27610 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

SUMMARY: This document describes 

corrections to final regulations (TD 

9521) that were published in the Federal 

Register on Thursday, April 7, 2011, 

providing guidance relating to the 

reduction of the number of separate 

foreign tax credit limitation categories 

under section 904(d) of the Internal 

Revenue Code. 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

May 12, 2011, and is applicable on 

April 7, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey L. Parry, (202) 622–3850 (not a 

toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The final regulations that are the 

subject of this correction are under 

section 904 of the Internal Revenue 

Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published on Thursday, April 7, 

2011 (76 FR 19268), final regulations 

(TD 9521) contain errors that may prove 

to be misleading and are in need of 

clarification. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the publication of the 

final regulations (TD 9521) which were 

the subject of FR Doc. 2011–8229 is 

corrected as follows: 

1. On page 19268, column 2, in the 

preamble, under the paragraph heading 

‘‘II. Losses in and Losses With Respect to 

the Pre-2007 Separate Category for High 

Withholding Tax Interest’’, line 9 from 

the last paragraph of the column, the 

language ‘‘7T(g)(ii)) that offset U.S. 

source income’’ is corrected to read 

‘‘7T(g)(1)(ii)) that offset U.S. source 

income’’. 

2. On page 19269, column 1, in the 

preamble, under the paragraph heading 

‘‘II. Losses in and Losses With Respect to 

the Pre-2007 Separate Category for High 

Withholding Tax Interest’’, the last 

sentence of first paragraph of the 

column, the language ‘‘The regulations 

have also been revised to clarify that, in 

the case of a financial services entity, to 

the extent an SLL in the post-2006 

separate category for general category 

income is recaptured as income in the 

post-2006 separate category for passive 

category income, the amount that would 

otherwise be recaptured as passive 

income (as opposed to specified passive 

category income) will be recaptured as 

general category income.’’ is removed. 

LaNita Van Dyke, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel (Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 2011–11580 Filed 5–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0142; FRL–9304–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Adoption of Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Large 

Appliance Coatings 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Maryland Department 

of the Environment (MDE). This SIP 

revision includes amendments to 

Maryland’s regulation for Volatile 

Organic Compounds from Specific 

Processes and meets the requirement to 

adopt Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for sources covered 

by EPA’s Control Techniques 

Guidelines (CTG) standards for large 

appliance coatings. These amendments 

will reduce emissions of volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from large 

appliance coating facilities. Therefore, 

this revision will help Maryland attain 

and maintain the national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. 

This action is being taken under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on July 11, 

2011 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse written comment by 

June 13, 2011. If EPA receives such 

comments, it 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 Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0142, by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0142, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– 

0142. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov 

website is an anonymous access system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

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 during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Maryland Department of 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 27611 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory Becoat, (215) 814–2036, or by 

e-mail at becoat.gregory@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

December 15, 2010, MDE submitted to 

EPA SIP revision concerning the 

adoption of the EPA CTG for large 

appliance coatings. 

I. Background 

Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides 

that SIPs for nonattainment areas must 

include reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), including RACT, for 

sources of emissions. Section 

182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain 

nonattainment areas, States must revise 

their SIPs to include RACT for sources 

of VOC emissions covered by a CTG 

document issued after November 15, 

1990 and prior to the area’s date of 

attainment. 

EPA defines RACT as ‘‘the lowest 

emission limitation that a particular 

source is capable of meeting by the 

application of control technology that is 

reasonably available considering 

technological and economic feasibility.’’ 

(44 FR 53761, Sept. 17, 1979). In 

subsequent Federal Register notices, 

EPA has addressed how states can meet 

the RACT requirements of the CAA. 

The CTG for large appliance coatings 

is intended to provide State and local 

air pollution control authorities 

information that should assist them in 

determining RACT for VOC from large 

appliance coatings. In developing this 

CTG, EPA evaluated the sources of VOC 

emissions from the large appliance 

coating industry and the available 

control approaches for addressing these 

emissions, including the costs of such 

approaches. Based on available 

information and data, EPA provides 

recommendations for RACT for large 

appliance coating. 

In December 1977, EPA published a 

final CTG for large appliance coatings, 

entitled ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Emissions from Existing Stationary 

Sources, Volume V, Surface Coating of 

Large Appliances,’’ EPA–450/2–77–034 

(December 1977). In October 1982, EPA 

promulgated national standards of 

performance for new stationary sources 

(NSPS) for large appliances (40 CFR part 

60, subpart SS). The 1982 NSPS requires 

VOC emissions limits based on VOC 

content of low VOC coating materials. In 

July 2002, EPA promulgated a national 

emission standard for hazardous air 

pollutants (NESHAP) for these 

industries large appliances (40 CFR part 

63, subpart NNNN). The 2002 NESHAP 

establishes national emission standards 

for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) for 

large appliance surface coating facilities 

and emissions limits based on the 

organic HAP content of low organic 

HAP coating materials. 

In 2006 and 2007, after conducting a 

review of currently existing state and 

local VOC emission reduction 

approaches for these industries, 

reviewing the 1977/1978 CTGs and the 

NESHAPs for these industries, and 

taking into account the information that 

has become available since then, EPA 

developed new CTGs for: Surface 

coating of large appliances, entitled 

‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Large Appliance Coatings,’’ EPA 453/R– 

07–004 (September 2007). 

Large appliance coatings include, but 

are not limited to, materials referred to 

as paint, topcoats, basecoats, primers, 

enamels, and adhesives used in the 

manufacture of large appliance parts or 

products. A large appliance part is 

defined as any organic surface-coated 

metal lid, door, casing, panel, or other 

interior or exterior part or accessory that 

is assembled to form a large appliance 

product. A large appliance product is 

also defined as any organic surfacecoated metal range, oven, microwave, 

refrigerator, freezer, washer, dryer, 

dishwasher, water heater, or trash 

compactor manufactured for household, 

commercial, or recreational use. There 

are several approaches to reducing VOC 

emissions from large appliance coatings: 

(1) Emission limits that can be achieved 

through the use of low-VOC coatings, (2) 

equivalent emission limits that can be 

achieved through the use of low-VOC 

coatings or a combination of coatings 

and add-on controls, (3) an overall 

control efficiency of 90 percent for addon controls, and (4) the implementation 

of work practice standards. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On December 15, 2010, MDE 

submitted to EPA a SIP revision (#10– 

09) concerning the adoption of the EPA 

CTG for large appliance coatings. EPA 

develops CTGs as guidance on control 

requirements for source categories. 

States can follow the CTGs or adopt 

more restrictive standards. MDE is 

adopting the more restrictive 2.3 

pounds/gallon (lbs/gal) standard for 

large appliance coatings (see EPA–450/ 

2–78–034, June 1978). This SIP revision 

amends Regulation .06—Large 

Appliance Coatings under COMAR 

26.11.19—Volatile Organic Compounds 

from Specific Processes. This action 

affects sources that coat doors, cases, 

lids, panels, or other interior or exterior 

part or accessory of residential and 

commercial washers, dryers, ranges, 

refrigerators, freezers, water heaters, 

dishwashers, trash compactors, air 

conditioners, ovens, microwave ovens, 

and other similar products. 

Regulation COMAR 26.11.19.06— 

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds 

Emissions from Large Appliance 

Coatings includes under section .06A 

the definition for large appliance 

coatings. Under section .06B, it also 

includes the coating standard 

requirements for large appliance 

coatings. These standards require that 

any person who uses a large appliance 

coating installation may not cause or 

permit the discharge into the 

atmosphere of any VOC from a large 

appliance coating installation in excess 

of 2.3 lbs/gal of coating applied 

(excluding water) (0.275 kg/l of coating 

applied (excluding water)); shall use 

control equipment to achieve an overall 

VOC emissions reduction of 90 percent 

or greater from the large appliance 

coating installation at the affected 

facility; and use one or more of the 

following application methods: 

(a) Electrostatic application; (b) high 

volume/low pressure (HVLP) spray; (c) 

Flow coat; (d) Roller coat; (e) Dip coat 

including electrodeposition; (f) Brush 

coat; or (g) other coating application 

method that has a transfer efficiency 

equivalent to or better than that 

achieved by HVLP spraying. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving the Maryland SIP 

revision that adopts the CTG standards 

for large appliance coatings. EPA is 

publishing this rule without prior 

proposal because the Agency views this 

as a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipates no adverse comment. 

However, in the Proposed Rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, EPA is 

publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if adverse comments are 

filed. This rule will be effective on July 

11, 2011 without further notice unless 

EPA receives adverse comment by June 

13, 2011. If EPA receives adverse 

comment, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. EPA will address all 

public comments in a subsequent final 

rule based on the proposed rule. EPA 

will not institute a second comment 

period on this action. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
27612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

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 action 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). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by July 11, 2011. 

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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. 

This action pertaining to Maryland’s 

adoption of the CTG standards for large 

appliance coatings may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See CAA 

section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: April 26, 2011. 

James W. Newsom, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart V—Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising an entry for 

COMAR 26.11.19.06 to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of Maryland Administrative 

Regulations (COMAR) citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date 

Additional explanation/ 

citation at 40 CFR 

52.1100 

*******

26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes 

*******

26.11.19.06 ..................................... Large Appliance Coating ................ 10/1/10 5/12/11 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

* * * * * * * 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 27613 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–11557 Filed 5–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0906; FRL–9278–9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, California Air 

Resources Board—Consumer 

Products 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of 

revisions to the California Air Resources 

Board portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions were proposed in the Federal 

Register on November 16, 2010 and 

concern volatile organic compound 

(VOC) emissions from consumer 

products. We are approving a State rule 

that regulates these emission sources 

under the Clean Air Act as amended in 

1990 (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on June 13, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0906 for 

this action. The index to the docket is 

available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. EPA Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On November 16, 2010 (75 FR 69910), 

EPA proposed to approve the following 

rule into the California SIP. 

Regulation Regulation title Amended Submitted 

California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, 

Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5—Consumer Products.

Article 2—Consumer Products ..................................... 05/05/09 02/16/10 

We proposed to approve this rule 

because we determined that it complies 

with the relevant CAA requirements. 

Our proposed action contains more 

information on the rule and our 

evaluation. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA’s proposed action provided a 

30-day public comment period. During 

this period, we received one comment 

from the general public regarding cap 

and trade regulations. The submitted 

comment is not germane to this action 

as amendments to California’s 

Consumer Products regulation deal with 

limiting the VOC content of products 

and does not deal with cap and trade 

programs. 

III. EPA Action 

No comments were submitted that 

change our assessment that the 

submitted rule complies with the 

relevant CAA requirements. Therefore, 

as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act, EPA is fully approving this rule 

into the California SIP. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not interfere with Executive 

Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 

1994)) because EPA lacks the 

discretionary authority to address 

environmental justice in this 

rulemaking. 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

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 action 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 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1