these requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. The small entities subject to the
requirements of this action are refiners, importers or blenders of
gasoline that choose to produce or import low RVP gasoline for sale in
the Birmingham area and gasoline distributers and retail stations in
the Birmingham area. This action relaxes the federal RVP standard for
gasoline sold in the Birmingham area during the summertime ozone season
(June 1 to September 15 of each year) from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. This
rule does not impose any requirements or create impacts on small
entities beyond those, if any, already required by or resulting from
the CAA section 211(h) Volatility Control program. We have therefore
concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden for all
directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This final rule does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100
million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The

action implements mandates specifically and explicitly set forth in CAA
section 211(h) without the exercise of any policy discretion by the
EPA.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This final rule
affects only those refiners, importers or blenders of gasoline that
choose to produce or import low RVP gasoline for sale in the Birmingham
area and gasoline distributers and retail stations in the Birmingham
area. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it approves a state program.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards, and therefore, is
not subject to the NTTAA.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations because it does not affect the applicable
ozone NAAQS which establish the level of protection provided to human
health or the environment. This rule relaxes the applicable volatility
standard of gasoline during the summer, possibly resulting in slightly
higher mobile source emissions. However, the state of Alabama has
demonstrated in the Birmingham area's approved maintenance plan that
this action will not interfere with attainment of the ozone NAAQS.
Therefore, disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations are not an
anticipated result. The results of this evaluation are contained in
Section V. of this final rule. A copy of Alabama's November 14, 2014
letter requesting that the EPA relax the RVP standard, including the
technical analysis demonstrating that the less stringent RVP in the
Birmingham area would not interfere with continued maintenance of the
1997 ozone NAAQS or any other applicable standard, has been placed in
the public docket for this action.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action may be filed only in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 31, 2015. Filing
a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action 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 CAA section 307(b)(2).

IX. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions

    The statutory authority for this action is granted to the EPA by
Sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, as amended; 42 U.S.C.
7545(h) and 7601(a).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Motor vehicle and
motor vehicle engines, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 25, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
part 80 as follows:

PART 80--REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7542, 7545, and 7601(a).

0
2. In Sec.  80.27(a)(2)(ii), the table is amended by:
0
a. Revising the entry for Alabama; and
0
b. Adding footnote 8.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  80.27  Controls and prohibitions on gasoline volatility.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *

                               Applicable Standards \1\ 1992 and Subsequent Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     State                           May          June         July        August     September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama \8\....................................          9.0          9.0          9.0          9.0          9.0

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Standards are expressed in pounds per square inch (psi).
* * * * *
\8\ The standard for Jefferson and Shelby Counties from June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through July 2, 2015
  was 7.8 psi.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2015-16392 Filed 7-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 227 (Monday, November 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 70432]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28543]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. PR13-6-000; PR13-7-000]

Washington Gas Light Company; Notice of Petition for Rate
Approval

    Take notice that on November 9, 2012, Washington Gas Light Company
(Washington Gas) filed its Lost and unaccounted-for Gas (LAUF) as
provided for in Paragraph IV.F of its FERC NGPA Gas Tariff as more
fully detailed in the petition.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 27, 2012.

    Dated: November 19, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-28543 Filed 11-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 9, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29934-29935]
[FR Doc No: 2023-09851]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2014-0022]

Technical Mapping Advisory Council

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

ACTION: Request for applicants for appointment to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's Technical Mapping Advisory Council.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is requesting
qualified individuals interested in serving on the Technical Mapping
Advisory Council (TMAC) apply for appointment. The TMAC, as established
in the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012, makes
recommendations to the FEMA Administrator on how to improve, in a cost-
effective manner, the accuracy, general quality, ease of use,
distribution, and dissemination of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs)
and risk data; and to define performance metrics and milestones
required to effectively and efficiently map flood risk areas in the
United States. The appointments are for 3 years each and applicants
will be considered for three vacancies on the TMAC.

DATES: Applications will be accepted until 11:59 p.m. ET on May 31,
2023.

ADDRESSES: Applications for membership should be submitted by one of
the following methods:
     Email: [email protected].
     Mail: FEMA, Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, Risk Management Directorate, Attn: Brian Koper, 400 C
Street SW, Suite 6NW-1412, Washington, DC 20472-3020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Koper, Designated Federal
Officer for the TMAC, FEMA, Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, Risk Management Directorate, 400 C Street SW, Suite
6NW-1412, Washington, DC 20472-3020,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. The TMAC website is: http://www.fema.gov/TMAC.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The TMAC is an advisory committee
established by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012,
42 U.S.C. 4101a, in accordance with provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. ch. 10 (Pub. L. 117-286). The TMAC makes
recommendations to FEMA on mapping-related issues and activities,
including mapping standards and guidelines, performance metrics and
milestones, map maintenance, interagency and intergovernmental
coordination, map accuracy, and funding strategies. In addition, the
TMAC submits an annual report to the FEMA Administrator that contains:
(1) a description of the activities of the Council; (2) an evaluation
of the status and performance of FIRMs and mapping activities to revise
and update FIRMs; and (3) a summary of recommendations made by the
Council to the FEMA Administrator.
    Members of the TMAC will be appointed based on their demonstrated
knowledge and competence in areas such as surveying, cartography,
remote sensing, geospatial information systems, or the technical
aspects of preparing and using FIRMs. In order for FEMA to maximize the
impact of the Council and the guidance it provides, the Council must be
diverse with regard to professional and technical expertise. FEMA is
committed to pursuing opportunities, consistent with applicable law, to
compose a committee that reflects the diversity of the nation's people.
    FEMA is requesting qualified individuals who are interested in
serving on the TMAC to apply for

appointment. Applicants will be considered for appointment to three
vacancies on the TMAC, the terms of which start in summer/fall 2023.
One of these three vacancies, as described below, will be appointed to
serve as Special Government Employees (SGE) as defined in title 18
U.S.C. 202(a) to serve in their individual capacity, while the other
two members of the TMAC will be appointed to serve as representative
members. Representative members are appointed to provide the
perspective of the organization that they represent. The candidate
selected for appointment as an SGE will be subject to the Federal
conflict of interest laws and standard of conduct regulations and
required to file a New Entrant Confidential Disclosure Report (OGE
450). This form can be obtained by visiting the website of the Office
of Government Ethics (http://www.oge.gov); please do not submit this
form with your application. Qualified applicants will be considered for
one or more of the following membership categories with vacancies:
    (a) One member of a recognized regional flood and stormwater
management organization;
    (b) One member (SGE) of a recognized risk management association or
organization;
    (c) One representative of a recognized professional association or
organization representing State geographic information;
    Members of the TMAC serve terms of three years. There is no
application form. However, applications must include the following
information:
     Applicant's full name;
     Home and business phone numbers;
     Preferred email address;
     Home and business mailing addresses;
     Current position title and organization;
     Resume or curriculum vitae; and
     The membership category of interest (e.g., member of a
recognized professional association or organization representing flood
hazard determination firms).
    The TMAC meets as often as needed to fulfill its mission, but not
less than twice a year. Members may be reimbursed for travel and per
diem incurred in the performance of their duties as members of the
TMAC. All travel for TMAC business must be approved in advance by the
Designated Federal Officer.
    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not discriminate in
employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin,
political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital
status, disability and genetic information, age, membership in an
employee organization, or other non-merit factor. DHS strives to
achieve a widely diverse candidate pool for all its recruitment
actions. Current DHS and FEMA employees will not be considered for
membership. Federally registered lobbyists will not be considered.

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration [bond] Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2023-09851 Filed 5-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7298-7299]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03335]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2017-0073 (Notice No. 2018-05)]

Hazardous Materials: Information Collection Activities

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, PHMSA
invites comments on an information collection pertaining to hazardous
materials transportation for which PHMSA intends to request renewal
from the Office of Management and Budget. On September 28, 2017, PHMSA
published a notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on
this Information Collection Renewal [82 FR 45361] under Docket No.
PHMSA-2017-0073 (Notice No. 2017-04). PHMSA received five comments;
however, they were outside the scope of the September 28, 2017, notice
and the Hazardous Materials Regulations.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
March 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. PHMSA-
2017-0073 (Notice No. 2018-05), by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System; U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing
Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: To the Docket Management System; Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
Docket Number (PHMSA-2017-0073) for this notice at the beginning of the
comment. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four
methods. All comments received will be posted without change to the
Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) and will include any personal
information provided.
    Requests for a copy of an information collection should be directed
to Steven Andrews or Shelby Geller, Standards and Rulemaking Division,
(202) 366-8553, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    Docket: For access to the dockets to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or DOT's Docket
Operations Office (see ADDRESSES).
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records

notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Andrews or Shelby Geller,
Standards and Rulemaking Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 1320.8 (d), title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) requires PHMSA to provide interested members of the
public and affected agencies an opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping requests. This notice identifies an
information collection request that PHMSA will be submitting to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for renewal and extension. This
information collection is contained in 49 CFR 171.6 of the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180). PHMSA has revised
burden estimates, where appropriate, to reflect current reporting
levels or adjustments based on changes in proposed or final rules
published since the information collection was last approved. The
following information is provided for this information collection: (1)
Title of the information collection, including former title if a change
is being made; (2) OMB control number; (3) summary of the information
collection activity; (4) description of affected public; (5) estimate
of total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden; and (6) frequency
of collection. PHMSA will request a 3-year term of approval for this
information collection activity and will publish a notice in the
Federal Register upon OMB's approval.
    PHMSA requests comments on the following information collection:
    Title: Hazardous Materials Shipping Papers & Emergency Response
Information.
    OMB Control Number: 2137-0034.
    Summary: This information collection is for the requirement to
provide a shipping paper and emergency response information with
shipments of hazardous materials. Shipping papers are a basic
communication tool in the transportation of hazardous materials and, by
definition (see 49 CFR 171.8), include a shipping order, bill of
lading, manifest, or other shipping document serving a similar purpose
and containing the information required by Sec. Sec.  172.202, 172.203,
and 172.204 of the HMR. A shipping paper with emergency response
information must accompany most hazardous materials shipments and be
readily available at all times during transportation.
    Shipping papers serve as the principal source of information
regarding the presence of hazardous materials, identification,
quantity, and emergency response procedures. They inform on compliance
with other requirements (i.e., the placement of rail cars containing
different hazardous materials in trains); prevent the loading of
poisons with foodstuffs; maintain the separation of incompatible
hazardous materials; and limit the amount of radioactive materials that
may be transported in a vehicle or aircraft. Shipping papers and
emergency response information also notify transport workers that
hazardous materials are present and serve as a principal means of
identifying hazardous materials during transportation emergencies.
Firefighters, police, and other emergency response personnel are
trained to obtain the DOT shipping papers and emergency response
information when responding to hazardous materials transportation
emergencies. The availability of accurate information concerning
hazardous materials being transported significantly improves response
efforts in these types of emergencies.
    Affected Public: Shippers and carriers of hazardous materials in
commerce.
    Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden:
    Number of Respondents: 260,000.
    Total Annual Responses: 175,234,493.
    Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,598,685.
    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 13, 2018.
William S. Schoonover,
Associate Administrator of Hazard Materials Safety, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-03335 Filed 2-16-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION - COMPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR PESTICIDE
PETITION

Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1011

EPA Registration Division contact: Sidney Jackson<PHONE_NUMBER>

Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4)

Pesticide Petition Number (PP#): 1E7951

	EPA has received a pesticide petition (PP), 1E7951, from the IR-4
Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College
Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposing, pursuant to
section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 by establishing a tolerance for
residues of the herbicide S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate (EPTC),
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the raw agricultural
commodity; watermelon at 0.08 parts per million (ppm).  The petition
also requests conversion of the existing Fruit, citrus, group 10
tolerance at 0.1 ppm to Fruit, citrus group 10-10 at 0.1 ppm and
conversion of existing safflower and sunflower tolerance at 0.08 ppm to
Sunflower subgroup 20B at 0.08 ppm.  EPA has determined that the
petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth
in section 408 (d)(2) of  FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated
the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data
support granting of the petition. Additional data may be needed before
EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism. EPTC is systemic pesticide and is rapidly
metabolized in plants into numerous products.  The Agency has determined
that EPTC and three hydroxy metabolites will serve as markers to
represent EPTC residues in plants.

	2. Analytical method. Adequate methods are available for the
determination of EPTC and three hydroxy metabolites in crops, including
watermelon.  EPTC is analyzed by extraction of the macerated samples
with toluene with subsequent quantification using gas chromatography
with nitrogen-phosphorous detection.  The three hydroxy metabolites are
extracted from macerated samples with a mixture of acetone and water.
The acetone is dispelled and the aqueous fraction is digested with acid.
 The hydrolyzed metabolites are then extracted with a mixture of hexane
and ether and the extract is purified through a solid phase extraction
cartridge.  The residues are then derivatized and quantified using a gas
chromatograph equipped with a mass-selective detector.  The Limit of
Quantitation of the methods is 0.05 ppm for EPTC and 0.01 ppm for each
of three hydroxy metabolites.

	3. Magnitude of residues. Residues of EPTC and metabolites were
undetectable (<0.08 ppm) in watermelon in seven applicable MOR trials.
A permanent tolerance of 0.08 ppm is proposed.

B. Toxicological Profile

	1. Acute toxicity.  EPTC is moderately toxic (Toxicity Category III)
via the oral and dermal routes, and in a primary eye irritation study in
rabbits, the technical product was found to be slightly irritating
(Toxicity Category III). EPTC is most toxic via the inhalation route
(Toxicity Category II).

	2. Genotoxicty. Testing of EPTC for genotoxicity through an in vivo
micronucleus test and a Drosophila sex-linked recessive lethal mutation
assay gave negative results.

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. Studies in rats and rabbits
showed developmental and reproductive toxicity only in the presence of
maternal or parental toxicity.  In a prenatal developmental toxicity
study in rats, developmental toxicity (in part, decreased fetal body
weights and decreased litter size, but effects were attributed to
maternal stress) was seen in the presence of marked maternal toxicity
(increased mortality and decreased body weight).  In a developmental
toxicity study in rabbits, developmental toxicity (decreased fetal body
weight) was again seen in the presence of marked maternal toxicity (in
part, decreased body weight and increased mortality).  In a two
generation reproduction test in rats, effects in the offspring were
observed only at or above treatment levels which resulted in parental
toxicity.

	4. Subchronic toxicity. Cardiotoxicity and neurotoxicity were observed
in subchronic studies in rats.  Cardiotoxicity was attributed to
myocardial degeneration by histological exam.  The acute neurotoxicity
study in the hen did not show neurotoxicity, however.

	5. Chronic toxicity. Chronic testing in rats and dogs also showed
cardiotoxicity and neurotoxicity.

	6. Animal metabolism. The metabolism of EPTC in rats was studied using
radiolabeled EPTC.  Most of the radioactivity was quickly excreted in
the urine and there was little accumulation in tissues.  Small amounts
were excreted in the feces by exhalation.  No sex-linked difference in
metabolism or distribution of EPTC was noted.

	7. Metabolite toxicology. The Agency has determined that metabolites
incorporating the thiocarbamate moiety are of concern.  These residues
include various acid conjugates.

	8. Endocrine disruption. There is no evidence of endocrine disruptor
effects in the EPTC database.

C. Aggregate Exposure

	1. Dietary exposure. Tolerances have been established in 40 CFR 180.117
for the residues of EPTC in or on a variety of raw agricultural
commodities.  Risk assessments were performed to assess dietary
exposures from EPTC in food as follows:

	i. Food. Acute dietary risk analysis demonstrates acceptable food risk
to the US population and all dietary subgroups.  The acute dietary
Margin of Exposure for the general population exceeded 9000 (based on
the 95%-ile estimate) with and without the proposed watermelon use and
the redefined citrus and oilseed subgroups based on a Tier 1 DEEM-FCID
analysis.  The lowest acute MOE with or without watermelon use was 3880
for children 1-2 years old.  A Tier 3 chronic risk assessment showed an
increase in the %cPAD for the general population from 6.2% to 13.0% with
an assumption of 100% of the watermelon crop treated.  The highest %cPAD
use for current labeled uses was 13.7% for children 1-2 years old but
was 30.8% with the watermelon use included for children 3-5 years old.
The large increase in the chronic risk estimate is due to a conservative
assumption of 100% crop treated for the proposed watermelon use.

	ii. Drinking water. Estimation of drinking water levels for EPTC did
not result in levels of concern.

	2. Non-dietary exposure. Exposures by non-dietary means were determined
to be not of concern in the EPTC Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(RED).

D. Cumulative Effects

	The Agency has determined that thiocarbamates cannot be regulated as a
single class due to differing neurotoxic activity patterns. Due to
incomplete information regarding developmental neurotoxicity, EPA has
retained the 10X FQPA Safety Factor.

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population. The proposed watermelon use for EPTC results in
exposures to the general population and all subpopulations that are
within acceptable ranges.

	2. Infants and children. Risk calculations for the proposed watermelon
use result in acceptable exposures.  The Agency has retained a 10X FQPA
safety factor in the toxicological endpoints for EPTC which was included
in the calculation of exposures.

F. International Tolerances

	There are no international Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) currently
established for EPTC.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 124 (Thursday, June 29, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29376-29379]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13411]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-7529; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-207-AD;
Amendment 39-18939; AD 2017-13-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-16-02,
which applied to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600)
airplanes. AD 2014-16-02 required revising the airplane flight manual
to prohibit thrust reverser operation, doing repetitive detailed
inspections of both engine thrust reversers for cracks, and modifying
the thrust reversers if necessary. The modification is also an interim
(optional) terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This new
AD adds a new terminating modification of the thrust reversers, which
includes new inspections and repair, if necessary. This AD was prompted
by a determination that it is necessary to add a requirement to repair
or modify the thrust reversers, which would terminate the requirements
of AD 2014-16-02. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 3, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 3,
2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of August
12, 2014 (79 FR 46968, August 12, 2014).

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; Widebody Customer Response Center North
America; toll-free telephone number 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial
telephone number 1-514-855-2999; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7529.

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-2015-
7529; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, 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: Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2014-16-02, Amendment 39-17926 (79
FR 46968, August 12, 2014) (``AD 2014-16-02''). AD 2014-16-02 applied
to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes. The
SNPRM published in the Federal Register on December 13, 2016 (81 FR
89881) (``the SNPRM''). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on December
24, 2015 (80 FR 80293) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a
determination that it is necessary to add a requirement to repair or
modify the thrust reversers, which would terminate the requirements of
AD 2014-16-02 after modification or repair. The NPRM proposed to
continue to require the actions specified in AD 2014-16-02 until
modification or repair of the thrust reversers. The SNPRM proposed to
reduce the compliance time for modification of the thrust reversers,
and add new modification procedures. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracks of the translating sleeve at the thrust reverser
actuator attachment points, which could result in deployment or
dislodgement of an engine thrust reverser in flight and subsequent
reduced control of the airplane.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2014-19R1, dated March 11, 2016 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-
1A11 (CL-600) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    There have been two reported incidents of partial deployment of
an engine thrust reverser in-flight, caused by a failure of the
translating sleeve at the thrust reverser actuator attachment
points. Inspection of the same area on some other thrust reversers
revealed cracks emanating from the holes under the nut plates.
    In both incidents, the affected aeroplane landed safely without
any noticeable controllability issues, however structural failure of
thrust reverser actuator attachment points resulting in thrust
reverser deployment or dislodgment in flight is a safety hazard
warranting an immediate mitigating action.
    To help in mitigating any immediate safety hazard, Bombardier
Inc. has revised the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) through Temporary
Revisions (TR) 600/29, 600/30, 600-1/24 and 600-1/26, to prohibit
the thrust reverser operation on affected aeroplanes. Additionally,
as an interim corrective action, Bombardier Inc. has issued alert
service bulletin (ASB) A600-0769 requiring an inspection and/or a
mechanical lock out of the thrust reverser to prevent it from moving
out of forward thrust mode.
    Original [TCCA] Emergency AD CF-2014-19 [which corresponds to
FAA AD 2014-16-02] was issued 20 June 2014 to mandate the
incorporation of above mentioned revised AFM procedures and
compliance with ASB A600-0769. This [TCCA] AD is now being revised
to include the terminating action [modification of the thrust
reversers] in accordance with Part C of the ASB A600-0769 Rev 02
dated 22 February 2016.

    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-2015-
7529.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the SNPRM or on the determination
of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed, except for
minor editorial

changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision
02, dated February 22, 2016. The service information describes
procedures for a new permanent modification of the thrust reversers on
both engines, which includes inspections for cracks and elongated
holes.
    We also reviewed the following TRs, which introduce procedures to
prohibit thrust reverser operation. These documents are distinct since
they apply to different airplane configurations.
     Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the
Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM.
     Canadair TR 600-1/24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the
Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets).
    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 AD affects 18 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFM revision; inspection [retained      29 work-hours x $85 per              N/A          $2,465         $44,370
 actions from AD 2014[dash]16[dash]02].  hour = $2,465.
New modification......................  100 work-hours x $85 per            $509           9,009         162,162
                                         hour = $8,500.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary modifications
that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this
modification:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification...............................  36 work-hours x $85 per hour =                 $509          $3,569
                                              $3,060.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions for the inspections that
are part of the new modification specified in this AD.

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 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2014-16-02, Amendment 39-17926 (79 FR 46968, August 12, 2014), and
adding the following new AD:

2017-13-09 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18939; Docket No. FAA-
2015-7529; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-207-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 3, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2014-16-02, Amendment 39-17926 (79 FR 46968,
August 12, 2014) (``AD 2014-16-02'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600)
airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 1004 through
1085 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 78, Engine
Exhaust.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of partial deployment of an
engine thrust reverser in flight caused by a failure of the
translating sleeve at the thrust reverser attachment points. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks of the translating
sleeve at the thrust reverser actuator attachment points, which
could result in deployment or dislodgement of an engine thrust
reverser in flight and subsequent reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision With Revised Service
Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2014-16-02, with revised service information. Within 1 calendar day
after August 12, 2014 (the effective date of AD 2014-16-02): Revise
the applicable sections of the AFM to include the information
specified in the temporary revisions (TRs) identified in paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable. These TRs introduce
procedures to prohibit thrust reverser operation. Operate the
airplane according to the limitations and procedures in the TRs
identified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, as
applicable. The revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD may be
done by inserting copies of the applicable TRs identified in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD into the AFM. When these TRs
have been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the general
revisions may be inserted in the AFM, provided the relevant
information in the general revision is identical to that in the
applicable TRs, and the TRs may be removed.
    (1) Canadair TR 600/29, dated June 20, 2014, to the Canadair CL-
600-1A11 AFM; or Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to
the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM. As of the effective date of this AD,
use only Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the
Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM.
    (2) Canadair TR 600-1/24, dated June 20, 2014, to the Canadair
CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets), including Erratum, Publication No. PSP
600-1AFM (US), TR No. 600-1/24, June 20, 2014; or Canadair TR 600-1/
24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM
(Winglets). As of the effective date of this AD, use only Canadair
TR 600-1/24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11
AFM (Winglets).

(h) Retained Repetitive Inspections and Modifications, With Revised
Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2014-16-02, with revised service information. Within 25 flight
cycles or 90 days, whichever occurs first, after August 12, 2014
(the effective date of AD 2014-16-02), do detailed inspections
(including a borescope inspection) of both engine thrust reversers
for cracks, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 01, dated June
26, 2014; or Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision
02, dated February 22, 2016. As of the effective date of this AD,
use only Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02,
dated February 22, 2016.
    (1) If no cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, repeat the inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100
flight cycles until the repair or modification specified in
paragraph (i) or (k) of this AD is done.
    (2) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, before further flight, modify the thrust
reversers on both engines, in accordance with Part B of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin
A600-0769, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2014; or Bombardier Alert
Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016. As
of the effective date of this AD, use only Bombardier Alert Service
Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016.

(i) Retained Optional Terminating Modification, With Revised Service
Information

    This paragraph restates the optional terminating action
specified in paragraph (i) of AD 2014-16-02, with revised service
information. Modifying the thrust reversers on both engines, in
accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 01, dated June
26, 2014; or Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision
02, dated February 22, 2016; terminates the inspections required by
paragraph (h) of this AD. As of the effective date of this AD, use
only Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated
February 22, 2016.

(j) Retained Credit for Previous Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the credit provided in paragraph (j) of
AD 2014-16-02, with no changes. This paragraph provides credit for
actions required by paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, if those
actions were performed before August 12, 2014 (the effective date of
AD 2014-16-02), using Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769,
dated June 19, 2014.

(k) New Requirement of This AD: Permanent Modification and Inspections

    Within 24 months after the accomplishing the modification
specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, or within 48 months after
accomplishing the initial inspection required by paragraph (h) of
this AD, whichever occurs later: Modify the thrust reversers on both
engines, including doing the inspections specified in paragraphs
(k)(1) through (k)(6) of this AD, in accordance with Part C of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin
A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, except as required
by paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of this AD. Modification of all
thrust reversers terminates the requirements of paragraphs (g), (h),
and (i) of this AD.
    (1) Do general visual inspections of the flipper doors for
cracks.
    (2) Do a general visual inspection of the thrust reverser skin,
frames, joints, splices, and fasteners for cracks.
    (3) Do a general visual inspection of the thrust reverser for
cracks.
    (4) Do liquid penetrant or eddy current inspections, as
applicable, of the frames for cracks.
    (5) Do a detailed visual inspection of the frames for cracks and
elongated holes, and do a liquid penetrant inspection of the frames
for cracks.
    (6) Do a liquid penetrant or an eddy current inspection of the
translating sleeve skin for cracks.

(l) New Requirement of This AD: Repair

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (k) of this AD,
any cracking or elongated hole is found, before further flight,
repair using a method approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil
Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval
Organization (DAO).

(m) New Exceptions to Service Information

    (1) If it is not possible to follow all instructions specified
in Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated
February 22, 2016, during accomplishment of the actions required by
paragraph (k) of this AD, before further flight, repair using a
method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA;
or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO.
    (2) Where Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision
02, dated February 22, 2016, specifies to contact Bombardier if shim
thickness is over the applicable thicknesses identified in
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated
February 22, 2016, before further flight, repair using a method
approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA; or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO.

(n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO, ANE-170, 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 ACO, send it
to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New
York ACO, 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: As of the effective date of
this AD, 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, ANE-170,

FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO. If approved by the
DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2014-19R1, dated March 11, 2016, 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-2015-7529.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Cesar Gomez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171,
FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
516-794-5531.
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (p)(5) and (p)(6) of this AD.

(p) 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.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
August 3, 2017.
    (i) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02,
dated February 22, 2016.
    (ii) Canadair Temporary Revision 600/29-2, dated January 18,
2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 Airplane Flight Manual.
    (iii) Canadair Temporary Revision 600-1/24-2, dated January 18,
2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 Airplane Flight Manual (Winglets).
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
August 12, 2014 (79 FR 46968, August 12, 2014).
    (i) Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 01,
dated June 26, 2014.
    (ii) Canadair TR 600/29, dated June 20, 2014, to the Canadair
CL-600-1A11 Airplane Flight Manual.
    (iii) Canadair TR 600-1/24, dated June 20, 2014, to the Canadair
CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets), including Erratum, Publication No. PSP
600-1AFM (US), TR No. 600-1/24, June 20, 2014.
    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center
North America; toll-free telephone number 1-866-538-1247 or direct-
dial telephone number 1-514-855-2999; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (7) 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 Renton, Washington, on June 16, 2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-13411 Filed 6-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 216 (Thursday, November 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 66929]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26490]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9902-47-OA]

Meetings of the Local Government Advisory Committee and the Small
Communities Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS) will meet
via teleconference on Tuesday, November 26, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.-11:30
a.m. (ET). The Subcommittee will discuss small systems waste treatment,
water infrastructure, air quality issues and other issues and
recommendations regarding environmental issues affecting small
communities. This is an open meeting and all interested persons are
invited to participate. The Subcommittee will hear comments from the
public between 10:30 a.m.-10:45 a.m. on November 26, 2013. Individuals
or organizations wishing to address the Committee will be allowed a
maximum of five minutes to present their point of view. Also, written
comments should be submitted electronically to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Please contact the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the number
listed below to schedule a time on the agenda. Time will be allotted on
a first-come first-serve basis, and the total period for comments may
be extended if the number of requests for appearances requires it.
    The Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) will meet via
teleconference on Tuesday, November 26, 2013, 11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.
(ET). The Committee will discuss Draft 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan,
air quality issues, brownfield clean ups, water quality issues,
environmental justice and other environmental issues of importance to
local governments. This is an open meeting and all interested persons
are invited to participate. The Committee will hear comments from the
public between 11:30 a.m.-11:45 a.m. (ET) on Tuesday, November 26,
2013. Individuals or organizations wishing to address the Committee
will be allowed a maximum of five minutes to present their point of
view. Also, written comments should be submitted electronically to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please contact the Designated Federal Officer
(DFO) at the number listed below to schedule a time on the agenda. Time
will be allotted on a first-come first-serve basis, and the total
period for comments may be extended if the number of requests for
appearances requires it.

ADDRESSES: EPA's Local Government Advisory Committee meetings will be
held via teleconference. Meeting summaries will be available after the
meeting online at www.epa.gov/ocir/scas_lgac/lgac_index.htm and can
be obtained by written request to the DFO.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Local Government Advisory Committee
(LGAC) contact Frances Eargle at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Information Services for Those With Disabilities: For information
on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact
Frances Eargle at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request
accommodation of a disability, please request it 10 days prior to the
meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

Frances Eargle,
Designated Federal Officer, Local Government Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2013-26490 Filed 11-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P