Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama: Volatile Organic Compounds, 59674-59677 [E6-16812]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
59674
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
LLC and LLC2, as allocated among those
debts in a reasonable and consistent manner
pursuant to paragraph (k)(3) of this section.
(iii) No events have occurred that would
allow a valuation of LLC under paragraph
(k)(2)(iii) of this section. Therefore, LLC’s net
value remains $175,000. LLC2’s net value as
of December 31, 2010, when LP determines
its partners’ shares of its liabilities, is
$140,000. Under paragraph (k)(3) of this
section, LP must allocate the net values of
LLC and LLC2 between its $100,000 and
$300,000 debts in a reasonable and consistent
manner. Because the $100,000 debt is senior
in priority to the $300,000 debt, LP first
allocates the net values of LLC and LLC2, pro
rata, to its $100,000 debt. Thus, LP allocates
$56,000 of LLC’s net value and $44,000 of
LLC2’s net value to its $100,000 debt, and A
is treated as bearing the economic risk of loss
for all of LP’s $100,000 debt. As a result, all
of LP’s $100,000 debt is characterized as
recourse under § 1.752–1(a) and is allocated
to A under this section. LP then allocates the
remaining $119,000 of LLC’s net value and
LLC2’s $96,000 net value to its $300,000
debt, and A is treated as bearing the
economic risk of loss for a total of $215,000
of the $300,000 debt. As a result, $215,000
of LP’s $300,000 debt is characterized as
recourse under § 1.752–1(a) and is allocated
to A under this section, and the remaining
$85,000 of LP’s $300,000 debt is
characterized as nonrecourse under § 1.752–
1(a) and is allocated as required by § 1.752–
3. This example illustrates one reasonable
method of allocating net values of
disregarded entities among multiple
partnership liabilities.
Example 4. Disregarded entity with
interests in two partnerships. (i) In 2007, B
forms a wholly owned domestic limited
liability company, LLC, with a contribution
of $175,000. B has no liability for LLC’s debts
and LLC has no enforceable right to
contribution from B. Under § 301.7701–
3(b)(1)(ii) of this chapter, LLC is a
disregarded entity. LLC contributes $50,000
to LP1 in exchange for a general partnership
interest in LP1, and $25,000 to LP2 in
exchange for a general partnership interest in
LP2. LLC retains the $100,000 in cash. Both
LP1 and LP2 have taxable years than end on
December 31 and, under both LP1’s and
LP2’s partnership agreements, only LLC is
required to make up any deficit in its capital
account. During 2007, LP1 and LP2 incur
partnership liabilities that are general
obligations of the partnership. LP1 borrows
$300,000 (Debt 1), and LP2 borrows $60,000
(Debt 2) and $40,000 (Debt 3). Debt 2 is
senior in priority to Debt 3. LP1 and LP2
make payments of only interest on Debts 1,
2, and 3 during 2007. As of the end of taxable
year 2007, LP1 and LP2 each have a net
taxable loss and must determine its partners’
shares of partnership liabilities under
§§ 1.705–1(a) and 1.752–4(d) as of December
31, 2007. As of that date, LLC’s interest in
LP1 has a fair market value of $45,000, and
LLC’s interest in LP2 has a fair market value
of $15,000.
(ii) Because LLC is a disregarded entity, B
is treated as the partner in LP1 and LP2 for
federal tax purposes. Only LLC has an
obligation to make a payment on account of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:49 Oct 10, 2006
Jkt 211001
Debts 1, 2, and 3 if LP1 and LP2 were to
constructively liquidate as described in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Therefore,
under this paragraph (k), B is treated as
bearing the economic risk of loss for LP1’s
and LP2’s liabilities only to the extent of
LLC’s net value as of the allocation date,
December 31, 2007.
(iii) LLC’s net value with respect to LP1 is
$115,000 ($100,000 cash + $15,000 interest in
LP2). Therefore, under paragraph (k)(1) of
this section, B is treated as bearing the
economic risk of loss for $115,000 of Debt 1.
Accordingly, $115,000 of LP1’s $300,000
debt is characterized as recourse under
§ 1.752–1(a) and is allocated to B under this
section. The balance of Debt 1 ($185,000) is
characterized as nonrecourse under § 1.752–
1(a) and is allocated as required by § 1.752–
3.
(iv) LLC’s net value with respect to LP2 is
$145,000 ($100,000 cash + $45,000 interest in
LP1). Therefore, under paragraph (k)(1) of
this section, B is treated as bearing the
economic risk of loss with respect to Debts
2 and 3 only to the extent of $145,000.
Because Debt 2 is senior in priority to Debt
3, LP2 first allocates $60,000 of LLC’s net
value to Debt 2. LP2 then allocates $40,000
of LLC’s net value to Debt 3. As a result, both
Debts 2 and 3 are characterized as recourse
under § 1.752–1(a) and allocated to B. This
example illustrates one reasonable method of
allocating the net value of a disregarded
entity among multiple partnership liabilities.
(l) Effective dates. Paragraph (a), the
last sentence of paragraph (b)(6), and
paragraphs (h)(3) and (k) of this section
apply to liabilities incurred or assumed
by a partnership on or after October 11,
2006, other than liabilities incurred or
assumed by a partnership pursuant to a
written binding contract in effect prior
to that date. The rules applicable to
liabilities incurred or assumed (or
subject to a binding contract in effect)
prior to October 11, 2006 are contained
in § 1.752–2 in effect prior to October
11, 2006, (see 26 CFR part 1 revised as
of April 1, 2006).
PART 602—OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
UNDER THE PAPERWORK
REDUCTION ACT
I Par. 5. The authority citation for part
602 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805.
Par. 6. Section 602.101 paragraph (b)
is amended by adding a new entry to the
table for ‘‘1.752–2’’ to read as follows:
I
§ 602.101
*
OMB Control numbers.
*
*
(b) * * *
*
*
CFR part or section where
identified and described
Current
OMB
Control No.
*
*
*
*
*
1.752–2 .....................................
1545–1905
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Current
OMB
Control No.
CFR part or section where
identified and described
*
*
*
*
*
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
Approved: June 30, 2006.
Eric Solomon,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury.
Editorial Note: This document was
received at the Office of the Federal Register
on October 4, 2006.
[FR Doc. E6–16719 Filed 10–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2005–AL–0004–200619a;
FRL–8229–8]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Alabama:
Volatile Organic Compounds
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to
the Alabama State Implementation Plan
(SIP), submitted by the Alabama
Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM) on November 18,
2005. The revisions include
modifications to Alabama’s Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) rules found
at Alabama Administrative Code (AAC)
Chapter 335–3–1. ADEM is taking an
action that was similarly approved by
EPA on November 29, 2004 (69 FR
69298). The revision adds several
compounds to the list of compounds
excluded from the definition of VOC on
the basis that they make a negligible
contribution to ozone formation. This
action is being taken pursuant to section
110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
December 11, 2006 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comment by November 13, 2006. If
adverse comment is received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–
OAR–2005–AL–0004,’’ by one of the
following methods:
E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM
11OCR1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: difrank.stacy@epa.gov.
3. Fax: 404–562–9019.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2005–AL–
0004,’’ Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy
DiFrank, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division 12th floor, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–
8960. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office’s normal
hours of operation. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2005–
AL–0004.’’ EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov website is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, 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
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. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:49 Oct 10, 2006
Jkt 211001
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30
excluding legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street,
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9042.
Ms. DiFrank can also be reached via
electronic mail at
difrank.stacy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Today’s Action
On November 18, 2005, ADEM
submitted proposed SIP revisions to
EPA for review and approval into the
Alabama SIP. The revisions include
changes made by the State of Alabama
to AAC Chapter 335–3–1, regarding
VOCs. The rules became state effective
on December 12, 2005. EPA is now
taking direct final action to approve the
proposed revisions, which include
revising the definition of VOC, which is
a part of the State’s strategy to meet the
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) by reducing emissions of
VOCs. In summary, the revisions
submitted by ADEM added four
compounds to the list of those excluded
from the definition of VOC, on the basis
that these compounds make a negligible
contribution to ozone formation. The
revision modified the definition to say
that: 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3methoxy-propane (n-C3F7OCH3) (known
as HFE–7000); 3-ethoxy1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluro-2(trifluoromethyl) hexane (known as
HFE–7500), 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
59675
heptafluoropropane (known as HFC–
227ea); and methyl formate
(HCOOOCH3) will be considered to be
negligibly reactive. The revisions
summarized above are approvable
pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
II. Background
Tropospheric ozone, commonly
known as smog, occurs when VOCs and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the
atmosphere. Because of the harmful
health effects of ozone, EPA limits the
amount of VOCs and NOX that can be
released into the atmosphere. VOCs are
those compounds of carbon (excluding
carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or
carbonates, and ammonium carbonate)
which form ozone through atmospheric
photochemical reactions. Compounds of
carbon (or organic compounds) have
different levels of reactivity; they do not
react at the same speed, or do not form
ozone to the same extent.
It has been EPA’s policy that
compounds of carbon with a negligible
level of reactivity need not be regulated
to reduce ozone (see 42 FR 35314, July
8, 1977). EPA determines whether a
given carbon compound has
‘‘negligible’’ reactivity by comparing the
compound’s reactivity to the reactivity
of ethane. EPA lists these compounds in
its regulations at 40 CFR 51.100(s), and
excludes them from the definition of
VOC. The chemicals on this list are
often called ‘‘negligibly reactive.’’ EPA
may periodically revise the list of
negligibly reactive compounds to add
compounds to or delete them from the
list.
EPA finalized a similar rule on
November 29, 2004 (69 FR 69298),
approving the addition of the four
compounds listed in Section I above to
the list of those excluded from the
definition of VOC.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving revisions to the
Alabama SIP to include changes made
to Alabama’s VOC regulations which are
part of the State’s strategy to meet the
NAAQS. These changes are consistent
with the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because the Agency
views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed
rules section of this Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision
should adverse comments be filed. This
rule will be effective December 11, 2006
without further notice unless the
E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM
11OCR1
59676
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Agency receives adverse comments by
November 13, 2006.
If EPA receives such comments, then
EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period. Parties
interested in commenting should do so
at this time. If no such comments are
received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on December 11,
2006 and no further action will be taken
on the proposed rule.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule approves pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not
contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
approves a state rule implementing a
Federal 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 CAA. 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. 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 December 11, 2006. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: September 18, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
I
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart B—Alabama
2. Section 52.50(c) is amended by
revising entries for ‘‘Section 335–3–
1.02’’ to read as follows:
I
§ 52.50
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED ALABAMA REGULATIONS
State citation
Title/subject
State effective date
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Chapter 335–3–1
*
Section 335–
3–1–.02.
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
Definitions ...............................................................
*
19:49 Oct 10, 2006
*
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Fmt 4700
Explanation
General provisions
*
*
*
12/12/2005 10/11/06 [Insert citation
of publication].
*
Frm 00028
EPA approval date
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM
*
11OCR1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–16812 Filed 10–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 213
[Docket No. FRA–2005–22522]
RIN 2130–AB71
Track Safety Standards; Inspections of
Joints in Continuous Welded Rail
(CWR)
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FRA is amending the Federal
Track Safety Standards to improve the
inspection of rail joints in continuous
welded rail (CWR). On November 2,
2005, FRA published an Interim Final
Rule (IFR) addressing the inspection of
rail joints in CWR. FRA requested
comments on the provisions of the IFR
and stated that a final rule would be
issued after a review of those comments.
This final rule adopts a portion of the
IFR and makes changes to other
portions. This final rule requires track
owners to develop and implement a
procedure for the detailed inspection of
CWR rail joints and also requires track
owners to keep records of those
inspections.
This final rule is effective
October 31, 2006.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kenneth Rusk, Staff Director, Office of
Safety, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20590,
Telephone: (202) 493–6236; or Sarah
Grimmer, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief
Counsel, FRA, 1120 Vermont Ave NW.,
Washington, DC 20950, Telephone (202)
493–6390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
I. Continuous Welded Rail (CWR)
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
A. General
CWR refers to the way in which rail
is joined together to form track. In CWR,
rails are welded together to form one
continuous rail that may be several
miles long. Although CWR is normally
one continuous rail, there can be joints 1
1 Rail joints commonly consist of two joint bars
that are bolted to the sides of the rail and that
contact the rail at the bottom surface of the rail head
and the top surface of the rail base.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:49 Oct 10, 2006
Jkt 211001
in it for one or more reasons: the need
for insulated joints that electrically
separate track segments for signaling
purposes, the need to terminate CWR
installations at a segment of jointed rail,
or the need to remove and replace a
section of defective rail.
B. Statutory and Regulatory History of
CWR
The Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) issued the first Federal Track
Safety Standards in 1971. See 36 FR
20336 (October 20, 1971). FRA
addressed CWR in a rather general
manner, stating, in § 213.119, that
railroads must install CWR at a rail
temperature that prevents lateral
displacement of track or pull-aparts of
rail ends and that CWR should not be
disturbed at rail temperatures higher
than the installation or adjusted
installation temperature.
In 1982, FRA deleted § 213.119,
because FRA believed it was so general
in nature that it provided little guidance
to railroads and it was difficult to
enforce. See 47 FR 7275 (February 18,
1982) and 47 FR 39398 (September 7,
1982). FRA stated: ‘‘While the
importance of controlling thermal
stresses within continuous welded rail
has long been recognized, research has
not advanced to the point where
specific safety requirements can be
established.’’ 47 FR 7279. FRA
explained that continuing research
might produce reliable data in this area
in the future.
The Rail Safety Enforcement and
Review Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–
365, September 3, 1992), required that
FRA evaluate procedures for installing
and maintaining CWR. In 1994,
Congress required DOT to evaluate cold
weather installation procedures for
CWR (Federal Railroad Safety
Reauthorization Act (Pub. L. 103–272,
July 5, 1994)). In light of the evaluation
of those procedures, as well as
information resulting from FRA’s own
research and development, FRA
addressed CWR procedures by adding
§ 213.119 during its 1998 revision of the
Track Safety Standards. See 63 FR
33992 (June 22, 1998).
Section 213.119, as added in 1998,
requires railroads to develop procedures
that, at a minimum, provide for the
installation, adjustment, maintenance,
and inspection of CWR, as well as a
training program and minimal
recordkeeping requirements. Section
213.119 does not dictate which
procedures a railroad must use in its
CWR plan. It allows each railroad to
develop and implement its individual
CWR plan based on procedures which
have proven effective for it over the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
59677
years. Accordingly, procedures can vary
from railroad to railroad.
On August 10, 2005, President Bush
signed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU), (Pub.
L. 109–59, August 10, 2005) into law.
Section 9005(a) of SAFETEA–LU
amended 49 U.S.C. 20142 by adding a
new subsection (e) as follows:
(e) Track Standards.—
(1) In General.—Within 90 days after the
date of enactment of this subsection, the
Federal Railroad Administration shall—
(A) require each track owner using
continuous welded rail track to include
procedures (in its procedures filed with the
Administration pursuant to section 213.119
of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations) to
improve the identification of cracks in rail
joint bars;
(B) instruct Administration track
inspectors to obtain copies of the most recent
continuous welded rail programs of each
railroad within the inspectors’ areas of
responsibility and require that inspectors use
those programs when conducting track
inspections; and
(C) establish a program to review
continuous welded rail joint bar inspection
data from railroads and Administration track
inspectors periodically.
(2) Inspection.—Whenever the
Administration determines that it is
necessary or appropriate, the Administration
may require railroads to increase the
frequency of inspection, or improve the
methods of inspection, of joint bars in
continuous welded rail.
Pursuant to this mandate, on
November 2, 2005, FRA revised the
Track Safety Standards of 49 CFR part
213 by publishing the IFR, 70 FR 66288,
which addresses CWR. FRA requested
comments on the IFR and provided the
Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
(RSAC) with an opportunity to review
the comments on the IFR. On February
22, 2006, RSAC established the Track
Safety Standards Working Group
(working group). The working group
was given two tasks: (1) Resolution of
comments on the IFR, and (2)
recommendations regarding FRA’s role
in oversight of CWR programs,
including analysis of data to determine
effective management of CWR safety by
the railroads. The first task, referred to
as ‘‘Phase I’’ of the CWR review,
includes analyzing the IFR on
inspection of joint bars in CWR
territory, reviewing the comments to the
IFR, and preparing recommendations for
the final rule. The publication of this
final rule concludes ‘‘Phase I’’ of
RSAC’s referral to the working group.
The working group is currently
reviewing ‘‘Phase II’’ of RSAC’s referral,
which involves an examination of all of
§ 213.119. The working group plans to
E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM
11OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 11, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59674-59677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16812]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2005-AL-0004-200619a; FRL-8229-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama:
Volatile Organic Compounds
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Alabama State Implementation
Plan (SIP), submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM) on November 18, 2005. The revisions include
modifications to Alabama's Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) rules
found at Alabama Administrative Code (AAC) Chapter 335-3-1. ADEM is
taking an action that was similarly approved by EPA on November 29,
2004 (69 FR 69298). The revision adds several compounds to the list of
compounds excluded from the definition of VOC on the basis that they
make a negligible contribution to ozone formation. This action is being
taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This direct final rule is effective December 11, 2006 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 13,
2006. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-
OAR-2005-AL-0004,'' by one of the following methods:
[[Page 59675]]
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: difrank.stacy@epa.gov.
3. Fax: 404-562-9019.
4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2005-AL-0004,'' Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division 12th floor, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2005-AL-0004.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov website is an
``anonymous access'' systems, 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 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding
legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9042. Ms. DiFrank can also be reached via electronic mail at
difrank.stacy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Today's Action
On November 18, 2005, ADEM submitted proposed SIP revisions to EPA
for review and approval into the Alabama SIP. The revisions include
changes made by the State of Alabama to AAC Chapter 335-3-1, regarding
VOCs. The rules became state effective on December 12, 2005. EPA is now
taking direct final action to approve the proposed revisions, which
include revising the definition of VOC, which is a part of the State's
strategy to meet the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) by
reducing emissions of VOCs. In summary, the revisions submitted by ADEM
added four compounds to the list of those excluded from the definition
of VOC, on the basis that these compounds make a negligible
contribution to ozone formation. The revision modified the definition
to say that: 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane (n-
C3F7OCH3) (known as HFE-7000); 3-
ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane
(known as HFE-7500), 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane (known as HFC-
227ea); and methyl formate (HCOOOCH3) will be considered to
be negligibly reactive. The revisions summarized above are approvable
pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
II. Background
Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, occurs when VOCs and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere. Because of
the harmful health effects of ozone, EPA limits the amount of VOCs and
NOX that can be released into the atmosphere. VOCs are those
compounds of carbon (excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or carbonates, and ammonium
carbonate) which form ozone through atmospheric photochemical
reactions. Compounds of carbon (or organic compounds) have different
levels of reactivity; they do not react at the same speed, or do not
form ozone to the same extent.
It has been EPA's policy that compounds of carbon with a negligible
level of reactivity need not be regulated to reduce ozone (see 42 FR
35314, July 8, 1977). EPA determines whether a given carbon compound
has ``negligible'' reactivity by comparing the compound's reactivity to
the reactivity of ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its regulations
at 40 CFR 51.100(s), and excludes them from the definition of VOC. The
chemicals on this list are often called ``negligibly reactive.'' EPA
may periodically revise the list of negligibly reactive compounds to
add compounds to or delete them from the list.
EPA finalized a similar rule on November 29, 2004 (69 FR 69298),
approving the addition of the four compounds listed in Section I above
to the list of those excluded from the definition of VOC.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving revisions to the Alabama SIP to include changes
made to Alabama's VOC regulations which are part of the State's
strategy to meet the NAAQS. These changes are consistent with the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective December 11,
2006 without further notice unless the
[[Page 59676]]
Agency receives adverse comments by November 13, 2006.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on December 11, 2006 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal 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 CAA. 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.
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 December 11, 2006. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: September 18, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart B--Alabama
0
2. Section 52.50(c) is amended by revising entries for ``Section 335-3-
1.02'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.50 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA Approved Alabama Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State cita- tion Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 335-3-1 General provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Section 335-3-1-.02............... Definitions.......... 12/12/2005 10/11/06 [Insert citation of .................................
publication].
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 59677]]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-16812 Filed 10-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
