10–21–10 Thursday Vol. 75 No. 203 Oct. 21, 2010

Pages 64949–65212

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:51 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\21OCWS.LOC 21OCWS hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS6 II Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010

The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records PUBLIC Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP currently on file for public inspection, see www.federalregister.gov. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration THE FEDERAL REGISTER: WHAT IT IS AND HOW TO USE IT authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, Federal Regulations. the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal The online edition of the Federal Register, www.gpoaccess.gov/ Register system and the public’s role in the develop- nara, available through GPO Access, is issued under the authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the ment of regulations. official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each day Code of Federal Regulations. the Federal Register is published and includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register doc- uments. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team, call toll free 1-888-293-6498; DC area 202- 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR sys- 512-1530; fax at 202-512-1262; or via e-mail at [email protected]. tem. The Support Team is available between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. WHY: To provide the public with access to information nec- Eastern Time, Monday–Friday, except official holidays. essary to research Federal agency regulations which di- The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper rectly affect them. There will be no discussion of spe- edition is $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, for a combined cific agency regulations. Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal llllllllllllllllll Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $165, plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half WHEN: Tuesday, November 9, 2010 the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to 9 a.m.–12:30 p.m. orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, WHERE: Office of the Federal Register is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing Conference Room, Suite 700 less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; 800 North Capitol Street, NW. and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, Washington, DC 20002 including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable RESERVATIONS: (202) 741–6008 to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Printing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1- 866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 75 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.

.

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:51 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\21OCWS.LOC 21OCWS hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS6 III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 203

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Agriculture Department Waivers of the Buy American Section of the American See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 65012–65013 See Forest Service Engineers Corps Air Force Department NOTICES NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 65007–65008 Mississippi Barrier Island Restoration, Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program for Hancock, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Harrison, and Jackson Counties, 65005–65006 NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Environmental Protection Agency Biological Control Agent for Hawkweeds, 64984–64985 RULES Army Department Approvals and Promulgations of Air Quality Implementation Plans: See Engineers Corps NOTICES Rhode Island; Determination of Attainment of 1997 Meetings: Ozone Standard for Providence Area, 64949–64951 Board of Visitors, United States Military Academy, Approvals and Promulgations of Implementation Plans: 65006–65007 Illinois; Voluntary Nitrogen Oxides Controls, 64951– 64953 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Missouri, 64953–64955 PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Approvals and Promulgations of Implementation Plans: Submissions, and Approvals, 65019–65020 Missouri, 64973–64974 Coal Combustion Residual Surface Impoundments; Data Civil Rights Commission Availability, 64974–64976 NOTICES National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Meetings: Emissions: Utah Advisory Committee, 64985–64986 Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Meetings; Sunshine Act, 64986 Chromium Anodizing Tanks; Group I Polymers and Meetings; Sunshine Act; Cancellation, 64986 Resins, etc., 65068–65149 National Priorities List; Proposed Rule No. 53, 64976–64983 Coast Guard NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Access in Litigation to Confidential Business Information, Marine Vapor Control Systems, 65152–65195 65013–65014 NOTICES Requests for Nominations of Experts: Meetings: Consultation on Revisions to Multi-Agency Radiation National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee, 65025– Survey and Site Investigation Manual, 65014–65016 65026 Federal Aviation Administration Commerce Department PROPOSED RULES See International Trade Administration Airworthiness Directives: See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Bombardier, Inc. Model CL 600 2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 and 440) Airplanes, 64960–64963 Defense Department Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 See Air Force Department Airplanes, 64963–64965 See Army Department Proposed Amendments of Class E Airspace: See Engineers Corps Columbus. OH, 64966–64968 Farmington, MO, 64969–64970 Education Department Henderson, KY, 64970–64971 NOTICES Johnson, KS, 64968–64969 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Mansfield, OH, 64965–64966 Submissions, and Approvals, 65008–65009 Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace: Central City, NE, 64971–64972 Energy Department Proposed Revocations of Class E Airspace: See Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office Lone Star, TX, 64972–64973 See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Consensus Standards: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office Standard Practice for Inspection of Airplane Electrical NOTICES Wiring Systems, 65051 Nationwide Limited Public Interest Waiver of the Buy Standard Practice for Maintenance of Airplane Electrical American Section of the Recovery Act, 65010–65012 Wiring Systems, 65052

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:52 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\21OCCN.SGM 21OCCN hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS5 IV Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Contents

Federal Communications Commission See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES See U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65016 Housing and Urban Development Department RULES Federal Emergency Management Agency Use of Public Housing Capital Funds for Financing NOTICES Activities, 65198–65212 Meetings: National Advisory Council, 65026 Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Energy Regulatory Commission See Land Management Bureau NOTICES See National Park Service Applications: International Trade Administration Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 65009–65010 NOTICES Baseline Filings: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Cranberry Pipeline Corp., New Mexico Gas Co., Inc., Reviews: Peoples Natural Gas Co. LLC, 65010 Certain Lined Paper Products from India, 64988–64994 Compliance Filing: ECOP Gas Co., LLC, 65010 International Trade Commission Small/Low-Impact Hydropower Webinar, 65012 NOTICES U.S.-Trans–Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement Federal Highway Administration Including Malaysia: NOTICES Advice on the Probable Economic Effect of Providing Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in Duty-Free Treatment for Imports, 65031–65032 California, 65052–65053 Justice Department Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES NOTICES Lodging of Consent Decrees, 65032–65033 Ocean Transportation Intermediary Licenses; Reissuances, 65016–65017 Labor Department Ocean Transportation Intermediary Licenses; Revocations, See Mine Safety and Health Administration 65017 See Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Land Management Bureau NOTICES NOTICES Qualifications of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes Filing of Plats of Survey: Mellitus, 65056–65057 Eastern States, 65028 Qualifications of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 65057–65059 Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Fish and Wildlife Service Petition for Modification of Existing Mandatory Safety NOTICES Standard, 65034–65035 Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plans and National Credit Union Administration Environmental Assessments: NOTICES Selawik National Wildlife Refuge, Kotzebue, AK, 65026– Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65035 65028 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Petitions for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Meetings: General Motors, LLC, 65054–65056 National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Mazda North American Operations, 65053–65054 Council, 64985 Upper Rio Grande Resource Advisory Committee, Monte National Institutes of Health Vista, CO, 64985 NOTICES Meetings: Health and Human Services Department Center for Scientific Review, 65020–65021 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, See National Institutes of Health 65021 RULES Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administrative Implementation; Correction, 64955 RULES NOTICES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition to the Atka Mackerel in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Special Exposure Cohort, 65018 Management Area, 64957 Pacific Cod by Vessels Catching Pacific Cod for Homeland Security Department Processing by the Offshore Component in the See Coast Guard Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska, See Federal Emergency Management Agency 64957–64958

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:52 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\21OCCN.SGM 21OCCN hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS5 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Contents V

Pollock in Statistical Area 630 of the Gulf of Alaska, Personnel Management Office 64958–64959 NOTICES Vessels Catching Pacific Cod for Processing by the Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Offshore Component in the Central Regulatory Area, Submissions, and Approvals: 64956 Customer Satisfaction Surveys, 65040–65041 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Performance Measurement Surveys, 65039–65040 Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Correction to Cod Program Services Evaluation Surveys, 65039 Landing Limit for Handgear A vessels in the Common Pool Fishery, 64955–64956 Research and Innovative Technology Administration NOTICES NOTICES Applications: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Marine Mammals; File No. 14525, 64986–64987 Submissions, and Approvals: Draft Policy for the Assessment of Civil Administrative Omnibus Household Survey Program, 65049–65051 Penalties and Permit Sanctions; Availability, 64987– 64988 Securities and Exchange Commission Solicitation of Nominations for Members: NOTICES Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Advisory Panel, Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: 64994–64996 International Securities Exchange, LLC, 65042–65044 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 65044–65046 Activities: NYSE Arca, Inc., 65041–65042 Suspension of Trading: Marine Geophysical Survey in Eastern Tropical Pacific Cape Systems Group, Inc., et al., 65046 Ocean, October through November 2010, 64996– 65005 Social Security Administration Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals, 65005 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, National Park Service Submissions, and Approvals, 65046–65047 NOTICES Surface Transportation Board Intent to Repatriate Cultural Items: NOTICES Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, OR Abandonment Exemptions: and University of Oregon Museum of Natural and CSX Transportation, Inc., Chesterfield and Darlington Cultural History, Eugene, OR, 65028–65029 Counties, SC, 65048–65049 Meetings: Union Pacific Railroad Co., Pulaski County, AR, 65047– Flight 93 National Memorial Advisory Commission, 65049 65029–65030 Nomination Solicitations: Transportation Department Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation See Federal Aviation Administration Review Committee, 65030–65031 See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration National Science Foundation See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES See Research and Innovative Technology Administration Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic See Surface Transportation Board Conservation Act, 65035–65036 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Nuclear Regulatory Commission Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, RULES Submissions, and Approvals: Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities: Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Updates to Incorporation by Reference of Regulatory Permanent Resident, 65022 Guides; Correction, 64949 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust NOTICES Status, 65021–65022 Meetings: Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, 65022– Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards 65023 Subcommittee on AP1000, 65036–65037 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards U.S. Customs and Border Protection Subcommittee on Power Uprates, 65037 NOTICES Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Issuance of Final Determination Concerning Certain Heating Subcommittee on Reliability and PRA, 65036–65038 Boilers, 65023–65025 Procedures for Meetings: Veterans Affairs Department Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 65038–65039 NOTICES Meetings: Occupational Safety and Health Administration Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation, 65059 NOTICES Advisory Committee on Prosthetics and Special- Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Disabilities Programs, 65060 Submissions, and Approvals: Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 65060–65066 Standard on Manlifts, 65033–65034

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:52 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\21OCCN.SGM 21OCCN hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS5 VI Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Contents

Separate Parts In This Issue Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this page for Part II phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Environmental Protection Agency, 65068–65149 and notice of recently enacted public laws.

Part III To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Homeland Security Department, Coast Guard, 65152–65195 LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Part IV archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Housing and Urban Development Department, 65198–65212 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:52 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\21OCCN.SGM 21OCCN hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS5 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Contents VII

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.

10 CFR 50...... 64949 14 CFR Proposed Rules: 39 (2 documents) ...... 64960, 64963 71 (7 documents) ...... 64965, 64966, 64968, 64969, 64970, 64971, 64972 24 CFR 905...... 65198 33 CFR Proposed Rules: 154...... 65152 155...... 65152 156...... 65152 40 CFR 52 (3 documents) ...... 64949, 64951, 64953 Proposed Rules: 52...... 64973 63...... 65058 257...... 64974 261...... 64974 264...... 64974 265...... 64974 268...... 64974 271...... 64974 300...... 64976 302...... 64974 42 CFR 110...... 64955 46 CFR Proposed Rules: 35...... 65152 39...... 65152 50 CFR 648...... 64955 679 (4 documents) ...... 64956, 64957, 64958

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:53 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\21OCLS.LOC 21OCLS hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS4 64949

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 203

Thursday, October 21, 2010

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER major rule and has verified this ADDRESSES: EPA has established a contains regulatory documents having general determination with the Office of docket for this action under Docket applicability and legal effect, most of which Information and Regulatory Affairs of Identification No. EPA–R01–OAR– are keyed to and codified in the Code of the Office of Management and Budget. 2010–0459. All documents in the docket Federal Regulations, which is published under are listed on the http:// 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th day of October 2010. www.regulations.gov Web site. Although The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. listed in the index, some information is the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of Cindy Bladey, not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other new books are listed in the first FEDERAL information whose disclosure is Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives REGISTER issue of each week. Branch. restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, [FR Doc. 2010–26393 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] is not placed on the Internet and will be NUCLEAR REGULATORY BILLING CODE 7590–01–P publicly available only in hard copy COMMISSION form. Publicly available docket materials are available either 10 CFR Part 50 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION electronically through http:// RIN 3150–AI37 AGENCY www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. [NRC–2009–0014] 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Domestic Licensing of Production and [EPA–R01–OAR–2010–0459; A–1–FRL– New England Regional Office, Office of 9215–9] Utilization Facilities; Updates to Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square— Incorporation by Reference of Approval and Promulgation of Air Regulatory Guides; Correction Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode that if at all possible, you contact the Island; Determination of Attainment of AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory contact listed in the FOR FURTHER the 1997 Ozone Standard for the Commission. INFORMATION CONTACT section to Providence, RI Area ACTION: Final rule; correction. schedule your inspection. The Regional AGENCY: Environmental Protection Office’s official hours of business are SUMMARY: This document corrects a Agency (EPA). Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, final rule that was published in the ACTION: excluding legal holidays. Federal Register on October 5, 2010 (75 Final rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FR 61321). The final rule amends the SUMMARY: The EPA is determining that Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) the Providence (All of Rhode Island) Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental regulations to incorporate by reference moderate 1997 8-hour ozone Protection Agency, EPA New England the latest revisions of two previously nonattainment area has attained the Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, incorporated regulatory guides. This 1997 8-hour National Ambient Air Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109–3912, document is necessary to include Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. telephone number (617) 918–1664, fax certification in the rule that the NRC has This determination is based upon number (617) 918–0664, e-mail complied with the requirements of the complete, quality-assured, certified [email protected]. Congressional Review Act. This ambient air monitoring data that show SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information was inadvertently omitted the area has monitored attainment of the Throughout this document whenever from the final rule. 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean DATES: The correction is effective on 2007–2009 monitoring period. EPA. November 4, 2010, the date the original Preliminary data available to date for Organization of this document. The final rule becomes effective. the 2010 ozone season is consistent with following outline is provided to aid in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: continued attainment. Under the locating information in this preamble. Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, provisions of EPA’s ozone Announcements, and Directives Branch, implementation rule, the requirements I. What actions is EPA taking? for this area to submit an attainment II. What is the effect of these actions? Office of Administration, Nuclear III. Final Action Regulatory Commission, Washington, demonstration, a reasonable further IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews DC 20555–0001, Telephone: (301) 492– progress plan, contingency measures, 3667 or Toll Free: (800) 368–5642. and other planning State I. What actions is EPA taking? SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the top Implementation Plans related to EPA is determining that the of the third column of Page 61335 of attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone Providence (All of Rhode Island) Federal Register document 2010–24814, NAAQS shall be suspended for so long moderate 8-hour ozone nonattainment published on October 5, 2010 (75 FR as the area continues to attain the 1997 area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 61321), add the following text: ozone NAAQS. In addition, EPA is National Ambient Air Quality Standard determining that this area has attained (NAAQS). This determination is based XII. Congressional Review Act the 1997 ozone NAAQS as of June 15, upon complete, quality-assured and In accordance with the Congressional 2010, its applicable attainment date. certified ambient air monitoring data Review Act of 1996, the NRC has DATES: Effective Date: This rule is that show the area has monitored determined that this action is not a effective on November 22, 2010. attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES 64950 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

for the 2007–2009 monitoring period. In failure to attain by its applicable • Are not significant regulatory addition, preliminary data through June attainment date. actions subject to Executive Order 15, 2010 show this area meets the 1997 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); III. Final Action ozone NAAQS. EPA is also determining, • Are not subject to requirements of under section 181(b)(2)(A) of the Clean EPA is determining that the Section 12(d) of the National Air Act (CAA), that this area has Providence (All of Rhode Island) 8-hour Technology Transfer and Advancement attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS by its ozone nonattainment area has attained Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because applicable attainment date (June 15, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard based application of those requirements would 2010). on three years of complete, quality- be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; assured and certified ozone monitoring and Other specific details related to the • determination and the rationale for data from 2007–2009. Preliminary data Do not provide EPA with the EPA’s action are explained in the Notice available through June 15, 2010 are discretionary authority to address, as of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) consistent with continued attainment. appropriate, disproportionate human published on July 28, 2010 (75 FR As provided in 40 CFR 51.918, this health or environmental effects, using 44179) and will not be restated here. No determination suspends the practicable and legally permissible comments were received on the NPR. requirements for Rhode Island to submit methods, under Executive Order 12898 an attainment demonstration, a (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). II. What is the effect of these actions? reasonable further progress plan, In addition, these actions do not have Under the provisions of EPA’s ozone contingency measures under section tribal implications as specified by implementation rule (see 40 CFR 172(c)(9), and any other planning SIP Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 51.918), the determination that the area related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour November 9, 2000), because the SIP is is attaining the standard suspends the ozone NAAQS for this area, for so long not approved to apply in Indian country requirements for the Providence (All of as the area continues to attain the 1997 located in the state, and EPA notes that Rhode Island) moderate ozone ozone standard. In addition, pursuant to it will not impose substantial direct nonattainment area to submit an CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), EPA is costs on tribal governments or preempt attainment demonstration, a reasonable determining that the Providence (All of tribal law. further progress plan, section 172(c)(9) Rhode Island) 8-hour ozone The Congressional Review Act, 5 contingency measures, and any other nonattainment area has attained the U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small planning State Implementation Plans 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its Business Regulatory Enforcement (SIPs) related to attainment of the 1997 applicable attainment date (June 15, Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 8-hour ozone NAAQS for so long as the 2010). that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must area continues to attain the 1997 ozone IV. Statutory and Executive Order submit a rule report, which includes a NAAQS. Reviews copy of the rule, to each House of the This action does not constitute a Congress and to the Comptroller General redesignation to attainment under CAA These actions make a determination of attainment based on air quality, and of the United States. EPA will submit a section 107(d)(3), because the area does report containing these actions and not have an approved maintenance plan result in the suspension of certain Federal requirements, and do not other required information to the U.S. as required under section 175A of the Senate, the U.S. House of CAA, nor a determination that the area impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that Representatives, and the Comptroller has met the other requirements for General of the United States prior to redesignation. The classification and reason, these actions: • Are not ‘‘significant regulatory publication of the rule in the Federal designation status of the area remains Register. A major rule cannot take effect actions’’ subject to review by the Office moderate nonattainment for the 1997 until 60 days after it is published in the of Management and Budget under 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as Federal Register. This action is not a Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, EPA determines that it meets the CAA ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. requirements for redesignation to October 4, 1993); • 804(2). attainment. If EPA subsequently Do not impose an information Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean determines, after notice-and-comment collection burden under the provisions Air Act, petitions for judicial review of rulemaking in the Federal Register, that of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 this action must be filed in the United the area has violated the 1997 8-hour U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • States Court of Appeals for the ozone standard, the basis for the Are certified as not having a appropriate circuit by December 20, suspension of these requirements would significant economic impact on a 2010. Filing a petition for no longer exist, and the area would substantial number of small entities reconsideration by the Administrator of thereafter have to address the pertinent under the Regulatory Flexibility Act this final rule does not affect the finality requirements. (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); of this action for the purposes of judicial • In addition, in accordance with CAA Do not contain any unfunded review nor does it extend the time section 181(b)(2)(A), EPA is determining mandate or significantly or uniquely within which a petition for judicial that the Providence (All of Rhode affect small governments, as described review may be filed, and shall not Island) 1997 8-hour ozone in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act postpone the effectiveness of such rule nonattainment area has attained the of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); or action. This action may not be • 1997 ozone NAAQS by its applicable Do not have Federalism challenged later in proceedings to attainment date of June 15, 2010. The implications as specified in Executive enforce its requirements. (See section effect of this determination of Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 307(b)(2).) attainment by the area’s attainment date 1999); is to discharge EPA’s obligation under • Are not economically significant List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 section 181(b)(2)(A), and to establish regulatory actions based on health or Environmental protection, Air that, in accordance with that section, safety risks subject to Executive Order pollution control, Incorporation by the area will not be reclassified for 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); reference, Intergovernmental relations,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64951

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and EPA approval of a State Implementation a rule governing NOX emission recordkeeping requirements, Volatile Plan (SIP) revision for regulations allowances (estimation and crediting of organic compounds. governing Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) NOX emission reductions as emission Dated: October 8, 2010. emission allowances granted for allowances for use in a national, implementation of voluntary control of Federally-operated NO emissions Ira W. Leighton, X NOX emissions from sources other than trading program) resulting from the Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New those covered by other Illinois NO application of voluntary NO emission England. X X emission control regulations. On March reductions at source facilities not ■ Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the 4, 2008, EPA proposed to disapprove subject to Illinois’ existing NOX Code of Federal Regulations is amended the requested SIP revision. This final emission control rules. This rule is as follows: rule completes the disapproval of the specified/codified in Illinois’ 35 Illinois requested SIP revision. Administrative Code (IAC), part 217, PART 52—[AMENDED] DATES: This final rule is effective on subpart X (the Subpart X rule). ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 November 22, 2010. II. Did anyone comment on the continues to read as follows: ADDRESSES: EPA has established a proposed disapproval of the state’s SIP Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. docket for this action under Docket ID revision request? No. EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1096. All Subpart OO—Rhode Island documents in the docket are listed on No comments were received during the http://www.regulations.gov Web the 30-day comment period on the ■ 2. Section 52.2088 is amended by site. Although listed in the index, some proposed disapproval of the Subpart X adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: information is not publicly available, rule as an Illinois SIP revision. The proposed rule was published on March § 52.2088 Control strategy: Ozone. i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 4, 2008 (73 FR 11565). * * * * * disclosure is restricted by statute. III. Illinois’ Voluntary Nitrogen Oxides (d) Determination of Attainment. Certain other material, such as Control Rule Effective November 22, 2010, EPA is copyrighted material, is not placed on On May 1, 2001, the Illinois EPA determining that the Providence (All of the Internet and will be publicly Rhode Island) 8-hour ozone submitted 35 Illinois Administrative available only in hard copy form. Code (IAC), part 217, subpart X as a nonattainment area has attained the Publicly available docket materials are 1997 8-hour ozone standard based on requested revision of the Illinois SIP. available either electronically through The Subpart X rule provided for the 2007–2009 monitoring data. Under the http://www.regulations.gov or in hard provisions of EPA’s ozone determination and crediting of NOX copy at the Environmental Protection emission reductions resulting from the implementation rule (see 40 CFR Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 51.918), this determination suspends voluntary application of NOX emission Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, controls as NO emission allowances the reasonable further progress and Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is X attainment demonstration requirements that could be sold in a national NOX open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., emission allowance trading system. A of section 182(b)(1) and related Monday through Friday, excluding requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the detailed description of the Subpart X Federal holidays. We recommend that rule and its subparts can be found in our Clean Air Act for as long as the area you telephone Edward Doty, does not monitor any violations of the proposed rule published in the Federal Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886– Register on March 4, 2008 (73 FR 1997 8-hour ozone standard. If a 6057 before visiting the Region 5 office. violation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS is 11566). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: monitored in the Providence (All of Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, IV. Why did EPA propose to disapprove Rhode Island) 8-hour ozone Attainment Planning and Maintenance this rule as a SIP revision? nonattainment area, this determination Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), shall no longer apply. In addition, this Our March 4, 2008, proposed rule Environmental Protection Agency, area met its June 15, 2010 attainment contained a number of comments Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, deadline for the 1997 ozone standard. specific to each subpart of the Subpart Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6057, X rule (73 FR 11573). Based on the more [FR Doc. 2010–26446 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] [email protected]. detailed comments and concerns raised BILLING CODE 6560–50–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: in the proposed rule, we had the Throughout this document whenever following general concerns regarding ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the Subpart X rule: (1) The Subpart X ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA. This supplementary information rule would unacceptably grant NO AGENCY X section is arranged as follows: emission allowances for source closures; 40 CFR Part 52 I. What action is EPA taking? (2) the rule does not prevent crediting II. Did anyone comment on the proposed of facility-specific NOX emission [EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1096; FRL–9215–8] disapproval of the state’s SIP revision reductions resulting from shifting of request? production and NO emissions from Approval and Promulgation of X III. Illinois’ Voluntary Nitrogen Oxides one facility to another; (3) the rule Implementation Plans; Illinois; Control Rule establishes an emission baseline year Voluntary Nitrogen Oxides Controls IV. Why did EPA propose to disapprove this (from which NO emission allowances rule as a SIP revision? X AGENCY: Environmental Protection V. Final Action are earned through subsequent NOX Agency (EPA). VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews emission reductions), 1995, that is too ACTION: Final rule. far in the past, prior to the State’s I. What action is EPA taking? adoption of the Subpart X rule and prior SUMMARY: On May 1, 2001, the Illinois EPA is disapproving a requested to the baseline year used for other Environmental Protection Agency Illinois SIP revision, submitted on May sources involved in EPA’s NOX Budget (Illinois EPA) submitted a request for 1, 2001, which would have incorporated Trading Program; (4) the rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES 64952 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

unacceptably allows the use of 40 CFR Executive Order 13175: Consultation Congressional Review Act part 60 emission monitoring and Coordination With Indian Tribal requirements rather than 40 CFR part 75 Governments The Congressional Review Act, 5 monitoring requirements required of U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small This rule also does not have tribal other sources involved in the NO Business Regulatory Enforcement X implications because it will not have a Budget Trading Program; and, (5) the Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides substantial direct effect on one or more rule contains other minor deficiencies that before a rule may take effect, the Indian tribes, on the relationship as noted in our March 4, 2008, proposed agency promulgating the rule must between the Federal Government and rule. Together, these problems led us to submit a rule report, which includes a Indian tribes, or on the distribution of propose disapproval of the Subpart X copy of the rule, to each House of the power and responsibilities between the rule as a revision to the Illinois SIP. Congress and to the Comptroller General We have received no public Federal Government and Indian tribes, of the United States. EPA will submit a comments or additional supporting as specified by Executive Order 13175 report containing this rule and other documentation from the State that (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). required information to the U.S. Senate, reverses or negates the above concerns. Executive Order 13132: Federalism the U.S. House of Representatives, and Therefore, these concerns remain as the the Comptroller General of the United bases for this final action. This action also does not have States prior to publication of the rule in Federalism implications because it does the Federal Register. A major rule V. Final Action not have substantial direct effects on the cannot take effect until 60 days after it EPA is disapproving Illinois’ 35 States, on the relationship between the is published in the Federal Register. Illinois Administrative Code (IAC), part national government and the States, or This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 217, subpart X rule submitted as a on the distribution of power and defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2). responsibilities among the various requested SIP revision on May 1, 2001. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, levels of government, as specified in petitions for judicial review of this VI. Statutory and Executive Order Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, action must be filed in the United States Reviews August 10, 1999). This action merely Court of Appeals for the appropriate approves a State rule implementing a Executive Order 12866: Regulatory circuit by December 20, 2010. Filing a Federal standard, and does not alter the Planning and Review petition for reconsideration by the relationship or the distribution of power Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Administrator of this final rule does not and responsibilities established in the 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is affect the finality of this rule for the Clean Air Act (CAA). not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and, purposes of judicial review nor does it therefore, is not subject to review by the Executive Order 13045: Protection of extend the time within which a petition Office of Management and Budget. Children From Environmental Health for judicial review may be filed, and Executive Order 13211: Actions That and Safety Risks shall not postpone the effectiveness of Significantly Affect Energy Supply, This rule also is not subject to such rule or action. This action may not Distribution, or Use Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of be challenged later in proceedings to Children from Environmental Health enforce its requirements. (See section Because it is not a ‘‘significant 307(b)(2).) regulatory action’’ under Executive Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy April 23, 1997), because it approves a List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 action,’’ this action is also not subject to State rule implementing a Federal Environmental protection, Air Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Standard. pollution control, Incorporation by Concerning Regulations That National Technology Transfer reference, Intergovernmental relations, Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Advancement Act Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May requirements. 22, 2001). In reviewing State submissions, EPA’s role is to approve State choices, Dated: October 7, 2010. Regulatory Flexibility Act provided that they meet the criteria of Susan Hedman, This action merely approves State law the CAA. In this context, in the absence Regional Administrator, Region 5. as meeting Federal requirements and of a prior existing requirement for the imposes no additional requirements State to use voluntary consensus ■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: beyond those imposed by State law. standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Accordingly, the Administrator certifies to disapprove a State submission for PART 52—[AMENDED] that this rule will not have a significant failure to use VCS. It would thus be economic impact on a substantial inconsistent with applicable law for ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 number of small entities under the EPA, when it reviews a State continues to read as follows: Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 submission, to use VCS in place of a Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. et seq.). State submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the Subpart O—Illinois Unfunded Mandates Reform Act requirements of section 12(d) of the Because this rule approves pre- National Technology Transfer and ■ 2. Section 52.726 is amended by existing requirements under State law Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. adding paragraph (hh) to read as and does not impose any additional 272 note) do not apply. follows: enforceable duty beyond that required § 52.726 Control strategy: Ozone. by State law, it does not contain any Paperwork Reduction Act unfunded mandate or significantly or This rule does not impose an * * * * * uniquely affect small governments, as information collection burden under the (hh) Disapproval. EPA is described in the Unfunded Mandates provisions of the Paperwork Reduction disapproving 35 Illinois Administrative Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Code part 217, subpart X, Voluntary

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64953

NOX Emissions Reduction Program, as a www.regulations.gov or e-mail Natural Resources to approve revisions revision to the Illinois SIP. information that you consider to be CBI to the SIP relating to changes in the SIP- [FR Doc. 2010–26438 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] or otherwise protected. The http:// approved program for Springfield, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P www.regulations.gov Web site is an Missouri. In order for the local ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which program’s ‘‘Air Pollution’’ rules to be means EPA will not know your identity incorporated into the Federally- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION or contact information unless you enforceable SIP, on behalf of the local AGENCY provide it in the body of your comment. agency, the State must submit the If you send an e-mail comment directly formally adopted regulations which are 40 CFR Part 52 to EPA without going through http:// consistent with State and Federal www.regulations.gov, your e-mail [EPA–R07–OAR–2010–0415; FRL–9210–3] requirements to EPA for inclusion in the address will be automatically captured SIP. The regulation adoption process Approval and Promulgation of and included as part of the comment generally includes public notice of a Implementation Plans; State of that is placed in the public docket and public comment period and a public Missouri made available on the Internet. If you hearing, and formal adoption of the rule submit an electronic comment, EPA by the State authorized rulemaking AGENCY: Environmental Protection recommends that you include your body. In this case that rulemaking body Agency (EPA). name and other contact information in is the local agency. After the local ACTION: Direct final rule. the body of your comment and with any agency formally adopts the rule, the disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA local agency submits the rulemaking to SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to cannot read your comment due to the State, and then the State submits the a State Implementation Plan (SIP) technical difficulties and cannot contact rulemaking to EPA for consideration for submitted by the State of Missouri. The you for clarification, EPA may not be formal action (inclusion of the purpose of this revision is to update the able to consider your comment. rulemaking into the SIP). EPA must Springfield City Code and is part of Electronic files should avoid the use of ongoing SIP maintenance to assure that special characters, any form of provide public notice and seek outdated local codes and ordinances do encryption, and be free of any defects or additional public comment regarding not remain in the SIP. The revision viruses. the proposed Federal action on the reflects updates to the Missouri Docket: All documents in the docket State’s submission. statewide rules, and will ensure are listed in the http:// The 2009 revisions for Springfield consistency between the applicable www.regulations.gov index. Although consist of administrative changes, local agency rules and the Federally listed in the index, some information is removing Springfield City Code Chapter approved rules. not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 2A and replacing it with the Springfield DATES: This direct final rule will be information whose disclosure is City Code Chapter 6. EPA had effective December 20, 2010, without restricted by statute. Certain other previously approved portions of Chapter further notice, unless EPA receives material, such as copyrighted material, 2A, as it relates to regulation of adverse comment by November 22, will be publicly available only in hard incinerators. In general, these changes 2010. If EPA receives adverse comment, copy form. Publicly available docket are administrative only and they do not we will publish a timely withdrawal of materials are available either add any new limitations, conditions or the direct final rule in the Federal electronically in http:// requirements. The revisions retain all Register informing the public that the www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at previous sections pertaining to rule will not take effect. the Environmental Protection Agency, definitions, test methods and tables, ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Air Planning and Development Branch, stack emission test methods, and identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, emission limitations for incinerators, OAR–2010–0415, by one of the Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s but with new numbering and titles. The following methods: official hours of business are Monday revision also removes compliance 1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow through Friday, 8 to 4:30 excluding schedules for incinerators which were the on-line instructions for submitting Federal holidays. The interested persons not in compliance upon the original comments. wanting to examine these documents effective date of the rule (1969). 2. E-mail: [email protected]. should make an appointment with the II. What revision is EPA approving? 3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Lachala office at least 24 hours in advance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kemp, Environmental Protection EPA is approving revisions to the Lachala Kemp at 913–551–7214, or by Agency, Air Planning and Development relevant portions of Springfield City e-mail at [email protected]. Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas Code Chapter 2A ‘‘Air Pollution Control City, Kansas 66101. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Standards’’, which are now found in Instructions: Direct your comments to Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or Chapter 6 of the Code. The local Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2010– ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section provides agency’s ‘‘Air Pollution Control 0415. EPA’s policy is that all comments additional information by addressing Standards’’ were revised as follows: received will be included in the public the following questions: docket without change and may be Article I, section 2A has been I. What is being addressed in this document? renumbered as Chapter 6 with other made available online at http:// II. What revisions is EPA approving? www.regulations.gov, including any III. What action is EPA taking? corresponding renumbering within the personal information provided, unless IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews chapter. the comment includes information All previous sections pertaining to claimed to be Confidential Business I. What is being addressed in this definitions, test methods and tables, Information (CBI) or other information document? stack emission test methods, and whose disclosure is restricted by statute. On January 21, 2009, EPA received a incinerators have all been retained, but Do not submit through http:// request from the Missouri Department of with new numbering and titles.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES 64954 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

What action is EPA taking? • Is not an economically significant reconsideration by the Administrator of EPA is approving these revisions to regulatory action based on health or this final rule does not affect the finality the Springfield City Code Chapter 2A safety risks subject to Executive Order of this action for the purposes of judicial 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); review nor does it extend the time Air Pollution Control Standard as • described above. We are processing this Is not a significant regulatory action within which a petition for judicial action as a direct final action because subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR review may be filed, and shall not 28355, May 22, 2001); postpone the effectiveness of such rule the revisions make routine changes to • the existing rules which are Is not subject to requirements of or action. Parties with objections to this noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not Section 12(d) of the National direct final rule are encouraged to file a anticipate any adverse comments. Technology Transfer and Advancement comment in response to the parallel Please note that if EPA receives adverse Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because notice of proposed rulemaking for this comment on part of this rule and if that application of those requirements would action published in the proposed rules part can be severed from the remainder be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; section of today’s Federal Register, of the rule, EPA may adopt as final and rather than file an immediate petition • Does not provide EPA with the those parts of the rule that are not the for judicial review of this direct final discretionary authority to address, as subject of an adverse comment. rule, so that EPA can withdraw this appropriate, disproportionate human direct final rule and address the Statutory and Executive Order Reviews health or environmental effects, using comment in the proposed rulemaking. Under the Clean Air Act, the practicable and legally permissible This action may not be challenged later Administrator is required to approve a methods, under Executive Order 12898 in proceedings to enforce its SIP submission that complies with the (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) In addition, this rule does not have provisions of the Act and applicable List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); Tribal implications as specified by 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, Environmental protection, Air submissions, EPA’s role is to approve November 9, 2000), because the SIP is pollution control, Carbon monoxide, State choices, provided that they meet not approved to apply in Indian country Incorporation by reference, the criteria of the Clean Air Act. located in the State, and EPA notes that Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Accordingly, this action merely it will not impose substantial direct Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate approves State law as meeting Federal costs on Tribal governments or preempt matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and does not impose Tribal law. requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile additional requirements beyond those The Congressional Review Act, 5 organic compounds. imposed by State law. For that reason, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Dated: September 22, 2010. this action: Karl Brooks, • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides action’’ subject to review by the Office that before a rule may take effect, the Regional Administrator, Region 7. of Management and Budget under agency promulgating the rule must ■ Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 is Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, submit a rule report, which includes a amended as follows: October 4, 1993); copy of the rule, to each House of the • Does not impose an information Congress and to the Comptroller General PART 52—[AMENDED] collection burden under the provisions of the United States. EPA will submit a of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 report containing this action and other ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); required information to the U.S. Senate, continues to read as follows: • Is certified as not having a the U.S. House of Representatives, and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. significant economic impact on a the Comptroller General of the United substantial number of small entities States prior to publication of the rule in Subpart AA—Missouri under the Regulatory Flexibility Act the Federal Register. A major rule (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); cannot take effect until 60 days after it ■ 2. In § 52.1320 the table in paragraph • Does not contain any unfunded is published in the Federal Register. (c) is amended by revising the entry for mandate or significantly or uniquely This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as ‘‘Chapter 2A’’ under the heading affect small governments, as described defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). ‘‘Springfield—Chapter 2A—Air in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Pollution Control Standards’’ to read as of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Air Act, petitions for judicial review of follows: • Does not have Federalism this action must be filed in the United implications as specified in Executive States Court of Appeals for the § 52.1320 Identification of plan. Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, appropriate circuit by December 20, * * * * * 1999); 2010. Filing a petition for (c) * * *

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

State Missouri Title effective EPA approval date Explanation citation date

Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Chapter 2 Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City Metropolitan Area

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64955

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS—Continued

State Missouri Title effective EPA approval date Explanation citation date

*******

Springfield—Chapter 2A—Air Pollution Control Standards

Article I ...... Definitions ...... 12/04/08 10/21/10 [insert FR page Only Section 6–2 is approved by EPA. number where the docu- ment begins]. Article II ...... Administrative and Enforce- 12/04/08 ...... Only Sections 6–151, 155, 156, and ment. 171 are approved by EPA. Incinerators. Article V ...... 12/04/08 ...... Only Sections 6–311 through 314 are approved by EPA.

* * * * * DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE under common pool regulations at [FR Doc. 2010–24918 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] § 648.82(b)(6) state that ‘‘The [300 lb BILLING CODE 6560–50–P National Oceanic and Atmospheric (136.1 kg)] cod trip limit shall be Administration adjusted proportionally to the trip limit for [Gulf of Maine (GOM)] cod (rounded 50 CFR Part 648 up to the nearest 50 lb (22.7 kg)), as DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND [Docket No. 0910051338–0151–02] specified in § 648.86(b)). An inseason HUMAN SERVICES action published in the Federal Register RIN 0648–XZ44 on September 27, 2010 (75 FR 59154), 42 CFR Part 110 reduced the GOM cod trip limit for NE Fisheries of the Northeastern United multispecies common pool vessels States; Northeast Multispecies RIN 0906–AA83 fishing under a day-at-sea (DAS) to 100 Fishery; Correction to Cod Landing lb (45.4 kg) per DAS up to 1,000 lb Limit for Handgear A Vessels in the Countermeasures Injury (453.6 kg) per trip, from the original 800 Common Pool Fishery Compensation Program (CICP): lb (362.9 kg) per DAS up to 4,000 lb Administrative Implementation; Interim AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries (1,814.4 kg) per trip limit, a 87.5 percent Final Rule Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and reduction. Therefore, the HA cod trip Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), limit should have been reduced 87.5 Correction Commerce. percent from 300 lb (136.1 kg) to 37.5 lb (17.0 kg), and rounded up to 50 lb In rule document 2010–25110 ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason (22.7 kg)). The HA cod limit applies to beginning on page 63656 in the issue of adjustment of landing limit. both the GOM and Georges Bank (GB) Friday, October 15, 2010, make the SUMMARY: This action addresses an stocks of cod. Additional details following corrections: oversight in a previous inseason action regarding the need to reduce the 1. On page 63656, in the first column, and decreases the landing limit for cod common pool GOM cod in order to in the DATES section, in the second and to 50 lb (22.7 kg) per trip for NE decrease the likelihood of harvest third lines, ‘‘Written one comments’’ multispecies limited access Handgear A exceeding the subcomponent of the should read ‘‘Written comments’’. (HA) permitted vessels fishing in the annual catch limit (ACL) allocated to common pool fishery for the remainder the common pool, and the authority of 2. On the same page, in the same the Administrator, Northeast (NE) column, in the ADDRESSES section, in of the 2010 fishing year (FY) (through April 30, 2011). This action is Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) the fourth and fifth lines, ‘‘submit your to take such action, are stated in the comments in only of these ways’’ should authorized under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery action published on September 27, 2010 read ‘‘submit your comments in only Conservation and Management Act (75 FR 59154), and are not repeated one of these ways’’. (Magnuson-Stevens Act), and is here. [FR Doc. C1–2010–25110 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] required by the regulations This action therefore, reduces the common pool cod trip limit for HA BILLING CODE 1505–01–D implementing Amendment 13, Amendment 16, and Framework vessels to 50 lb (22.7 kg) from 100 lb Adjustment 44 (FW 44) to the NE (45.4 kg). Catch will be closely Multispecies Fishery Management Plan monitored through dealer-reported (FMP). landings, vessel monitoring system (VMS) catch reports, and other available DATES: Effective October 21, 2010, information. Further inseason through April 30, 2011. adjustments to decrease the trip limit, or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to increase differential DAS measures, Douglas Potts, Fishery Policy Analyst, may be considered, based on updated (978) 281–9341, fax (978) 281–9135. catch data and projections. Conversely, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: if the common pool sub-ACL is Regulations governing possession and projected to be under-harvested by the landing limits for HA vessels fishing end of FY 2010, in-season adjustments,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES 64956 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

such as increasing the trip limit for the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE TAC apportioned to vessels catching remainder of FY2010, will be Pacific cod for processing by the considered. National Oceanic and Atmospheric offshore component of the Central Administration Regulatory Area of the GOA will soon Classification be reached. Therefore, the Regional 50 CFR Part 679 This action is authorized by 50 CFR Administrator is establishing a directed part 648 and is exempt from review [Docket No. 0910131362–0087–02] fishing allowance of 3,600 mt, and is under Executive Order 12866. setting aside the remaining 78 mt as RIN 0648–XZ79 bycatch to support other anticipated Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and groundfish fisheries. In accordance with (d)(3), there is good cause to waive prior Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional notice and opportunity for public Administrator finds that this directed comment, as well as the delayed Vessels Catching Pacific Cod for Processing by the Offshore fishing allowance has been reached. effectiveness for this action, because Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting notice, comment, and a delayed Component in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska directed fishing for Pacific cod by effectiveness would be impracticable vessels catching Pacific cod for and contrary to the public interest. The AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries processing by the offshore component in regulations at §§ 648.82(b)(6) require Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA. that the HA cod trip limit be adjusted Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), After the effective date of this closure Commerce. proportionally to the trip limit for GOM the maximum retainable amounts at cod. By an administrative error, the ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time inseason action published on September during a trip. 27, 2010, reduced the GOM cod trip SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed limit but failed to address the required fishing for Pacific cod by vessels Classification catching Pacific cod for processing by proper reduction to the HA cod trip the offshore component in the Central This action responds to the best limit. This action would correct this Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska available information recently obtained oversight by reducing the cod trip limit (GOA). This action is necessary to from the fishery. The Assistant for NE multispieces HA vessels in the prevent exceeding the 2010 Pacific total Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA common pool fishery from 100 lb/trip to allowable catch (TAC) apportioned to (AA), finds good cause to waive the 50 lb/trip. vessels catching Pacific cod for requirement to provide prior notice and It is important to take this action processing by the offshore component of opportunity for public comment immediately due to the oversight in not the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA. pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 effecting this trip limit reduction earlier DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is and the concern that any delay in time (A.l.t.), October 16, 2010, through impracticable and contrary to the public effectiveness would further 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2010. interest. This requirement is disadvantage vessels subject to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh impracticable and contrary to the public lower trip limits implemented on Keaton, 907–586–7228. interest as it would prevent NMFS from September 27, 2010. Providing for prior SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS responding to the most recent fisheries notice and comment for this action are manages the groundfish fishery in the data in a timely fashion and would unnecessary because the action is non- GOA exclusive economic zone delay the directed fishing closure of discretionary and NMFS could not according to the Fishery Management Pacific cod by vessels catching Pacific adjust the measure based on comments Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of cod for processing by the offshore received. The time necessary to provide Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North component in the Central Regulatory delayed effectiveness would prevent Pacific Fishery Management Council Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to NMFS from implementing the reduced under authority of the Magnuson- publish a notice providing time for trip limit in a timely manner and would Stevens Fishery Conservation and public comment because the most increase the likelihood of exceeding the Management Act. Regulations governing recent, relevant data only became common pool sub-ACL. Attainment of fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance available as of October 13, 2010. any of the common pool sub-ACLs prior with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 The AA also finds good cause to to the end of the FY on April 30, 2011, CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. waive the 30-day delay in the effective would result in accountability measures Regulations governing sideboard date of this action under 5 U.S.C. being put in place for the common pool protections for GOA groundfish 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon fisheries appear at subpart B of 50 CFR in FY 2011. These restrictions could the reasons provided above for waiver of part 680. result in the loss of yield of other prior notice and opportunity for public The 2010 Pacific cod TAC comment. valuable species caught by vessels in the apportioned to vessels catching Pacific common pool. cod for processing by the offshore This action is required by § 679.20 Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. component of the Central Regulatory and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. Dated: October 15, 2010. Area of the GOA is 3,678 metric tons (mt), as established by the final 2010 Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Carrie Selberg, and 2011 harvest specifications for Dated: October 15, 2010. Acting Director, Office of Sustainable groundfish of the GOA (75 FR 11749, Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. March 12, 2010). Carrie Selberg, [FR Doc. 2010–26504 Filed 10–18–10; 4:15 pm] In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), Acting Director, Office of Sustainable BILLING CODE 3510–22–P the Administrator, Alaska Region, Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. NMFS (Regional Administrator) has [FR Doc. 2010–26505 Filed 10–18–10; 4:15 pm] determined that the 2010 Pacific cod BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64957

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE fields, if you wish to remain public interest. This requirement is anonymous). Attachments to electronic impracticable and contrary to the public National Oceanic and Atmospheric comments will be accepted in Microsoft interest as it would prevent NMFS from Administration Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe responding to the most recent fisheries portable document file (pdf) formats data in a timely fashion and would 50 CFR Part 679 only. delay the opening of the Atka mackerel [Docket No. 0910131363–0087–01] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: fishery in the Eastern Aleutian District Obren Davis, 907–586–7228. and the Bering Sea subarea for vessels RIN 0648–XZ85 participating in the BSAI trawl limited SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS access fishery. NMFS was unable to Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic manages the groundfish fishery in the publish a notice providing time for Zone Off Alaska; Atka Mackerel in the BSAI exclusive economic zone public comment because the most Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands according to the Fishery Management recent, relevant data only became Management Area Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea available as of October 14, 2010. The and Aleutian Islands Management Area AA also finds good cause to waive the AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific 30-day delay in the effective date of this Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Fishery Management Council under action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), authority of the Magnuson-Stevens finding is based upon the reasons Commerce. Fishery Conservation and Management provided above for waiver of prior ACTION: Temporary rule; modification of Act. Regulations governing fishing by notice and opportunity for public a closure. U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP comment. appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 SUMMARY: NMFS is opening directed Without this inseason adjustment, and 50 CFR part 679. fishing for Atka mackerel in the Eastern NMFS closed the directed fishery for NMFS could not allow the fishery for Aleutian District and the Bering Sea Atka mackerel by vessels participating Atka mackerel fishery in the Eastern subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery Aleutian District and the Bering Sea Islands management area (BSAI) for in the Eastern Aleutian District and the subarea for vessels participating in the vessels participating in the BSAI trawl Bering Sea subarea on September 1, BSAI trawl limited access fishery to be limited access fishery. This action is 2010 (75 FR 53606, September 1, 2010). harvested in an expedient manner and necessary to fully use the 2010 total NMFS has determined that in accordance with the regulatory allowable catch (TAC) of Atka mackerel approximately 300 mt of the 2010 Atka schedule. Under § 679.25(c)(2), in these areas specified for vessels mackerel TAC specified for vessels interested persons are invited to submit participating in the BSAI trawl limited participating in the BSAI trawl limited written comments on this action to the access fishery. access fishery in the Eastern Aleutian above address until November 1, 2010. DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local District and the Bering Sea subarea This action is required by § 679.20 time (A.l.t.), October 15, 2010, through remain in the directed fishing and § 679.25 and is exempt from review 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October 22, 2010. allowance. Therefore, in accordance under Executive Order 12866. Comments must be received at the with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. following address no later than 4:30 (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully utilize the Dated: October 15, 2010. p.m., A.l.t., November 1, 2010. 2010 TAC of Atka mackerel in these Emily H. Menashes, ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue areas specified for vessels participating Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Salveson, Assistant Regional in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery, Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries NMFS is terminating the previous [FR Doc. 2010–26419 Filed 10–15–10; 4:15 pm] Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: closure and is reopening directed Ellen Sebastian. You may submit fishing for Atka mackerel by vessels BILLING CODE 3510–22–P comments, identified by 0648–XZ85, by participating in the BSAI trawl limited any one of the following methods: access fishery in the Eastern Aleutian DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Electronic Submissions: Submit all District and the Bering Sea subarea electronic public comments via the effective 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October 15, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at 2010. Pursuant to § 679.25(b), the Administration http://www.regulations.gov. Regional Administrator considered the • Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK following factors in reaching this 50 CFR Part 679 99802. decision: (1) The catch per unit of effort • Fax: (907) 586–7557. and the rate of harvest and, (2) the [Docket No. 0910131362–0087–02] • Hand Delivery to the Federal economic impacts on fishing businesses Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room affected in the BSAI trawl limited access RIN 0648–XZ80 420A, Juneau, AK. sector. All comments received are a part of Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic the public record and will generally be Classification Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by posted to http://www.regulations.gov This action responds to the best Vessels Catching Pacific Cod for without change. All Personal Identifying available information recently obtained Processing by the Offshore Information (e.g., name, address) from the fishery. The Assistant Component in the Western Regulatory voluntarily submitted by the commenter Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, Area of the Gulf of Alaska may be publicly accessible. Do not (AA) finds good cause to waive the AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries submit Confidential Business requirement to provide prior notice and Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Information or otherwise sensitive or opportunity for public comment Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), protected information. pursuant to the authority set forth at Commerce. NMFS will accept anonymous 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such a requirement ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. comments (enter N/A in the required is impracticable and contrary to the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES 64958 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time SUMMARY: NMFS is opening directed fishing for Pacific cod by vessels during a trip. fishing for pollock in Statistical Area catching Pacific cod for processing by 630 of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) for 72 Classification the offshore component in the Western hours. This action is necessary to fully Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska This action responds to the best use the 2010 total allowable catch (TAC) (GOA). This action is necessary to available information recently obtained of pollock specified for Statistical Area prevent exceeding the 2010 Pacific total from the fishery. The Assistant 630 of the GOA. allowable catch (TAC) apportioned to Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local vessels catching Pacific cod for (AA), finds good cause to waive the time (A.l.t.), October 15, 2010, through processing by the offshore component of requirement to provide prior notice and 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October 18, 2010. the Western Regulatory Area of the opportunity for public comment Comments must be received at the GOA. pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 following address no later than 4:30 DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is p.m., A.l.t., November 1, 2010. time (A.l.t.), October 16, 2010, through impracticable and contrary to the public ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2010. interest. This requirement is Salveson, Assistant Regional impracticable and contrary to the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Keaton, 907–586–7228. interest as it would prevent NMFS from Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: responding to the most recent fisheries SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS Ellen Sebastian. You may submit data in a timely fashion and would manages the groundfish fishery in the comments, identified by 0648–XZ84, by delay the directed fishing closure of GOA exclusive economic zone any one of the following methods: Pacific cod by vessels catching Pacific • according to the Fishery Management Electronic Submissions: Submit all cod for processing by the offshore Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of electronic public comments via the component in the Western Regulatory Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to Pacific Fishery Management Council http://www.regulations.gov. publish a notice providing time for • under authority of the Magnuson- Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK public comment because the most Stevens Fishery Conservation and 99802. recent, relevant data only became • Management Act. Regulations governing Fax: (907) 586–7557. available as of October 13, 2010. • Hand Delivery to the Federal fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance The AA also finds good cause to Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 waive the 30-day delay in the effective 420A, Juneau, AK. CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. date of this action under 5 U.S.C. All comments received are a part of Regulations governing sideboard 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the public record and will generally be protections for GOA groundfish the reasons provided above for waiver of posted to http://www.regulations.gov fisheries appear at subpart B of 50 CFR prior notice and opportunity for public without change. All Personal Identifying part 680. comment. Information (e.g., name, address) The 2010 Pacific cod TAC This action is required by § 679.20 voluntarily submitted by the commenter apportioned to vessels catching Pacific and is exempt from review under may be publicly accessible. Do not cod for processing by the offshore Executive Order 12866. submit Confidential Business component of the Western Regulatory Information or otherwise sensitive or Area of the GOA is 2,077 metric tons Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. protected information. (mt), as established by the final 2010 Dated: October 15, 2010. NMFS will accept anonymous and 2011 harvest specifications for Carrie Selberg, comments (enter N/A in the required groundfish of the GOA (75 FR 11749, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable fields, if you wish to remain March 12, 2010). Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. anonymous). Attachments to electronic In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), [FR Doc. 2010–26421 Filed 10–15–10; 4:15 pm] comments will be accepted in Microsoft the Administrator, Alaska Region, BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe NMFS (Regional Administrator) has portable document file (pdf) formats determined that the 2010 Pacific cod only. TAC apportioned to vessels catching DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Pacific cod for processing by the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh offshore component of the Western National Oceanic and Atmospheric Keaton, 907–586–7228. Regulatory Area of the GOA will soon Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS be reached. Therefore, the Regional manages the groundfish fishery in the Administrator is establishing a directed 50 CFR Part 679 GOA exclusive economic zone fishing allowance of 2,000 mt, and is according to the Fishery Management setting aside the remaining 77 mt as [Docket No. 0910131362–0087–02] Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of bycatch to support other anticipated Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North groundfish fisheries. In accordance with RIN 0648–XZ84 Pacific Fishery Management Council § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional under authority of the Magnuson- Administrator finds that this directed Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Stevens Fishery Conservation and fishing allowance has been reached. Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical Management Act. Regulations governing Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting Area 630 of the Gulf of Alaska fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance directed fishing for Pacific cod by AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 vessels catching Pacific cod for Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. processing by the offshore component in Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), NMFS closed the directed fishery for the Western Regulatory Area of the Commerce. pollock in Statistical Area 630 of the GOA under § 679.20(d)(1)(iii) on GOA. ACTION: Temporary rule; modification of After the effective date of this closure October 2, 2010 (75 FR 61638, October a closure. the maximum retainable amounts at 6, 2010).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64959

NMFS has determined that GOA effective 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October date of this action under 5 U.S.C. approximately 1,150 metric tons of 18, 2010. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon pollock remain in the directed fishing Classification the reasons provided above for waiver of allowance. Therefore, in accordance prior notice and opportunity for public with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and This action responds to the best comment. available information recently obtained (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully utilize the Without this inseason adjustment, 2010 TAC of pollock in Statistical Area from the fishery. The Assistant NMFS could not allow the fishery for 630, NMFS is terminating the previous Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA pollock in Statistical Area 630 of the closure and is reopening directed (AA), finds good cause to waive the GOA to be harvested in an expedient fishing for pollock in Statistical Area requirement to provide prior notice and manner and in accordance with the 630 of the GOA. This will enhance the opportunity for public comment socioeconomic well-being of harvesters pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 regulatory schedule. Under dependent upon pollock in this area. U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is § 679.25(c)(2), interested persons are The Administrator, Alaska Region impracticable and contrary to the public invited to submit written comments on interest. This requirement is (Regional Administrator) considered the this action to the above address until impracticable and contrary to the public following factors in reaching this November 1, 2010. interest as it would prevent NMFS from decision: (1) The current catch of This action is required by § 679.20 responding to the most recent fisheries pollock by the GOA trawl sector and, (2) data in a timely fashion and would and § 679.25 and is exempt from review the harvest capacity and stated intent on delay the opening of pollock in under Executive Order 12866. future harvesting patterns of vessels Statistical Area 630 of the GOA. NMFS Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. participating in this fishery. was unable to publish a notice Dated: October 15, 2010. In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), providing time for public comment the Regional Administrator finds that because the most recent, relevant data Emily H. Menashes, this directed fishing allowance will be only became available as of October 14, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable reached after 72 hours. Consequently, 2010. Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for The AA also finds good cause to [FR Doc. 2010–26422 Filed 10–15–10; 4:15 pm] pollock in Statistical Area 630 of the waive the 30-day delay in the effective BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:33 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM 21OCR1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES 64960

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 203

Thursday, October 21, 2010

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER • Fax: (202) 493–2251. comments on the overall regulatory, contains notices to the public of the proposed • Mail: U.S. Department of economic, environmental, and energy issuance of rules and regulations. The Transportation, Docket Operations, aspects of this proposed AD. We will purpose of these notices is to give interested M–30, West Building Ground Floor, consider all comments received by the persons an opportunity to participate in the Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey closing date and may amend this rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. proposed AD based on those comments. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of We will post all comments we Transportation, Docket Operations, receive, without change, to http:// DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION M–30, West Building Ground Floor, www.regulations.gov, including any Room W12–40, 1200 New Jersey personal information you provide. We Federal Aviation Administration Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between will also post a report summarizing each 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through substantive verbal contact we receive 14 CFR Part 39 Friday, except Federal holidays. about this proposed AD. For service information identified in Discussion [Docket No. FAA–2010–1039; Directorate this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, Identifier 2010–NM–002–AD] Inc., 400 Coˆte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, On March 8, 2005, we issued AD RIN 2120–AA64 Que´bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 2005–06–04, Amendment 39–14012 (70 514–855–5000; fax 514–855–7401; FR 12963, March 17, 2005). That AD Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, e-mail [email protected]; required actions intended to address an Inc. Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Internet http://www.bombardier.com. unsafe condition on the products listed Series 100 & 440) Airplanes You may review copies of the above. referenced service information at the Since we issued AD 2005–06–04, the AGENCY: Federal Aviation FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, inspection for the throttle control Administration (FAA), DOT. 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, gearbox (TCGB) required by that AD has ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Washington. For information on the been transcribed in a new certification (NPRM). availability of this material at the FAA, maintenance requirement (CMR) task. call 425–227–1221. This NPRM proposes to mandate the SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new incorporation of the new CMR task into airworthiness directive (AD) for the Examining the AD Docket the CL–600–2B19 maintenance products listed above that would You may examine the AD docket on requirements manual (MRM) as supersede an existing AD. This the Internet at http:// introduced by the MRM temporary proposed AD results from mandatory www.regulations.gov; or in person at the revision 2A–47. Transport Canada Civil continuing airworthiness information Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. Aviation, which is the aviation (MCAI) originated by an aviation and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, authority for Canada, has issued authority of another country to identify except Federal holidays. The AD docket Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF– and correct an unsafe condition on an contains this proposed AD, the 2004–01R2, dated September 29, 2009 aviation product. The MCAI describes regulatory evaluation, any comments (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to the unsafe condition as: received, and other information. The correct an unsafe condition for the There has been numerous reported failures street address for the Docket Operations specified products. The MCAI states: of the Regional Jet engine TCGB [throttle office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in There has been numerous reported failures control gearbox] P/Ns: 2100140–003, the ADDRESSES section. Comments will of the Regional Jet engine TCGB P/Ns: 2100140–005 & 2100140–007. Some of these be available in the AD docket shortly 2100140–003, 2100140–005 & 2100140–007. failures have resulted in in-flight engine after receipt. Some of these failures have resulted in in- shutdowns. Post incident investigations flight engine shutdowns. Post incident revealed that excessive wear within the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: investigations revealed that excessive wear engine TCGB could alter the rigging position Rocco Viselli, Senior Aviation Safety within the engine TCGB could alter the or cause the throttle to jam. With the rigging Engineer, Avionic & Flight Test Branch, rigging position or cause the throttle to jam. position altered, movement of the throttle ANE–172, FAA, New York Aircraft With the rigging position altered, movement lever towards the idle position can result in Certification Office, 1600 Stewart of the throttle lever towards the idle position throttle moving too close to the fuel shut-off Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York can result in throttle moving too close to the position, which potentially, can cause the 11590; telephone (516) 228–7331; fax fuel shut-off position, which potentially, can engine to flame out. (516) 794–5531. cause the engine to flame out. * * * * * Bombardier issued Service Bulletin (SB) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed AD would require actions 601R–76–019 dated 21 August 2003, to introduce an inspection of, and if required, that are intended to address the unsafe Comments Invited replacement of the throttle control gearbox condition described in the MCAI. We invite you to send any written with a serviceable unit. AD CF–2004–01 was DATES: We must receive comments on relevant data, views, or arguments about originally issued to mandate the subject this proposed AD by December 6, 2010. this proposed AD. Send your comments inspection requirement as per SB 601R–76– 019 and subsequent revisions. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by to an address listed under the The subject TCGB inspection requirements any of the following methods: ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. • mandated as per the earlier versions of this Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to FAA–2010–1039; Directorate Identifier AD, are now transcribed in a new http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 2010–NM–002–AD’’ at the beginning of Certification Maintenance Requirement instructions for submitting comments. your comments. We specifically invite (CMR) task. This revision is issued to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64961

mandate the incorporation of the new CMR proposed AD take about 7 work-hours List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 task into the CL–600–2B19 Maintenance per product. The average labor rate is Requirements Manual (MRM), as introduced Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation $85 per work-hour. Based on these safety, Incorporation by reference, by the MRM Temporary Revision (TR) figures, we estimate the cost of the 2A–47. Safety. requirements retained in this proposed You may obtain further information AD on U.S. operators to be $379,610, or The Proposed Amendment by examining the MCAI in the AD $595 per product Accordingly, under the authority docket. We estimate that it would take about delegated to me by the Administrator, Relevant Service Information 1 work-hour per product to comply with the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part the new basic requirements of this 39 as follows: Bombardier has issued Service proposed AD. The average labor rate is Bulletin 601R–76–019, Revision B, $85 per work-hour. Based on these PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS dated February 16, 2005; and Service figures, we estimate the cost of the new DIRECTIVES Bulletin 601R–76–019, Revision C, basic requirements in this proposed AD 1. The authority citation for part 39 dated July 5, 2007. Bombardier has also on U.S. operators to be $54,230, or $85 continues to read as follows: issued Temporary Revision 2A–47, per product. dated May 27, 2009, to Appendix A— Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Certification Maintenance Authority for This Rulemaking Requirements, of Part 2 of the Title 49 of the United States Code § 39.13 [Amended] Bombardier CL–600–2B19 Maintenance specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by Requirements Manual. The actions rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, removing Amendment 39–14012 (70 FR described in this service information are section 106, describes the authority of 12963, March 17, 2005) and adding the intended to correct the unsafe condition the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: following new AD: identified in the MCAI. Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2010– detail the scope of the Agency’s 1039; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM– FAA’s Determination and Requirements 002–AD. of This Proposed AD authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under Comments Due Date This product has been approved by ‘‘ the authority described in Subtitle VII, (a) We must receive comments by the aviation authority of another Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: December 6, 2010. country, and is approved for operation General requirements.’’ Under that in the United States. Pursuant to our section, Congress charges the FAA with Affected ADs bilateral agreement with the State of promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in (b) The AD supersedes AD 2005–06–04, Design Authority, we have been notified air commerce by prescribing regulations Amendment 39–14012. of the unsafe condition described in the for practices, methods, and procedures Applicability MCAI and service information the Administrator finds necessary for (c) This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. referenced above. We are proposing this safety in air commerce. This regulation Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 AD because we evaluated all pertinent is within the scope of that authority & 440) airplanes, certificated in any category, information and determined an unsafe because it addresses an unsafe condition having an engine throttle control gearbox condition exists and is likely to exist or that is likely to exist or develop on (TCGB) with part number 2100140–003, develop on other products of the same products identified in this rulemaking 2100140–005, or 2100140–007 installed. type design. action. Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to Differences Between This AD and the Regulatory Findings include new inspections. Compliance with MCAI or Service Information We determined that this proposed AD these inspections is required by 14 CFR We have reviewed the MCAI and would not have federalism implications 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been related service information and, in previously modified, altered, or repaired in under Executive Order 13132. This the areas addressed by these inspections, the general, agree with their substance. But proposed AD would not have a operator may not be able to accomplish the we might have found it necessary to use substantial direct effect on the States, on inspections described in the revisions. In this different words from those in the MCAI the relationship between the national situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. Government and the States, or on the the operator must request approval for an operators and is enforceable. In making distribution of power and alternative method of compliance according these changes, we do not intend to differ responsibilities among the various to paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. The request substantively from the information levels of government. should include a description of changes to provided in the MCAI and related For the reasons discussed above, I the required inspections that will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane. service information. certify this proposed regulation: We might also have proposed 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Subject different actions in this AD from those action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the America Code 76: Engine Controls. policies. Any such differences are DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures highlighted in a NOTE within the (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and Reason proposed AD. 3. Will not have a significant (e) The mandatory continuing economic impact, positive or negative, airworthiness information (MCAI) states: Costs of Compliance on a substantial number of small entities There has been numerous reported failures Based on the service information, we under the criteria of the Regulatory of the Regional Jet engine TCGB P/Ns: 2100140–003, 2100140–005 & 2100140–007. estimate that this proposed AD would Flexibility Act. Some of these failures have resulted in in- affect about 638 products of U.S. We prepared a regulatory evaluation flight engine shutdowns. Post incident registry. of the estimated costs to comply with investigations revealed that excessive wear The actions that are required by AD this proposed AD and placed it in the within the engine TCGB could alter the 2005–06–04 and retained in this AD docket. rigging position or cause the throttle to jam.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64962 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

With the rigging position altered, movement lighting is normally supplemented with a paragraph B.(7), and the wear value on the of the throttle lever towards the idle position direct source of good lighting at an intensity other gearbox is the same as that specified in can result in throttle moving too close to the deemed appropriate by the inspector. Part A, paragraph B.(8), of the fuel shut-off position, which potentially, can Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier cause the engine to flame out. lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, dated August Bombardier issued Service Bulletin (SB) and elaborate access procedures may be 21, 2003; Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, 601R–76–019 dated 21 August 2003, to required.’’ 2004; Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or introduce an inspection of, and if required, Revision C, dated July 5, 2007: Within 1,000 replacement of the throttle control gearbox Corrective Action flight hours after the inspection, replace the with a serviceable unit. AD CF–2004–01 was (h) If the wear value found during any gearbox with the wear value that is the same originally issued to mandate the subject inspection required by paragraph (g) of this as that specified in Part A, paragraph B.(7), inspection requirement as per SB 601R–76– AD is not the same as that specified in Part with a new or serviceable gearbox. Do the 019 and subsequent revisions. A, paragraph B.(8), of the Accomplishment replacement by doing all the actions per Part The subject TCGB inspection requirements Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin B, paragraphs D. through F.(7), of the mandated as per the earlier versions of this 601R–76–019, dated August 21, 2003; Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier AD, are now transcribed in a new Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, 2004; Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, dated August Certification Maintenance Requirement Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or 21, 2003; Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, (CMR) task. This revision is issued to Revision C, dated July 5, 2007: Do the 2004; Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or mandate the incorporation of the new CMR applicable actions required by paragraph Revision C, dated July 5, 2007. As the task into the CL–600–2B19 Maintenance (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD, at the time effective date of this AD, only Bombardier Requirements Manual (MRM), as introduced specified, per the Accomplishment Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, Revision C, by the MRM Temporary Revision (TR) Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin dated July 5, 2007, may be used. 2A–47. 601R–76–019, dated August 21, 2003; Additional Guidance Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, 2004; Compliance Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or Note 3: Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R– (f) You are responsible for having the Revision C, dated July 5, 2007. Repeat the 76–019, dated August 21, 2003; Revision ‘A,’ actions required by this AD performed within inspection required by paragraph (g) of this dated February 19, 2004; Revision B, dated the compliance times specified, unless the AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 February 16, 2005; or Revision C, dated July actions have already been done. flight hours. As the effective date of this AD, 5, 2007; reference Trans Digm, Inc., AeroControlex Group, Service Bulletin Restatement of Requirements of AD 2005– only Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–76– 2100140–007–76–04, dated July 22, 2003, as 06–04, With New Service Information 019, Revision C, dated July 5, 2007, may be used. Doing the inspection required by an additional source of guidance for Inspection paragraph (k) of this AD terminates the accomplishment of the inspections and (g) For airplanes having serial numbers inspection requirements of this paragraph. replacement. (1) If the wear value on one or both of the (S/Ns) 7003 through 7067 inclusive, and Reporting Requirement 7069 and subsequent: At the applicable time gearboxes is the same as that specified in Part specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this A, paragraph B.(5), of the Accomplishment (i) At the applicable time specified in AD, do a detailed inspection for wear of the Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, submit left and right engine throttle control 601R–76–019, dated August 21, 2003; a report of gearbox wear to Bombardier gearboxes having part number (P/N) Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, 2004; Aerospace, In-Service Engineering (Engine 2100140–005 or 2100140–007 by doing all Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or Group); fax (514) 855–7708. The report must the actions per Part A, paragraphs A., B., and Revision C, dated July 5, 2007: Before further include the airplane serial number, the C.(1) through C.(4), of the Accomplishment flight, replace the affected gearbox with a number of flight hours on the airplane, and Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin new or serviceable gearbox, by doing all the the number of flight hours on each gearbox 601R–76–019, dated August 21, 2003; actions per Part B, paragraphs D. through (if different than the number of flight hours Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, 2004; F.(7) of the Accomplishment Instructions of on the airplane). Under the provisions of the Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. Revision C, dated July 5, 2007. If the wear dated August 21, 2003; Revision ‘A,’ dated 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and value is the same as that specified in Part A, February 19, 2004; Revision B, dated Budget (OMB) has approved the information paragraph B.(8), of the Accomplishment February 16, 2005; or Revision C, dated July collection requirements contained in this AD Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 5, 2007. As the effective date of this AD, only and has assigned OMB Control Number 601R–76–019, dated August 21, 2003; Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, 2120–0056. Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, 2004; Revision C, dated July 5, 2007, may be used. (1) For Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19 Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or (2) If the wear value on both the left and (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, Revision C, dated July 5, 2007: Repeat the right gearboxes is the same as that specified serial numbers 7003 through 7067 inclusive, inspection thereafter at intervals not to in Part A, paragraph B.(6), of Bombardier and 7069 through 7999 inclusive: Submit a exceed 1,000 flight hours. As of the effective Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, dated August report within 10 days after doing the date of this AD, only Bombardier Service 21, 2003; Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, inspection required by paragraph (g) of this Bulletin 601R–76–019, Revision C, dated July 2004; Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or AD, or within 10 days after March 25, 2004, 5, 2007, may be used. Doing the inspection Revision C, dated July 5, 2007: Before further whichever is later. required by paragraph (k) of this AD flight, replace the gearbox having the higher (2) For Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19 terminates the requirement in this paragraph. wear value with a new or serviceable (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, (1) For airplanes having S/Ns 7003 through gearbox, by doing all the actions per Part B, serial numbers 8000 and subsequent: Submit 7067 inclusive and 7069 through 7999 paragraphs D. through F.(7), of the a report within 10 days after doing the inclusive: Within 1,000 flight hours or 90 Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier inspection required by paragraph (g) of this days after March 25, 2004 (the effective date Service Bulletin 601R–76–019, dated August AD, or within 10 days after April 1, 2005 (the of AD 2004–05–12), whichever is later. 21, 2003; Revision ‘A,’ dated February 19, effective date of AD 2005–06–04), whichever (2) For airplanes having S/Ns 8000 and 2004; Revision B, dated February 16, 2005; or is later. subsequent: Within 1,000 flight hours or 90 Revision C, dated July 5, 2007. Within 1,000 New Requirements of This AD days after April 1, 2005 (the effective date of flight hours after doing the replacement, AD 2005–06–04), whichever is later. replace the other gearbox. As the effective Actions Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a date of this AD, only Bombardier Service (j) For all airplanes: Within 30 days as the detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive visual Bulletin 601R–76–019, Revision C, dated July effective date of this AD, revise the examination of a specific structural area, 5, 2007, may be used. Airworthiness Limitations (AWL) section of system, installation, or assembly to detect (3) If the wear value on only one gearbox the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness damage, failure, or irregularity. Available is the same as that specified in Part A, to include the information in Bombardier

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64963

Temporary Revision 2A–47, dated May 27, Management and Budget (OMB) has ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 2009, to Appendix A—Certification approved the information collection any of the following methods: Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2 of the requirements and has assigned OMB Control • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Bombardier CL–600–2B19 Maintenance Number 2120–0056. Requirements Manual. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Related Information instructions for submitting comments. Note 4: The actions required by paragraph (n) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness • Fax: (202) 493–2251. (j) of this AD may be done by inserting a copy • of Bombardier Temporary Revision 2A–47, Directive CF–2004–01R2, dated September Mail: U.S. Department of dated May 27, 2009, into the AWL section of 29, 2009; Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R– Transportation, Docket Operations, Appendix A—Certification Maintenance 76–019, Revision C, dated July 5, 2007; and M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Requirements, of Part 2 of the Bombardier Bombardier Temporary Revision 2A–47, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey CL–600–2B19 Maintenance Requirements dated May 27, 2009, to Appendix A— Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Manual. When this temporary revision has Certification Maintenance Requirements, of • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Part 2 of the Bombardier CL–600–2B19 been included in the limitation section of the Transportation, Docket Operations, general revisions of the document, the Maintenance Requirements Manual; for general revisions may be inserted in the related information. M–30, West Building Ground Floor, document, provided the relevant information Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Issued in Renton, Washington, on October Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between in the general revision is identical to that in 13, 2010. Bombardier Temporary Revision 2A–47, 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through dated May 27, 2009. John Piccola, Friday, except Federal holidays. (k) For the task identified in Bombardier Acting Manager, Transport Airplane For service information identified in Temporary Revision 2A–47, dated May 27, Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. this proposed AD, contact Fokker 2009, do the initial inspection within 1,000 [FR Doc. 2010–26550 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., flight hours after the effective date of this AD. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE Nieuw-Vennep, Doing the initial inspection required by this the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)252– paragraph terminates the requirements of 627–350; fax +31 (0)252–627–211; e- paragraph (g) of this AD and the inspection DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD. mail technicalservices.fokkerservices@ (l) Thereafter, except as provided by Federal Aviation Administration stork.com; Internet http:// paragraph (m) of this AD, no alternative www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may intervals may be approved for the task 14 CFR Part 39 review copies of the referenced service indentified in Bombardier Temporary information at the FAA, Transport Revision 2A–47, dated May 27, 2009, which [Docket No. FAA–2010–1038; Directorate Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind requires a special detailed inspection of the Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For throttle control gearbox for gear and rack Identifier 2009–NM–250–AD] teeth wear. information on the availability of this RIN 2120–AA64 material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. FAA AD Differences Examining the AD Docket Note 5: This AD differs from the MCAI Airworthiness Directives; Fokker and/or service information as follows: No Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 You may examine the AD docket on differences. and 0100 Airplanes the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov; or in person at the AGENCY: Federal Aviation Other FAA AD Provisions Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. Administration (FAA), DOT. (m) The following provisions also apply to and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, this AD: ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking except Federal holidays. The AD docket (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (NPRM). contains this proposed AD, the (AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, FAA, SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new regulatory evaluation, any comments has the authority to approve AMOCs for this airworthiness directive (AD) for the received, and other information. The AD, if requested using the procedures found products listed above. This proposed street address for the Docket Operations in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: AD results from mandatory continuing office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in Program Manager, Continuing Operational the ADDRESSES section. Comments will Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of be available in the AD docket shortly Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York after receipt. 11590; telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516– another country to identify and correct 794–5531. Before using any approved AMOC an unsafe condition on an aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, product. The MCAI describes the unsafe Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, notify your principal maintenance inspector condition as: International Branch, ANM–116, (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, During a normal walkaround check on a as appropriate, or lacking a principal 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, inspector, your local Flight Standards District F28 Mark 0100 aeroplane, a large crack was discovered in the lower portion of the right Washington 98057–3356; telephone Office. The AMOC approval letter must 425–227–1137; fax 425–227–1149. specifically reference this AD. (RH) MLG [main landing gear] piston. The (2) Airworthy Product: For any affected MLG unit had accumulated 7909 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: flight cycles (FC) at the time of detection. requirement in this AD to obtain corrective Comments Invited actions from a manufacturer or other source, *** use these actions if they are FAA-approved. This condition, if not detected and We invite you to send any written Corrective actions are considered FAA- corrected, could lead to MLG failure, relevant data, views, or arguments about approved if they are approved by the State possibly resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane during the landing roll-out. this proposed AD. Send your comments of Design Authority (or their delegated to an address listed under the agent). You are required to assure the product The proposed AD would require actions ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. is airworthy before it is returned to service. that are intended to address the unsafe (3) Reporting Requirements: For any FAA–2010–1038; Directorate Identifier reporting requirement in this AD, under the condition described in the MCAI. 2009–NM–250–AD’’ at the beginning of provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act DATES: We must receive comments on your comments. We specifically invite (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of this proposed AD by December 6, 2010. comments on the overall regulatory,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64964 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

economic, environmental, and energy AD because we evaluated all pertinent substantial direct effect on the States, on aspects of this proposed AD. We will information and determined an unsafe the relationship between the national consider all comments received by the condition exists and is likely to exist or Government and the States, or on the closing date and may amend this develop on other products of the same distribution of power and proposed AD based on those comments. type design. responsibilities among the various We will post all comments we levels of government. receive, without change, to http:// Differences Between This AD and the For the reasons discussed above, I www.regulations.gov, including any MCAI or Service Information certify this proposed regulation: personal information you provide. We We have reviewed the MCAI and 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory will also post a report summarizing each related service information and, in action’’ under Executive Order 12866; substantive verbal contact we receive general, agree with their substance. But 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the about this proposed AD. we might have found it necessary to use DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures different words from those in the MCAI (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and Discussion to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 3. Will not have a significant The European Aviation Safety Agency operators and is enforceable. In making economic impact, positive or negative, (EASA), which is the Technical Agent these changes, we do not intend to differ on a substantial number of small entities for the Member States of the European substantively from the information under the criteria of the Regulatory Community, has issued EASA provided in the MCAI and related Flexibility Act. We prepared a Airworthiness Directive 2009–0221, service information. regulatory evaluation of the estimated dated October 14, 2009 (referred to after We might also have proposed costs to comply with this proposed AD this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe different actions in this AD from those and placed it in the AD docket. condition for the specified products. in the MCAI in order to follow FAA List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 The MCAI states: policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation During a normal walkaround check on a safety, Incorporation by reference, F28 Mark 0100 aeroplane, a large crack was proposed AD. Safety. discovered in the lower portion of the right Costs of Compliance (RH) MLG [main landing gear] piston. The The Proposed Amendment affected MLG unit had accumulated 7909 Based on the service information, we flight cycles (FC) at the time of detection. The estimate that this proposed AD would Accordingly, under the authority piston has been sent to Goodrich, the landing affect about 6 products of U.S. registry. delegated to me by the Administrator, gear manufacturer, for detailed investigation. We also estimate that it would take the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part This condition, if not detected and about 3 work-hours per product to 39 as follows: corrected, could lead to MLG failure, possibly resulting in loss of control of the comply with the basic requirements of PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS aeroplane during the landing roll-out. this proposed AD. The average labor DIRECTIVES For the reasons described above, this AD rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on requires a one-time detailed visual inspection these figures, we estimate the cost of the 1. The authority citation for part 39 of the MLG pistons, the replacement of any proposed AD on U.S. operators to be continues to read as follows: MLG pistons on which cracks are detected, $1,530, or $255 per product. and the reporting of all findings to the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. aeroplane TC [type certificate] holder. The Authority for This Rulemaking § 39.13 [Amended] inspection results, in combination with the Title 49 of the United States Code findings of the crack/metallurgical 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding investigation of the cracked piston by specifies the FAA’s authority to issue the following new AD: Goodrich, will be used to determine the rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA– necessity of additional and/or more detailed section 106, describes the authority of 2010–1038; Directorate Identifier 2009– inspections, or any other corrective action. the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: NM–250–AD. This AD is considered an interim measure, Aviation Programs’’ describes in more and further action is likely to follow. detail the scope of the Agency’s Comments Due Date You may obtain further information by authority. (a) We must receive comments by December 6, 2010. examining the MCAI in the AD docket. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, Affected ADs Relevant Service Information Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: (b) None. Fokker Services B.V. has issued General requirements.’’ Under that Service Bulletin SBF100–32–158, dated section, Congress charges the FAA with Applicability October 2, 2009. The actions described promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in (c) This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. in this service information are intended air commerce by prescribing regulations Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes, to correct the unsafe condition for practices, methods, and procedures certificated in any category, equipped with the Administrator finds necessary for Goodrich (formerly Menasco, Colt Industries) identified in the MCAI. main landing gear (MLG) units having part safety in air commerce. This regulation FAA’s Determination and Requirements number (P/N) 41050–7, 41050–8, 41050–9, is within the scope of that authority of This Proposed AD 41050–10, 41050–11, 41050–12, 41050–13, because it addresses an unsafe condition 41050–14, 41050–15, 41050–16, 41060–1, This product has been approved by that is likely to exist or develop on 41060–2, 41060–3, 41060–4, 41060–5, or the aviation authority of another products identified in this rulemaking 41060–6. country, and is approved for operation action. Subject in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Regulatory Findings (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing gear. Design Authority, we have been notified We determined that this proposed AD of the unsafe condition described in the would not have federalism implications Reason MCAI and service information under Executive Order 13132. This (e) The mandatory continuing referenced above. We are proposing this proposed AD would not have a airworthiness information (MCAI) states:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64965

During a normal walkaround check on a Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to Regional Airport. The FAA is taking this F28 Mark 0100 aeroplane, a large crack was approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested action to enhance the safety and discovered in the lower portion of the right using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. management of Instrument Flight Rules (RH) MLG piston. The affected MLG unit had Send information to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, (IFR) operations at the airport. accumulated 7909 flight cycles (FC) at the Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, time of detection. The piston has been sent ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, DATES: Comments must be received on to Goodrich, the landing gear manufacturer, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, or before December 6, 2010. for detailed investigation. Washington 98057–3356; telephone 425– ADDRESSES: Send comments on this This condition, if not detected and 227–1137; fax 425–227–1149. Before using proposal to the U.S. Department of corrected, could lead to MLG failure, any approved AMOC on any airplane to Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 possibly resulting in loss of control of the which the AMOC applies, notify your New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building aeroplane during the landing roll-out. principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or Ground Floor, Room W12–140, For the reasons described above, this AD principal avionics inspector (PAI), as requires a one-time detailed visual inspection appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must of the MLG pistons, the replacement of any your local Flight Standards District Office. identify the docket number FAA–2010– MLG pistons on which cracks are detected, The AMOC approval letter must specifically 0771/Airspace Docket No. 10–AGL–12, and the reporting of all findings to the reference this AD. at the beginning of your comments. You aeroplane TC [type certificate] holder. The (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement may also submit comments through the inspection results, in combination with the in this AD to obtain corrective actions from Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. findings of the crack/metallurgical a manufacturer or other source, use these You may review the public docket investigation of the cracked piston by actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective containing the proposal, any comments Goodrich, will be used to determine the actions are considered FAA-approved if they received, and any final disposition in necessity of additional and/or more detailed are approved by the State of Design Authority inspections, or any other corrective action. (or their delegated agent). You are required person in the Dockets Office between This AD is considered an interim measure, to assure the product is airworthy before it 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through and further action is likely to follow. is returned to service. Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647– Compliance (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the 5527), is on the ground floor of the (f) You are responsible for having the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act building at the above address. actions required by this AD performed within (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of the compliance times specified, unless the Management and Budget (OMB) has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: actions have already been done. approved the information collection Scott Enander, Central Service Center, Inspection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Operations Support Group, Federal Number 2120–0056. Aviation Administration, Southwest (g) Within 30 days after the effective day Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort of this AD, do a detailed visual inspection for Related Information cracks of the MLG pistons, in accordance Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321– (k) For related information, refer to MCAI 7716. with the Accomplishment Instructions of European Aviation Safety Agency Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100–32–158, Airworthiness Directive 2009–0221, dated SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: dated October 2, 2009. October 14, 2009; and Fokker Service Comments Invited (h) If any cracked MLG piston is found Bulletin SBF100–32–158, dated October 2, during the inspection required by paragraph 2009. Interested parties are invited to (g) of this AD, before further flight replace the participate in this proposed rulemaking affected piston with a serviceable part, in Issued in Renton, Washington, on October by submitting such written data, views, 13, 2010. accordance with the Accomplishment or arguments, as they may desire. Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin John Piccola, Comments that provide the factual basis SBF100–32–158, dated October 2, 2009. Acting Manager, Transport Airplane (i) At the applicable time specified in supporting the views and suggestions Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. presented are particularly helpful in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, report the [FR Doc. 2010–26561 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] inspection results (including no findings) to developing reasoned regulatory Fokker Services B.V. by using the BILLING CODE 4910–13–P decisions on the proposal. Comments Questionnaire provided in Fokker Service are specifically invited on the overall Bulletin SBF100–32–158, dated October 2, regulatory, aeronautical, economic, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2009. environmental, and energy-related (1) If the inspection was done on or after Federal Aviation Administration aspects of the proposal. the effective date of this AD: Submit the Communications should identify both report within 30 days after the inspection. (2) If the inspection was done before the 14 CFR Part 71 docket numbers and be submitted in effective date of this AD: Submit the report triplicate to the address listed above. [Docket No. FAA–2010–0771; Airspace within 30 days after the effective date of this Commenters wishing the FAA to Docket No. 10–AGL–12] AD. acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those FAA AD Differences Proposed Amendment of Class E comments a self-addressed, stamped Airspace; Mansfield, OH Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ postcard on which the following or service information as follows: The AGENCY: Federal Aviation statement is made: ‘‘Comments to applicability of the MCAI includes MLG part Administration (FAA), DOT. Docket No. FAA–2010–0771/Airspace number (P/N) 41050–6, which is not an Docket No. 10–AGL–12.’’ The postcard affected part. P/N 41060–6, however, is an ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking affected part, and is included in the (NPRM). will be date/time stamped and returned applicability of this AD. to the commenter. SUMMARY: This action proposes to Other FAA AD Provisions amend Class E airspace at Mansfield, Availability of NPRMs (j) The following provisions also apply to OH. Additional controlled airspace is An electronic copy of this document this AD: necessary to accommodate new may be downloaded through the (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance Standard Instrument Approach Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. (AMOCs): The Manager, International Procedures (SIAPs) at Mansfield Lahm Recently published rulemaking

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64966 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

documents can also be accessed through 106 describes the authority of the FAA Airport extending from the 6.9-mile radius to the FAA’s Web page at http:// Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 11.1 miles southeast of the airport, and ° www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ Programs, describes in more detail the within 4 miles each side of the 317 bearing air_traffic/publications/ scope of the agency’s authority. This from Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport _ extending from the 6.9-mile radius to 10.7 airspace amendments/. rulemaking is promulgated under the miles northwest of the airport, and within 4 You may review the public docket authority described in subtitle VII, part miles each side of the 047° bearing from containing the proposal, any comments A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport extending received and any final disposition in section, the FAA is charged with from the 6.9-mile radius to 11.2 miles person in the Dockets Office (see prescribing regulations to assign the use northeast of the airport, and within 4 miles ADDRESSES section for address and of airspace necessary to ensure the each side of the 227° bearing from Mansfield phone number) between 9 a.m. and safety of aircraft and the efficient use of Lahm Regional Airport extending from the 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except airspace. This regulation is within the 6.9-mile radius to 10.9 miles southwest of the airport, and within 6.1 miles each side of the Federal holidays. An informal docket scope of that authority as it would add ° may also be examined during normal Mansfield VORTAC 307 radial extending additional controlled airspace at from the 6.9-mile radius to 13.3 miles business hours at the office of the Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport, northwest of the VORTAC, and within 4.4 Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Mansfield, OH. miles each side of the Mansfield VORTAC Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137. 130° radial extending from the 6.9-mile Persons interested in being placed on List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 radius to 13.8 miles southeast of the a mailing list for future NPRMs should Airspace, Incorporation by reference, VORTAC. contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking Navigation (Air). 202–267–9677, to request a copy of Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on October 6, Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of The Proposed Amendment 2010. Proposed Rulemaking Distribution In consideration of the foregoing, the Anthony D. Roetzel, System, which describes the application Federal Aviation Administration Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO procedure. proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Central Service Center. follows: [FR Doc. 2010–26528 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] The Proposal BILLING CODE 4901–13–P This action proposes to amend title PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR CFR), part 71 by adding additional Class TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION E airspace extending upward from 700 REPORTING POINTS feet above the surface for SIAPs at Federal Aviation Administration 1. The authority citation for part 71 Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport, continues to read as follows: Mansfield, OH. Controlled airspace is 14 CFR Part 71 needed for the safety and management Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– [Docket No. FAA–2010–0770; Airspace of IFR operations at the airport. Docket No. 10–AGL–11] Class E airspace areas are published 1963 Comp., p. 389. in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order § 71.1 [Amended] Proposed Amendment of Class E 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and 2. The incorporation by reference in Airspace; Columbus, OH effective September 15, 2010, which is 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9U incorporated by reference in 14 CFR AGENCY: Federal Aviation Airspace Designations and Reporting Administration (FAA), DOT. 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Points, dated August 18, 2010, and listed in this document would be ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking effective September 15, 2010, is (NPRM). published subsequently in the Order. amended as follows: The FAA has determined that this SUMMARY: This action proposes to proposed regulation only involves an Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas amend Class E airspace in the established body of technical extending upward from 700 feet or more Columbus, OH area. Additional regulations for which frequent and above the surface of the earth. controlled airspace is necessary to routine amendments are necessary to * * * * * accommodate new Standard Instrument keep them operationally current. It, Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at Port therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant AGL OH E5 Mansfield, OH [Amended] Columbus International Airport. The regulatory action’’ under Executive Mansfield, Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport, FAA is taking this action to enhance the Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant OH ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ safety and management of Instrument rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies (Lat. 40 49 17 N., long. 82 31 00 W.) Galion, Galion Municipal Airport, OH Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February (Lat. 40°45′12″ N., long. 82°43′26″ W.) airport. 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant Shelby, Shelby Community Airport, OH preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation (Lat. 40°52′22″ N., long. 82°41′51″ W.) DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Willard, Willard Airport, OH received on or before December 6, 2010. Since this is a routine matter that will (Lat. 41°02′20″ N., long. 82°43′28″ W.) ADDRESSES: Send comments on this only affect air traffic procedures and air Mansfield VORTAC proposal to the U.S. Department of ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ navigation, it is certified that this rule, (Lat. 40 52 07 N., long. 82 35 28 W.) Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 when promulgated, will not have a That airspace extending upward from 700 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building significant economic impact on a feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile Ground Floor, Room W12–140, substantial number of small entities radius of Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport, Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must and within a 6.3-mile radius of Galion under the criteria of the Regulatory Municipal Airport, and within a 6.3-mile identify the docket number FAA–2010– Flexibility Act. radius of Shelby Community Airport, and 0770/Airspace Docket No. 10–AGL–11, The FAA’s authority to issue rules within a 6.3-mile radius of Willard Airport, at the beginning of your comments. You regarding aviation safety is found in title and within 4 miles each side of the 137° may also submit comments through the 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle I, section bearing from Mansfield Lahm Regional Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64967

You may review the public docket Persons interested in being placed on scope of that authority as it would add containing the proposal, any comments a mailing list for future NPRMs should additional controlled airspace in the received, and any final disposition in contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking Columbus, OH area. person in the Dockets Office between 202–267–9677, to request a copy of List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Friday, except Federal holidays. The Proposed Rulemaking Distribution Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647– System, which describes the application Navigation (Air). 5527), is on the ground floor of the procedure. The Proposed Amendment building at the above address. The Proposal In consideration of the foregoing, the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This action proposes to amend title Federal Aviation Administration Scott Enander, Central Service Center, 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Operations Support Group, Federal CFR), part 71 by adding additional Class follows: Aviation Administration, Southwest E airspace extending upward from 700 Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort feet above the surface for SIAPs at Port PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321– Columbus International Airport, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 7716. Columbus, OH. The addition of the TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28R SIAP at the REPORTING POINTS Comments Invited airport has created the need to extend 1. The authority citation for part 71 Class E airspace to the east of the continues to read as follows: Interested parties are invited to existing controlled airspace. Controlled participate in this proposed rulemaking airspace is needed for the safety and Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, by submitting such written data, views, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– management of IFR operations at the 1963 Comp., p. 389. or arguments, as they may desire. airport. Comments that provide the factual basis Class E airspace areas are published § 71.1 [Amended] supporting the views and suggestions in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 2. The incorporation by reference in presented are particularly helpful in 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9U, developing reasoned regulatory effective September 15, 2010, which is Airspace Designations and Reporting decisions on the proposal. Comments incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Points, dated August 18, 2010, and are specifically invited on the overall 71.1. The Class E airspace designation effective September 15, 2010, is regulatory, aeronautical, economic, listed in this document would be amended as follows: environmental, and energy-related published subsequently in the Order. aspects of the proposal. The FAA has determined that this Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas Communications should identify both proposed regulation only involves an extending upward from 700 feet or more docket numbers and be submitted in established body of technical above the surface of the earth. triplicate to the address listed above. regulations for which frequent and * * * * * Commenters wishing the FAA to routine amendments are necessary to AGL OH E5 Columbus, OH (Amended) acknowledge receipt of their comments keep them operationally current. It, Columbus, Port Columbus International on this notice must submit with those therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant Airport, OH comments a self-addressed, stamped regulatory action’’ under Executive (Lat. 39°59′53″ N., long. 82°53′31″ W.) postcard on which the following Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant Columbus, Rickenbacker International statement is made: ‘‘Comments to rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies Airport, OH Docket No. FAA–2010–0770/Airspace and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February (Lat. 39°48″50″ N., long. 82°55′40″ W.) ’’ Columbus, Ohio State University Airport, OH Docket No. 10–AGL–11. The postcard 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ will be date/time stamped and returned preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation (Lat. 40 04 47 N., long. 83 04 23 W.) Columbus, Bolton Field Airport, OH to the commenter. as the anticipated impact is so minimal. (Lat. 39°54′04″ N., long. 83°08′13″ W.) Since this is a routine matter that will Availability of NPRMs Columbus, Darby Dan Airport, OH only affect air traffic procedures and air (Lat. 39°56′31″ N., long. 83°12′18″ W.) An electronic copy of this document navigation, it is certified that this rule, Lancaster, Fairfield County Airport, OH may be downloaded through the when promulgated, will not have a (Lat. 39°45′20″ N., long. 82°39′26″ W.) Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. significant economic impact on a Don Scott NDB Recently published rulemaking substantial number of small entities (Lat. 40°04′49″ N., long. 83°04′44″ W.) documents can also be accessed through under the criteria of the Regulatory That airspace extending upward from 700 the FAA’s Web page at http:// Flexibility Act. feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius _ of Port Columbus International Airport, and www.faa.gov/airports airtraffic/ The FAA’s authority to issue rules ° air_traffic/publications/ regarding aviation safety is found in title within 3.3 miles either side of the 094 _ bearing from Port Columbus International airspace amendments/. 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section Airport extending from the 7-mile radius to You may review the public docket 106 describes the authority of the FAA 12.1 miles east of the airport, and within a containing the proposal, any comments Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 7-mile radius of Rickenbacker International received and any final disposition in Programs, describes in more detail the Airport, and within 4 miles either side of the person in the Dockets Office (see scope of the agency’s authority. This 045° bearing from Rickenbacker International ADDRESSES section for address and rulemaking is promulgated under the Airport extending from the 7-mile radius area phone number) between 9 a.m. and authority described in subtitle VII, part to 12.5 miles northeast of the airport, and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that within a 6.5-mile radius of the Ohio State University Airport, and within 3 miles either Federal holidays. An informal docket section, the FAA is charged with side of the 091° bearing from the Don Scott may also be examined during normal prescribing regulations to assign the use NDB extending from the 6.5-mile radius area business hours at the office of the of airspace necessary to ensure the to 9.8 miles east of the NDB, and within a Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 7.4-mile of Bolton Field Airport, and within Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137. airspace. This regulation is within the a 6.4-mile radius of Fairfield County Airport,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64968 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

and within a 6.5-mile radius of Darby Dan SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: needed for the safety and management Airport, excluding that airspace within the of IFR operations at the airport. Comments Invited London, OH, Class E airspace area. Adjustments to the geographic Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on October 6, Interested parties are invited to coordinates for the airport also would be 2010. participate in this proposed rulemaking made in accordance with the FAA’s Anthony D. Roetzel, by submitting such written data, views, National Aeronautical Navigation Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO or arguments, as they may desire. Services. Central Service Center. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions Class E airspace areas are published [FR Doc. 2010–26529 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order BILLING CODE 4901–13–P presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and decisions on the proposal. Comments effective September 15, 2010, which is DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION are specifically invited on the overall incorporated by reference in 14 CFR regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Federal Aviation Administration environmental, and energy-related listed in this document would be aspects of the proposal. published subsequently in the Order. 14 CFR Part 71 Communications should identify both The FAA has determined that this [Docket No. FAA–2010–0841; Airspace docket numbers and be submitted in proposed regulation only involves an Docket No. 10–ACE–11] triplicate to the address listed above. established body of technical Commenters wishing the FAA to regulations for which frequent and Proposed Amendment of Class E acknowledge receipt of their comments routine amendments are necessary to Airspace; Johnson, KS on this notice must submit with those keep them operationally current. It, comments a self-addressed, stamped AGENCY: Federal Aviation therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant postcard on which the following Administration (FAA), DOT. regulatory action’’ under Executive statement is made: ‘‘Comments to ‘‘ ACTION: Order 12866; (2) is not a significant Notice of proposed rulemaking Docket No. FAA–2010–0841/Airspace (NPRM). rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies Docket No. 10–ACE–11.’’ The postcard and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February SUMMARY: This action proposes to will be date/time stamped and returned 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant amend Class E airspace at Johnson, KS. to the commenter. preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation Additional controlled airspace is Availability of NPRMs as the anticipated impact is so minimal. necessary to accommodate new Since this is a routine matter that will Standard Instrument Approach An electronic copy of this document only affect air traffic procedures and air Procedures (SIAPs) at Stanton County may be downloaded through the navigation, it is certified that this rule, Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Municipal Airport. Minor adjustments when promulgated, will not have a Recently published rulemaking to geographic coordinates also would be significant economic impact on a documents can also be accessed through made. The FAA is taking this action to substantial number of small entities enhance the safety and management of the FAA’s Web page at http:// _ under the criteria of the Regulatory Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations www.faa.gov/airports airtraffic/ _ Flexibility Act. at the airport. air traffic/publications/ airspace_amendments/. The FAA’s authority to issue rules DATES: Comments must be received on You may review the public docket regarding aviation safety is found in or before December 6, 2010. containing the proposal, any comments Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, ADDRESSES: Send comments on this received and any final disposition in section 106 describes the authority of proposal to the U.S. Department of person in the Dockets Office (see the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 ADDRESSES section for address and Aviation Programs, describes in more New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building phone number) between 9 a.m. and detail the scope of the agency’s Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except authority. This rulemaking is Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must Federal holidays. An informal docket promulgated under the authority identify the docket number FAA–2010– may also be examined during normal described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart 0841/Airspace Docket No. 10–ACE–11, business hours at the office of the I, section 40103. Under that section, the at the beginning of your comments. You Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham FAA is charged with prescribing may also submit comments through the Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137. regulations to assign the use of airspace Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons interested in being placed on necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft You may review the public docket a mailing list for future NPRMs should and the efficient use of airspace. This containing the proposal, any comments contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking regulation is within the scope of that received, and any final disposition in 202–267–9677, to request a copy of authority as it would add additional person in the Dockets Office between Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of controlled airspace at Stanton County 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Proposed Rulemaking Distribution Municipal Airport, Johnson, KS. Friday, except Federal holidays. The System, which describes the application Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647– procedure. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address. The Proposal Airspace, Incorporation by reference, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This action proposes to amend Title Navigation (Air). Scott Enander, Central Service Center, 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 The Proposed Amendment Operations Support Group, Federal CFR), part 71 by adding additional Class Aviation Administration, Southwest E airspace extending upward from 700 In consideration of the foregoing, the Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort feet above the surface for SIAPs at Federal Aviation Administration Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321– Stanton County Municipal Airport, proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 7716. Johnson, KS. Controlled airspace is follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64969

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be air_traffic/publications/ B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR received on or before December 6, 2010. airspace_amendments/. You may review the public docket TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND ADDRESSES: Send comments on this containing the proposal, any comments REPORTING POINTS proposal to the U.S. Department of received and any final disposition in Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 1. The authority citation for part 71 person in the Dockets Office (see New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building continues to read as follows: ADDRESSES section for address and Ground Floor, Room W12–140, phone number) between 9 a.m. and Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except identify the docket number FAA–2010– 1963 Comp., p. 389. Federal holidays. An informal docket 0769/Airspace Docket No. 10–ACE–9, at may also be examined during normal § 71.1 [Amended] the beginning of your comments. You business hours at the office of the may also submit comments through the 2. The incorporation by reference in Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9U Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137. Airspace Designations and Reporting You may review the public docket Persons interested in being placed on Points, signed August 18, 2010, and containing the proposal, any comments a mailing list for future NPRMs should effective September 15, 2010, is received, and any final disposition in contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking amended as follows: person in the Dockets Office between 202–267–9677, to request a copy of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of extending upward from 700 feet or more Friday, except Federal holidays. The Proposed Rulemaking Distribution above the surface of the earth. Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647– System, which describes the application 5527), is on the ground floor of the * * * * * procedure. building at the above address. ACE KS E5 Johnson, KS [Amended] The Proposal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanton County Municipal Airport, KS This action proposes to amend title ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Scott Enander, Central Service Center, (Lat. 37 35 07 N., long. 101 43 56 W.) Operations Support Group, Federal 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 Bear Creek NDB CFR), part 71 by adding additional Class (Lat. 37°38′08″ N., long. 101°44′05″ W.) Aviation Administration, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort E airspace extending upward from 700 That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface for SIAPs at feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321– 7716. Farmington Regional Airport, radius of Stanton County Municipal Airport, Farmington, MO. Controlled airspace is and within 8 miles west and 4 miles east of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the Bear Creek NDB 358° bearing extending needed for the safety and management from the 6.6-mile radius to 16 miles north of Comments Invited of IFR operations at the airport. the NDB. Class E airspace areas are published Interested parties are invited to in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on October 6, participate in this proposed rulemaking 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and 2010. by submitting such written data, views, effective September 15, 2010, which is Anthony D. Roetzel, or arguments, as they may desire. incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Comments that provide the factual basis 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Central Service Center. supporting the views and suggestions listed in this document would be [FR Doc. 2010–26530 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] presented are particularly helpful in published subsequently in the Order. BILLING CODE 4901–13–P developing reasoned regulatory The FAA has determined that this decisions on the proposal. Comments proposed regulation only involves an are specifically invited on the overall established body of technical DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION regulatory, aeronautical, economic, regulations for which frequent and environmental, and energy-related routine amendments are necessary to Federal Aviation Administration aspects of the proposal. keep them operationally current. It, Communications should identify both therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant 14 CFR Part 71 docket numbers and be submitted in regulatory action’’ under Executive [Docket No. FAA–2010–0769; Airspace triplicate to the address listed above. Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant Docket No. 10–ACE–9] Commenters wishing the FAA to rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies acknowledge receipt of their comments and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February Proposed Amendment of Class E on this notice must submit with those 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant Airspace; Farmington, MO comments a self-addressed, stamped preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation AGENCY: Federal Aviation postcard on which the following as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Administration (FAA), DOT. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Since this is a routine matter that will Docket No. FAA–2010–0769/Airspace ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking only affect air traffic procedures and air ’’ (NPRM). Docket No. 10–ACE–9. The postcard navigation, it is certified that this rule, will be date/time stamped and returned when promulgated, will not have a SUMMARY: This action proposes to to the commenter. significant economic impact on a amend Class E airspace at Farmington, Availability of NPRMs substantial number of small entities MO. Additional controlled airspace is under the criteria of the Regulatory necessary to accommodate new An electronic copy of this document Flexibility Act. Standard Instrument Approach may be downloaded through the The FAA’s authority to issue rules Procedures (SIAPs) at Farmington Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. regarding aviation safety is found in Regional Airport. The FAA is taking this Recently published rulemaking Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, action to enhance the safety and documents can also be accessed through section 106 describes the authority of management of Instrument Flight Rules the FAA’s Web page at http:// the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, (IFR) operations at the airport. www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ Aviation Programs, describes in more

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64970 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

detail the scope of the agency’s Issued in Fort Worth, TX on October 6, reasoned regulatory decisions on the authority. This rulemaking is 2010. proposal. Comments are specifically promulgated under the authority Anthony D. Roetzel, invited on the overall regulatory, described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO aeronautical, economic, environmental, I, section 40103. Under that section, the Central Service Center. and energy-related aspects of the FAA is charged with prescribing [FR Doc. 2010–26581 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] proposal. regulations to assign the use of airspace BILLING CODE 4901–13–P Communications should identify both necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– and the efficient use of airspace. This 2010–0937; Airspace Docket No. 10– regulation is within the scope of that DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ASO–35) and be submitted in triplicate authority as it would add additional to the Docket Management System (see controlled airspace at Farmington Federal Aviation Administration ADDRESSES section for address and Regional Airport, Farmington, MO. phone number). You may also submit 14 CFR Part 71 comments through the Internet at List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA–2010–0937; Airspace http://www.regulations.gov. Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Docket No. 10–ASO–35] Comments wishing the FAA to Navigation (Air). acknowledge receipt of their comments Proposed Amendment of Class E on this action must submit with those The Proposed Amendment Airspace; Henderson, KY comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following In consideration of the foregoing, the AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Federal Aviation Administration Docket No. FAA–2010–0937; Airspace ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Docket No. 10–ASO–35.’’ The postcard (NPRM). follows: will be date/time stamped and returned PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, SUMMARY: This action proposes to to the commenter. B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR amend Class E Airspace at Henderson, All communications received before TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND KY, as the Geneva Non-Directional the specified closing date for comments REPORTING POINTS Beacon (NDB) has been will be considered before taking action decommissioned and new Standard on the proposed rule. The proposal 1. The authority citation for part 71 Instrument Approach Procedures contained in this notice may be changed continues to read as follows: (SIAPs) have been developed at in light of the comments received. A Henderson City-County Airport. This report summarizing each substantive Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, action would enhance the safety and public contact with FAA personnel 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– airspace management of Instrument concerned with this rulemaking will be 1963 Comp., p. 389. Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the filed in the docket. § 71.1 [Amended] airport. Availability of NPRMs 2. The incorporation by reference in DATES: Comments must be received on An electronic copy of this document 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9U, or before December 6, 2010. may be downloaded from and Airspace Designations and Reporting ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule comments submitted through http:// Points, dated August 18, 2010, and to: U.S. Department of Transportation, www.regulations.gov. Recently effective September 15, 2010, is Docket Operations, West Building published rulemaking documents can amended as follows: Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 also be accessed through the FAA’s Web New Jersey, SE., Washington, DC Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas page at http://www.faa.gov/ 20590–0001; Telephone: 1–800–647– airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/ extending upward from 700 feet or more _ above the surface of the earth. 5527; Fax: 202–493–2251. You must publications/airspace amendments/. identify the Docket Number FAA–2010– You may review the public docket * * * * * 0937; Airspace Docket No. 10–ASO–35, containing the proposal, any comments ACE MO E5 Farmington, MO [Amended] at the beginning of your comments. You received, and any final disposition in may also submit and review received Farmington Regional Airport, MO person in the Dockets Office (see the (Lat. 37°45′40″ N., long. 90°25′43″ W.) comments through the Internet at ADDRESSES section for address and Farmington VORTAC http://www.regulations.gov. phone number) between 9 a.m. and (Lat. 37°40′24″ N., long. 90°14′03″ W.) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Perrine NDB Melinda Giddens, Operations Support Federal Holidays. An informal docket (Lat. 37°45′50″ N., long. 90°25′43″ W.) Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal may also be examined during normal That airspace extending upward from 700 Aviation Administration, P.O. Box business hours at the office of the feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation radius of Farmington Regional Airport, and telephone (404) 305–5610. Administration, room 210, 1701 within 4 miles each side of the 204° bearing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337. from the airport extending from the 6.4-mile Comments Invited radius to 11.5 miles southwest of the airport, Persons interested in being placed on and within 2.6 miles each side of the 034° Interested persons are invited to a mailing list for future NPRM’s should bearing from the Perrine NDB extending from comment on this rule by submitting contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, the 6.4-mile radius to 7.9 miles northeast of such written data, views, or arguments, (202) 267–9677, to request a copy of the airport, and within 1.3 miles each side of as they may desire. Comments that Advisory circular No. 11–2A, Notice of the Farmington VORTAC 300° radial provide the factual basis supporting the Proposed Rulemaking distribution extending from the 6.4-mile radius of the views and suggestions presented are System, which describes the application airport to the VORTAC. particularly helpful in developing procedure.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64971

The Proposal The Proposed Amendment necessary to accommodate new The FAA is considering an In consideration of the foregoing, the Standard Instrument Approach amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Federal Aviation Administration Procedures (SIAP) at Central City Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Municipal—Larry Reineke Field Class E airspace extending upward from follows: Airport. The FAA is taking this action 700 feet above the surface to support to enhance the safety and management new SIAPs developed at Henderson PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) City-County Airport, Henderson, KY. B, C, D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE operations for SIAPs at the airport. AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE Airspace reconfiguration is necessary DATES: Comments must be received on due to the decommissioning of the ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS or before December 6, 2010. Geneva NDB and cancellation of the 1. The authority citation for part 71 ADDRESSES: Send comments on this NDB approach, and for continued safety continues to read as follows: and management of IFR operations at proposal to the U.S. Department of the airport. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Class E airspace designations are 1963 Comp., p. 389. published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Ground Floor, Room W12–140, order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, § 71.1 [Amended] Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must and effective September 15, 2010, which 2. The incorporation by reference in identify the docket number FAA–2010– is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 0837/Airspace Docket No. 10–ACE–10, 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Administration Order 7400.9U, at the beginning of your comments. You listed in this document will be Airspace Designations and Reporting may also submit comments through the published subsequently in the Order. Points, dated August 18, 2010, effective Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. The FAA has determined that this September 15, 2010, is amended as You may review the public docket proposed regulation only involves an follows: containing the proposal, any comments established body of technical received, and any final disposition in Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas regulations for which frequent and person in the Dockets Office between extending upward from 700 feet or more 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through routine amendments are necessary to above the surface of the earth. keep them operationally current. It, Friday, except Federal holidays. The * * * * * therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647– regulatory action’’ under Executive ASO KY E5 Henderson, KY [Amended] 5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address. Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant Henderson City-County Airport, KY rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies (Lat. 37°48′28″ N., long. 87°41′09″ W.) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February Pocket City VORTAC, Evansville, IN Scott Enander, Central Service Center, ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant (Lat. 37 55 42 N., long. 87 45 45 W.) Operations Support Group, Federal preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation That airspace extending upward from 700 Aviation Administration, Southwest as the anticipated impact is so minimal. feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort radius of the Henderson City-County Airport Since this is a routine matter that will ° Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321– only affect air traffic procedures and air and within 1.0 miles each side of the 153 radial from the Pocket City VORTAC 7716. navigation, it is certified that this extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 8.2 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: proposed rule, when promulgated, miles southeast of the VORTAC. would not have a significant economic Comments Invited impact on a substantial number of small Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 12, 2010. entities under the criteria of the Interested parties are invited to Regulatory Flexibility Act. Mark D. Ward, participate in this proposed rulemaking The FAA’s authority to issue rules Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern by submitting such written data, views, regarding aviation safety is found in Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. or arguments, as they may desire. Title 49 of the United States Code. [FR Doc. 2010–26567 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Comments that provide the factual basis Subtitle I, section 106 describes the BILLING CODE 4910–13–P supporting the views and suggestions authority of the FAA Administrator. presented are particularly helpful in Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, developing reasoned regulatory describes in more detail the scope of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall agency’s authority. This proposed Federal Aviation Administration rulemaking is promulgated under the regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related authority described in subtitle VII, part, 14 CFR Part 71 A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that aspects of the proposal. section, the FAA is charged with [Docket No. FAA–2010–0837; Airspace Communications should identify both prescribing regulations to assign the use Docket No. 10–ACE–10] docket numbers and be submitted in of airspace necessary to ensure the triplicate to the address listed above. safety of aircraft and the efficient use of Proposed Establishment of Class E Commenters wishing the FAA to airspace. This proposed regulation is Airspace; Central City, NE acknowledge receipt of their comments within the scope of that authority as it AGENCY: Federal Aviation on this notice must submit with those would amend Class E airspace at Administration (FAA), DOT. comments a self-addressed, stamped Henderson City-County Airport, ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking postcard on which the following Henderson, KY. (NPRM). statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Docket No. FAA–2010–0837/Airspace Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 SUMMARY: This action proposes to Docket No. 10–ACE–10.’’ The postcard Airspace, Incorporation by reference, establish Class E airspace at Central will be date/time stamped and returned Navigation (Air). City, NE. Controlled airspace is to the commenter.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64972 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Availability of NPRMs significant economic impact on a Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on September 27, 2010. An electronic copy of this document substantial number of small entities Anthony D. Roetzel, may be downloaded through the under the criteria of the Regulatory Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Flexibility Act. Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center. Recently published rulemaking The FAA’s authority to issue rules documents can also be accessed through regarding aviation safety is found in title [FR Doc. 2010–26570 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] the FAA’s Web page at http:// 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section BILLING CODE 4901–13–P www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ 106 describes the authority of the FAA air_traffic/publications/ Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation _ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION airspace amendments/. Programs, describes in more detail the You may review the public docket scope of the agency’s authority. This Federal Aviation Administration containing the proposal, any comments rulemaking is promulgated under the received and any final disposition in authority described in subtitle VII, part 14 CFR Part 71 person in the Dockets Office (see A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that ADDRESSES section for address and section, the FAA is charged with phone number) between 9 a.m. and [Docket No. FAA–2010–0772; Airspace prescribing regulations to assign the use Docket No. 10–ASW–10] 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An informal docket of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of Proposed Revocation of Class E may also be examined during normal Airspace; Lone Star, TX business hours at the office of the airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham AGENCY: Federal Aviation Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137. establish controlled airspace at Central Administration (FAA), DOT. Persons interested in being placed on City Municipal—Larry Reineke Field ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking a mailing list for future NPRMs should Airport, Central City, NE. (NPRM). contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 (202) 267–9677, to request a copy of SUMMARY: This action proposes to Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Airspace, Incorporation by reference, remove Class E airspace at Lone Star, Proposed Rulemaking Distribution Navigation (Air). TX. Abandonment of the former Lone System, which describes the application The Proposed Amendment Star Steel Company Airport and procedure. cancellation of all Standard Instrument The Proposal In consideration of the foregoing, the Approach Procedures (SIAPs) has eliminated the need for controlled This action proposes to amend title Federal Aviation Administration airspace in the Lone Star, TX, area. The 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as FAA is taking this action to ensure the CFR), part 71 by establishing Class E follows: efficient use of airspace within the airspace extending upward from 700 PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, National Airspace System. feet above the surface for SIAPs operations at Central City Municipal— B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR DATES: Comments must be received on Larry Reineke Field Airport, Central TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND or before December 6, 2010. REPORTING POINTS City, NE. Controlled airspace is needed ADDRESSES: Send comments on this for the safety and management of IFR proposal to the U.S. Department of operations at the airport. 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 Class E airspace areas are published New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010 and 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must effective September 15, 2010, which is 1963 Comp., p. 389. identify the docket number FAA–2010– incorporated by reference in 14 CFR § 71.1 [Amended] 0772/Airspace Docket No. 10–ASW–10, 71.1. The Class E airspace designation at the beginning of your comments. You listed in this document would be 2. The incorporation by reference in may also submit comments through the published subsequently in the Order. 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9U, Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. The FAA has determined that this Airspace Designations and Reporting You may review the public docket proposed regulation only involves an Points, dated August 18, 2010, and containing the proposal, any comments established body of technical effective September 15, 2010, is received, and any final disposition in regulations for which frequent and amended as follows: person in the Dockets Office between routine amendments are necessary to 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through keep them operationally current. It, Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas Friday, except Federal holidays. The therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant extending upward from 700 feet or more Docket Office (telephone 1–800–647– above the surface of the earth. regulatory action’’ under Executive 5527), is on the ground floor of the Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant * * * * * building at the above address. rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February ACE NE E5 Central City, NE [New] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant Central City Municipal—Larry Reineke Field Scott Enander, Central Service Center, preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation Airport, IL Operations Support Group, Federal as the anticipated impact is so minimal. (Lat. 41°06′42″ N., long. 98°03′05″ W.) Aviation Administration, Southwest Since this is a routine matter that will That airspace extending upward from 700 Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort only affect air traffic procedures and air feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321– navigation, it is certified that this rule, radius of Central City Municipal—Larry 7716. when promulgated, will not have a Reineke Field Airport. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64973

Comments Invited Class E airspace areas are published Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Interested parties are invited to 1963 Comp., p. 389. participate in this proposed rulemaking 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and by submitting such written data, views, effective September 15, 2010, which is § 71.1 [Amended] incorporated by reference in 14 CFR or arguments, as they may desire. 2. The incorporation by reference in Comments that provide the factual basis 71.1. The Class E airspace designation 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9U, supporting the views and suggestions listed in this document would be Airspace Designations and Reporting presented are particularly helpful in published subsequently in the Order. Points, signed August 18, 2010, and developing reasoned regulatory The FAA has determined that this effective September 15, 2010, is decisions on the proposal. Comments proposed regulation only involves an amended as follows: are specifically invited on the overall established body of technical Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace extending regulatory, aeronautical, economic, regulations for which frequent and upward from 700 feet above the surface. environmental, and energy-related routine amendments are necessary to aspects of the proposal. keep them operationally current. It, * * * * * Communications should identify both therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant ASW TX E5 Lone Star, TX [Removed] docket numbers and be submitted in regulatory action’’ under Executive triplicate to the address listed above. Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on October 6, 2010. Commenters wishing the FAA to rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies Anthony D. Roetzel, acknowledge receipt of their comments and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February on this notice must submit with those 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center. comments a self-addressed, stamped preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation postcard on which the following as the anticipated impact is so minimal. [FR Doc. 2010–26533 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Since this is a routine matter that will BILLING CODE 4901–13–P Docket No. FAA–2010–0772/Airspace only affect air traffic procedures and air Docket No. 10–ASW–10.’’ The postcard navigation, it is certified that this rule, will be date/time stamped and returned when promulgated, will not have a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION to the commenter. significant economic impact on a AGENCY Availability of NPRMs substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory 40 CFR Part 52 An electronic copy of this document Flexibility Act. [EPA–R07–OAR–2010–0415; FRL–9210–2] may be downloaded through the The FAA’s authority to issue rules Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Approval and Promulgation of regarding aviation safety is found in title Recently published rulemaking Implementation Plans; State of 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section documents can also be accessed through Missouri 106 describes the authority of the FAA the FAA’s Web page at http:// Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ AGENCY: Environmental Protection Programs, describes in more detail the air_traffic/publications/ Agency (EPA). scope of the agency’s authority. This airspace_amendments/. ACTION: Proposed rule. rulemaking is promulgated under the Additionally, any person may obtain authority described in subtitle VII, part SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a copy of this notice by submitting a A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that a revision to a State Implementation request to the Federal Aviation section, the FAA is charged with Plan (SIP) submitted by the state of Administration (FAA), Office of Air prescribing regulations to assign the use Missouri. The purpose of this revision is Traffic Airspace Management, ATA– of airspace necessary to ensure the to update the Springfield City Code and 400, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., safety of aircraft and the efficient use of is part of ongoing SIP maintenance to Washington, DC 20591, or by calling airspace. This regulation is within the assure that outdated local codes and (202) 267–8783. Communications must scope of that authority as it would ordinances do not remain in the SIP. identify both docket numbers for this remove controlled airspace at the former The revision reflects updates to the notice. Persons interested in being Lone Star Steel Company Airport, Lone Missouri statewide rules, and will placed on a mailing list for future Star, TX. ensure consistency between the NPRM’s should contact the FAA’s applicable local agency rules and the Office of Rulemaking (202) 267–9677, to List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Federally approved rules. request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Airspace, Incorporation by reference, DATES: Comments on this proposed Distribution System, which describes Navigation (Air). action must be received in writing by November 22, 2010. the application procedure. The Proposed Amendment ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, The Proposal In consideration of the foregoing, the identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– This action proposes to amend Title Federal Aviation Administration OAR–2010–0415, by mail to Lachala 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Kemp, Environmental Protection CFR), part 71 by removing the Class E follows: Agency, Air Planning and Development airspace extending upward from 700 Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas feet above the surface at the former Lone PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, City, Kansas 66101. Comments may also Star Steel Company Airport, Lone Star, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR be submitted electronically or through TX. The airport has been abandoned TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND hand delivery/courier by following the and all SIAPs have been cancelled, REPORTING POINTS detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES therefore, controlled airspace is no section of the direct final rule located in longer needed for the safety and 1. The authority citation for part 71 the rules section of this Federal management of IFR operations. continues to read as follows: Register.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64974 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rule. The information has been posted docket without change and may be Lachala Kemp at (913) 551–7214, or by on EPA’s Web site, and is now currently made available online at http:// e-mail at [email protected]. available in the docket; it consists of www.regulations.gov, including any SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the responses to Information Collection personal information provided, unless final rules section of the Federal Requests that EPA sent to electric the comment includes information Register, EPA is approving the state’s utilities on their coal combustion claimed to be Confidential Business SIP revision as a direct final rule residual surface impoundments as well Information (CBI) or other information without prior proposal because the as reports and materials related to the whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Agency views this is a noncontroversial site assessments EPA has conducted on Do not submit information that you revision amendment and anticipates no a subset of these impoundments. consider to be CBI or otherwise relevant adverse comments to this DATES: Submit comments on or before protected through http:// action. A detailed rationale for the November 19, 2010. www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The approval is set forth in the direct final ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, http://www.regulations.gov Web site is rule. If no relevant adverse comments identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which are received in response to this action, RCRA–2009–0640, by one of the means EPA will not know your identity no further activity is contemplated in following methods: or contact information unless you relation to this action. If EPA receives • http://www.regulations.gov: Follow provide it in the body of your comment. relevant adverse comments, the direct the on-line instructions for submitting If you send an e-mail comment directly final rule will be withdrawn and all comments. to EPA without going through http:// public comments received will be • E-mail: Comments may be sent by www.regulations.gov, your e-mail addressed in a subsequent final rule electronic mail (e-mail) to rcra- address will be automatically captured based on this proposed action. EPA will [email protected], Attention Docket ID and included as part of the comment not institute a second comment period No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2009–0640. In that is placed in the public docket and on this action. Any parties interested in contrast to EPA’s electronic public made available on the Internet. If you commenting on this action should do so docket, EPA’s e-mail system is not an submit an electronic comment, EPA at this time. Please note that if EPA ‘‘anonymous access’’ system. If you send recommends that you include your receives adverse comments on part of an e-mail comment directly to the name and other contact information in this rule and if that part can be severed Docket without going through EPA’s the body of your comment and with any from the remainder of the rule, EPA may electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA adopt as final those parts of the rule that system automatically captures your e- cannot read your comment due to are not the subject of an adverse mail address. E-mail addresses that are technical difficulties and cannot contact comment. For additional information, automatically captured by EPA’s e-mail you for clarification, EPA may not be see the direct final rule which is located system are included as part of the able to consider your comment. in the rules section of this Federal comment that is placed in the official Electronic files should avoid the use of Register. public docket, and made available in special characters, any form of Dated: September 22, 2010. EPA’s electronic public docket. encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information Karl Brooks, • Fax: Comments may be faxed to about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA Regional Administrator, Region 7. 202–566–9744; Attention Docket ID No. Docket Center homepage at http:// [FR Doc. 2010–24920 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] EPA–HQ–RCRA–2009–0640. • Mail: Send your comments to the www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Hazardous and Solid Waste For additional instructions on Management System; Identification and submitting comments, go to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Listing of Special Wastes; Disposal of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of AGENCY Coal Combustion Residuals From this document. Electric Utilities Docket, Attention Docket: All documents in the docket 40 CFR Parts 257, 261, 264, 265, 268, Docket ID No., EPA–HQ–RCRA–2009– are listed in the http:// 271, and 302 0640, Environmental Protection Agency, www.regulations.gov index. Although Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania listed in the index, some information is [EPA–HQ–RCRA–2009–0640; FRL–9216–3] Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other RIN 2050–AE81 Please include a total of two copies. information whose disclosure is • Hand Delivery: Deliver two copies restricted by statute. Certain other Notice of Data Availability on Coal of your comments to the Hazardous and material, such as copyrighted material, Combustion Residual Surface Solid Waste Management System; will be publicly available only in hard Impoundments Identification and Listing of Special copy. Publicly available docket AGENCY: Environmental Protection Wastes; Disposal of Coal Combustion materials are available either Agency (EPA). Residuals From Electric Utilities Docket, electronically in http:// ACTION: Notice of data availability. Attention Docket ID No., EPA–HQ– www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at RCRA–2009–0640, EPA/DC, EPA West, the Hazardous and Solid Waste SUMMARY: This document announces the Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., Management System; Identification and availability of new information and data NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such Listing of Special Wastes; Disposal of posted in the docket for EPA’s proposed deliveries are only accepted during the Coal Combustion Residuals From rulemaking (75 FR 51434, August 20, Docket’s normal hours of operation, and Electric Utilities Docket, EPA/DC, EPA 2010) on the Disposal of Coal special arrangements should be made West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Combustion Residuals from Electric for deliveries of boxed information. Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. This Utilities. The Agency is seeking public Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. comment on how, if at all, this Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2009– to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, additional information should affect the 0640. EPA’s policy is that all comments excluding legal holidays. The Docket Agency’s decisions as it develops a final received will be included in the public telephone number is (202) 566–0270.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64975

The Public Reading Room is open from you submit to EPA as CBI by marking facilities and 629 surface 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through any part or all of that information as CBI impoundments and similar management Friday, excluding legal holidays. The (if you submit CBI on a disk or CD ROM, units are currently posted in the docket. telephone number for the Public mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM (Note: These responses have been Reading Room is (202) 566–1744. as CBI and then identify electronically posted on EPA’s Web site since they FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim within the disk or CD ROM the specific have been received by the Agency. Kohler, Office of Resource Conservation information that is CBI). Information so Thus, these responses have already been and Recovery (5304P), U.S. marked will not be disclosed, except in publicly available.) The 228 facilities Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 accordance with procedures set forth in that responded to EPA’s information Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 40 CFR part 2. collection request have 629 surface Washington, DC 20460–0002, telephone In addition to one complete version of impoundments and similar management (703) 347–8953, e-mail address the comment that includes any units; 200 units (32 percent) have been [email protected]. For more information claimed as CBI, a copy of given a hazard potential rating using the information on this rulemaking, please the comment that does not contain the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National visit http://www.epa.gov/coalashrule. information claimed as CBI must be Inventory of Dams criteria. Of the 200 submitted for inclusion in the public units that have been rated, 50 units (25 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: docket and EPA’s electronic public percent) are rated as having a High I. What should I consider as I prepare docket. If you submit the copy that does Hazard Potential; 71 units (36 percent) my comments for EPA? not contain CBI on a disk or CD ROM, are rated as having a Significant Hazard Potential; 71 units (36 percent) are rated 1. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as having a Low Hazard Potential; and When submitting comments, remember clearly that it does not contain CBI. 8 units (4 percent) are rated as having to: Information not marked as CBI will be a Less than Low Hazard Potential. 429 • Identify the rulemaking by docket included in the public docket and EPA’s units (68 percent) have not received a number and other identifying electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about hazard potential rating. The hazard information (subject heading, Federal potential ratings do not assess the Register date and page number). CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, • please contact: LaShan Haynes, Office of stability of these units; rather, the Follow directions—The agency may ratings assess the potential for loss of ask you to respond to specific questions Resource Conservation and Recovery (5305P), U.S. Environmental Protection life or environmental and economic or organize comments by referencing a damage. Units rated as having a High Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460–0002, Potential Hazard are those where failure or section number. will probably cause loss of life. • Explain why you agree or disagree; telephone (703) 605–0516, e-mail address [email protected]. Of the 629 surface impoundments and suggest alternatives and substitute similar units covered in these responses, language for your requested changes. III. Coal Combustion Residual Surface 443 (70 percent) were designed by a • Describe any assumptions and Impoundment Information professional engineer. The units show provide any technical information and/ A. Background on Information considerable variation in height, with 80 or data that you used. units (13 percent) being reported as • Collection Request Responses If you estimate potential costs or greater than 50 feet in height; 133 units burdens, explain how you arrived at After the failure of the coal (21 percent) being reported as greater your estimate in sufficient detail to combustion residual (CCR) surface than 25 feet, but less than 51 feet in allow for it to be reproduced. impoundment at the Tennessee Valley height; 268 units (43 percent) being • Provide specific examples to Authority’s Kingston facility in reported as greater than 6 feet, but less illustrate your concerns, and suggest December 2008, EPA undertook an than 26 feet in height; 39 units (6 alternatives. effort to assess the structural integrity of percent) being reported as greater than • Explain your views as clearly as the other CCR surface impoundments. 0 feet, but less than 7 feet in height; and possible. This effort had three components: (1) 105 units (17 percent) being reported as • Make sure to submit your An Information Collection Request having no height. comments by the comment period (ICR#2020–0003) that was sent to A majority of the information deadline identified. facilities known to have surface contained in the company responses has 2. Docket Copying Costs. The first impoundments or similar management been inserted into a database. All the 100-copied pages are free. Thereafter, units asking for specific information on fields and entries in this database have the charge for making copies of Docket the structural stability of those units; (2) been extracted and posted in the docket materials is 15 cents per page. on-site assessments of the structural as PDF and Microsoft Excel integrity of these units; and (3) reports II. How should I submit CBI to the spreadsheets which enable users to and recommendations for actions at the agency? easily search for aggregate or facility- facility. EPA is still in the process of specific information. Do not submit information that you completing these assessments; however, consider to be CBI electronically EPA is placing the data that are B. Background on CCR Impoundment through http://www.regulations.gov or currently available in the docket for the Assessment Information by e-mail. Send or deliver information rulemaking, and is soliciting public As part of EPA’s ongoing national identified as CBI only to the following comment on these data in connection effort to assess the management of CCRs, address: RCRA CBI Document Control with this rulemaking. EPA has assessed the structural integrity Officer, Office of Resource Conservation EPA sent Information Collection of many impoundments and similar and Recovery (5305P), U.S. EPA, 1200 Requests in March, April and December management units containing CCRs at Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., of 2009 to electric utilities that have electric utilities. This effort is still Washington, DC 20460, Attention surface impoundments or similar ongoing; however, EPA is making Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2009– management units that contain CCRs. available for comment those 53 0640. You may claim information that All of the responses covering 228 assessment reports that have been

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64976 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

finalized. Most of the impoundments EPA’s Web site. EPA continues to ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION that have been assessed have a ‘‘high’’ or review the reports and the technical AGENCY ‘‘significant’’ hazard potential rating. As recommendations, and is working with mentioned above, the hazard potential the facilities to ensure that the 40 CFR Part 300 rating is not related to the stability of recommendations are implemented. these impoundments, but to the EPA has provided a copy of the final [EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0634, EPA–HQ– potential for harm should the report to each facility and has requested SFUND–2010–0636, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010– impoundment fail. For example, a that the facility implement the 0638, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0639, EPA– ‘‘significant’’ hazard potential rating recommendations in the reports and HQ–SFUND–2010–0640, EPA–HQ–SFUND– means impoundment failure can cause develop plans for taking action. The 2010–0641, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0643, economic loss, environmental damage, action plans that have been completed EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0645, EPA–HQ– or damage to infrastructure. also have been placed in the docket SFUND–2010–0646, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010– The assessment reports being placed along with the draft assessment reports, 0647; FRL–9216–1] into the docket have been completed by comments on the draft reports, and the contractors who are experts in the area final assessment reports. (Note: These of dam integrity, reflect the best reports and action plans have been RIN 2050–AD75 professional judgment of the posted on EPA’s Web site since they National Priorities List, Proposed Rule engineering firm, and are signed and have been received by the Agency. No. 53 stamped by a professional engineer who Thus, these reports and action plans is licensed in the state in which the have already been publicly available.) AGENCY: Environmental Protection impoundment is located. The reports Additional action plans will be posted Agency. are based on a visual assessment of the to EPA’s Web site as they become site, interviews with site personnel, and available (but in the absence of further ACTION: Proposed rule. the review of geotechnical reports and EPA action, will not be considered part studies related to the design, of the rulemaking record). Should SUMMARY: The Comprehensive construction and operation of these facilities fail to take sufficient measures, Environmental Response, impoundments, if available. The EPA will take additional action, if the Compensation, and Liability Act engineering firms also reviewed past circumstances warrant, and will be (‘‘CERCLA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), as amended, state/federal inspections of the devoting special attention to those requires that the National Oil and facilities receiving a ‘‘poor’’ or impoundments. EPA’s contractors were Hazardous Substances Pollution ‘‘unsatisfactory’’ rating. not authorized to conduct any physical Contingency Plan (‘‘NCP’’) include a list drilling, coring or sampling while on Some companies have claimed that certain information they have provided of national priorities among the known site; however, they did review studies releases or threatened releases of which may have included such to EPA related to their coal ash hazardous substances, pollutants, or information. Also, the contractors were impoundments is CBI. While EPA contaminants throughout the United asked to rate the impoundments as reviews these claims, the information States. The National Priorities List ‘‘satisfactory,’’ ‘‘fair,’’ ‘‘poor,’’ or that is claimed as CBI is redacted ‘‘ ’’ ‘‘unsatisfactory,’’ terms commonly used (removed) from the coal ash reports. If ( NPL ) constitutes this list. The NPL is in the field of dam safety. Only these claims are accepted by EPA, the intended primarily to guide the impoundments rated as ‘‘unsatisfactory’’ information will remain redacted. If Environmental Protection Agency pose immediate safety threats. None of EPA denies these claims, the (‘‘EPA’’ or ‘‘the Agency’’) in determining the impoundments assessed so far have information will be made publicly which sites warrant further received an ‘‘unsatisfactory’’ rating. available and posted to EPA’s Web site. investigation. These further Impoundment ratings noted in the C. Conclusion investigations will allow EPA to assess the nature and extent of public health reports should be taken in the proper The Agency solicits comments on this and environmental risks associated with context, since a unit may be found to be information, including the extent to the site and to determine what CERCLA- structurally sound, while it may receive which both the CCR surface ‘‘ ’’ ‘‘ ’’ a fair or poor rating based on other impoundment information collection financed remedial action(s), if any, may factors such as lack of information. request responses and assessment be appropriate. This rule proposes to These condition ratings are different materials on the structural integrity of add nine sites to the General Superfund than the hazard potential ratings these impoundments should be factored section of the NPL. This rule also described above because they are related into EPA’s final rule on the Disposal of withdraws one site from proposal to the to the stability of the individual Coal Combustion Residuals from General Superfund section of the NPL. impoundment as assessed through a Electric Utilities. field inspection and available DATES: Comments regarding any of these information on the impoundment. Dated: October 13, 2010. proposed listings must be submitted Draft copies of these reports have Mathy Stanislaus, (postmarked) on or before December 20, been reviewed by the facilities and the Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste 2010. states for factual accuracy and their and Emergency Response. ADDRESSES: Identify the appropriate comments on the draft reports have also [FR Doc. 2010–26657 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Docket Number from the table below. been placed in the docket and posted to BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DOCKET IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS BY SITE:

Site name City/County, State Docket ID No.

GBF, Inc., Dump ...... Antioch, CA ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0647 Armstrong World Industries ...... Macon, GA ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0640 Dwyer Property Ground Water Plume ...... Elkton, MD ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0639

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64977

DOCKET IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS BY SITE:—Continued

Site name City/County, State Docket ID No.

Washington County Lead District—Furnace Creek ...... Caledonia, MO ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0646 Horton Iron and Metal ...... Wilmington, NC ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0641 Mansfield Trail Dump ...... Byram Township, NJ ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0634 Milford Contaminated Aquifer ...... Milford, OH ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0643 Cabo Rojo Ground Water Contamination ...... Cabo Rojo, PR ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0638 Hormigas Ground Water Plume ...... Caguas, PR ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0636 West County Road 112 Ground Water ...... Midland, TX ...... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2010–0645

Submit your comments, identified by name and other contact information in G. What should I consider when preparing the appropriate Docket number, by one the body of your comment and with any my comments? of the following methods: disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA H. May I submit comments after the public • http://www.regulations.gov: Follow comment period is over? cannot read your comment due to I. May I view public comments submitted the online instructions for submitting technical difficulties and cannot contact by others? comments. you for clarification, EPA may not be J. May I submit comments regarding sites • E-mail: [email protected]. able to consider your comment. not currently proposed to the NPL? • Mail: Mail comments (no facsimiles Electronic files should avoid the use of III. Contents of This Proposed Rule or tapes) to Docket Coordinator, special characters, any form of A. Proposed Additions to the NPL Headquarters; U.S. Environmental encryption, and be free of any defects or B. Withdrawal of Site From Proposal to the Protection Agency; CERCLA Docket viruses. For additional Docket addresses NPL Office; (Mail Code 5305T); 1200 IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews and further details on their contents, see A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.; section II, ‘‘Public Review/Public Planning and Review Washington, DC 20460. Comment,’’ of the Supplementary 1. What is Executive Order 12866? • Hand Delivery or Express Mail: Information portion of this preamble. 2. Is this proposed rule subject to Executive Send comments (no facsimiles or tapes) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Order 12866 review? to Docket Coordinator, Headquarters; Terry Jeng, phone: (703) 603–8852, B. Paperwork Reduction Act U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1. What is the Paperwork Reduction Act? e-mail: [email protected], Site 2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act CERCLA Docket Office; 1301 Assessment and Remedy Decisions Constitution Avenue, NW.; EPA West, apply to this proposed rule? Branch, Assessment and Remediation C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004. Division, Office of Superfund 1. What is the Regulatory Flexibility Act? Such deliveries are only accepted Remediation and Technology 2. How has EPA complied with the during the Docket’s normal hours of Innovation (mail code 5204P), U.S. Regulatory Flexibility Act? operation (8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Monday through Friday, excluding 1. What is the Unfunded Mandates Reform Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Act (UMRA)? Federal holidays). Washington, DC 20460; or the Instructions: Direct your comments to 2. Does UMRA apply to this proposed rule? Superfund Hotline, phone (800) 424– E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism the appropriate Docket number (see 9346 or (703) 412–9810 in the 1. What is Executive Order 13132? table above). EPA’s policy is that all Washington, DC, metropolitan area. 2. Does Executive Order 13132 apply to comments received will be included in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: this proposed rule? the public Docket without change and F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation may be made available online at http:// Table of Contents and Coordination With Indian Tribal www.regulations.gov, including any Governments personal information provided, unless I. Background 1. What is Executive Order 13175? the comment includes information A. What are CERCLA and SARA? 2. Does Executive Order 13175 apply to B. What is the NCP? this proposed rule? claimed to be Confidential Business C. What is the national priorities list G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Information (CBI) or other information (NPL)? Children From Environmental Health whose disclosure is restricted by statute. D. How are sites listed on the NPL? and Safety Risks Do not submit information that you E. What happens to sites on the NPL? 1. What is Executive Order 13045? consider to be CBI or otherwise F. Does the NPL define the boundaries of 2. Does Executive Order 13045 apply to protected through http:// sites? this proposed rule? www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The G. How are sites removed from the NPL? H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That http://www.regulations.gov Web site is H. May EPA delete portions of sites from Significantly Affect Energy Supply, ‘‘ ’’ the NPL as they are cleaned up? Distribution, or Usage an anonymous access system; that I. What is the construction completion list 1. What is Executive Order 13211? means EPA will not know your identity (CCL)? 2. Does Executive Order 13211 apply to or contact information unless you J. What is the sitewide ready for this proposed rule? provide it in the body of your comment. anticipated use measure? I. National Technology Transfer and If you send an e-mail comment directly II. Public Review/Public Comment Advancement Act to EPA without going through http:// A. May I review the documents relevant to 1. What is the National Technology www.regulations.gov, your e-mail this proposed rule? Transfer and Advancement Act? address will be automatically captured B. How do I access the documents? 2. Does the National Technology Transfer C. What documents are available for public and Advancement Act apply to this and included as part of the comment review at the headquarters docket? proposed rule? that is placed in the public Docket and D. What documents are available for public J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions made available on the Internet. If you review at the regional dockets? To Address Environmental Justice in submit an electronic comment, EPA E. How do I submit my comments? Minority Populations and Low-Income recommends that you include your F. What happens to my comments? Populations

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64978 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

1. What is Executive Order 12898? under section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA, the NPL include one facility designated 2. Does Executive Order 12898 apply to as amended. Section 105(a)(8)(B) by each State as the greatest danger to this proposed rule? defines the NPL as a list of ‘‘releases’’ public health, welfare, or the and the highest priority ‘‘facilities’’ and environment among known facilities in I. Background requires that the NPL be revised at least the State. This mechanism for listing is A. What are CERCLA and SARA? annually. The NPL is intended set out in the NCP at 40 CFR primarily to guide EPA in determining 300.425(c)(2). (3) The third mechanism In 1980, Congress enacted the which sites warrant further for listing, included in the NCP at 40 Comprehensive Environmental investigation to assess the nature and CFR 300.425(c)(3), allows certain sites Response, Compensation, and Liability extent of public health and ‘‘ ’’ to be listed without any HRS score, if all Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601–9675 ( CERCLA or environmental risks associated with a ‘‘ ’’ of the following conditions are met: the Act ), in response to the dangers of release of hazardous substances, • The Agency for Toxic Substances uncontrolled releases or threatened pollutants or contaminants. The NPL is and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the releases of hazardous substances, and only of limited significance, however, as U.S. Public Health Service has issued a releases or substantial threats of releases it does not assign liability to any party health advisory that recommends into the environment of any pollutant or or to the owner of any specific property. dissociation of individuals from the contaminant that may present an Also, placing a site on the NPL does not release. imminent or substantial danger to the mean that any remedial or removal • EPA determines that the release public health or welfare. CERCLA was action necessarily need be taken. poses a significant threat to public amended on October 17, 1986, by the For purposes of listing, the NPL health. Superfund Amendments and includes two sections, one of sites that • EPA anticipates that it will be more Reauthorization Act (‘‘SARA’’), Public are generally evaluated and cleaned up cost-effective to use its remedial Law 99–499, 100 Stat. 1613 et seq. by EPA (the ‘‘General Superfund authority than to use its removal B. What is the NCP? Section’’), and one of sites that are authority to respond to the release. owned or operated by other Federal EPA promulgated an original NPL of To implement CERCLA, EPA agencies (the ‘‘Federal Facilities 406 sites on September 8, 1983 (48 FR promulgated the revised National Oil Section’’). With respect to sites in the 40658) and generally has updated it at and Hazardous Substances Pollution Federal Facilities Section, these sites are least annually. Contingency Plan (‘‘NCP’’), 40 CFR part generally being addressed by other E. What happens to sites on the NPL? 300, on July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), Federal agencies. Under Executive pursuant to CERCLA section 105 and Order 12580 (52 FR 2923, January 29, A site may undergo remedial action Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, 1987) and CERCLA section 120, each financed by the Trust Fund established August 20, 1981). The NCP sets Federal agency is responsible for under CERCLA (commonly referred to guidelines and procedures for carrying out most response actions at as the ‘‘Superfund’’) only after it is responding to releases and threatened facilities under its own jurisdiction, placed on the NPL, as provided in the releases of hazardous substances, or custody, or control, although EPA is NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(b)(1). releases or substantial threats of releases responsible for preparing a Hazard (‘‘Remedial actions’’ are those into the environment of any pollutant or Ranking System (‘‘HRS’’) score and ‘‘consistent with permanent remedy, contaminant that may present an determining whether the facility is taken instead of or in addition to imminent or substantial danger to the placed on the NPL. removal actions * * *.’’ 42 U.S.C. public health or welfare. EPA has 9601(24).) However, under 40 CFR D. How are sites listed on the NPL? revised the NCP on several occasions. 300.425(b)(2) placing a site on the NPL The most recent comprehensive revision There are three mechanisms for ‘‘does not imply that monies will be was on March 8, 1990 (55 FR 8666). placing sites on the NPL for possible expended.’’ EPA may pursue other As required under section remedial action (see 40 CFR 300.425(c) appropriate authorities to respond to the 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA, the NCP also of the NCP): (1) A site may be included releases, including enforcement action includes ‘‘criteria for determining on the NPL if it scores sufficiently high under CERCLA and other laws. priorities among releases or threatened on the HRS, which EPA promulgated as releases throughout the United States appendix A of the NCP (40 CFR part F. Does the NPL define the boundaries for the purpose of taking remedial 300). The HRS serves as a screening tool of sites? action and, to the extent practicable to evaluate the relative potential of The NPL does not describe releases in taking into account the potential uncontrolled hazardous substances, precise geographical terms; it would be urgency of such action, for the purpose pollutants or contaminants to pose a neither feasible nor consistent with the of taking removal action.’’ ‘‘Removal’’ threat to human health or the limited purpose of the NPL (to identify actions are defined broadly and include environment. On December 14, 1990 (55 releases that are priorities for further a wide range of actions taken to study, FR 51532), EPA promulgated revisions evaluation), for it to do so. Indeed, the clean up, prevent or otherwise address to the HRS partly in response to precise nature and extent of the site are releases and threatened releases of CERCLA section 105(c), added by typically not known at the time of hazardous substances, pollutants or SARA. The revised HRS evaluates four listing. contaminants (42 U.S.C. 9601(23)). pathways: Ground water, surface water, Although a CERCLA ‘‘facility’’ is soil exposure, and air. As a matter of broadly defined to include any area C. What is the National Priorities List Agency policy, those sites that score where a hazardous substance has ‘‘come (NPL)? 28.50 or greater on the HRS are eligible to be located’’ (CERCLA section 101(9)), The NPL is a list of national priorities for the NPL. (2) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. the listing process itself is not intended among the known or threatened releases 9605(a)(8)(B), each State may designate to define or reflect the boundaries of of hazardous substances, pollutants, or a single site as its top priority to be such facilities or releases. Of course, contaminants throughout the United listed on the NPL, without any HRS HRS data (if the HRS is used to list a States. The list, which is appendix B of score. This provision of CERCLA site) upon which the NPL placement the NCP (40 CFR part 300), was required requires that, to the extent practicable, was based will, to some extent, describe

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64979

the release(s) at issue. That is, the NPL ‘‘has come to be located’’ before all levels or other requirements have been site would include all releases evaluated necessary studies and remedial work are achieved; (2) EPA has determined that as part of that HRS analysis. completed at a site. Indeed, the known the response action should be limited to When a site is listed, the approach boundaries of the contamination can be measures that do not involve generally used to describe the relevant expected to change over time. Thus, in construction (e.g., institutional release(s) is to delineate a geographical most cases, it may be impossible to controls); or (3) the site qualifies for area (usually the area within an describe the boundaries of a release deletion from the NPL. For the most up- installation or plant boundaries) and with absolute certainty. to-date information on the CCL, see identify the site by reference to that Further, as noted above, NPL listing EPA’s Internet site at http:// area. However, the NPL site is not does not assign liability to any party or www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/ necessarily coextensive with the to the owner of any specific property. ccl.htm. boundaries of the installation or plant, Thus, if a party does not believe it is and the boundaries of the installation or liable for releases on discrete parcels of J. What is the sitewide ready for plant are not necessarily the property, it can submit supporting anticipated use measure? ‘‘boundaries’’ of the site. Rather, the site information to the Agency at any time The Sitewide Ready for Anticipated consists of all contaminated areas after it receives notice it is a potentially Use measure (formerly called Sitewide within the area used to identify the site, responsible party. Ready-for-Reuse) represents important as well as any other location where that For these reasons, the NPL need not Superfund accomplishments and the contamination has come to be located, be amended as further research reveals measure reflects the high priority EPA or from where that contamination came. more information about the location of places on considering anticipated future In other words, while geographic the contamination or release. land use as part of our remedy selection terms are often used to designate the site process. See Guidance for Implementing G. How are sites removed from the NPL? (e.g., the ‘‘Jones Co. plant site’’) in terms the Sitewide Ready-for-Reuse Measure, of the property owned by a particular EPA may delete sites from the NPL May 24, 2006, OSWER 9365.0–36. This party, the site, properly understood, is where no further response is measure applies to final and deleted not limited to that property (e.g., it may appropriate under Superfund, as sites where construction is complete, all extend beyond the property due to explained in the NCP at 40 CFR cleanup goals have been achieved, and contaminant migration), and conversely 300.425(e). This section also provides all institutional or other controls are in may not occupy the full extent of the that EPA shall consult with states on place. EPA has been successful on many property (e.g., where there are proposed deletions and shall consider occasions in carrying out remedial uncontaminated parts of the identified whether any of the following criteria actions that ensure protectiveness of property, they may not be, strictly have been met: human health and the environment, speaking, part of the ‘‘site’’). The ‘‘site’’ (i) Responsible parties or other including current and future land users, is thus neither equal to, nor confined by, persons have implemented all in a manner that allows contaminated the boundaries of any specific property appropriate response actions required; properties to be restored to that may give the site its name, and the (ii) All appropriate Superfund- environmental and economic vitality. name itself should not be read to imply financed response has been For further information, please go to that this site is coextensive with the implemented and no further response http://www.epa.gov/superfund/ entire area within the property action is required; or programs/recycle/tools/index.html. boundary of the installation or plant. In (iii) The remedial investigation has addition, the site name is merely used shown the release poses no significant II. Public Review/Public Comment to help identify the geographic location threat to public health or the A. May I review the documents relevant of the contamination and is not meant environment, and taking of remedial to this proposed rule? to constitute any determination of measures is not appropriate. liability at a site. For example, the name Yes, documents that form the basis for ‘‘Jones Co. plant site,’’ does not imply H. May EPA delete portions of sites from EPA’s evaluation and scoring of the sites that the Jones company is responsible the NPL as they are cleaned up? in this proposed rule are contained in for the contamination located on the In November 1995, EPA initiated a public Dockets located both at EPA plant site. policy to delete portions of NPL sites Headquarters in Washington, DC, and in EPA regulations provide that the where cleanup is complete (60 FR the Regional offices. These documents Remedial Investigation (‘‘RI’’) ‘‘is a 55465, November 1, 1995). Total site are also available by electronic access at process undertaken * * * to determine cleanup may take many years, while http://www.regulations.gov (see the nature and extent of the problem portions of the site may have been instructions in the ADDRESSES section presented by the release’’ as more cleaned up and made available for above). information is developed on site productive use. contamination, and which is generally B. How do I access the documents? performed in an interactive fashion with I. What is the construction completion You may view the documents, by the Feasibility Study (‘‘FS’’) (40 CFR list (CCL)? appointment only, in the Headquarters 300.5). During the RI/FS process, the EPA also has developed an NPL or the Regional Dockets after the release may be found to be larger or construction completion list (‘‘CCL’’) to publication of this proposed rule. The smaller than was originally thought, as simplify its system of categorizing sites hours of operation for the Headquarters more is learned about the source(s) and and to better communicate the Docket are from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., the migration of the contamination. successful completion of cleanup Monday through Friday excluding However, the HRS inquiry focuses on an activities (58 FR 12142, March 2, 1993). Federal holidays. Please contact the evaluation of the threat posed and Inclusion of a site on the CCL has no Regional Dockets for hours. therefore the boundaries of the release legal significance. The following is the contact need not be exactly defined. Moreover, Sites qualify for the CCL when: (1) information for the EPA Headquarters it generally is impossible to discover the Any necessary physical construction is Docket: Docket Coordinator, full extent of where the contamination complete, whether or not final cleanup Headquarters; U.S. Environmental

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64980 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Protection Agency; CERCLA Docket You may use the Docket at http:// listing criteria. EPA will not address Office; 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.; www.regulations.gov to access comments unless they indicate which EPA West, Room 3334, Washington, DC documents in the Headquarters Docket component of the HRS documentation 20004; 202/566–0276. (Please note this (see instructions included in the record or what particular point in EPA’s is a visiting address only. Mail ADDRESSES section above). Please note stated eligibility criteria is at issue. comments to EPA Headquarters as that there are differences between the H. May I submit comments after the detailed at the beginning of this Headquarters Docket and the Regional public comment period is over? preamble.) Dockets and those differences are The contact information for the outlined below. Generally, EPA will not respond to Regional Dockets is as follows: C. What documents are available for late comments. EPA can only guarantee Joan Berggren, Region 1 (CT, ME, MA, that it will consider those comments NH, RI, VT), U.S. EPA, Superfund public review at the headquarters docket? postmarked by the close of the formal Records and Information Center, comment period. EPA has a policy of Mailcode HSC, One Congress Street, The Headquarters Docket for this generally not delaying a final listing Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114–2023; proposed rule contains the following for decision solely to accommodate 617/918–1417. the sites proposed in this rule: HRS consideration of late comments. Ildefonso Acosta, Region 2 (NJ, NY, score sheets; Documentation Records PR, VI), U.S. EPA, 290 Broadway, New describing the information used to I. May I view public comments York, NY 10007–1866; 212/637–4344. compute the score; information for any submitted by others? Dawn Shellenberger (ASRC), Region 3 sites affected by particular statutory During the comment period, (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV), U.S. EPA, requirements or EPA listing policies; comments are placed in the Library, 1650 Arch Street, Mailcode and a list of documents referenced in Headquarters Docket and are available 3PM52, Philadelphia, PA 19103; 215/ the Documentation Record. to the public on an ‘‘as received’’ basis. 814–5364. Debbie Jourdan, Region 4 (AL, FL, D. What documents are available for A complete set of comments will be GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN), U.S. EPA, 61 public review at the regional dockets? available for viewing in the Regional Forsyth Street, SW., Mail code 9T25, The Regional Dockets for this Dockets approximately one week after Atlanta, GA 30303; 404/562–8862. proposed rule contain all of the the formal comment period closes. Janet Pfundheller, Region 5 (IL, IN, information in the Headquarters Docket All public comments, whether MI, MN, OH, WI), U.S. EPA, Records plus the actual reference documents submitted electronically or in paper, Center, Superfund Division SMR–7J, containing the data principally relied will be made available for public Metcalfe Federal Building, 77 West upon and cited by EPA in calculating or viewing in the electronic public Docket Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604; evaluating the HRS score for the sites. at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA 312/353–5821. These reference documents are available receives them and without change, Brenda Cook, Region 6 (AR, LA, NM, only in the Regional Dockets. unless the comment contains OK, TX), U.S. EPA, 1445 Ross Avenue, copyrighted material, Confidential Suite 1200, Mailcode 6SFTS, Dallas, TX E. How do I submit my comments? Business Information (CBI), or other 75202–2733; 214/665–7436. Comments must be submitted to EPA information whose disclosure is Michelle Quick, Region 7 (IA, KS, Headquarters as detailed at the restricted by statute. Once in the public MO, NE), U.S. EPA, 901 North 5th beginning of this preamble in the Dockets system, select ‘‘search,’’ then Street, Mailcode SUPRERNB, Kansas ADDRESSES section. Please note that the key in the appropriate Docket ID City, KS 66101; 913/551–7335. mailing addresses differ according to number. Sabrina Forrest, Region 8 (CO, MT, method of delivery. There are two ND, SD, UT, WY), U.S. EPA, 1595 J. May I submit comments regarding different addresses that depend on sites not currently proposed to the NPL? Wynkoop Street, Mailcode 8EPR–B, whether comments are sent by express Denver, CO 80202–1129; 303/312–6484. mail or by postal mail. In certain instances, interested parties Karen Jurist, Region 9 (AZ, CA, HI, F. What happens to my comments? have written to EPA concerning sites NV, AS, GU, MP), U.S. EPA, 75 that were not at that time proposed to Hawthorne Street, Mailcode SFD–9–1, EPA considers all comments received the NPL. If those sites are later proposed San Francisco, CA 94105; 415/972– during the comment period. Significant to the NPL, parties should review their 3219. comments are typically addressed in a earlier concerns and, if still appropriate, Ken Marcy, Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, support document that EPA will publish resubmit those concerns for WA), U.S. EPA, 1200 6th Avenue, concurrently with the Federal Register consideration during the formal Mailcode ECL–112, Seattle, WA 98101; document if, and when, the site is listed comment period. Site-specific 206/463–1349. on the NPL. correspondence received prior to the You may also request copies from period of formal proposal and comment EPA Headquarters or the Regional G. What should I consider when preparing my comments? will not generally be included in the Dockets. An informal request, rather Docket. than a formal written request under the Comments that include complex or Freedom of Information Act, should be voluminous reports, or materials III. Contents of This Proposed Rule the ordinary procedure for obtaining prepared for purposes other than HRS A. Proposed Additions to the NPL copies of any of these documents. Please scoring, should point out the specific note that due to the difficulty of information that EPA should consider In today’s proposed rule, EPA is reproducing oversized maps, oversized and how it affects individual HRS factor proposing to add nine sites to the maps may be viewed only in-person; values or other listing criteria General Superfund section of the NPL. since EPA dockets are not equipped to (Northside Sanitary Landfill v. Thomas, All of the sites in this proposed either copy and mail out such maps or 849 F.2d 1516 (DC Cir. 1988)). EPA will rulemaking are being proposed based on scan them and send them out not address voluminous comments that HRS scores of 28.50 or above. The sites electronically. are not referenced to the HRS or other are presented in the tables below.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64981

GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION

State Site name City/county

GA ...... Armstrong World Industries ...... Macon. MD ...... Dwyer Property Ground Water Plume ...... Elkton. MO ...... Washington County Lead District—Furnace Creek ...... Caledonia. NC ...... Horton Iron and Metal ...... Wilmington. NJ ...... Mansfield Trail Dump ...... Byram Township. OH ...... Milford Contaminated Aquifer ...... Milford. PR ...... Cabo Rojo Ground Water Contamination ...... Cabo Rojo. PR ...... Hormigas Ground Water Plume ...... Caguas. TX ...... West County Road 112 Ground Water ...... Midland.

B. Withdrawal of Site From Proposal to 2. Is this proposed rule subject to previously applicable instructions and the NPL Executive Order 12866 review? requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of EPA is withdrawing the proposal to No. The listing of sites on the NPL does not impose any obligations on any information; search data sources; add the GBF, Inc. Dump site in Antioch, entities. The listing does not set complete and review the collection of California, to the NPL, because the standards or a regulatory regime and information; and transmit or otherwise California Department of Toxic imposes no liability or costs. Any disclose the information. Substances Control has been, and will liability under CERCLA exists An agency may not conduct or continue to be, the lead agency irrespective of whether a site is listed. sponsor, and a person is not required to overseeing the site cleanup pursuant to It has been determined that this action respond to, a collection of information a California consent order. Cleanup is is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ unless it displays a currently valid OMB progressing successfully and no further under the terms of Executive Order control number. The OMB control EPA actions are necessary. The 12866 and is therefore not subject to numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 proposed rule can be found at 57 FR OMB review. CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 4824 (February 7, 1992). Refer to the C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–SFUND– B. Paperwork Reduction Act 2010–0647 for supporting 1. What is the Paperwork Reduction 1. What is the Regulatory Flexibility documentation regarding this action. Act? Act? IV. Statutory and Executive Order According to the Paperwork Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by Reviews Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or the Small Business Regulatory A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory sponsor, and a person is not required to Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of Planning and Review respond to a collection of information 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking for any 1. What is Executive Order 12866? that requires OMB approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by proposed or final rule, it must prepare Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR OMB and displays a currently valid and make available for public comment 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency OMB control number. The OMB control a regulatory flexibility analysis that must determine whether a regulatory numbers for EPA’s regulations, after describes the effect of the rule on small action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore initial display in the preamble of the entities (i.e., small businesses, small subject to Office of Management and final rules, are listed in 40 CFR part 9. organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). However, no regulatory Budget (OMB) review and the 2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act flexibility analysis is required if the requirements of the Executive Order. Apply to this proposed rule? head of an agency certifies the rule will The Order defines ‘‘significant This action does not impose an not have a significant economic impact regulatory action’’ as one that is likely to information collection burden under the on a substantial number of small result in a rule that may: (1) Have an provisions of the Paperwork Reduction entities. SBREFA amended the annual effect on the economy of $100 Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. EPA has Regulatory Flexibility Act to require million or more or adversely affect in a determined that the PRA does not apply Federal agencies to provide a statement material way the economy, a sector of because this rule does not contain any of the factual basis for certifying that a the economy, productivity, competition, information collection requirements that rule will not have a significant jobs, the environment, public health or require approval of the OMB. economic impact on a substantial safety, or State, local, or tribal Burden means the total time, effort, or number of small entities. governments or communities; (2) create financial resources expended by persons a serious inconsistency or otherwise to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose 2. How has EPA complied with the interfere with an action taken or or provide information to or for a Regulatory Flexibility Act? planned by another agency; (3) Federal agency. This includes the time This proposed rule listing sites on the materially alter the budgetary impact of needed to review instructions; develop, NPL, if promulgated, would not impose entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan acquire, install, and utilize technology any obligations on any group, including programs or the rights and obligations of and systems for the purposes of small entities. This proposed rule, if recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel collecting, validating, and verifying promulgated, also would establish no legal or policy issues arising out of legal information, processing and standards or requirements that any mandates, the President’s priorities, or maintaining information, and disclosing small entity must meet, and would the principles set forth in the Executive and providing information; adjust the impose no direct costs on any small Order. existing ways to comply with any entity. Whether an entity, small or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64982 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

otherwise, is liable for response costs for 2. Does UMRA apply to this proposed spirit of Executive Order 13132, and a release of hazardous substances rule? consistent with EPA policy to promote depends on whether that entity is liable This proposed rule does not contain communications between EPA and State under CERCLA 107(a). Any such a Federal mandate that may result in and local governments, EPA therefore liability exists regardless of whether the expenditures of $100 million or more consulted with State officials and/or site is listed on the NPL through this for State, local, and tribal governments, representatives of State governments rulemaking. Thus, this proposed rule, if in the aggregate, or the private sector in early in the process of developing the promulgated, would not impose any any one year. Proposing a site on the rule to permit them to have meaningful requirements on any small entities. For NPL does not itself impose any costs. and timely input into its development. the foregoing reasons, I certify that this Proposal does not mean that EPA All sites included in this proposed rule proposed rule, if promulgated, will not necessarily will undertake remedial were referred to EPA by States for listing. For all sites in this rule, EPA have a significant economic impact on action. Nor does proposal require any received letters of support either from a substantial number of small entities. action by a private party or determine liability for response costs. Costs that the Governor or a State official who was D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act arise out of site responses result from delegated the authority by the Governor site-specific decisions regarding what to speak on their behalf regarding NPL 1. What is the Unfunded Mandates listing decisions. Reform Act (UMRA)? actions to take, not directly from the act of proposing a site to be placed on the F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Title II of the Unfunded Mandates NPL. Thus, this rule is not subject to the and Coordination With Indian Tribal Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public requirements of section 202 and 205 of Governments Law 104–4, establishes requirements for UMRA. 1. What is Executive Order 13175? Federal agencies to assess the effects of This rule is also not subject to the their regulatory actions on State, local, requirements of section 203 of UMRA Executive Order 13175, entitled and tribal governments and the private because it contains no regulatory ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, requirements that might significantly or Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR EPA generally must prepare a written uniquely affect small governments. As is 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA statement, including a cost-benefit mentioned above, site proposal does not to develop an accountable process to analysis, for proposed and final rules impose any costs and would not require ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may result any action of a small government. tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal in expenditures by State, local, and E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism tribal governments, in the aggregate, or implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal by the private sector, of $100 million or 1. What is Executive Order 13132? implications’’ is defined in the more in any one year. Before EPA Executive Order 13132, entitled Executive Order to include regulations ‘‘ promulgates a rule where a written ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the statement is needed, section 205 of the 1999), requires EPA to develop an relationship between the Federal UMRA generally requires EPA to accountable process to ensure Government and the Indian tribes, or on identify and consider a reasonable ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State the distribution of power and number of regulatory alternatives and and local officials in the development of responsibilities between the Federal adopt the least costly, most cost- regulatory policies that have federalism Government and Indian tribes.’’ effective, or least burdensome implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have alternative that achieves the objectives federalism implications’’ is defined in 2. Does Executive Order 13175 apply to of the rule. The provisions of section the Executive Order to include this proposed rule? ‘‘ 205 do not apply when they are regulations that have substantial direct This action does not have tribal inconsistent with applicable law. effects on the States, on the relationship implications, as specified in Executive Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to between the national government and Order 13175. Proposing a site to the adopt an alternative other than the least the States, or on the distribution of NPL does not impose any costs on a costly, most cost-effective, or least power and responsibilities among the tribe or require a tribe to take remedial ’’ burdensome alternative if the various levels of government. action. Thus, Executive Order 13175 Administrator publishes with the final 2. Does Executive Order 13132 apply to does not apply to this proposed rule. rule an explanation why that alternative this proposed rule? G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of was not adopted. Before EPA establishes This proposed rule does not have Children From Environmental Health any regulatory requirements that may federalism implications. It will not have and Safety Risks significantly or uniquely affect small substantial direct effects on the States, governments, including tribal on the relationship between the national 1. What is Executive Order 13045? governments, it must have developed government and the States, or on the Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of under section 203 of the UMRA a small distribution of power and Children From Environmental Health government agency plan. The plan must responsibilities among the various Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, provide for notifying potentially levels of government, as specified in April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: affected small governments, enabling Executive Order 13132, because it does (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically officials of affected small governments not contain any requirements applicable significant’’ as defined under Executive to have meaningful and timely input in to States or other levels of government. Order 12866, and (2) concerns an the development of EPA regulatory Thus, the requirements of the Executive environmental health or safety risk that proposals with significant Federal Order do not apply to this proposed EPA has reason to believe may have a intergovernmental mandates, and rule. disproportionate effect on children. If informing, educating, and advising EPA believes, however, that this the regulatory action meets both criteria, small governments on compliance with proposed rule may be of significant the Agency must evaluate the the regulatory requirements. interest to State governments. In the environmental health or safety effects of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 64983

the planned rule on children, and to the NPL does not require an entity to executive policy on environmental explain why the planned regulation is conduct any action that would require justice. Its main provision directs preferable to other potentially effective energy use, let alone that which would Federal agencies, to the greatest extent and reasonably feasible alternatives significantly affect energy supply, practicable and permitted by law, to considered by the Agency. distribution, or usage. Thus, Executive make environmental justice part of their Order 13175 does not apply to this mission by identifying and addressing, 2. Does Executive Order 13045 apply to action. as appropriate, disproportionately high this proposed rule? and adverse human health or I. National Technology Transfer and This proposed rule is not subject to environmental effects of their programs, Advancement Act Executive Order 13045 because it is not policies, and activities on minority an economically significant rule as 1. What Is the National Technology populations and low-income defined by Executive Order 12866, and Transfer and Advancement Act? populations in the United States. because the Agency does not have Section 12(d) of the National 2. Does Executive Order 12898 apply to reason to believe the environmental Technology Transfer and Advancement this rule? health or safety risks addressed by this Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– proposed rule present a 113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), EPA has determined that this disproportionate risk to children. directs EPA to use voluntary consensus proposed rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent human health or environmental effects Significantly Affect Energy Supply, on minority or low-income populations Distribution, or Usage with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus because it does not affect the level of 1. What is Executive Order 13211? standards are technical standards (e.g., protection provided to human health or the environment. As this rule does not Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions materials specifications, test methods, impose any enforceable duty upon Concerning Regulations That sampling procedures, and business State, tribal or local governments, this Significantly Affect Energy Supply, practices) that are developed or adopted rule will neither increase nor decrease Distribution, or Use,’’ (66 FR 28355 (May by voluntary consensus standards environmental protection. 22, 2001)) requires Federal agencies to bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to prepare a ‘‘Statement of Energy Effects’’ provide Congress, through OMB, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 explanations when the Agency decides when undertaking certain regulatory Environmental protection, Air not to use available and applicable actions. A Statement of Energy Effects pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous voluntary consensus standards. describes the adverse effects of a substances, Hazardous waste, ‘‘significant energy action’’ on energy 2. Does the National Technology Intergovernmental relations, Natural supply, distribution and use, reasonable Transfer and Advancement Act apply to resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, alternatives to the action, and the this proposed rule? Reporting and recordkeeping expected effects of the alternatives on requirements, Superfund, Water energy supply, distribution and use. No. This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. pollution control, Water supply. 2. Does Executive Order 13211 apply to Therefore, EPA did not consider the use Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. this proposed rule? of any voluntary consensus standards. 9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, ‘‘ 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, This action is not a significant energy J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. action’’ as defined in Executive Order Actions To Address Environmental Dated: October 14, 2010. 13211, because it is not likely to have Justice in Minority Populations and a significant adverse effect on the Low-Income Populations Mathy Stanislaus, supply, distribution, or use of energy. Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste Further, we have concluded that this 1. What Is Executive Order 12898? and Emergency Response. rule is not likely to have any adverse Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR [FR Doc. 2010–26461 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] energy impacts because proposing a site 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:39 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 64984

Notices Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 203

Thursday, October 21, 2010

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Reading Room: You may read any organisms for the biological control of contains documents other than rules or comments that we receive on the hawkweeds have been released in North proposed rules that are applicable to the environmental assessment in our America. Gall wasps cause abnormal public. Notices of hearings and investigations, reading room. The reading room is outgrowths (galls) to form on committee meetings, agency decisions and located in room 1141 of the USDA rulings, delegations of authority, filing of hawkweeds. Under certain conditions, petitions and applications and agency South Building, 14th Street and these galls may stress the plant, statements of organization and functions are Independence Avenue, SW., reducing competitive ability, seed examples of documents appearing in this Washington, DC. Normal reading room production, and long-distance spread, section. hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday which may result in a long-term, non- through Friday, except holidays. To be damaging method to control hawkweed. sure someone is there to help you, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE please call (202) 690–2817 before Thus, a permit application has been coming. submitted to APHIS for the purpose of Animal and Plant Health Inspection Other Information: Additional releasing the hawkweed gall wasp, Service information about APHIS and its Aulacidea subterminalis, into the [Docket No. APHIS–2010–0078] programs is available on the Internet at continental United States to control http://www.aphis.usda.gov. invasive hawkweeds. These permits Availability of an Environmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. would contain no special provisions or Assessment for a Biological Control Shirley A. Wager-Page, Chief, Pest requirements concerning release Agent for Hawkweeds Permitting Branch, Plant Health procedures or mitigating measures. Programs, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health APHIS’ review and analysis of the Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737–1237; Inspection Service, USDA. proposed action are documented in (301) 734–8453. ACTION: Notice of availability and detail in a draft environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: request for comments. assessment (EA) titled ‘‘Field Release of Background the Gall Wasp, Aulacidea subterminalis SUMMARY: We are advising the public (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae), for The Animal and Plant Health that the Animal and Plant Health Biological Control of Invasive Inspection Service (APHIS) is proposing Inspection Service has prepared an Hawkweeds (Hieracium spp.) in the to issue permits for the release of the environmental assessment relative to Continental United States’’ (March the control of hawkweeds (Hieracium hawkweed gall wasp, Aulacidea subterminalis, into the continental 2010). We are making the EA available spp.). The environmental assessment to the public for review and comment. considers the effects of, and alternatives United States for the biological control of hawkweeds (Hieracium pilosella, H. We will consider all comments that we to, the release of the hawkweed gall receive on or before the date listed wasp, Aulacidea subterminalis, into the aurantiacum, H. floribundum, and H. flagellare). under the heading DATES at the continental United States as a biological beginning of this notice. control agent to reduce the severity of Introduced hawkweeds are native to infestations of hawkweeds. We are Europe and were probably introduced The EA may be viewed on the making the environmental assessment into the eastern United States during the Regulations.gov Web site or in our available to the public for review and 1800s. Introduced hawkweeds are reading room (see ADDRESSES above for comment. highly competitive and relatively free of instructions for accessing insects and pathogens in North Regulations.gov and information on the DATES: We will consider all comments America. These species outcompete location and hours of the reading room). that we receive on or before November native and desirable vegetation, limiting 22, 2010. You may request paper copies of the EA economic use of infested land and by calling or writing to the person listed ADDRESSES: You may submit comments posing risks to threatened, endangered, under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION by either of the following methods: and sensitive species. CONTACT. Please refer to the title of the • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Hawkweeds can be controlled through http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ the application of chemical herbicides, EA when requesting copies. component/main?main=DocketDetail& mowing, cultural control, and the use of The EA has been prepared in d=APHIS–2010–0078 to submit or view biological control organisms. The use of accordance with: (1) The National comments and to view supporting and herbicides, while effective, is limited to Environmental Policy Act of 1969 related materials available relatively accessible sites and control is (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et electronically. only temporary. Broadcast applications seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: of herbicides could also have adverse Environmental Quality for Please send one copy of your comment impacts on nontarget vegetation if not implementing the procedural provisions to Docket No. APHIS–2010–0078, carefully applied. Mowing prevents of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), Regulatory Analysis and Development, seed production but encourages faster (3) USDA regulations implementing PPD, APHIS, Station 3A–03.8, 4700 vegetative spread. Cultural control NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD includes the use of fertilizers to increase NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR 20737–1238. Please state that your the competitive ability of more desirable part 372). comment refers to Docket No. APHIS– species, but has no effect on dense 2010–0078. patches of hawkweed. Currently, no

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64985

Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 the record and are available for public October 2010. between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern inspection and copying. The public may Kevin Shea, Standard Time, Monday through Friday. inspect comments received at the San Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Luis Valley Public Lands Center, 1803 Health Inspection Service. meeting is open to the public. Those West U.S. Highway 160, Monte Vista, [FR Doc. 2010–26467 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] interested in attending should contact CO 81144. BILLING CODE 3410–34–P Mary Dempsey to be placed on the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: meeting attendance list. Council Mike Blakeman, RAC coordinator, discussion is limited to Forest Service USDA, San Luis Valley Public Lands DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE staff and Council members; however, Center, 1803 West U.S. Highway 160, persons who wish to bring urban and Monte Vista, CO 81144; 719–852–6212; Forest Service community forestry matters to the E-mail [email protected]. attention of the Council may file written Individuals who use National Urban and Community statements with the Council staff (201 telecommunication devices for the deaf Forestry Advisory Council 14th Street, SW., Yates Building (1 (TDD) may call the Federal Information AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Central) MS–1151, Washington, DC Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 ACTION: Notice of meeting. 20250–1151, e-mail: between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern [email protected]) before or after the Standard Time, Monday through Friday. SUMMARY: The National Urban and meeting. Public input sessions will be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Community Forestry Advisory Council provided at the meeting. Public meeting is open to the public. The will meet in Philadelphia, PA, comments will be compiled and following business will be conducted: November 11, 2010, during the Home provided to the Secretary of Agriculture (1) Introductions of all committee Depot Foundation and National Arbor along with the Council’s members, replacement members and Day Foundation’s Partners in recommendations. Forest Service personnel; (2) Review, Community Forestry National Dated: October 14, 2010. evaluate and recommend project Conference. The purpose of the Robin L. Thompson, proposals to be funded with Title II Council’s meeting is to discuss Associate Deputy Chief, State and Private money; (3) Create a timeline to receive finalizing their annual accomplishment Forestry. and review new project proposals and report, recommendations for the [FR Doc. 2010–26513 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] schedule the next meeting; and (4) Secretary of Agriculture, develop the BILLING CODE 3410–11–P Public Comment. Persons who wish to 2011 plan of work, meet with the Forest bring related matters to the attention of Services’s new assistant director for the Committee may file written Urban and Community Forestry, and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE statements with the Committee staff hear public input related to urban and before or after the meeting. community forestry. Forest Service Dated: October 13, 2010. DATES: The meeting will be held on Dan S. Dallas, November 11, 2010, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. or Upper Rio Grande Resource Advisory until Council business is completed. Committee Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 2010–26668 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. BILLING CODE 3410–11–P the Lowes Hotel, 1200 Market Street, ACTION: Notice of meeting. Philadelphia, PA 19107, Phone: 215– 627–1200. SUMMARY: The Upper Rio Grande Written comments concerning this Resource Advisory Committee will meet COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS meeting should be addressed to Nancy in Monte Vista, Colorado. The Stremple, Executive Staff to National committee is meeting as authorized Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting Urban and Community Forestry under the Secure Rural Schools and of the Utah Advisory Committee Advisory Council, 201 14th Street, SW., Community Self-Determination Act Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Yates Building (1 Central) MS–1151, (Pub. L. 110–343) and in compliance the provisions of the rules and Washington, DC 20250–1151. with the Federal Advisory Committee regulations of the U.S. Commission on Comments may also be sent via e-mail Act. The purpose is to review and Civil Rights (Commission), and the to [email protected], or via facsimile recommend project proposals to be Federal Advisory Committee Act to 202–690–5792. funded with Title II money. (FACA) that a planning meeting of the All comments, including names and DATES: The meeting will be held on Utah Advisory Committee to the addresses when provided, are placed in November 8, 2010, and will begin at Commission will convene by conference the record and are available for public 10 a.m. call at 10 a.m. on Thursday, November inspection and copying. Visitors are ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 4, 2010. The purpose of this meeting is encouraged to call ahead to facilitate the San Luis Valley Public Lands to provide a brief overview of recent entry into the Forest Service building. Center, 1803 West U.S. Highway 160, Commission and regional activities, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Monte Vista, Colorado. Written discuss civil rights issues in the state, Mary Dempsey, Staff Assistant to comments should be sent to Mike discussion regarding the Utah Anti- National Urban and Community Blakeman, San Luis Valley Public Lands Discrimination and Labor Division Forestry Advisory Council, 201 14th Center, 1803 West U.S. Highway 160, Audit and next steps in developing a Street, SW., Yates Building (1 Central) Monte Vista, CO 81144. Comments may resource directory of human rights MS–1151, Washington, DC 20250–1151, also be sent via e-mail to agencies/organizations in the Salt Lake phone 202–205–1054. [email protected], or via facsimile area, and a discussion on immigration. Individuals who use to 719–852–6250. This meeting is available to the public telecommunication devices for the deaf All comments, including names and through the following toll-free call-in (TDD) may call the Federal Information addresses when provided, are placed in and conference ID numbers: 1–(800)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64986 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

516–9896; conference ID 8334. Any Meeting Agenda PLACE: 624 Ninth Street, NW., Room interested member of the public may This meeting is open to the public. 540, Washington, DC 20425. call this number and listen to the I. Approval of Agenda. Meeting Agenda meeting. Callers can expect to incur II. Program Planning. charges for calls they initiate over This meeting is open to the public. • Approval of New Black Panther wireless lines, and the Commission will Party Enforcement Report. I. Approval of Agenda. not refund any incurred charges. Callers • Consideration of Findings and II. Program Planning. will incur no charge for calls they • Approval of New Black Panther Recommendations for Briefing initiate over land-line connections to Party Enforcement Report. Report on English-Only in the the toll-free telephone number. Persons • Consideration of Findings and Workplace. Recommendations for Briefing with hearing impairments may also • Consideration of Policy on Report on English-Only in the follow the proceedings by first calling Commissioner Statements and the Federal Relay Service at 1–800–977– Workplace. Rebuttals. • 8339 and providing the Service with the • Update on Sex Discrimination in Consideration of Policy on conference call number and conference Liberal Arts College Admissions— Commissioner Statements and ID. Some of the discussion of this Rebuttals. • Update on Sex Discrimination in To ensure that the Commission agenda item may be held in closed Liberal Arts College Admissions— secures an appropriate number of lines session. for the public, persons are asked to • Update on Clearinghouse Project. Some of the discussion of this register by contacting Evelyn Bohor of III. State Advisory Committee Issues. agenda item may be held in closed the Rocky Mountain Regional Office and • session. Kentucky SAC. • TTY/TDD (303) 866–1049 by noon on • Maryland SAC. Update on Clearinghouse Project. November 1. • Vermont SAC. III. State Advisory Committee Issues. • Kentucky SAC. Members of the public are entitled to IV. Staff Director’s Report. • Maryland SAC. submit written comments. The V. Announcements. • Vermont SAC. comments must be received in the VI. Approval of Minutes of October 8 IV. Staff Director’s Report. regional office by December 4, 2010. Meeting. VII. Adjourn. V. Announcements. The address is: U.S. Commission on VI. Approval of Minutes of October 8 CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER Civil Rights, Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting. INFORMATION: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Office, 999 18th Street, Suite 1380 VII. Adjourn. South, Denver, CO 80202. Comments Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376– CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER may be e-mailed to [email protected]. 8591. TDD: (202) 376–8116. INFORMATION: Records generated by this meeting may Persons with a disability requiring Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting be inspected and reproduced at the special services, such as an interpreter Chief, Public Affairs Unit (202) 376– Rocky Mountain Regional Office, as for the hearing impaired, should contact 8591. TDD: (202) 376–8116. they become available, both before and Pamela Dunston at least seven days Persons with a disability requiring after the meeting. Persons interested in prior to the meeting at 202–376–8105. special services, such as an interpreter the work of this advisory committee are TDD: (202) 376–8116. for the hearing impaired, should contact Pamela Dunston at least seven days advised to go to the Commission’s Web Dated: October 19, 2010. site, http://www.usccr.gov, or to contact prior to the meeting at 202–376–8105. David Blackwood, TDD: (202) 376–8116. the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at General Counsel. the above e-mail or street address. Dated: October 19, 2010. [FR Doc. 2010–26752 Filed 10–19–10; 4:15 pm] The meeting will be conducted David Blackwood, BILLING CODE 6335–01–P pursuant to the provisions of the rules General Counsel. and regulations of the Commission and [FR Doc. 2010–26751 Filed 10–19–10; 4:15 pm] FACA. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS BILLING CODE 6335–01–P Dated in Washington, DC, October 18, 2010. Sunshine Act Notice DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Peter Minarik, AGENCY: United States Commission on Acting Chief, Regional Programs Civil Rights. Coordination Unit. National Oceanic and Atmospheric ACTION: Notice of meeting cancellation. Administration [FR Doc. 2010–26487 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335–01–P SUMMARY: On October 12, 2010 (75 FR RIN 0648–XZ86 63144–63145), the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights announced a business Marine Mammals; File No. 14525 COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS meeting to be held on Friday, October AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 22, 2010 at the Commission’s Sunshine Act Notice Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and headquarters. On Monday, October 18, Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), AGENCY: United States Commission on 2010, the meeting was cancelled. The Commerce. decision to cancel the meeting was too Civil Rights. ACTION: Notice; receipt of application. close in time to the date and time of the ACTION: Notice of meeting. meeting for the publication of a SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that cancellation notice to appear in advance Oleg Lyamin, Ph.D., Dept. of Psychiatry, DATE AND TIME: Friday, October 29, 2010; of the scheduled meeting date. The School of Medicine, University of 8:30 a.m. EDT. details of the cancelled meeting are: California at Los Angeles (UCLA), 16111 PLACE: 624 Ninth Street, NW., Room DATE AND TIME: Friday, October 22, 2010; Plummer St., North Hills, CA 91343, has 540, Washington, DC 20425. 9:30 a.m. EDT. applied in due form for a permit to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64987

import specimens of northern fur seals seal during sleep and waking using ADDRESSES: Interested persons may (Callorhinus ursinus) for scientific microdialysis, high-performance liquid submit comments by any of the research. chromatography and radioimmunoassay following methods: DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail analysis. The second aim of the study is • Electronic Submissions: Submit comments must be received on or before to localize the distribution of the above electronic public comments via the November 22, 2010. mentioned cell groups in the fur seal Federal e-Rulemaking portal http:// brain as well as to localize the positions ADDRESSES: The application and related www.regulations.gov or documents are available for review by of the sites where the microdialysis [email protected]; selecting ‘‘Records Open for Public samples were collected. Samples would • Fax: 301 427–2210; Attn: Frank Comment’’ from the Features box on the be imported from Russia to UCLA for Sprtel; Applications and Permits for Protected analysis and samples would be exported • Mail: Office of General Counsel for Species (APPS) home page, https:// from the U.S. to South Africa for Enforcement and Litigation, National apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting additional analysis. Oceanic and Atmospheric In compliance with the National File No. 14525 from the list of available Administration, 8484 Georgia Avenue, Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 applications. Suite 400, Silver Spring, MD 20910, U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial These documents are also available Attn: Frank Sprtel. determination has been made that the upon written request or by appointment The draft Penalty Policy is available in the following office(s): activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to electronically at the following Web site: Permits, Conservation and Education http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ole/ Division, Office of Protected Resources, prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. penaltypolicy.html. Commenters may NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room also request a hard copy of the draft 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, Penalty Policy by sending a self- (301) 713–2289; fax (301) 713–0376; and addressed envelope (size 8.5 x 11 Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal inches) to the street address provided Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, above. Comments submitted in response CA 90802–4213; phone (562) 980–4001; Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors. to this notice are a matter of public fax (562) 980–4018. record. Before including an address, Written comments on this application Dated: October 15, 2010. phone number, e-mail address, or other should be submitted to the Chief, P. Michael Payne, personal identifying information in a Permits, Conservation and Education Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education comment, please be aware that Division, at the address listed above. Division, Office of Protected Resources, comments—including any personal Comments may also be submitted by National Marine Fisheries Service. identifying information—can and will facsimile to (301) 713–0376, or by e- [FR Doc. 2010–26648 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] be made publicly available. While a mail to [email protected]. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P request can be made to withhold Please include File No. 14525 in the personal identifying information from subject line of the e-mail comment. public review, NOAA cannot ensure Those individuals requesting a public DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE that it will be able to do so. hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and National Oceanic and Atmospheric FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Education Division at the address listed Administration Frank Sprtel at the above address or by telephone at 301 495–7147. above. The request should set forth the [Docket No. 101014509–0508–01] specific reasons why a hearing on this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The draft application would be appropriate. RIN 0648–XZ62 Penalty Policy is intended to provide FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Notice of Availability of Draft Policy for guidance for the Assessment of civil Amy Sloan or Jennifer Skidmore, (301) the Assessment of Civil Administrative administrative penalties and permit 713–2289. Penalties and Permit Sanctions for sanctions under the statutes and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Public Review and Comment regulations enforced by NOAA. As subject permit is requested under the explained more fully in the text of the authority of the Marine Mammal AGENCY: Office of General Counsel draft Penalty Policy, the purpose of the Protection Act of 1972, as amended (OGC), National Oceanic and Policy is to ensure that: (1) Civil (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), administrative penalties and permit regulations governing the taking and Commerce. sanctions are assessed in accordance importing of marine mammals (50 CFR ACTION: Notice of availability; request with the laws that NOAA enforces in a part 216). for comments. fair and consistent manner; (2) penalties The applicant proposes to import and permit sanctions are appropriate for biological samples from 10 subadult SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and the gravity of the violation; (3) penalties male fur seals over a five-year period for Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and permit sanctions are sufficient to studies on mechanisms of sleep in fur announces the availability of a draft deter both particular violators and the seals. Fur seals will be captured in Policy for the Assessment of Civil regulated community from committing Russia, held in captivity, sampled while Administrative Penalties and Permit violations; (4) economic incentives for in captivity, and euthanized at the Sanctions (Penalty Policy) for public noncompliance are eliminated; and (5) termination of study to obtain their review and comment. compliance is expeditiously achieved brains. Whole brains and brain tissues DATES: The draft Penalty Policy will and maintained to protect natural will be imported to the U.S. for remain available for public review until resources. Under this Policy, NOAA anatomical and immunohistochemical December 20, 2010. To ensure that expects to improve consistency at a studies. The first aim of the project is to comments will be considered, NOAA national level, provide greater correlate the release of major must receive written comments by predictability for the regulated neurotransmitters in the brain of the fur December 20, 2010. community and the public, improve

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64988 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

transparency in enforcement, and more factors should be considered in Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; effectively protect natural resources. assessing penalties under the penalty telephone (202) 482–3692 or (202) 482– Under the proposed penalty policy, policy; (5) whether the matrixes and 3797, respectively. penalties and permit sanctions are based schedules in the penalty policy Background on three criteria: (1) A base penalty (Appendices 2 and 3), adequately reflect amount and permit sanction reflective an appropriate range of penalties for On September 1, 2009, the of the seriousness of the violation; (2) an particular violations; and (6) whether Department issued a notice of adjustment of the base penalty and there should be any change in the opportunity to request an administrative permit sanction upward or downward to proposed method of calculating review of this order for the period of reflect particular circumstances of a economic benefit in the penalty policy. review (POR) of September 1, 2008, specific violation; and (3) an additional through August 31, 2009. See Dated: October 15, 2010. amount added to the adjusted base Antidumping or Countervailing Duty penalty to recoup the economic benefit Lois J. Schiffer, Order, Finding, or Suspended of noncompliance. We note that the new General Counsel, National Oceanic and Investigation; Opportunity to Request penalty policy is a departure from Atmospheric Administration. Administrative Review, 74 FR 45179 NOAA’s prior practice of developing [FR Doc. 2010–26417 Filed 10–15–10; 4:15 pm] (September 1, 2009). detailed penalty schedules by region BILLING CODE 3510–12–P Pursuant to a request from the and by specific types of violations with Association of American School Paper broad ranges for both penalty and Suppliers, (petitioner),1 the Department permit sanctions. The new policy uses DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE published in the Federal Register the a simplified approach of one penalty notice of initiation of this antidumping International Trade Administration and permit sanction matrix for each duty administrative review with respect major statute NOAA enforces, to be [A–533–843] to 32 companies, including Navneet and applied nationally, with narrower Super Impex for the period September penalty and permit sanction ranges. Certain Lined Paper Products From 1, 2008, through August 31, 2009. See This approach assures that NOAA India: Notice of Preliminary Results of Initiation of Antidumping and attorneys are provided with greater Antidumping Duty Administrative Countervailing Duty Administrative guidance in recommending penalties, Review Reviews and Request for Revocation in and should assure fairness and AGENCY: Import Administration, Part, 74 FR 54956 (October 26, 2009). consistency of approach across NOAA International Trade Administration, (Initiation Notice). On October 26, 2009, statutes, across fisheries, and across the U.S. Department of Commerce. the petitioner timely withdrew its country. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce request for a review of Blue Bird (India) When finalized, this draft Penalty (the Department) is conducting an Limited (Blue Bird). Policy will supersede previous guidance administrative review of the On November 3, 2009, the Department regarding assessment of penalties or antidumping duty order on certain lined notified interested parties of its intent to permit sanctions and previous penalty paper products (CLPP) from India. For use CBP data for respondent selection. and permit sanction schedules issued by the period September 1, 2008, through See Memorandum to The File, Through the NOAA Office of the General August 31, 2009, we have preliminarily Melissa Skinner, Office Director, Office Counsel. This Penalty Policy provides determined that Navneet Publications 3 and Through James Terpstra, Program guidance for the NOAA Office of the (India) Limited (Navneet) did not make Manager, Office 3 from Stephanie General Counsel, but does not, nor is it sales of subject merchandise at less than Moore, Case Analyst titled ‘‘Customs intended to, create a right or benefit, normal value (NV) (i.e., sales were made and Border Patrol Data for Selection of substantive or procedural, enforceable at at de minimis dumping margins). If Respondents for Individual Review.’’ law or in equity, in any person or On November 10 and December 3, these preliminary results are adopted in company. 2009, the Department received the final results of this administrative The full penalty policy, along with comments regarding respondent review, we will instruct U.S. Customs examples, matrixes, and schedules, can selection from the petitioner. On and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ January 29, 2010, the Department appropriate entries without regard to ole/penaltypolicy.html. NOAA is selected Navneet and Super Impex as antidumping duties. For the same seeking public comment on all portions companies to be individually examined of the penalty policy, but specifically period, we have preliminarily determined that U.S. sales have been asks for comment in the following areas: 1 On September 30, 2009, the Department (1) The handling of recreational, versus made below NV by Super Impex. If received a timely request to conduct an commercial, activity in assessing these preliminary results are adopted in administrative review of the following 32 penalties—specifically, whether to our final results, we will instruct CBP to companies: Abhinav Paper Products Pvt. Ltd.; assess antidumping duties based on the American Scholar, Inc., and/or I–Scholar; create separate matrixes and/or Ampoules & Vials Mfg. Co., Ltd.; Bafna Exports; schedules for recreational activity in the difference between the export price (EP) Blue Bird India Ltd.; Cello International Pvt. Ltd penalty policy, or to leave such and NV. See ‘‘Preliminary Results of (M/S Cello Paper Products); Creative Divya; distinctions as an ‘‘adjustment’’ factor, as Review’’ section of this notice. Corporate Stationery Pvt. Ltd.; D.D International; Interested parties are invited to Exmart International Pvt. Ltd.; Fatechand currently written; (2) the evaluation of Mahendrakumar; FFI International; Freight India prior violations in assessing penalties— comment on these preliminary results. Logistics Pvt. Ltd.; International Greetings Pvt. Ltd.; specifically, whether to create upward DATES: Effective Date: October 21, 2010. Lodha Offset Limited; Magic International Pvt. Ltd.; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marigold ExIm Pvt. Ltd.; Marisa International; penalty assessments based on prior Navneet Publications (India) Ltd.; Paperwise Inc.; charged conduct, or only to consider Stephanie Moore (Navneet) or Cindy Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd.; Premier Exports; prior conduct that is fully adjudicated; Robinson (Super Impex) AD/CVD Riddhi Enterprises; SAB International; SAR (3) whether the proposed use of permit Operations, Office 3, Import Transport Systems; Seet Kamal International; Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Eternity Int’l Freight, sanctions in the penalty policy is Administration, International Trade forwarder on behalf of Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd.); appropriate; (4) whether any additional Administration, U.S. Department of Sonal Printers Pvt. Ltd.; Super Impex; Swati Growth upward or downward ‘‘adjustment’’ Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Funds Ltd.; V & M; and Yash Laminates.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64989

in this administrative review of the (COP) files to reflect the minor such as sticker sheets or miniature antidumping duty order on CLPP from corrections presented to the verification calendars, if such items are physically India. See Memorandum to Melissa team. On August 11, 2010, we received incorporated, included with, or attached Skinner, Director, Office 3 Through Super Impex’s minor correction to the product, cover and/or backing James Terpstra, Program Manager, provided at the outset of the thereto. Office 3 from Stephanie Moore, Case verification, and on August 18, 2010, we Specifically excluded from the scope Analyst titled ‘‘Antidumping Duty received Super Impex’s revised U.S. of this order are: Administrative Review of Certain Lined sales and COP databases. • Unlined copy machine paper; Paper Products from India: Selection of • writing pads with a backing Period of Review Respondents for Individual Review’’ (including but not limited to products (Respondent Selection Memo), dated The period of review (POR) is commonly known as ‘‘tablets,’’ ‘‘note January 29, 2010. September 1, 2008, through August 31, pads,’’ ‘‘legal pads,’’ and ‘‘quadrille On February 1, 2010, the Department 2009. pads’’), provided that they do not have issued an antidumping questionnaire Scope of the Order a front cover (whether permanent or (original questionnaire) to Navneet and removable). This exclusion does not Super Impex with a due date of March The scope of this order includes apply to such writing pads if they 9, 2010. On March 12, 2010, we granted certain lined paper products, typically consist of hole-punched or drilled filler a three-week extension until April 6, school supplies (for purposes of this paper; 2010, for Navneet to submit its response scope definition, the actual use of or • three-ring or multiple-ring binders, to the original questionnaire. On May 6, labeling these products as school or notebook organizers incorporating 2010, petitioner submitted deficiency supplies or non-school supplies is not a such a ring binder provided that they do comments regarding Navneet’s April 6, defining characteristic) composed of or not include subject paper; 2010, original questionnaire response. including paper that incorporates • index cards; On May 14, 2010, the Department straight horizontal and/or vertical lines • printed books and other books that issued a supplemental questionnaire to on ten or more paper sheets (there shall are case bound through the inclusion of Navneet with a due date of May 28, be no minimum page requirement for binders board, a spine strip, and cover 2010. On May 27, 2010, we granted a loose leaf filler paper) including but not wrap; two-week extension until June 11, 2010, limited to such products as single- and • newspapers; for Navneet to submit its response to the multi-subject notebooks, composition • pictures and photographs; supplemental questionnaire. books, wireless notebooks, loose leaf or • desk and wall calendars and With respect to Super Impex, we glued filler paper, graph paper, and organizers (including but not limited to received Super Impex’s sections A, C, laboratory notebooks, and with the such products generally known as and D responses to the Department’s smaller dimension of the paper ‘‘office planners,’’ ‘‘time books,’’ and original questionnaire on March 9, measuring 6 inches to 15 inches ‘‘appointment books’’); March 30, and April 14, 2010, (inclusive) and the larger dimension of • telephone logs; respectively. On March 25 and April 30, the paper measuring 83⁄4 inches to 15 • address books; 2010, petitioner submitted deficiency inches (inclusive). Page dimensions are • columnar pads & tablets, with or comments on Super Impex’s sections A, measured size (not advertised, stated, or without covers, primarily suited for the C, and D questionnaire response. On ‘‘tear-out’’ size), and are measured as recording of written numerical business May 10 and June 24, 2010, we issued they appear in the product (i.e., stitched data; the first and second supplemental and folded pages in a notebook are • lined business or office forms, questionnaires, respectively, to Super measured by the size of the page as it including but not limited to: pre-printed Impex, and Super Impex submitted its appears in the notebook page, not the business forms, lined invoice pads and responses on June 2 and July 7, 2010, size of the unfolded paper). However, paper, mailing and address labels, respectively. Petitioner submitted for measurement purposes, pages with manifests, and shipping log books; additional deficiency comments on tapered or rounded edges shall be • lined continuous computer paper; Super Impex’s first supplemental measured at their longest and widest • boxed or packaged writing response on July 17, 2010. On July 19, points. Subject lined paper products stationary (including but not limited to 2010, petitioner provided pre- may be loose, packaged or bound using products commonly known as ‘‘fine verification comments. On July 20, any binding method (other than case business paper,’’ ‘‘parchment paper,’’ 2010, petitioner provided comments on bound through the inclusion of binders and ‘‘letterhead’’), whether or not certain new factual information board, a spine strip, and cover wrap). containing a lined header or decorative contained in Super Impex’s second Subject merchandise may or may not lines; supplemental questionnaire response. contain any combination of a front • Stenographic pads (‘‘steno pads’’), On May 18, 2010, the Department cover, a rear cover, and/or backing of Gregg ruled (‘‘Gregg ruling’’ consists of a extended the time limits for the any composition, regardless of the single- or double-margin vertical ruling preliminary results. See Certain Lined inclusion of images or graphics on the line down the center of the page. For a Paper Products from India and People’s cover, backing, or paper. Subject six-inch by nine-inch stenographic pad, Republic of China: Extension of Time merchandise is within the scope of this the ruling would be located Limits for the Preliminary Results of order whether or not the lined paper approximately three inches from the left Antidumping Duty Administrative and/or cover are hole punched, drilled, of the book), measuring 6 inches by 9 Reviews, 75 FR 27706 (May 18, 2010). perforated, and/or reinforced. Subject inches; The Department conducted the sales merchandise may contain accessory or Also excluded from the scope of this and cost verification of Super Impex informational items including but not order are the following trademarked from August 2 through August 13, 2010, limited to pockets, tabs, dividers, products: in Mumbai, India. At verification, the closure devices, index cards, stencils, • FlyTM lined paper products: A Department’s verification team protractors, writing implements, notebook, notebook organizer, loose or requested that Super Impex provide reference materials such as glued note paper, with papers that are updated sales and cost of production mathematical tables, or printed items printed with infrared reflective inks and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64990 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

readable only by a FlyTM pen-top spine and bound by a 3-ring plastic be foreign like products for purposes of computer. The product must bear the fixture. The polyolefin plastic covers are determining appropriate product valid trademark FlyTM (products found of a specific thickness; front cover is comparisons to U.S. sales. We have to be bearing an invalidly licensed or 0.019 inches (within normal relied on eight criteria to match U.S. used trademark are not excluded from manufacturing tolerances) and rear sales of subject merchandise to the scope). cover is 0.028 inches (within normal comparison market sales of the foreign • TM Zwipes : A notebook or notebook manufacturing tolerances). During like product: (1) Form, (2) paper organizer made with a blended construction, the polyester covering is volume, (3) brightness, (4) binding type, polyolefin writing surface as the cover sewn to the front cover face to face (5) cover material, (6) back material, (7) and pocket surfaces of the notebook, (outside to outside) so that when the number of inserts, and (8) insert suitable for writing using a specially- book is closed, the stitching is material. Where there were no sales of developed permanent marker and erase concealed from the outside. During system (known as a ZwipesTM pen). construction, the polyester cover is identical merchandise in the home This system allows the marker portion sewn to the back cover with the outside market made in the ordinary course of to mark the writing surface with a of the polyester spine cover to the inside trade to compare to U.S. sales, we permanent ink. The eraser portion of the back cover. Both free ends (the ends not compared U.S. sales to the next most marker dispenses a solvent capable of sewn to the cover and back) are stitched similar foreign like product on the basis solubilizing the permanent ink allowing with a turned edge construction. Each of the characteristics listed above. the ink to be removed. The product ring within the fixture is comprised of For purposes of the preliminary must bear the valid trademark ZwipesTM a flexible strap portion that snaps into results, where appropriate, we have (products found to be bearing an a stationary post which forms a closed calculated the adjustment for invalidly licensed or used trademark are binding ring. The ring fixture is riveted differences in merchandise based on the not excluded from the scope). with six metal rivets and sewn to the difference in the variable cost of • FiveStar®AdvanceTM: A notebook back plastic cover and is specifically manufacturing (VCOM) between each or notebook organizer bound by a positioned on the outside back cover. U.S. model and the most similar home continuous spiral, or helical, wire and The product must bear the valid market model selected for comparison. with plastic front and rear covers made trademark FiveStar FlexTM (products of a blended polyolefin plastic material found to be bearing an invalidly Normal Value Comparisons joined by 300 denier polyester, coated licensed or used trademark are not on the backside with PVC (poly vinyl excluded from the scope). To determine whether sales of CLPP chloride) coating, and extending the Merchandise subject to this order is from Navneet to the United States were entire length of the spiral or helical typically imported under headings made at less than NV, we compared EP wire. The polyolefin plastic covers are 4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, to the NV, as described in the ‘‘Export of specific thickness; front cover is 4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, Price’’ and ‘‘Normal Value’’ sections of 0.019 inches (within normal 4820.10.2020, 4820.10.2030, this notice. In accordance with section manufacturing tolerances) and rear 4820.10.2040, 4820.10.2050, 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we calculated cover is 0.028 inches (within normal 4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000 of the monthly weighted-average prices for NV manufacturing tolerances). Integral with Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the and compared these to individual U.S. the stitching that attaches the polyester United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS transaction prices. spine covering, is captured both ends of headings are provided for convenience a 1″ wide elastic fabric band. This band and customs purposes; however, the Export Price is located 23⁄8″ from the top of the front written description of the scope of the plastic cover and provides pen or pencil order is dispositive. For all U.S. sales made by Navneet storage. Both ends of the spiral wire are and Super Impex, we used the EP cut and then bent backwards to overlap Verification methodology, in accordance with with the previous coil but specifically As provided in section 782(i) of the section 772(a) of the Act, because the outside the coil diameter but inside the Act, we have verified information subject merchandise was sold directly to polyester covering. During construction, provided by Super Impex in the the first unaffiliated purchaser in the the polyester covering is sewn to the administrative review of the order on United States prior to importation. We front and rear covers face to face subject merchandise from India using based EP on packed prices to the first (outside to outside) so that when the standard verification procedures, unaffiliated purchaser in the United book is closed, the stitching is including the examination of relevant States. When appropriate, we reduced concealed from the outside. Both free sales and cost information, financial the EP prices to reflect discounts. ends (the ends not sewn to the cover records, and the selection and review of In accordance with section and back) are stitched with a turned original documentation containing 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act, we made edge construction. The flexible relevant information. Our verification deductions, where appropriate, for polyester material forms a covering over results are outlined in the public movement expenses including foreign the spiral wire to protect it and provide version of our verification report dated inland freight from plant/warehouse to a comfortable grip on the product. The October 7, 2010, which is on file in the the port of exportation, foreign product must bear the valid trademarks Central Records Unit (CRU) in Room FiveStar®AdvanceTM (products found to 7046 of the Department’s main building. brokerage and handling, and foreign bill be bearing an invalidly licensed or used of lading charges. We also increased EP trademark are not excluded from the Product Comparisons by an amount equal to the scope). In accordance with section 771(16) of countervailing duty (CVD) rate • FiveStar FlexTM: A notebook, a the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the attributed to export subsidies in the notebook organizer, or binder with Act), all products produced by Navneet most recently completed countervailing plastic polyolefin front and rear covers covered by the description in the ‘‘Scope duty administrative review of CLPP joined by 300 denier polyester spine of the Order’’ section above and sold in from India, in accordance with section cover extending the entire length of the India during the POR are considered to 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64991

Normal Value market LOT constituted a different LOT final results of the Second than the EP or CEP LOT. Administrative Review,2 and Selection of Comparison Market Consistent with 19 CFR 351.412, to accompanying Issues and Decision To determine whether there was a determine whether comparison market Memorandum at Comment 5. The sufficient volume of sales in the home sales were at a different LOT, we differences in Navneet’s selling market to serve as a viable basis for examined stages in the marketing activities chart indicate that there are calculating NV, we compared Navneet’s process and selling functions along the two LOTs in the home market: (1) LOT1 and Super Impex’s volume of home chain of distribution between the and (2) a combined LOT2, which is market sales of the foreign like product producer and the unaffiliated (or arm’s- comprised of Navneet’s reported LOT2 to the volume of their U.S. sales of the length) customers. If the comparison through LOT5. The selling activities in subject merchandise. Pursuant to market sales were at a different LOT and the combined LOT2 in the home market sections 773(a)(1)(B) and 773(a)(1)(C) of the differences affect price are comparable to the selling activities the Act, because Navneet had an comparability, as manifested in a in the LOT in the U.S. market. Due to aggregate volume of home market sales pattern of consistent price differences the proprietary nature of this issue, of the foreign like product that was between the sales on which NV is based please refer to Navneet’s Preliminary greater than five percent of its aggregate and comparison market sales at the LOT Calculation Memorandum for further volume of U.S. sales of the subject of the export transaction, we will make discussion, dated October 7, 2010 merchandise, we determined that the an LOT adjustment under section (Preliminary Calculation home market was viable. Super Impex 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. Memorandum). reported that it made no sales to the Navneet reported that it has five In the U.S. market, Navneet reported home market and that its sales to third channels of distribution or five LOTs in that its sales were made through one countries were not viable. See Super the home market (i.e., distributors with channel of distribution to one customer Impex’s Section A Response, dated merchandising—full service; category, and therefore, at one LOT. The March 9, 2010, at A–3 and A–4. distributors with no merchandising— Department has determined that Therefore, for Super Impex, we used limited service; retail chain stores; Navneet’s home market sales in the constructed value (CV) as the basis for institutional end-users who purchase combined LOT2 are at the same stage of calculating NV, in accordance with materials for their own use; and schools marketing as the U.S. sales. We only section 773(a)(4) of the Act. that purchase customized products for compared home market sales in the Section 773(a)(1)(C)(i) of the Act their own use and for selling to combined LOT2 to the U.S. sales and applies to the Department’s students). determined that no LOT adjustment for determination of NV if the foreign like Section 351.412(c)(2) of the Navneet’s sales to the United States was product is not sold (or offered for sale) Department’s regulations provides that necessary. for consumption in the exporting the Department will determine that Although Navneet reported that it has country. When sales in the home market sales are made at different LOTs if they are not viable, section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii) of are made at different marketing stages five channels of distribution or five the Act provides that sales to a (or their equivalent). Substantial LOTs in the home market, Navneet particular third country market may be differences in selling activities are a states that without intending to waive utilized if: (1) The prices in such market necessary, but not a sufficient, condition its right to make further argument on are representative; (2) the aggregate for determining that there is a difference this point, it has acceded to the quantity of the foreign like product sold in the stage of marketing. Some overlap Department’s level of trade definitions by the producer or exporter in the third in selling activities will not preclude a in reporting its sales in this review. See country market is five percent or more determination that sales are at different Navneet’s Questionnaire Response, of the aggregate quantity of the subject stages of marketing. dated April 6, 2010, at page B–39. Thus, merchandise sold in or to the United Our analysis of the selling activities Navneet, in its home market database States; and (3) the Department does not for Navneet shows that Navneet reported two LOTs: LOT1 sales to determine that a particular market performs similar selling activities for distributors with full-service situation in the third country market different customer categories, although downstream merchandising, and a prevents a proper comparison with the some of the activities were at different combined LOT2, which consists of sales U.S. price. levels of intensity. Moreover, some made through channels two through selling activities within the claimed five. Level of Trade LOT1 are at a higher level of intensity Cost of Production Analysis In accordance with section than the same selling activities in the 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent claimed LOT2 through LOT5. In We are investigating Navneet’s costs practicable, the Department determines addition, there is overlap among the because during the most recently NV based on sales in the comparison channels of distribution for the different completed segment of the proceeding in market at the same level of trade (LOT) customer categories between LOT1 and which Navneet participated (the Second as the EP or CEP transactions. In order LOT2 through LOT5 customers. Administrative Review), the Department to perform the LOT analysis, we Although there are differences in found and disregarded sales that failed examine the selling functions provided intensity of selling activities among the cost test. to different customer categories to LOT2 through LOT5 customers, this, in In accordance with section 773(b)(3) evaluate the LOT in a particular market. and of itself, does not show a substantial of the Act, we calculated a weighted- Specifically, we compare the selling difference in selling activities that average cost of production (COP) based functions performed for home market would form the basis for finding distinct on the sum of the cost of materials and sales with those performed with respect LOTs. See, Certain Lined Paper fabrication for the foreign like product, to the EP or CEP transactions, after Products From India: Notice of plus amounts for selling, general and deductions for economic activities Preliminary Results of Antidumping 2 See Certain Lined Paper Products from India: occurring in the United States, pursuant Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty to section 772(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 51558, 51563 (October 7, 2009) Administrative Review, 75 FR 7563 (February 22, 351.412, to determine if the home (Preliminary Results), unchanged in the 2010).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64992 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

administrative expenses (SG&A) and Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the on CV. In accordance with section packing expenses. For these preliminary Act, where less than 20 percent of a 773(e) of the Act, we calculated CV results, we have adjusted Navneet’s respondent’s sales of a given product based on the sum of Super Impex’s cost reported cost of manufacturing to were at prices less than the COP, we did of materials and fabrication for the include common production costs not not disregard any below-cost sales of foreign like product, plus amounts for allocated to divisions and other that product because we determined SG&A, profit, and U.S. packing costs. common production costs of the that the below-cost sales were not made We calculated the cost of materials and stationery division not allocated to in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ fabrication based on the CV information subdivisions. We tested and identified below-cost provided by Super Impex in its section Consistent with the Department’s home market sales for Navneet. We D response. Because Super Impex does methodology in the second disregarded individual below-cost sales not have Indian sales of the foreign like administrative review, we calculated the of a given product and used the product or third country sales, the COP and constructed value (CV) of all remaining sales as the basis for Department does not have comparison CONNUMs sold in the home market to determining NV, in accordance with market selling expenses or profit to use exclude the central excise tax on raw section 773(b)(1) of the Act. See in its calculations, as directed by section material inputs. See Preliminary Results Preliminary Calculation Memorandum. 773(e) of the Act. As an alternative, the at 51564, unchanged in the final results Calculation of Normal Value Based on Department has used as selling expenses of the Second Administrative Review. Comparison Market Prices and profit for Super Impex, data from the March 31, 2009 financial statements Test of Comparison Market Prices For Navneet, we based home market of two Indian companies which are prices on packed prices to unaffiliated As required under section 773(b)(2) of already on the records: Blue Bird and purchasers in India. Where appropriate, Navneet. We found that both Blue Bird the Act, we compared the weighted- in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B) average COP to the per-unit price of the and Navneet produce and sell of the Act, we deducted from the merchandise within the same general comparison market sales of the foreign starting price inland freight. Pursuant to like product, to determine whether category of products as the foreign like 19 CFR 351.401(c), we deducted rebates product in the Indian market.3 For these sales were made at prices below and discounts. In accordance with the COP within an extended period of purposes of these preliminary results, sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act, we calculated the selling expenses and time in substantial quantities, and we added U.S. packing costs and whether such prices were sufficient to profit for Super Impex based on the deducted comparison market packing, simple average ratios of the respective permit the recovery of all costs within respectively. selling expenses and profit of Blue Bird a reasonable period of time. We In addition, for comparisons made to and Navneet. See Memorandum from determined the net comparison market EP sales, we made adjustments for Cindy Robinson to Melissa Skinner, prices for the below-cost test by differences in circumstances of sale Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, subtracting from the gross unit price any (COS) pursuant to section Cost of Production and Constructed applicable movement charges, 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR Value Calculation Adjustments for the discounts, rebates, direct and indirect 351.410(b) by deducting direct selling Preliminary Results—Super Impex selling expenses and packing expenses expenses incurred for home market Paper Limited, dated October 7, 2010 which were excluded from COP for sales (credit expense) and adding U.S. (COP/CV Memo). comparison purposes. direct selling expenses (i.e., credit Currency Conversion Results of COP Test directly linked to sales transactions). In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) We made currency conversions into Pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the of the Act, we based NV on LOT2 sales. U.S. dollars in accordance with section Act, we may disregard below-COP sales See the ‘‘Level of Trade’’ section above. 773A(a) of the Act based on exchange in the determination of NV if these sales Finally, consistent with section rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. have been made within an extended 773(a)(6)(B)(iii) of the Act, we made an sales, as certified by the Federal Reserve period of time in substantial quantities adjustment for central excise taxes that Bank. and were not at prices which permit Navneet paid on raw material inputs Non-Selected Rate recovery of all costs within a reasonable used to produce merchandise that was period of time. Where 20 percent or sold in the home market that were not The statute and the Department’s more of a respondent’s sales of a given paid on the same inputs used to regulations do not directly address the product during the POR were at prices produce merchandise that was exported establishment of rates to be applied to less than the COP for at least six months from India. Under Indian law, Navneet companies not selected for individual of the POR, we determined that sales of was prohibited from charging this excise examination where the Department that model were made in ’’substantial tax on sales of school supplies. In limited its examination in an quantities’’ within an extended period of addition, the excise tax that Navneet administrative review pursuant to time, in accordance with sections paid on inputs into school supplies was section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. However, 773(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the Act. Where not refunded and was not otherwise the Department normally determines the prices of a respondent’s sales of a given recovered by Navneet. Therefore, we rates for non-selected companies in product were below the per-unit COP at find the tax is included in the price and the time of sale and below the weighted- adjustment is warranted. For products 3 On July 19, 2010, petitioner also placed on average per-unit costs for the POR, we record the March 31, 2009, financial statements of other than school supplies, Navneet Cello Writing Instruments & Containers Private determined that sales were not at prices reported home market selling prices net Limited (Cello). However, we found that Cello is which would permit recovery of all of the excise tax. not a producer and seller of merchandise within the costs within a reasonable period of time, same general category of products as the foreign like in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) Calculation of Normal Value Based on product in the Indian market. Therefore, for Constructed Value purposes of these preliminary results, we have not of the Act. In such cases, we disregarded included Cello’s data in the derivation of selling the below-cost sales in accordance with In accordance with section 773(a)(4) and profit ratios for Super Impex. See COP/CV section 773(b)(1) of the Act. of the Act, we based Super Impex’s NV Memo.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64993

reviews in a manner that is consistent In this review, Super Impex is the the ‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section, with section 735(c)(5) of the Act. only respondent for which the below. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs Department has calculated a company- the Department to calculate an all-others specific rate that is not zero, de minimis, Preliminary Results of the Review rate using the weighted average of the or based on total facts available. We preliminarily determine that dumping margins established for the Therefore, for purposes of these weighted-average dumping margins producers/exporters individually preliminary results, the 29 remaining exist for the following respondents for examined, excluding any zero or de non-selected companies subject to this the period September 1, 2008, through minimis margins or any margins based review will receive the rate calculated August 31, 2009, as follows: on total facts available. for Super Impex in this review. See also

Weighted Manufacturer/exporter average margin (percent)

Navneet Publications (India) Ltd ...... De minimis. Super Impex ...... 2.12.

Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the 29 Non-Selected Companies Subject to This Review:

Weighted average Manufacturer/exporter margin (percent)

Abhinav Paper Products Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 American Scholar, Inc. and/or I–Scholar ...... 2.12 Ampoules & Vials Mfg. Co. Ltd ...... 2.12 Bafna Exports ...... 2.12 Cello International Pvt. Ltd. (M/S Cello Paper Products) ...... 2.12 Corporate Stationary Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 Creative Divya ...... 2.12 D.D International ...... 2.12 Exmart International Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 Fatechand Mahendrakumar ...... 2.12 FFI International ...... 2.12 Freight India Logistics Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 International Greetings Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 Lodha Offset Limited ...... 2.12 Magic International ...... 2.12 Marigold ExIm Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 Marisa International ...... 2.12 Paperwise Inc ...... 2.12 Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd ...... 2.12 Premier Exports ...... 2.12 Riddhi Enterprises ...... 2.12 SAB International ...... 2.12 Sar Transport Systems ...... 2.12 Seet Kamal International ...... 2.12 Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Eternity Int’l Freight, forwarder on behalf of Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd.) ...... 2.12 Sonal Printers Pvt Ltd ...... 2.12 Swati Growth Funds Ltd ...... 2.12 V & M ...... 2.12 Yash Laminates ...... 2.12

Public Comment 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties submitting An interested party may request a arguments in this proceeding are hearing within 30 days of publication of The Department will disclose requested to submit with the argument: these preliminary results. See 19 CFR calculations performed within five days (1) A statement of the issue, (2) a brief 351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested, of the date of publication of this notice summary of the argument, and (3) a ordinarily will be held two days after to the parties to this proceeding in table of authorities, in accordance with the due date of the rebuttal briefs in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 19 CFR 351.309(d)(2). Further, parties accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1). Interested parties may submit case briefs submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs The Department will issue the final no later than 30 days after the date of are requested to provide the Department results of this administrative review, publication of these preliminary results with an additional electronic copy of which will include the results of its of review. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii). the public version of any such analysis of issues raised in any such Rebuttal briefs are limited to issues comments on a computer diskette. Case raised in the case briefs and may be and rebuttal briefs must be served on comments, or at a hearing, if requested, filed no later than five days after the interested parties in accordance with 19 within 120 days of publication of these time limit for filing the case briefs. See CFR 351.303(f). preliminary results, unless extended.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64994 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, and calculated a cash deposit rate based on published in accordance with sections 19 CFR 351.213(h). the simple average of the cash deposit 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 rates calculated for the companies CFR 351.221(b)(4). Assessment Rate selected for individual review. In this Upon completion of the final results instance, there is only one non-AFA rate Dated: October 7, 2010. of this administrative review, the which we applied. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Department shall determine, and CBP The following deposit rates will be shall assess, antidumping duties on all Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import effective upon publication of the final Administration. appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR results of this administrative review for [FR Doc. 2010–26191 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 351.212(b)(1), the Department will all shipments of CLPP from India calculate importer-specific assessment entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P rates for each respondent based on the for consumption on or after the ratio of the total amount of antidumping publication date, as provided by section DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE duties calculated for the examined sales 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash to the total entered value of those sales. deposit rate for companies subject to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Where the respondent did not report the this review will be the rate established Administration entered value for U.S. sales, we have in the final results of this review, except calculated importer-specific assessment if the rate is less than 0.5 percent and, RIN 0648–XZ75 rates for the merchandise in question by therefore, de minimis, no cash deposit aggregating the dumping margins will be required; (2) for previously Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; calculated for all U.S. sales to each reviewed or investigated companies not Advisory Panel importer and dividing this amount by listed above, the cash deposit rate will the total quantity of those sales. To continue to be the company-specific rate AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries determine whether the duty assessment published for the most recent final Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and rates were de minimis, in accordance results for a review in which that Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR manufacturer or exporter participated; Commerce. 351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer- (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered ACTION: specific ad valorem rates based on the Notice; solicitation of in this review, a prior review, or the nominations. estimated entered value. Where the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) assessment rate is above de minimis, we investigation, but the manufacturer is, SUMMARY: NMFS solicits nominations will instruct CBP to assess duties on all the cash deposit rate will be the rate for the Atlantic Highly Migratory entries of subject merchandise by that established for the most recent final Species (HMS) Advisory Panel (AP). importer. Pursuant to 19 CFR results for the manufacturer of the NMFS consults with and considers the 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to merchandise; and (4) if neither the comments and views of the HMS AP liquidate without regard to antidumping exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm when preparing and implementing duties any entries for which the covered in this or any previous review Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) or assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less conducted by the Department, the cash FMP amendments for Atlantic tunas, than 0.50 percent). The Department deposit rate will be 3.91 percent, the all- swordfish, sharks, and billfish. intends to issue assessment instructions others rate established in the LTFV Nominations are being sought to fill directly to CBP 15 days after publication investigation. See Lined Paper Orders.4 one-third (11) of the seats on the HMS of the final results of this review. AP for a 3-year appointment. The Department clarified its These cash deposit requirements, when Individuals with definable interests in ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on imposed, shall remain in effect until the recreational and commercial fishing May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and further notice. and related industries, environmental Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Notification to Importers community, academia, and non- Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 This notice also serves as a governmental organizations will be FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This preliminary reminder to importers of considered for membership in the HMS clarification will apply to entries of their responsibility under 19 CFR AP. subject merchandise during the POR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding produced by the respondents subject to DATES: Nominations must be received the reimbursement of antidumping this review for which the reviewed on or before November 22, 2010. duties prior to liquidation of the companies did not know that the ADDRESSES: relevant entries during this review You may submit merchandise which it sold to an period. Failure to comply with this nominations and requests for the intermediary (e.g. a reseller, trading requirement could result in the Advisory Panel Statement of company, or exporter) was destined for Secretary’s presumption that Organization, Practices, and Procedures the United States. In such instances, we reimbursement of antidumping duties by any of the following methods: will instruct CBP to liquidate • occurred and the subsequent assessment E-mail: unreviewed entries at the all-others rate of double antidumping duties. [email protected]. if there is no rate for the intermediary These preliminary results of Include in the subject line the following involved in the transaction. For a full administrative review are issued and identifier: ‘‘HMS AP Nominations.’’ discussion of this clarification, see id. • Mail: Brian Parker, Highly Cash Deposit Requirements 4 See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Migratory Species Management Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Lined Paper Division, NMFS, 1315 East-West To calculate the cash deposit rate for Products from the People’s Republic of China; Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Navneet, we divided its total dumping Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Lined • Fax: 301–713–1917. margin by the total net value of its sales Paper Products from India, Indonesia and the during the review period. For the People’s Republic of China; and Notice of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper Craig Cockrell at (301) 713–2347 x128. responsive companies which were not Products from India and Indonesia, 71 FR 56949 selected for individual review, we have (September 28, 2006) (Lined Paper Orders). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64995

Introduction interest in HMS or in particular species shown in Table 1, consists of 12 of sharks, swordfish, tunas, or billfish; members representing commercial The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 2. A statement of background and/or interests, 12 members representing Conservation and Management Act qualifications; recreational interests, 4 members (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 3. A written commitment that the representing environmental interests, 4 et seq., as amended by the Sustainable applicant or nominee shall actively academic representatives, and 1 Fisheries Act, Public Law 104–297, participate in good faith in the meetings International Commission for the provided for the establishment of and tasks of the HMS AP; and Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) Advisory Panels to assist in the 4. A list of outreach resources that the Advisory Committee Chairperson. Each collection and evaluation of information applicant has at his/her disposal to HMS AP member serves a three-year relevant to the development of any communicate HMS issues to various term with approximately one-third (11) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) or interest groups. of the total number of seats (33) expiring FMP amendment. The HMS AP has on December 31 of each year. NMFS consulted with NMFS on the HMS FMP Tenure for the HMS AP seeks to fill 5 commercial, 4 (April 1999), Amendment 1 to the Member tenure will be for 3 years (36 recreational, and 2 environmental Billfish FMP (April 1999), Amendment months), with approximately one-third vacancies by December 31, 2010. NMFS 1 to the HMS FMP (November 2003), the of the members’ terms expiring on will seek to fill vacancies based Consolidated HMS FMP (July 2006), and December 31 of each year. Nominations primarily on maintaining the current Amendments 1, 2, and 3 to the are sought for terms beginning January representation from each of the sectors, Consolidated HMS FMP (April 2008, 2011 and expiring December 2013. and secondarily by species expertise September 2008, and February 2009, and/or representation from the regions respectively). B. Participants (Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, South Procedures and Guidelines Nominations for the HMS AP will be Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and accepted to allow representation from Caribbean). Table 1 includes the current A. Nomination Procedures for commercial and recreational fishing representation on the HMS AP by sector Appointments to the Advisory Panel interests, the scientific community, and and species and terms that are expiring the conservation community who are are identified in bold. It does not Nomination packages should include: knowledgeable about Atlantic HMS necessarily indicate that NMFS will 1. The name of the applicant or and/or Atlantic HMS fisheries. Current only consider persons who have nominee and a description of his/her representation on the HMS AP, as expertise in the species that are listed.

TABLE 1—CURRENT EXPIRING REPRESENTATION ON THE HMS AP BY SECTOR AND SPECIES. TERMS THAT ARE EXPIRING ARE IN BOLD

Sector Species Date appointed Date term expires

Academic ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Academic ...... Tuna ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Academic ...... Shark ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Academic ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Commercial ...... Swordfish/Tuna ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Commercial ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Commercial ...... Tuna ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Commercial ...... Swordfish ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Commercial ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Commercial ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Commercial ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Commercial ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Commercial ...... Tuna ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Commercial ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Commercial ...... Shark ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Commercial ...... Swordfish/Tuna ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Environmental ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Environmental ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Environmental ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Environmental ...... Shark ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Recreational ...... Billfish ...... 1/1/2008 12/31/2010 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Recreational ...... Tuna ...... 1/1/2009 12/31/2011 Recreational ...... Swordfish ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Recreational ...... Billfish ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 Recreational ...... HMS ...... 1/1/2010 12/31/2012 ICCAT Chair ...... HMS ......

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64996 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Each sector must be adequately DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Background represented, and the intent is to have a group that, as a whole, reflects an National Oceanic and Atmospheric Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 appropriate and equitable balance and Administration U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) directs the mix of interests given the Secretary of Commerce to authorize, RIN 0648–XZ60 upon request, the incidental, but not responsibilities of the HMS AP. Criteria intentional, taking of small numbers of for membership include one or more of Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to marine mammals of a species or the following: (1) Experience in the Specified Activities; Marine population stock, by United States HMS recreational fishing industry; (2) Geophysical Survey in the Eastern citizens who engage in a specified experience in the HMS commercial Tropical Pacific Ocean, October Through November 2010 activity (other than commercial fishing) fishing industry; (3) experience in within a specified geographical region if fishery-related industries (e.g., marinas, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries certain findings are made and, if the bait and tackle shops); (4) experience in Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and taking is limited to harassment, a notice the scientific community working with Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), of a proposed authorization is provided HMS; and/or (5) representation of a Commerce. to the public for review. private, non-governmental, regional, ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental Authorization for incidental taking of national, or international organization take authorization. small numbers of marine mammals shall representing marine fisheries; or be granted if NMFS finds that the taking environmental, governmental, or SUMMARY: In accordance with the will have a negligible impact on the academic interests dealing with HMS. Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) regulations, notification is species or stock(s), and will not have an Five additional members on the HMS hereby given that NMFS has issued an unmitigable adverse impact on the AP include one member representing Incidental Harassment Authorization availability of the species or stock(s) for each of the following Councils: New (IHA) to Scripps Institution of subsistence uses. The authorization England Fishery Management Council, Oceanography (SIO), a part of the must set forth the permissible methods the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management University of California, to take small of taking, other means of effecting the Council, the South Atlantic Fishery numbers of marine mammals, by least practicable adverse impact on the Management Council, the Gulf of harassment, incidental to conducting a species or stock and its habitat, and Mexico Fishery Management Council, marine geophysical survey in the monitoring and reporting of such and the Caribbean Fishery Management eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP), takings. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible Council. The HMS AP also includes 22 October through November, 2010. impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘*** an ex-officio participants: 20 DATES: Effective October 19, 2010, impact resulting from the specified representatives of the coastal states and through November 30, 2010. activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely two representatives of the interstate ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and to, adversely affect the species or stock commissions (the Atlantic States Marine application are available by writing to P. through effects on annual rates of Fisheries Commission and the Gulf Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, recruitment or survival.’’ States Marine Fisheries Commission). Conservation and Education Division, NMFS will provide the necessary Office of Protected Resources, National Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA administrative support, including Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East- established an expedited process by technical assistance, for the HMS AP. West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization to However, NMFS will not compensate or by telephoning the contacts listed incidentally take small numbers of participants with monetary support of here. A copy of the application marine mammals by harassment. any kind. Depending on availability of containing a list of the references used in this document may be obtained by Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA funds, members may be reimbursed for establishes a 45-day time limit for travel costs related to the HMS AP writing to the above address, telephoning the contact listed here (see NMFS’ review of an application meetings. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or followed by a 30-day public notice and C. Meeting Schedule visiting the Internet at: http:// comment period on any proposed www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ authorizations for the incidental Meetings of the HMS AP will be held incidental.htm#applications. The harassment of small numbers of marine as frequently as necessary but are following associated documents are also mammals. Within 45 days of the close routinely held twice each year in the available at the same Internet address: of the public comment period, NMFS spring and fall. The meetings may be SIO’s application, the Environmental must either issue or deny the held in conjunction with public Assessment (EA) prepared by NMFS, authorization. hearings. and the finding of no significant impact Except with respect to certain Dated: October 15, 2010. (FONSI). The NMFS Biological Opinion activities not pertinent here, the MMPA will be available online at: http:// ‘‘ ’’ Emily H. Menashes, defines harassment as: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/ Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance Acting Director, Office of Sustainable opinions.htm. Documents cited in this which (i) has the potential to injure a marine Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. notice may be viewed, by appointment, mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [FR Doc. 2010–26478 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] during regular business hours, at the [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential BILLING CODE 3510–22–P aforementioned address. to disturb a marine mammal or marine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben mammal stock in the wild by causing Laws or Candace Nachman, Office of disruption of behavioral patterns, including, Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713– but not limited to, migration, breathing, 2289. nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [Level B harassment].

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64997

Summary of Request of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, streamer was referenced in error; 40 and NMFS received an application on Ecuador, and Peru, in the high seas and 16 channel streamers will be utilized as May 28, 2010 from SIO for the taking, within the Exclusive Economic Zones discussed in this document. • Several errors were corrected with by harassment, of marine mammals, (EEZs) of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, regard to exposure estimates and the incidental to conducting a marine and Ecuador. At each of four sites (see resulting take authorization (see geophysical survey in the ETP. SIO, Figure 1 of SIO’s application), seismic Estimated Take of Marine Mammals by with research funding from the U.S. operations will be conducted for Incidental Harassment and Table 2 of National Science Foundation (NSF), approximately two days, and each water sampling and coring station will be this document). plans to conduct a marine seismic occupied for one to two days. SIO will Æ Take estimate for sperm whales survey in the ETP, from October through operate the Melville to deploy an airgun (Physeter macrocephalus) was November 2010. array and tow a hydrophone streamer to presented as 23 due to a calculation SIO plans to use one source vessel, complete the survey. Some minor error and has been revised to 22. the R/V Melville (Melville), with a deviation from these dates is possible, Æ Take estimate for striped dolphins seismic airgun array to conduct a depending on logistics and weather. (Stenella coeruleoalba) was presented as geophysical survey in the ETP. In Therefore, NMFS plans to issue an six, due to the erroneous use of Fraser’s addition to the operations of the seismic authorization that extends to November dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei) density airgun array, SIO intends to operate a 30, 2010. estimates. Take estimate, as well as multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a The Melville will deploy a pair of low- density estimate, for striped dolphin has sub-bottom profiler (SBP) continuously energy generator-injector (GI) airguns as been corrected to 192. throughout the survey. The purpose of an energy source at a depth of 2 m (each Æ Exposure estimates and take this project is to better understand how with a discharge volume of 45 in 3), plus authorization numbers have been marine sediments record paleo- either of two towed hydrophone corrected for several species by oceanographic information. streamers, one 725 m (2,378.6 ft) long rounding up rather than down. As there Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased with 40 channels, and the other 350 m can be no portion of an individual in underwater sound) generated during the (1,148.3 ft) long with 16 channels. estimating take, NMFS has rounded up operation of the seismic airgun array Hydrophone streamers are towed at in all cases where exposure estimates may have the potential to cause marine adjustable depth to afford best reception have some non-negligible portion of a mammals in the survey area to be of returning seismic signals, depending whole (see Table 2 in this document). behaviorally disturbed in a manner that upon surface conditions, but are Comments and Responses NMFS considers to be Level B typically towed at approximately 10 m. harassment. This is the principal means The energy to the GI airgun is A notice of receipt of the SIO of marine mammal taking associated compressed air supplied by compressors application and proposed IHA was with these activities and SIO has onboard the source vessel. As the GI published in the Federal Register on requested an authorization for the airgun is towed along the survey lines, September 3, 2010 (75 FR 54095). incidental take, by Level B harassment the receiving systems will receive the During the comment period, NMFS only, of up to 21 species of marine returning acoustic signals. The study received comments from the Marine mammals. These species include: (e.g., equipment testing, startup, line Mammal Commission (Commission). Bryde’s whale; blue whale; sperm changes, repeat coverage of any areas) The public comments can be found whale; humpback whale; Cuvier’s will take place in waters deeper than online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ beaked whale; Blainville’s beaked 1,000 m (3,280 ft). All planned permits/incidental.htm. Following are whale; pygmy beaked whale; gingko- geophysical data acquisition activities their comments and NMFS’ responses. toothed beaked whale; rough-toothed will be conducted by SIO with on-board Comment 1: The Commission dolphin; bottlenose dolphin; assistance by the scientists who have recommends that NMFS require the pantropical spotted dolphin; spinner proposed the study. The Chief Scientist applicant to use location-specific dolphin; striped dolphin; Fraser’s is Dr. Franco Marcantonio of Texas environmental parameters to re-estimate dolphin; short-beaked common dolphin; A&M University. The vessel will be self- safety zones and then recalculate Risso’s dolphin; melon-headed whale; contained, and the crew will live aboard associated exposures. The Commission pygmy killer whale; false killer whale; the vessel for the entire cruise. further suggests that the applicant killer whale; and short-finned pilot NMFS outlined the purpose of the should be required to use in-situ whale. Blainville’s beaked whale, program in a previous notice for the measurements to verify and, if need be, pygmy beaked whale, and gingko- proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September refine the safety zones prior to or at the toothed beaked whale are hereafter 3, 2010). The activities to be conducted beginning of the survey, and that the grouped as Mesoplodon sp., as these have not changed between the proposed applicant should be required to species are expected to be encountered IHA notice and this final notice determine actual exposures based on only infrequently and are difficult to announcing the issuance of the IHA. For refined safety zones, sightability, and distinguish from one another. a more detailed description of the relevant detection functions. authorized action, including vessel and Response: NMFS is confident in the Description of the Specified Activity acoustic source specifications, the peer-reviewed results of the Lamont- The Melville is expected to depart reader should refer to the Doherty Earth Observatory seismic Puntarenas, Costa Rica, on October 19, aforementioned proposed IHA notice. equipment calibration studies which, 2010, and spend approximately fifteen Several errors found in the notice for although viewed as conservative, are days conducting seismic surveys, ten the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, used to determine cruise-specific days collecting water and core samples, September 3, 2010) have been corrected exclusion zones and which factor into and approximately two days in transit, in this document. These errors are as exposure estimates. With the expected arriving at Arica, Chile, on November follows: low density of marine mammals, 14, 2010. The proposed survey will • The notice for proposed IHA combined with the remote, deep-water encompass the area from approximately referenced 40, 16, and 12 channel survey location, NMFS has determined 8° N–12° S and 80–91° W, off the coasts hydrophone streamers. The 12 channel that the exclusion zones identified in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 64998 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

the IHA are appropriate for the survey the vessel to operate without the need Also, seismic vessels are moving and that additional field measurement is for refueling and servicing. continuously (because of the long, not necessary at this time. While During the cruise, there will be towed array) and NMFS believes that exposures of marine mammals to significant amounts of transit time pre- unless the animal submerges and acoustic stimuli are difficult to estimate, and post-survey during which PSOs will follows at the speed of the vessel (highly NMFS is confident that the levels of be on watch (e.g., prior to and after the unlikely, especially when considering take authorized herein are estimated seismic portions of the survey). The that a significant part of their based upon the best available scientific collection of this observational data by movements is vertical [deep-diving]), information and estimation PSOs may provide meaningful baseline the vessel will be far beyond the length methodology. The safety zones used to data on marine mammals, but it is of the safety radii within 30 min, and estimate exposure are appropriate and unlikely that the information would therefore it will be safe to resume sufficient. result in any statistically robust acquisition. Finally, due to the nature of Comment 2: The Commission conclusions for this particular seismic the seismic source to be used during the recommends that NMFS provide survey. As the monitoring program is survey, power-down (as mentioned in additional justification for its currently devised, one PSO (at the Commission’s comment) will not be preliminary determination that the minimum) will be on watch not only used as a mitigation measure. planned monitoring program will be during all daylight airgun operations, or In addition, mitigation measures are sufficient to detect, with a high level of start-up of airguns at any time, but at all required to be ‘‘practicable.’’ NMFS confidence, all marine mammals within times when effective observation is believes that the framework for visual or entering the identified safety zones. possible. Any further revisions of study monitoring will (1) be effective at Response: As discussed in the design are impractical. spotting almost all species for which proposed rule, combined with the fact In addition, SIO is not responsible for take is requested; and (2) that imposing that a portion of marine mammals the study design. Through a cooperative additional requirements, such as those would be expected to avoid exposure to agreement with the NSF, SIO is the suggested by the Commission, would the higher levels of sound present operator of the Melville, which hosts the not meaningfully increase the within the designated safety zone, as field research program. The study is effectiveness of observing marine well as the comparatively small size of designed by the Principal Investigator mammals approaching or entering the the safety zone, NMFS believes that the and is submitted to NSF as a proposal exclusion zones. The Commission’s planned monitoring program will be for funding consideration and recommendation would cause sufficient to, with reasonable certainty, subsequently reviewed by a merit additional impact on the science minimize the exposure of marine review panel. This study was selected mission, limiting acquisition mammals to sound within the identified opportunity without dramatically exclusion zones (EZ). This monitoring, based on its scientific merits, and increasing overall effectiveness of visual along with the required mitigation extension or modification of the field monitoring. measures, will help ensure the component would require scientific authorized taking effects the least justification and NSF approval and Comment 5: The Commission practicable adverse impact on the potentially further merit review. recommends that NMFS continue to affected species or stocks and will have Comment 4: The Commission require ramp-up and power-down a negligible impact on the affected recommends that NMFS extend the procedures as a mitigation measure species or stocks. Until proven monitoring period to at least one hour pending the outcome of a meeting to technological advances are made, before initiation of seismic activities discuss these procedures. nighttime mitigation measures during and at least one hour before the Response: NMFS will continue to operations include combinations of the resumption of airgun activities after a require ramp-up and power-down use of protected species observers power-down because of a marine procedures as mitigation measures, (PSOs) and night vision devices. In the mammal sighting within a safety zone. when applicable, unless or until these event of a complete shut-down of the Response: As the Commission points measures are proven to be ineffective or airgun array, for mitigation or repairs, out, several species of deep-diving other measures are proven to be more airgun operations will be suspended cetaceans are capable of remaining effective. until nautical twilight-dawn (when underwater for more than 30 minutes, Comment 6: The Commission PSOs are able to clear the EZ). Airgun however, for the following reasons recommends that NMFS not include operations will not begin until the entire NMFS believes that 30 minutes is an detailed information and analyses for EZ radius is visible for at least 30 adequate length for the monitoring species that are not expected to be in the minutes. period prior to the start-up of airguns: proposed survey area in future Federal Comment 3: The Commission (1) In most cases PSOs are making Register notices. recommends that NMFS propose to SIO observations during times when seismic Response: NMFS agrees that detailed that it revise its study design to include sources are not being operated and will information and analyses for species collection of meaningful baseline data actually be observing prior to the 30 min that are not expected to be in the on the distribution and behavior of observation period anyway, (2) the proposed survey area should not be marine mammals. majority of the species that may be included in Federal Register notices. Response: The purpose of this cruise exposed do not stay underwater more NMFS considers the information is for marine geophysical research, not than 30 minutes, and (3) if deep-diving included in the Federal Register notice to conduct a dedicated marine mammal individuals happened to be in the area of proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, research survey. Extending or altering in the short time immediately prior to September 3, 2010) in this case to be the survey is not practicable from either the pre-start-up monitoring and if an necessary justification for an operational or research standpoint animal’s maximum underwater time is determinations to not authorize take for for the applicant. Due to the remote 45 min, there is only a one in three certain species. location of the survey and the length of chance that the last random surfacing In closing, NMFS is planning to meet time needed to conduct the requested would be prior to the beginning of the with the Commission to further discuss research, there may be little time left for required 30 min monitoring period. the broad issues raised in their

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64999

comments, which relate to more than auditory physical effects. Additional on best practices recommended in just the IHA contemplated here. information on the behavioral reactions Richardson et al. (1995), Pierson et al. (or lack thereof) by all types of marine (1998), and Weir and Dolman (2007). Description of the Marine Mammals in mammals to seismic vessels can be The measures are described in detail the Area of the Specified Activity found in SIO’s application and NMFS’ below. Forty-three species of marine EA. The notice of the proposed IHA also Mitigation measures to be mammals, including 29 odontocetes, 7 included a discussion of the potential implemented by SIO during the survey mysticetes, 6 pinnipeds, and the marine effects of the multibeam echosounder include (1) visual monitoring by sea otter (Enhydra lutris), are known to (MBES) and the sub-bottom profiler protected species observers (discussed occur in the ETP. Of these, 21 cetacean (SBP). Because of the shape of the later in this document), (2) species are likely to occur in the beams of these sources and their power, establishment of an exclusion zone (EZ), proposed survey areas in the ETP during NMFS believes it unlikely that marine (3) speed or course alteration, provided October-November (see Table 2 in this mammals will be exposed to either the that doing so will not compromise document), and are considered further MBES or the SBP at levels at or above operational safety requirements, (4) GI here. Three of these cetacean species are those likely to cause harassment. airgun shut down procedures, and (5) listed under the Endangered Species Act Further, NMFS believes that the brief ramp-up procedures. Although power- (ESA) as Endangered: The sperm exposure of cetaceans to a few signals down procedures are often standard (Physeter macrocephalus), humpback from the multi-beam bathymetric sonar operating practice for seismic surveys, (Megaptera novaeangliae), and blue system is not likely to result in the they will not be used here because (Balaenoptera musculus) whales. harassment of marine mammals. powering down from two airguns to one NMFS has presented a more detailed Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal airgun would make only a small discussion of the status of these stocks Habitat difference in the 180-dB safety radius. and their occurrence in the ETP in the The difference is not enough to allow notice of the proposed IHA (75 FR A detailed discussion of the potential continued one-airgun operations if a 54095, September 3, 2010). effects of this action on marine mammal mammal came within the safety radius habitat, including physiological and for two airguns. Potential Effects on Marine Mammals behavioral effects on marine fish and Exclusion Zones—As discussed invertebrates was included in the Summary of Potential Effects of Airgun previously in this document, NMFS has proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September Sounds determined that for acoustic effects, 3, 2010). Based on the discussion in the using acoustic thresholds in Level B harassment of cetaceans has proposed IHA notice and the nature of combination with corresponding safety the potential to occur during the seismic the activities (limited duration), the radii is an effective way to consistently survey due to acoustic stimuli caused by authorized operations are not expected apply measures to avoid or minimize the firing of airguns, which introduces to result in any permanent impact on the impacts of an action. Thresholds are sound into the marine environment. The habitats used by marine mammals, used to establish a mitigation shut- effects of sounds from airguns might including the food sources they use. The down, or exclusion, zone, i.e., if an include one or more of the following: main impact associated with the activity animal enters an area calculated to be tolerance, masking of natural sounds, will be temporarily elevated noise levels ensonified above the level of an behavioral disturbance, temporary or and the associated direct effects on established threshold, a sound source is permanent hearing impairment, or non- marine mammals. auditory physical or physiological shut down. effects (Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon Mitigation As a matter of past practice and based et al., 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007; In order to issue an incidental take on the best available information at the Southall et al., 2007). Permanent authorization (ITA) under sections time regarding the effects of marine hearing impairment, in the unlikely 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA, sound, NMFS estimates that Level A event that it occurred, would constitute NMFS must, where applicable, set forth harassment from acoustic sources may injury, but temporary threshold shift the permissible methods of taking occur when cetaceans are exposed to (TTS) is not an injury (Southall et al., pursuant to such activity, and other levels above 180 dB re 1 μPa (rms) level. 2007). Although the possibility cannot means of effecting the least practicable NMFS also considers 160 dB re 1 μPa be entirely excluded, it is unlikely that adverse impact on such species or stock (rms) as the criterion for estimating the the project would result in any cases of and its habitat, paying particular onset of Level B harassment from temporary or permanent hearing attention to rookeries, mating grounds, acoustic sources producing impulse impairment, or any significant non- and areas of similar significance, and on sounds, as in this seismic survey. auditory physical or physiological the availability of such species or stock Empirical data concerning the 180– effects. Some behavioral disturbance is for taking for certain subsistence uses and 160–dB distances have been expected, but NMFS expects the (where relevant). acquired based on measurements during disturbance to be localized and short- Mitigation and monitoring measures the acoustic verification study term. to be implemented for the seismic conducted by L–DEO in the northern The notice of the proposed IHA (75 survey have been developed and refined Gulf of Mexico from May 27–June 3, FR 54095, September 3, 2010) included during previous SIO seismic studies and 2003 (Tolstoy et al., 2004). The a discussion of the effects of sounds associated EAs, IHA applications, and empirical data indicate that, for this from airguns on mysticetes and IHAs. The mitigation and monitoring survey, the assumed 180– and 160–dB odontocetes, including tolerance, measures described herein represent a radii are 40 m (131.2 ft) and 400 m masking, behavioral disturbance, combination of procedures required by (1,312.3 ft), respectively (see Table 1 in hearing impairment, and other non- past IHAs for other similar projects and this document).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65000 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

TABLE 1—PREDICTED DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS ≥190, 180 AND 160 DB RE 1 μPA (RMS) MIGHT BE RE- CEIVED FROM TWO 45 IN3 GI AIRGUNS THAT WILL BE USED DURING THE SEISMIC SURVEYS IN THE EASTERN TROP- ICAL PACIFIC OCEAN DURING OCTOBER–NOVEMBER 2010 [Distances are based on model results provided by L–DEO.]

Estimated Distances at Received Tow depth Levels (m) Source and volume (m) Water depth 180 dB 160 dB

Two GI airguns, 45 in3 each ...... 2 Deep (>1,000 m) 40 400

Speed or Course Alteration—If a monitor the exclusion zone, and, if Monitoring and Reporting marine mammal is detected outside the marine mammals are sighted, a shut- In order to issue an ITA for an EZ but is likely to enter it based on down will be implemented as though activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the relative movement of the vessel and the both GI airguns were operational. MMPA states that NMFS must set forth animal, and if safety and scientific If the complete EZ has not been ‘‘requirements pertaining to the objectives allow, the vessel speed and/ visible for at least 30 min prior to the monitoring and reporting of such or course will be adjusted to minimize start of operations in either daylight or taking.’’ The MMPA implementing the likelihood of the animal entering the nighttime, ramp-up will not commence. regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) EZ. In the event that safety and/or If one GI airgun has operated, ramp-up indicate that requests for IHAs must scientific objectives do not allow for to full power will be permissible at include the suggested means of alteration of speed and/or course as a night or in poor visibility on the accomplishing the necessary monitoring needed mitigation measure, shut-down assumption that marine mammals will and reporting that will result in procedures will still be utilized (see be alerted to the approaching seismic below). Major course and speed increased knowledge of the species and vessel by the sounds from the single GI of the level of taking or impacts on adjustments are often impractical when airgun and could move away if they towing long seismic streamers and large populations of marine mammals that are choose. A ramp-up from a shut-down expected to be present in the action source arrays but are possible in this may occur at night, but only when the case because only a small source and area. entire EZ is visible, and it has been SIO will sponsor marine mammal short streamers will be used. determined from the pre-ramp up watch Shut-down Procedures—If a marine monitoring during the present project, that the EZ is clear of marine mammals. in order to implement the mitigation mammal is detected by PSOs outside Ramp-up of the GI airguns will not be the EZ but is likely to enter the EZ, and measures that require real-time initiated if a marine mammal is sighted monitoring, and to satisfy the if the vessel’s speed and/or course within or near the applicable EZ during cannot be changed to avoid having the monitoring requirements of the IHA. day or night. SIO’s Monitoring Plan is described animal enter the EZ, the airgun array, NMFS has carefully evaluated the MBES, and SBP will be shut down below this section and was planned as applicant’s proposed mitigation a self-contained project independent of before the animal is within the EZ. measures in the context of ensuring that Likewise, if a marine mammal is already any other related monitoring projects NMFS prescribes the means of effecting that may be occurring simultaneously in within the EZ when first detected, the the least practicable impact on the airgun array, MBES, and SBP will be the same regions. SIO is prepared to affected marine mammal species and discuss coordination of its monitoring shut down immediately. Following a stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation shut down, seismic activity will not program with any related work that of potential measures included might be done by other groups insofar resume until the marine mammal has consideration of the following factors in cleared the EZ. The animal will be as this is practical. relation to one another: considered to have cleared the EZ if it • The manner in which, and the Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring (a) is visually observed to have left the degree to which, the successful EZ, or (b) has not been seen within the Three protected species observers implementation of the measure is EZ for 15 min in the case of small (PSOs) will be based aboard the seismic expected to minimize adverse impacts odontocetes, or has not been seen source vessel for the duration of the to marine mammals; cruise and will watch for marine within the EZ for 30 min in the case of • mysticetes and large odontocetes, The proven or likely efficacy of the mammals near the vessel during including sperm and beaked whales. specific measure to minimize adverse daytime airgun operations and during Ramp-up Procedures—A ramp-up impacts as planned; and start-up of airguns at any time. Watches • procedure will be followed when the GI The practicability of the measure will be conducted by at least one airguns begin operating after a specified for applicant implementation. observer 100% of the time during period without GI airgun operations. It Based on our evaluation of the seismic surveys in daylight hours. is proposed that, for the present cruise, applicant’s proposed measures, as well Daylight observation by at least one this period would be approximately 1– as other measures considered by NMFS, observer will continue during non- 2 min. This period is based on the 180– NMFS has preliminarily determined seismic periods, as long as weather dB radii for the GI airguns (see Table 1 that the proposed mitigation measures conditions make observations in this document) in relation to the provide the means of effecting the least meaningful, for comparison of sighting planned speed of the Melville while practicable impact on marine mammal rates and animal behavior during shooting. Ramp-up will begin with a species or stocks and their habitat, periods with vs. without airgun single GI airgun (45 in3). The second GI paying particular attention to rookeries, operations. PSOs will be appointed by airgun (45 in3) will be added after 5 mating grounds, and areas of similar SIO with NMFS concurrence after a min. During ramp up, the PSOs will significance. review of their qualifications.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65001

The Melville is a suitable platform for on watch of any suspected marine mammals in the area where the seismic marine mammal observations. The mammal sighting. If needed, the bridge study is conducted; and observer platform is located one deck will be contacted in order to maneuver • Data on the behavior and movement below and forward of the bridge (12.46 the ship to avoid interception with patterns of marine mammals seen at meters (40.88 ft) above the waterline), approaching marine mammals. times with and without seismic activity. affording a relatively unobstructed 180- PSO Data and Documentation A report will be submitted to NMFS degree forward view. Aft views can be within 90 days after the end of the obtained along the port and starboard PSOs will record data to estimate the cruise. The report will describe the decks. During daytime hours, the numbers of marine mammals exposed to operations that were conducted and observer(s) will scan the area various received sound levels and to sightings of marine mammals near the × systematically using reticulated 25 document reactions or lack thereof. Data operations. The report will be submitted × 150 big-eye binoculars and 7 50 hand- will be used to estimate numbers of to NMFS, providing full documentation held binoculars to determine bearing animals potentially ‘‘taken’’ by of methods, results, and interpretation and distance of sightings. A clinometer harassment (as defined in the MMPA). pertaining to all monitoring. The 90-day is used to determine distances of They will also provide information report will summarize the dates and animals in close proximity to the vessel. needed to order a shutdown of the locations of seismic operations and all Hand-held fixed rangefinders and seismic source when a marine mammal marine mammal sightings (dates, times, distance marks on the ship’s side rails is within or near the EZ. When a locations, activities, associated seismic are used to measure the exact location sighting is made, the following survey activities). The report will also of the safety zone. Laser rangefinders, information about the sighting will be include estimates of the amount and which have proven to be less reliable for recorded: nature of potential ‘‘take’’ of marine • open water sighting, are also provided. Species, group size, and age/size/ mammals by harassment or in other During darkness, night-vision sex categories (if determinable); ways. equipment will be available. The PSOs behavior when first sighted and after All injured or dead marine mammals will be in wireless communication with initial sighting; heading (if consistent), (regardless of cause) will be reported to ship’s officers on the bridge and bearing and distance from seismic NMFS as soon as practicable. The report scientists in the vessel’s operations vessel; sighting cue, apparent reaction to laboratory, so they can advise promptly should include species or description of the seismic source or vessel (e.g., none, animal, condition of animal, location, of the need for avoidance maneuvers or avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.); GI airgun shut down. time first found, observed behaviors (if and behavioral pace; and alive), and photo or video, if available. Before commencing seismic • Time, location, heading, speed, operations during daylight hours, two activity of the vessel, sea state, Estimated Take of Marine Mammals by observers will maintain a 360-degree visibility, cloud cover, and sun glare. Incidental Harassment watch for all marine mammals for at least 30 minutes prior to the start of The data will also be recorded at the With respect to the activities seismic operations after an extended start and end of each observation watch described here, the MMPA defines shutdown of the airguns (1–2 minutes, and during a watch whenever there is a ‘‘harassment’’ as: change in one or more of the variables. depending on vessel speed). If no Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance marine mammals are observed within All observations, as well as which (i) has the potential to injure a marine the EZ during this time, the observers information regarding seismic source mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild will notify the seismic personnel of an shutdown, will be recorded in a [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential ‘‘all clear’’ status. Watch periods are standardized format. Data collection to disturb a marine mammal or marine scheduled as a 2-hour rotation. The procedures are adapted from the line- mammal stock in the wild by causing transect protocols developed by the disruption of behavioral patterns, including, observers continually scan the water but not limited to, migration, breathing, from the horizon to the ship’s hull, and SWFSC for their marine mammal abundance research cruises. A laptop nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering forward of 90 degrees from the port and [Level B harassment]. starboard beams. Based on PSO computer is located on the observer observations, the GI airgun(s) will be platform for ease of data entry. The All anticipated takes will be by Level shut down (as described earlier in this computer is connected to the ship’s B harassment, involving temporary document) when marine mammals are Global Positioning System, which changes in behavior. The mitigation and detected within or about to enter a allows a record of time and position to monitoring measures described herein designated EZ that corresponds to the be made at 3-minute intervals and for are expected to minimize the possibility 180-dB re 1 μPa (rms) isopleth. The each event entered (such as sightings, of injurious or lethal takes such that PSOs will continue to maintain watch to weather updates and effort changes). take by Level A harassment, serious determine when the animal(s) are Data accuracy will be verified by the injury or mortality is considered remote. outside the EZ, and airgun operations PSOs at sea and preliminary reports will However, as noted earlier, there is no will not resume until the animal has left be prepared during the field program specific information demonstrating that that EZ. The predicted distance for the and summaries forwarded to the SIO’s injurious or lethal ‘‘takes’’ would occur 180-dB EZ is listed in Table 1 earlier in shore facility and to NSF weekly or even in the absence of the planned this document. Seismic operations will more frequently. PSO observations will mitigation and monitoring measures. resume only after the animals are seen provide the following information: The sections here describe methods to to exit the safety radius or after no • The basis for decisions about estimate ‘‘take by Level B harassment’’ further visual detection of the animal for shutting down the airgun arrays; and present estimates of the numbers of 15 minutes (for small odontocetes and • Information needed to estimate the marine mammals that might be affected pinnipeds) or 30 minutes (for mysticetes number of marine mammals potentially during the proposed seismic program. and large odontocetes, including beaked ‘‘taken by harassment’’, which will be The estimates of ‘‘take’’ are based on data whales). reported to NMFS; collected in the ETP by NMFS SWFSC The bridge officers and other crew • Data on the occurrence, during 12 ship-based cetacean and will be instructed to alert the observer distribution, and activities of marine ecosystem assessment surveys

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65002 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

conducted during July–December from Ferguson and Barlow (2003) for 5° x 5° numbers of marine mammals that might 1986–2006. blocks that include the proposed survey be taken. These estimates assume that It is assumed that, during areas and corridors. Those blocks there will be no weather, equipment, or simultaneous operations of the seismic included 27,275 km (16,947.9 mi) of mitigation delays, which is highly sources and the other sources, any survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0–5 unlikely. There is some uncertainty marine mammals close enough to be and 2,564 km (1,593.2 mi) of survey about the representativeness of the data affected by the MBES or SBP would effort in Beaufort sea states 0–2. and the assumptions used in the already be affected by the seismic Densities were obtained for an calculations presented here. However, sources. However, whether or not the additional eight species that were the approach used here is believed to be seismic sources are operating sighted in one or more of those blocks. the best available approach. simultaneously with the other sources, Oceanographic conditions, including The number of different individuals marine mammals are expected to exhibit occasional El Nino and La Nina events, that may be exposed to GI airgun sounds no more than short-term and influence the distribution and numbers with received levels ≥160 dB re 1 μPa inconsequential responses to the MBES of marine mammals present in the ETP, (rms) on one or more occasions was and SBP given their characteristics (e.g., resulting in considerable year-to-year estimated by considering the total narrow downward-directed beam) and variation in the distribution and marine area that would be within the other considerations described above, abundance of many marine mammal 160-dB radius around the operating such as the unlikelihood of being species (Escorza-Trevino, 2009). Thus, airgun array on at least one occasion, exposed to the source at higher levels for some species, the densities derived along with the expected density of and the fact that it would likely only be from recent surveys may not be animals in the area. The proposed for one or two pulses. Such reactions are representative of the densities that will seismic lines do not run parallel to each not considered to constitute ‘‘taking’’ be encountered during the proposed other in close proximity, which (NMFS, 2001). Therefore, no additional seismic survey. minimizes the number of times an allowance is included for animals that Table 3 in SIO’s application gives the individual mammal may be exposed might be affected by sound sources average (or ‘‘best’’) and maximum during the survey; in this case, an other than the seismic sources (i.e., densities for each species of cetacean individual could be exposed 1.01 times airguns). likely to occur in the study area, i.e., on average. The numbers of different Extensive systematic ship-based species for which densities were individuals potentially exposed to ≥160 surveys have been conducted by NMFS obtained or assigned. These densities dB re 1 μPa (rms) were calculated by SWFSC for marine mammals in the ETP. have been corrected for both multiplying the expected species SWFSC has recently developed habitat detectability and availability bias by the density, times the anticipated area to be modeling as a method to estimate study authors. Detectability bias is ensonified to that level during GI airgun cetacean densities on a finer spatial associated with diminishing sightability operations. scale than traditional line-transect with increasing lateral distance from the The area expected to be ensonified analyses by using a continuous function trackline. Availability bias refers to the was determined by entering the planned of habitat variables, e.g., sea surface fact that there is less than 100 percent survey lines into a MapInfo GIS, using temperature, depth, distance from shore, probability of sighting an animal that is the GIS to identify the relevant areas by and prey density (Barlow et al., 2009). present along the survey trackline. The ‘‘drawing’’ the applicable 160-dB buffer The models have been incorporated into estimated numbers of individuals (see Table 1 in this document) around a web-based Geographic Information potentially exposed are presented next each seismic line, and then calculating System (GIS) developed by Duke based on the 160-dB re 1 μPa (rms) the total area within the buffers. Areas University’s Department of Defense Level B harassment criterion for all where overlap occurred (because of Strategic Environmental Research and cetaceans. It is assumed that marine intersecting lines) were included only Development Program (SERDP) team in mammals exposed to airgun sounds at once when estimating the number of close collaboration with the SWFSC that level might change their behavior individuals exposed. SERDP team (Read et al., 2009). The GIS sufficiently to be considered ‘‘taken by Applying the approach described was used to obtain densities for the 10 harassment’’. here, approximately 4,340 km2 (1,675.7 cetaceans in the model (Bryde’s whale, It should be noted that the following mi2) would be within the 160-dB blue whale, Mesoplodon spp., rough- estimates of ‘‘takes by harassment’’ isopleth on one or more occasions toothed, bottlenose, pantropical spotted, assume that the surveys will be during the surveys. In calculating spinner, striped, and short-beaked undertaken and completed; in fact, the exposure estimates, this figure was common dolphins, and short-finned planned number of line-kilometers has increased by 25% (i.e., to 5,425 km2) in pilot whale) in each of eight areas: The been increased to accommodate lines order to account for the potential need four proposed survey areas (see Figure that may need to be repeated, to re-survey lines or other contingency. 1 in SIO’s application), and corridors 1° equipment testing, etc. As is typical on This approach does not allow for wide and centered on the tracklines offshore ship surveys, inclement turnover in the mammal populations in between the survey areas and from the weather and equipment malfunctions the study area during the course of the southernmost survey area to the EEZ of are likely to cause delays and may limit survey. That might underestimate actual Peru. For species sighted in SWFSC the number of useful line-kilometers of numbers of individuals exposed, surveys whose sample sizes were too seismic operations that can be although the conservative distances small to model density (sperm whale, undertaken. Furthermore, any marine used to calculate the area may offset humpback whale, Cuvier’s beaked mammal sightings within or near the this. In addition, the approach assumes whale, Fraser’s dolphin, Risso’s designated EZ will result in the that no cetaceans will move away or dolphin, melon-headed, pygmy killer, shutdown of seismic operations as a toward the trackline as the Melville false killer, and killer whales), SIO used mitigation measure. Thus, the following approaches in response to increasing densities from the surveys conducted estimates of the numbers of marine sound levels prior to the time the levels during summer and fall 1986–1996, as mammals potentially exposed to 160-dB reach 160 dB. Another way of summarized by Ferguson and Barlow re 1 μPa (rms) sounds are precautionary interpreting the estimates that follow (2001). Densities were calculated from and probably overestimate the actual (Table 2 in this document) is that they

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65003

represent the number of individuals that be exposed to ≥160 dB re 1 μPa (rms). measures into consideration and thus are expected (in the absence of a seismic The take estimates presented here do are likely to be overestimates. program) to occur in the waters that will not take the proposed mitigation

TABLE 2—THE ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO SOUND LEVELS GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 160 DB DURING SIO’S PROPOSED SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE EASTERN TROPICAL PACIFIC OCEAN IN OCT–NOV 2010. THE PROPOSED SOUND SOURCE IS A PAIR OF GI AIRGUNS. RECEIVED LEVELS ARE EXPRESSED IN DB RE 1 μPA (RMS) (AVERAGED OVER PULSE DURATION), CONSISTENT WITH NMFS’ PRACTICE. NOT ALL MARINE MAMMALS WILL CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR WHEN EXPOSED TO THESE SOUND LEVELS, BUT SOME MAY ALTER THEIR BEHAVIOR WHEN LEVELS ARE LOWER (SEE TEXT). SEE TABLES 2–4 IN SIO’S APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DETAIL.

Number of Approx. % individuals regional Take Species exposed population authorization (best) 1 (best) 2

Mysticetes

Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) ...... 3 0.02 3 Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) ...... **2 0.05 2 Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) ...... **2 3 NA 2

Odontocetes

Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) ...... 22 0.09 22 Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris) ...... 10 0.05 10 Mesoplodon sp. (unidentified) ...... **2 <0.01 **2 Rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis) ...... 9 0.01 *15 Pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata) ...... **68 0.01 *131 Spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris) ...... 21 <0.01 *109 Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) ...... **83 0.02 **83 Striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba) ...... 192 <0.01 192 Fraser’s dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei) ...... 6 <0.01 *440 Short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) ...... 777 0.02 777 Pygmy killer whale (Feresa attenuata) ...... **4 0.01 *30 Melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra) ...... **16 0.03 *258 Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) ...... **56 0.05 **56 False killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens) ...... **3 0.01 *11 Killer whale (Orcinus orca) ...... 5 0.05 5 Short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus) ...... **35 0.01 **35 * Requested take authorization increased from ‘best’ exposure estimate to mean group size as reported in Ferguson et al. (2006). ** Rounded-up, where proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010) presented figures rounded down. See Description of the Specified Ac- tivity in this document for discussion. 1 Best (mean) estimate density are from Table 3 of SIO’s application. Humpback whale estimates calculated independently using methodology described previously. 2 Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 in the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010). 3 Southern Hemisphere population sizes are poorly understood. However, the number of individuals potentially exposed is low relative to re- gional population.

Negligible Impact and Small Numbers potentially affected by Level B temporary nature in space and time. Analysis harassment over the course of the IHA. Due to the nature, degree, and context NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ For each species, these numbers are of the behavioral harassment in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘* * * an impact small (each, less than one percent) anticipated, the activity is not expected resulting from the specified activity that relative to the population size. to impact rates of recruitment or cannot be reasonably expected to, and is No takes by (Level A harassment), survival. not reasonably likely to, adversely affect serious injury, or mortality are For reasons stated previously, the the species or stock through effects on anticipated to occur as a result of the specified activities associated with the annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ SIO’s marine geophysical survey, and survey are not likely to cause TTS, PTS In making a negligible impact none are authorized. Only short-term or other non-auditory injury, serious determination, NMFS considers: behavioral disturbance is anticipated to injury, or death to affected marine (1) The number of anticipated occur due to the brief and sporadic mammals because: mortalities; duration of the survey activities, and (1) The likelihood that, given (2) The number and nature of these takes are not expected to occur in sufficient notice through relatively slow anticipated injuries; a place that is of specific biological ship speed, marine mammals are (3) The number, nature, and intensity, importance to marine mammals, such as expected to move away from a noise and duration of Level B harassment; and in a known breeding, calving, or feeding source that is annoying prior to its (4) The context in which the takes area, as no such times or places are becoming potentially injurious; occur. known for the project location or time. (2) The fact that cetaceans would have As mentioned previously, NMFS If such a place, previously unknown, to be closer than 40 m (0.025 mi) in estimates that 21 species of marine does exist in the project area, NMFS deep water when the full array is in use mammals (including three species would still anticipate that the impacts at a 2 m (6.6 ft) tow depth from the categorized as Mesoplodon sp.) could be would be negligible due to their vessel to be exposed to levels of sound

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:04 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65004 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

believed to have even a minimal chance species in the specified geographic National Environmental Policy Act of causing PTS; region. (NEPA) (3) The fact that marine mammals Based on the analysis contained To meet NMFS’ National would have to be closer than 400 m herein of the likely effects of the (0.25 mi) in deep water when the full Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 specified activity on marine mammals U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) requirements for the array is in use at a 2 m (6.6 ft) tow depth and their habitat, and taking into from the vessel to be exposed to levels issuance of an IHA to SIO, NMFS has consideration the implementation of the prepared an Environmental Assessment of sound (160 dB) believed to have even mitigation and monitoring measures, a minimal chance at causing TTS; and (EA) titled ‘‘Issuance of an Incidental NMFS finds that SIO’s planned research Harassment Authorization to the (4) The likelihood that marine activities, will result in the incidental mammal detection ability by trained Scripps Institution of Oceanography to take of small numbers of marine Take Marine Mammals by Harassment observers is high at that short distance mammals, by Level B harassment only, from the vessel; Incidental to a Marine Geophysical and that the total taking from the marine Survey off of Central and South (5) The incorporation of other geophysical survey will have a required mitigation measures (i.e., America in the Eastern Tropical Pacific negligible impact on the affected species Ocean, October-November 2010’’. This ramp-up, shut-down, temporal and or stocks. spatial avoidance, and additional EA incorporates by reference the NSF’s mitigation measures); and Impact on Availability of Affected Environmental Analysis Pursuant To (7) The relatively limited duration Species or Stock for Taking for Executive Order 12114 (NSF, 2010) and and geographically widespread Subsistence Uses an associated report (Report) prepared distances of the seismic survey by LGL Limited Environmental (approximately 15 days). There are no relevant subsistence uses Research Associates (LGL) for NSF, titled, ‘‘Environmental Assessment of a As a result, no take by injury, serious of marine mammals implicated by this Marine Geophysical Survey by the R/V injury, or death is anticipated or action. Melville in the Pacific Ocean off Central authorized, and the potential for Endangered Species Act and South America, October-November temporary or permanent hearing 2010’’ (LGL, 2010) by reference pursuant impairment is very low and will be Of the 21 species of marine mammals to 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) avoided through the incorporation of that may occur in the survey area, three 1502.21 and NOAA Administrative the monitoring and mitigation measures. are listed as endangered under the ESA, Order (NAO) 216–6 § 5.09(d). NMFS’ EA While the number of marine including the humpback, blue, and analyzes the direct, indirect and mammals potentially incidentally sperm whales. Under Section 7 of the cumulative environmental impacts of harassed will depend on the ESA, NSF had initiated formal the specified activities on marine distribution and abundance of marine consultation with the NMFS, Office of mammals including those listed as mammals in the vicinity of the survey Protected Resources, Endangered threatened or endangered under the activity, the number of potential Level Species Division, on this seismic ESA. NMFS also evaluated and B incidental harassment takings (see survey. NMFS’ Office of Protected considered comments provided by the Table 2) is estimated to be small, less Resources, Permits, Conservation and public in finalizing the EA and than one percent of any of the estimated Education Division, also initiated formal addressing the intensity of impacts to population sizes based on the data consultation under Section 7 of the ESA marine mammals disclosed in Table 2 of this notice, and with NMFS’ Office of Protected has been mitigated to the lowest level Resources, Endangered Species The NMFS has made a Finding of No practicable through incorporation of the Division, to obtain a Biological Opinion Significant Impact (FONSI) and, monitoring and mitigation measures (BiOp) evaluating the effects of issuing therefore, will not prepare an mentioned previously in this document. the IHA on threatened and endangered environmental impact statement for the Also, there are no known important marine mammals and, consistent with issuance of an IHA to SIO for this reproductive or feeding areas in the the requirements for mitigation and activity. The EA and the NMFS FONSI action area. monitoring set forth in the IHA, for this activity are available upon NMFS has determined, provided that authorizing incidental take. On October request (see ADDRESSES). the aforementioned mitigation and 15, 2010, NMFS concluded formal Determinations monitoring measures are implemented, Section 7 consultation with itself and that the impact of conducting a marine issued a BiOp which concluded that the NMFS has determined that the impact geophysical survey in the ETP, October proposed action and issuance of the IHA of conducting the specific seismic through November 2010, may result, at are not likely to jeopardize the survey activities described in this notice worst, in a temporary modification in continued existence of the humpback, and the IHA request in the specific behavior and/or low-level physiological blue, and sperm whales and leatherback geographic region in the eastern tropical effects (Level B harassment) of small (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia Pacific Ocean may result, at worst, in a numbers of certain species of marine mydas), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), temporary modification in behavior mammals. hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), and (Level B harassment) of small numbers While behavioral modifications, olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea of marine mammals. Further, this including temporarily vacating the area turtles. The BiOp also concluded that activity is expected to result in a during the operation of the airgun(s), designated critical habitat for these negligible impact on the affected species may be made by these species to avoid species does not occur in the action area or stocks of marine mammals. The the resultant acoustic disturbance, the and would not be affected by the survey. provision requiring that the activity not availability of alternate areas within SIO must comply with the Relevant have an unmitigable impact on the these areas and the short and sporadic Terms and Conditions of the Incidental availability of the affected species or duration of the research activities, have Take Statement corresponding to NMFS’ stock of marine mammals for led NMFS to determine that this action BiOp issued to both NSF and NMFS’ subsistence uses is not implicated for will have a negligible impact on the Office of Protected Resources. this action.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65005

Authorization vessels in the ETP under certain Dated: October 15, 2010. As a result of these determinations, conditions. If requested by the Eric C. Schwaab, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to SIO harvesting nation, the Assistant Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, for conducting a marine geophysical Administrator will determine whether National Marine Fisheries Service. survey in the eastern tropical Pacific to make an affirmative finding based [FR Doc. 2010–26652 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Ocean, provided the previously upon documentary evidence provided BILLING CODE 3510–22–P mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and by the government of the harvesting reporting requirements are incorporated. nation, the IATTC, or the Department of The duration of the IHA would not State. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE exceed one year from the date of its The affirmative finding process issuance. Department of the Army; Corps of requires that the harvesting nation is Engineers Dated: October 15, 2010. meeting its obligations under the IDCP Helen M. Golde, and obligations of membership in the Intent To Prepare a Draft Supplemental Deputy Director, Office of Protected IATTC. Every 5 years, the government of Environmental Impact Statement Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. the harvesting nation must request an (SEIS), Mississippi Barrier Island [FR Doc. 2010–26547 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] affirmative finding and submit the Restoration, Mississippi Coastal BILLING CODE 3510–22–P required documentary evidence directly Improvements Program (MsCIP) for to the Assistant Administrator. On an Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson annual basis, NMFS will review the Counties, MS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE affirmative finding and determine AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric whether the harvesting nation continues Army Corps of Engineers, DOD. Administration to meet the requirements. A nation may ACTION: Notice of intent. provide information related to RIN 0648–XZ53 compliance with IDCP and IATTC SUMMARY: The Mobile District, U.S. measures directly to NMFS on an Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Taking and Importing of Marine intends to prepare a Draft Supplemental Mammals annual basis or may authorize the IATTC to release the information to Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) to the MsCIP Comprehensive AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries NMFS to annually renew an affirmative Plan and Integrated Programmatic EIS, Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and finding determination without an prepared in June 2009, which evaluated Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), application from the harvesting nation. Commerce. comprehensive water resource An affirmative finding will be ACTION: Notice; annual affirmative improvements associated with finding renewal. terminated, in consultation with the hurricane and storm damage risk Secretary of State, if the Assistant reduction, shoreline erosion, salt water SUMMARY: The Assistant Administrator Administrator determines that the intrusion and fish and wildlife for Fisheries, NMFS, (Assistant requirements of 50 CFR 216.24(f) are no preservation in three coastal counties of Administrator) has renewed the longer being met or that a nation is Mississippi. As described in the affirmative finding for the Government consistently failing to take enforcement Comprehensive Plan, the SEIS will of El Salvador under the Marine actions on violations, thereby address potential impacts associated Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This diminishing the effectiveness of the with the comprehensive restoration of affirmative finding will allow yellowfin IDCP. the Mississippi barrier islands. These tuna harvested in the eastern tropical actions are related to the consequences As a part of the affirmative finding Pacific Ocean (ETP) in compliance with of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico in the International Dolphin Conservation process set forth in 50 CFR 216.24(f), the 2005 and will be used as a basis for Program (IDCP) by El Salvadorian-flag Assistant Administrator considered ensuring compliance with the National purse seine vessels or purse seine documentary evidence submitted by the Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Republic of El Salvador or obtained vessels operating under El Salvadorian ADDRESSES: Questions about the jurisdiction to be imported into the from the IATTC and the Department of proposed action and the DSEIS should United States. The affirmative finding State and has determined that El be addressed to Mr. Larry Parson, or Dr. was based on review of documentary Salvador has met the MMPA’s Susan Ivester Rees, Planning and evidence submitted by the Government requirements to receive an annual Environmental Division, Mobile of El Salvador and obtained from the affirmative finding renewal. District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Inter-American Tropical Tuna After consultation with the P.O. Box 2288, Mobile, AL 36628–0001. Commission (IATTC) and the U.S. Department of State, the Assistant FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Department of State. Administrator issued the Republic of El Larry Parson, (251) 694–3139 or e-mail DATES: The affirmative finding renewal Salvador’s annual affirmative finding at [email protected] or Dr. is effective from April 1, 2010, through renewal, allowing the continued Susan Ivester Rees, (251) 694–414, or e- March 31, 2011. importation into the United States of mail at [email protected]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: yellowfin tuna and products derived SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sarah Wilkin, Southwest Region, NMFS, from yellowfin tuna harvested in the 1. Hurricane Katrina made landfall in 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, ETP by El Salvadorian-flag purse seine Mississippi on August 29, 2005 causing Long Beach, CA 90802–4213; phone vessels or purse seine vessels operating catastrophic damage to lives, property, 562–980–3230; fax 562–980–4027. under El Salvadorian jurisdiction. This and natural resources throughout SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The annual renewal of El Salvador’s coastal Mississippi. In response, the MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., allows affirmative finding will remain valid U.S. Congress directed the Secretary of the entry into the United States of the Army through the Corps of through March 31, 2011. yellowfin tuna harvested by purse seine Engineers (the Corps) to conduct an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65006 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

analysis and design for comprehensive for flood damage reduction. The EIS in the SEIS: Water quality, threatened improvements or modifications to identified, screened, evaluated, and endangered species, essential fish existing improvements in the coastal prioritized, and optimized an array of habitat and other marine habitat, area of Mississippi in the interest of alternatives. cultural resources, parks and protected hurricane and storm damage reduction, 3. The Draft SEIS. As discussed in the lands, wetlands, and cumulative prevention of saltwater intrusion, Integrated Programmatic EIS, a impacts. preservation of fish and wildlife, supplement would be prepared to c. The Corps will serve as the lead prevention of erosion, barrier island address the borrow sources and Federal agency during preparation of restoration, and other related water placement areas for the Mississippi the SEIS. The following agencies have resources purposes. Further, the Corps Barrier Islands Restoration. This is been invited to participate as was directed to provide interim phase II of the plan described in the cooperating agencies: U.S. recommendations for near term Programmatic EIS. Under phase I, the Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. improvements by June 30, 2006, with general plan of the barrier islands Department of the Interior—Fish and final recommendations provided by restoration was addressed; however the Wildlife Service, National Park Service, December 30, 2007. Environmental final design was not completed because U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. impacts associated with implementation the borrow sources were not identified. Department of Transportation—Federal of 15 interim projects were addressed in The Comprehensive Barrier Island Highway Administration; U.S. an Environmental Assessment and a Restoration consists of the placement of Department of Commerce—National Finding of No Significant Impact signed approximately 22 million cubic yards of Oceanic and Atmospheric on June 29, 2006. sand within the National Park Service’s Administration and the National Marine Gulf Islands National Seashore, Fisheries Service; U.S. Department of 2. The MsCIP Comprehensive Plan Mississippi unit. Between 13–16 million evaluated an array of measures to Homeland Security—Federal Emergency cubic yards of sand would be used to Management Agency; U.S. Department promote the recovery of coastal close Camille Cut between East Ship of Agriculture—Natural Resources Mississippi from the hurricanes of 2005 Island and West Ship Island, which Conservation Service; Mississippi and to provide for a coast resilient to originally was opened by Hurricane Department of Marine Resources; future storm events. The Integrated Camille, through the construction of a Mississippi Department of Programmatic EIS evaluated multiple low level dune system. The remaining Environmental Quality, and Mississippi natural and engineered alternatives to sand would be placed in the littoral Department of Archives and History; provide various measures for various zones at the eastern ends of Ship and Mississippi Museum of Natural Science; levels of risk reduction and restoration Petit Bois Islands. This would result in Mississippi Department of for the Mississippi coast. Formulation of the restoration of 1,150 acres of critical Transportation; Mississippi Emergency the comprehensive plan involved coastal zone habitats and improvement identifying potential ‘‘Lines of Defense’’ to the water quality of the Mississippi Management Agency and the Gulf moving from offshore to nearshore, Sound and provide incidental Regional Planning Commission. shoreline, and along existing natural protection to two cultural sites on Ship Participation from other agencies, features inland, to possibly reduce Island listed on the National Register of interest groups, and individual citizens damage from hurricane and storm Historic Places. In addition, the project is being encouraged and sought. events. This analysis included would include the restoration of Cat 5. It is anticipated that the SEIS will restoration of the barrier islands, Island using 1–2 million cubic yards of be made available for public review in nearshore features such as rubble and sand which are not included in the 22 December 2010. movable wall breakwaters, beachfront million cubic yards of sand. Curtis M. Flakes, measures such as dunes, berms, and 4. Public Involvement: a. The Corps Chief, Planning and Environmental Division. seawalls, coastal roadways and beach has conducted extensive public front property barriers such as elevation involvement during the Comprehensive [FR Doc. 2010–26493 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] of roadways and property, and various Plan and Integrated Programmatic EIS of BILLING CODE 3720–58–P other inland features such as June 2009. Since April 2006, the Corps installation of levees, elevated highway- Mobile District has hosted over 90 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE topped levee systems, and surge public involvement events, including 12 protection gates, for potential inclusion formal public and agency meetings, a 2- Department of the Army in the overall damage reduction system. day Regional coordination meeting, a Consideration of ‘‘non-structural Public Scoping workshop, 3 online Board of Visitors, United States measures’’, such as acquisition and meetings, a Public Hearing workshop, Military Academy (USMA) relocation of structures, hurricane and numerous internal meetings, which evaluation, floodplain management, the agencies were invited to participate. AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. building codes and other event planning The Corps also launched a project ACTION: Meeting notice. activities also serve as important website enabling user downloads, hurricane and storm damage reduction project team collaboration, and SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the planning features. Other alternatives communication among agencies and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of considered restoration of storm public. This Web site will be updated 1972, the Government in the Sunshine damaged habitats such as coastal with information on the SEIS for the Act of 1976, and Federal regulations marshes, beaches, forests, oyster reefs, Mississippi Barrier Island Restoration governing advisory committee meetings, and submerged aquatic vegetation in Project throughout the NEPA process: the Department of Defense announces a Mississippi Sound and on the http://www.mscip.usace.army.mil. Federal advisory committee meeting for Mississippi mainland; restoration of b. The SEIS will analyze potential the United States Military Academy historical water flows to coastal environmental impacts and benefits Board of Visitors. This is the 2010 watersheds including freshwater associated with proposed borrow and Annual Meeting of the USMA Board of diversion from Louisiana; and placement sites. Specifically, the Visitors. Members of the Board will be watershed based drainage modifications following major issues will be analyzed provided updates on Academy issues.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65007

DATES: Friday, November 5, 2010 at 1 be allowed to present questions from the The proposed systems report, as p.m.–3 p.m. floor or speak to any issue under required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the ADDRESSES: Jefferson Hall Library, Haig consideration by the Board. Privacy Act, was submitted on October 5, 2010, to the House Committee on Room, West Point, NY. Brenda S. Bowen, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Oversight and Government Reform, and Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. the Senate Committee on Homeland Committee’s Designated Federal Officer [FR Doc. 2010–26492 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] or Point of Contact is Ms. Joy A. Security and Governmental Affairs BILLING CODE 3710–08–P Pasquazi, (845) 938–5078, pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I [email protected]. to Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A–130, ‘‘Federal Agency SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Responsibilities for Maintaining provisions of the Federal Advisory Department of the Air Force Records About Individuals,’’ dated Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996; 61 Appendix, as amended), the [Docket ID: USAF–2010–0027] FR 6427). Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and Privacy Act of 1974; System of Dated: October 18, 2010. 41 CFR 102–3.150, the Department of Records Mitchell S. Bryman, Defense announces that the following Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Federal advisory committee meeting AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, Officer, Department of Defense. DoD. will take place: FO36 AFOSI E 1. Name of Committee: United States ACTION: Notice to add a system of Military Academy Board of Visitors. records. SYSTEM NAME: 2. Date: Friday, November 5, 2010. Command Learning Management SUMMARY: The Department of the Air 3. Time: 1 p.m.–3 p.m. Members of System. the public wishing to attend the meeting Force is proposing to add a system of will need to show photo identification records notice in its existing inventory SYSTEM LOCATION: in order to gain access to the meeting of records systems subject to the Privacy Headquarters, Air Force Office of location. All participants are subject to Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. Special Investigations (AFOSI), 1535 security screening. DATES: The proposed action will be Command Drive, Andrews AFB, MD 4. Location: Jefferson Hall Library, effective on November 22, 2010, unless 20762–7002. Haig Room, West Point, NY. comments are received that would 5. Purpose of the Meeting: This is the result in a contrary determination. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: 2010 Annual Meeting of the USMA ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, All military personnel on active and Board of Visitors (BoV). Members of the identified by docket number and title, Board will be provided updates on reserve duty, Air Force civilians and by any of the following methods: contractors assigned to or employed Academy issues. • Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// 6. Agenda: The Academy leadership either directly or indirectly by the Air www.regulations.gov. Follow the Force Office of Special Investigations will provide the Board updates on the instructions for submitting comments. following: Education and Academic • (AFOSI). Also includes AFOSI Mail: Federal Docket Management personnel assigned to any Department Instruction, Military Construction Real System Office, Room 3C843 Pentagon, Property Master Plan, Sustainment, of Defense (DoD) activity or DoD 1160 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC sponsored program. renovation and Maintenance Program, 20301–1160. Fiscal Year 2010. Instructions: All submissions received CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 7. Public’s Accessibility to the must include the agency name and Records concerning completion of all Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and docket number for this Federal Register training courses attended, course 41 CFR102–3.140 through 102–3.165, document. The general policy for certification, records of ancillary and the availability of space, this comments and other submissions from training completion and weapons meeting is open to the public. Seating is members of the public is to make these qualification. Record data includes on a first-come basis. submissions available for public name, Social Security Number (SSN), 8. Committee’s Designated Federal viewing on the Internet at http:// home address and work telephone Officer or Point of Contact: Ms. Joy A. www.regulations.gov as they are number. Pasquazi, (845) 938–5078, received without change, including any [email protected]. personal identifiers or contact AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: Any member of the public is information. 10 U.S.C. 8013, Secretary of the Air permitted to file a written statement Force; AFI 36–2201 V1, Training FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. with the USMA Board of Visitors. Development, Delivery and Evaluation; Charles J. Shedrick, 703–696–6488. Written statements should be sent to the Air Force Mission Directive 39, Air Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Force Office of Special Investigations United States Military Academy, Office Department of the Air Force systems of (AFOSI); Air Force Policy Directive 71– of the Secretary of the General Staff records notices subject to the Privacy 1, Criminal Investigations and (MASG), 646 Swift Road, West Point, Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, Counterintelligence; and E.O. 9397 NY 10996–1905 or faxed to the have been published in the Federal (SSN), as amended. Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at Register and are available from the (845) 938–3214. Written statements Department of the Air Force Privacy PURPOSE(S): must be received no later than five Office, Air Force Privacy Act Office, Used by the Air Force Special working days prior to the next meeting Office of Warfighting Integration and Investigations Academy (AFSIA) in order to provide time for member Chief Information officer, ATTN: SAF/ training monitors, supervisors and consideration. By rule, no member of XCPPI, 1800 Air Force Pentagon, personnel to identify, monitor and the public attending open meetings will Washington, DC 20330–1800. schedule Air Force and AFOSI

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65008 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

mandated training. The system Information and Privacy Act request Office of Management and Budget, 725 maintains each individuals training form giving their contact information 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, New history and is a repository for historical (name, address, phone number, contact Executive Office Building, Washington, documentation such as certificates and e-mail address, and a brief description DC 20503, be faxed to (202) 395–5806 or transcripts. of the information they are seeking) and e-mailed to are required to sign and date the penalty [email protected] with a ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE of perjury clause attesting that they are cc: to [email protected]. Please note SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: the person they say they are. that written comments received in response to this notice will be In addition to those disclosures RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. considered public records. Individuals seeking access to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 552A(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, information about themselves should these records contained therein may be 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of address written inquiries to the Chief, 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires specifically disclosed outside the Information Release Branch, HQ AFOSI/ Department of Defense as a routine use that the Office of Management and XILI, ATTN: Freedom of Information/ Budget (OMB) provide interested pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as Privacy Act Officer, P.O. Box 2218, follows: Federal agencies and the public an early Waldorf, MD 20604–2218. opportunity to comment on information The DoD ‘Blanket Routine Uses’ Individuals should complete AFOSI’s published at the beginning of the Air collection requests. The OMB is Certification of Identity, Freedom of particularly interested in comments Force’s compilation of systems of Information and Privacy Act request records notices apply to this system. which: (1) Evaluate whether the form giving their contact information proposed collection of information is POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, (name, address, phone number, contact necessary for the proper performance of RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND e-mail address, and a brief description the functions of the agency, including DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: of the information they are seeking) and whether the information will have STORAGE: are required to sign and date the penalty practical utility; (2) Evaluate the Electronic storage media. of perjury clause attesting that they are accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the the person they say they are. burden of the proposed collection of RETRIEVABILITY: information, including the validity of Retrieved by individual’s name. CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: The Air Force rules for accessing the methodology and assumptions used; SAFEGUARDS: records, and for contesting contents and (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and Records are accessed by custodian of appealing initial agency determinations clarity of the information to be the record system and by person(s) are published in Air Force Instruction collected; and (4) Minimize the burden responsible for servicing the record 33–332; 32 CFR part 806b; or may be of the collection of information on those system in performance of their official obtained from the system manager. who are to respond, including through duties, properly screened and cleared the use of appropriate automated, for need-to-know. Records are stored on RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: electronic, mechanical, or other the Learning Management System From the individual, individual technological collection techniques or computer server located behind a training records, and the Security Forces other forms of information technology. Virtual Private Network (VPN) Management Information System Dated: October 14, 2010. controlled by AFOSI and accessible (SFMIS). Darrin A. King, only by persons cleared for access to the EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: Director, Information Collection Clearance network. Division, Regulatory Information None. Management Services, Office of Management. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: [FR Doc. 2010–26517 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Retained in database until Office of Special Education and BILLING CODE 5001–06–P reassignment outside of AFOSI or Rehabilitative Services separation/retirement; records are Type of Review: Extension. destroyed within 365 days after such DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Title of Collection: Rehabilitation actions by the data base administrator. Services Administration Grant Back-up tapes are overwritten every Notice of Submission for OMB Review Reallotment Form. three weeks removing any inactive OMB Control Number: 1820–0692. AGENCY: records. Department of Education. Agency Form Number(s): N/A. ACTION: Comment request. SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: Frequency of Responses: Annually. Affected Public: Not-for-profit Director of War Fighting Integration, SUMMARY: The Director, Information institutions; State, Local, or Tribal HQ AFOSI/XI, 1535 Command Drive, Collection Clearance Division, Government, State Educational Andrews AFB, MD 20762–7002. Regulatory Information Management Agencies or Local Education Agencies. Services, Office of Management invites NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: Total Estimated Number of Annual comments on the submission for OMB Individuals seeking to determine Responses: 402. review as required by the Paperwork whether information about themselves Total Estimated Annual Burden Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13). is contained in this system of records Hours: 12. should address written inquiries to the DATES: Interested persons are invited to Abstract: The Rehabilitation Act of Chief, Information Release Branch, HQ submit comments on or before 1973, as amended, authorizes the AFOSI/XILI, ATTN: Freedom of November 22, 2010. commissioner to reallot to other grant Information/Privacy Act Officer, P.O. ADDRESSES: Written comments should recipients that portion of a recipient’s Box 2218, Waldorf, MD 20604–2218. be addressed to the Office of annual grant that cannot be used. To Individuals should complete AFOSI’s Information and Regulatory Affairs, maximize the use of appropriated funds Certification of Identity, Freedom of Attention: Education Desk Officer, under the formula grant programs, the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65009

Office of Special Education and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY k. Description of Application: The Rehabilitative Services has established a licensee requests Commission approval reallotment process for the Basic Federal Energy Regulatory to grant DR Horton, Inc. (applicant) a Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants; Commission lease of 2.26 acres of project lands for Supported Employment State Grants; [Project No. 2232–584] use as a residential marina to serve off- Independent Living State Grants, Part B water residents of the Vineyards on (IL–Part B); Independent Living Services Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Lake Wylie. The proposed marina for Older Individuals Who Are Blind Application for Amendment of License would consist of six cluster docks (to (IL–OB); Client Assistance (CAP) and and Soliciting Comments, Motions To accommodate 48 watercraft), a boat ramp, a courtesy dock, and a canoe Protection and Advocacy of Individual Intervene, and Protests launch dock. Additionally, the Rights (PAIR) Programs. The authority October 13, 2010. applicant would install riprap along for the Rehabilitation Services Take notice that the following 1,625 feet of shoreline, and remove Administration to reallot formula grant hydroelectric application has been filed 6,130 cubic yards of sediment from the funds is found at sections 110(b)(2) with the Commission and is available reservoir. (VR), 622(b) (SE), 711(c) (IL–Part B), for public inspection: l. Locations of the Application: A 752(j)(4) (IL–OB), 112(e)(2) (CAP), and a. Application Type: Application for copy of the application is available for 509(e) (PAIR) of the act. The non-project use of project lands and inspection and reproduction at the information will be used by the awards waters. Commission’s Public Reference Room, mentioned above. For each grant award, b. Project No: 2232–584. located at 888 First Street, NE., Room the grantee will be required to enter the c. Date Filed: September 23, 2010. 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling d. Applicant: Duke Energy Carolinas, amount of funds being relinquished (202) 502–8371. This filing may also be LLC. viewed on the Commission’s Web site at and/or any additional funds being e. Name of Project: Catawba-Wateree http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ requested. Hydroelectric Project. link. Enter the docket number excluding The information will be used by the f. Location: Lake Wylie in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. the last three digits in the docket Rehabilitation Services Administration number field (P–2232) to access the State Monitoring and Program g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a–825r. document. You may also register online Improvement Division to reallot formula at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ grant funds for the awards mentioned h. Applicant Contact: Kelvin Reagan, P.O. Box 1006, Charlotte, North esubscription.asp to be notified via e- above. Currently, the information is Carolina, 28201–1006. Tel: (704) 382– mail of new filings and issuances collected through the issuance of an 9386. related to this or other pending projects. annual Information Memorandum for i. FERC Contact: Mark Carter, For assistance, call 1–866–208–3676 or each grant award; the grantee will be telephone (678) 245–3083, and e-mail e-mail [email protected], required to enter the amount of funds [email protected]. for TTY, call (202) 502–8659. A copy is being relinquished and/or any j. Deadline for filing comments, also available for inspection and additional funds being requested. motions to intervene, and protests: reproduction at the address in item (h) Requests for copies of the information November 15, 2010. above. m. Individuals desiring to be included collection submission for OMB review Comments, protests, and on the Commission’s mailing list should may be accessed from the RegInfo.gov interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 so indicate by writing to the Secretary Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/ CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the of the Commission. public/do/PRAMain or from the instructions on the Commission’s Web n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Department’s Web site at http:// site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e- Intervene: Anyone may submit edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the filing’’ link. The Commission strongly comments, a protest, or a motion to ‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and encourages electronic filings. intervene in accordance with the by clicking on link number 4410. When All documents (original and eight requirements of Rules of Practice and you access the information collection, copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. click on ‘‘Download Attachments ’’ to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, In determining the appropriate action to view. Written requests for information 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC take, the Commission will consider all should be addressed to U.S. Department 20426. Please include the project protests or other comments filed, but of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, number (P–2232–584) on any comments only those who file a motion to SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. or motions filed. intervene in accordance with the Requests may also be electronically The Commission’s Rules of Practice Commission’s Rules may become a mailed to the Internet address and Procedure require all interveners party to the proceeding. Any comments, [email protected] or faxed to 202– filing documents with the Commission protests, or motions to intervene must 401–0920. Please specify the complete to serve a copy of that document on be received on or before the specified each person whose name appears on the title of the information collection and comment date for the particular official service list for the project. OMB Control Number when making application. Further, if an intervener files comments o. Any filings must bear in all capital your request. or documents with the Commission letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, Individuals who use a relating to the merits of an issue that ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO telecommunications device for the deaf may affect the responsibilities of a INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the (TDD) may call the Federal Information particular resource agency, it must also project number of the particular Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– serve a copy of the document on that application to which the filing refers. 8339. resource agency. A copy of any motion p. Agency Comments: Federal, State, [FR Doc. 2010–26501 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] to intervene must also be served upon and local agencies are invited to file each representative of the Applicant comments on the described application. BILLING CODE 4000–01–P specified in the particular application. A copy of the application may be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65010 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

obtained by agencies directly from the agency’s comments must also be sent to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicant. If an agency does not file the Applicant’s representatives. comments within the time specified for Federal Energy Regulatory Kimberly D. Bose, filing comments, it will be presumed to Commission Secretary. have no comments. One copy of an [Docket No. PR11–1–000; Docket No. PR11– [FR Doc. 2010–26480 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 2–000; Docket No. PR11–3–000] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Notice of Baseline Filings

October 14, 2010.

Cranberry Pipeline Corporation ...... Docket No. PR11–1–000 New Mexico Gas Company, Inc ...... Docket No. PR11–2–000 Peoples Natural Gas Company LLC ...... Docket No. PR11–3–000 (Not Consolidated)

Take notice that on October 8, 2010, [email protected], or call ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. and October 13, 2010, respectively the (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Persons unable to file electronically applicants listed above submitted their (202) 502–8659. should submit an original and 7 copies baseline filing of its Statement of Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern time of the protest or intervention to the Operating Conditions for services on Monday, October 25, 2010. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC provided under section 311 of the Kimberly D. Bose, Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA). 20426. Secretary. Any person desiring to participate in This filing is accessible on-line at this rate proceeding must file a motion [FR Doc. 2010–26482 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] http://www.ferc.gov, using the to intervene or to protest this filing must BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for file in accordance with Rules 211 and review in the Commission’s Public 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Reference Room in Washington, DC. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Web site that enables subscribers to and 385.214). Protests will be Federal Energy Regulatory receive e-mail notification when a considered by the Commission in Commission determining the appropriate action to be document is added to a subscribed taken, but will not serve to make [Docket No. PR10–11–003] docket(s). For assistance with any FERC protestants parties to the proceeding. Online service, please e-mail ECOP Gas Company, LLC; Notice of Any person wishing to become a party [email protected], or call Compliance Filing must file a notice of intervention or (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. motion to intervene, as appropriate. October 13, 2010. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Such notices, motions, or protests must Take notice that on October 8, 2010, Friday, October 22, 2010. be filed on or before the date as ECOP Gas Company, LLC (ECOP) filed indicated below. Anyone filing an its Refund Report pursuant to its July Kimberly D. Bose, intervention or protest must serve a 30, 2010, Settlement Agreement Secretary. copy of that document on the Applicant. approved by an August 12, 2010, Letter [FR Doc. 2010–26481 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Anyone filing an intervention or protest Order. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P on or before the intervention or protest Any person desiring to participate in date need not serve motions to intervene this rate filing must file in accordance or protests on persons other than the with Rules 211 and 214 of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicant. Commission’s Rules of Practice and The Commission encourages Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Office of Energy Efficiency and electronic submission of protests and 385.214). Protests will be considered by Renewable Energy interventions in lieu of paper using the the Commission in determining the ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. appropriate action to be taken, but will Nationwide Limited Public Interest Persons unable to file electronically not serve to make protestants parties to Waiver Under Section 1605 (Buy should submit an original and 7 copies the proceeding. Any person wishing to American) of the American Recovery of the protest or intervention to the become a party must file a notice of and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, intervention or motion to intervene, as (Recovery Act) 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC appropriate. Such notices, motions, or AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 20426. protests must be filed on or before the Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of This filing is accessible on-line at date as indicated below. Anyone filing Energy (DOE). http://www.ferc.gov, using the an intervention or protest must serve a ACTION: Notice of limited waiver. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for copy of that document on the Applicant. review in the Commission’s Public Anyone filing an intervention or protest SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Reference Room in Washington, DC. on or before the intervention or protest Energy (DOE) is hereby granting an There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the date need not serve motions to intervene Amended nationwide limited waiver of Web site that enables subscribers to or protests on persons other than the the Buy American requirements of receive e-mail notification when a Applicant. section 1605 of the Recovery Act under document is added to a subscribed The Commission encourages the authority of Section 1605(b)(1) docket(s). For assistance with any FERC electronic submission of protests and (amended public interest waiver), with Online service, please e-mail interventions in lieu of paper using the respect to the following solar photo-

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65011

voltaic (PV) equipment: installations containing domestically The Buy American provisions contain (1) Domestically-manufactured modules manufactured PV cells or modules no requirement with regard to the origin containing foreign-manufactured cells, (panels). of components or subcomponents in (2) foreign-manufactured modules, This amended determination clarifies manufactured goods used in a project, when completely comprised of and supersedes the solar public interest as long as the manufacturing occurs in domestically-manufactured cells, and waiver issued on August 6, 2010. the United States [(2 CFR (3) any ancillary items and equipment Specifically, this amended public 176.70(a)(2)(ii)]. However, determining (including, but not limited to, charge interest determination clarifies that where final manufacturing occurs in the controllers, combiners and disconnect thin-film and flexible PV installations context of the solar production chain is boxes, breakers and fuses, racks, are also subject to the terms of this complicated. Under a plain reading of trackers, lugs, wires, cables and all waiver. the Recovery Act Buy American otherwise incidental equipment with This amended public interest provisions, only the PV modules would the exception of inverters and batteries) determination waives the Buy American need to be manufactured in the United when utilized in a solar installation requirements in EERE-funded Recovery States, but the source of the component involving a U.S. manufactured PV Act projects for the purchase of the parts—including the high-value cells— module, or a module manufactured following solar PV equipment: would not be relevant to complying abroad but comprised exclusively of (1) Domestically-manufactured modules with the Buy American requirements. domestically-manufactured cells. This containing foreign-manufactured cells, EERE and the National Renewable waiver expires February 6, 2011 (six (2) foreign-manufactured modules, Energy Laboratory have conducted months from the date of the original when completely comprised of extensive research into the nature of the waiver issuance). Recipients of EERE domestically-manufactured cells, and domestic solar manufacturing industry Recovery Act funds who have taken (3) any ancillary items and equipment to determine the best way to apply the substantial steps to commit funds for (including, but not limited to, charge Buy American requirements to solar PV the purchase of the items covered in this controllers, combiners and disconnect projects. EERE considered three basic waiver by February 6, 2011 will not be boxes, breakers and fuses, racks, options: (1) Follow the current impacted by the expiration of this trackers, lugs, wires, cables and all interpretation of the Buy American waiver. otherwise incidental equipment with provisions and require that only the This amended determination clarifies the exception of inverters and batteries) modules be produced in the United and supersedes the solar public interest when utilized in a solar installation States, irrespective of the origin of the waiver issued on August 6, 2010. involving a U.S. manufactured PV cells contained in the modules; Specifically, this amended public module, or a module manufactured (2) apply the interpretation that the interest determination clarifies that abroad but comprised exclusively of modules and cells are distinct thin-film and flexible PV installations domestically-manufactured cells. This manufactured goods and thus both must are also subject to the terms of this waiver expires February 6, 2011 (six be produced in the United States; and waiver. months from the date of the original (3) choose a more inclusive approach DATES: Effective Date: September 30, waiver issuance). Recipients of EERE that allows a solar installation to 2010. Recovery Act funds who have taken comply if either the cells or the modules substantial steps to commit funds for are manufactured in the United States. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the purchase of the items covered in this Of the options considered, only Benjamin Goldstein, Recovery Act Buy waiver by February 6, 2011 will not be option (3) recognizes EERE’s American Coordinator, Weatherization impacted by the expiration of this determination that the manufacturing and Intergovernmental Program, Office waiver. process for cells and the final PV of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Definitions—Solar cells are the basic module production represent distinct Energy (EERE), (202) 287–1553, building block of PV technologies. The and significant stages in the solar PV [email protected], Department of cells are functional semiconductors, manufacturing chain. Conducting either Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, made by processing and treating of these discrete activities in the United SW., Mailstop EE–2K, Washington, DC crystalline silicon or other photo- States creates roughly equal numbers of 20585. sensitive materials to create a layered American jobs. Furthermore, the design SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the product that generates electricity by and manufacture of the cells captures authority of the Recovery Act, section absorbing light photons. The individual the largest portion of the intellectual 1605(b)(1), the head of a Federal cells are cut and/or assembled into property present in a solar installation. department or agency may issue a larger groups known as panels or For all the reasons outlined above, ‘‘determination of inapplicability’’ (a modules. These two terms are EERE believes the public interest is best waiver of the Buy American provisions) synonymous and used interchangeably served by supporting the domestic cell if the application of section 1605 would in this memorandum. The panel is the manufacturing industry. It is therefore be inconsistent with the public interest. end product, and consists of a series of in the public interest to issue a waiver On November 10, 2009, the Secretary of solar cells, a backing surface, and a of the Recovery Act Buy American Energy delegated the authority to make covering to protect the cells from provisions that allows grantees to all inapplicability determinations to the weather and other types of damage. A purchase foreign modules made with Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency solar array is created by installing domestically-manufactured cells, in and Renewable Energy, for EERE multiple modules in the same location addition to domestic modules with Recovery Act projects. to increase the electrical generating foreign-produced cells. Pursuant to this delegation, the capacity. Operational solar PV modules Because EERE believes strongly in Assistant Secretary has determined that and arrays use cells to capture and strengthening the domestic PV application of section 1605 restrictions transfer solar-generated electricity. The manufacturing supply chain in the would be inconsistent with the public solar modules and cells represent the United States, EERE is limiting the interest for incidental and/or ancillary highest intellectual content and dollar- duration of this waiver to six months solar Photovoltaic (PV) equipment, value items associated with solar PV from the date it was originally issued, when this equipment is utilized in solar energy generation. with the expectation that there will be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65012 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

an increase in the number of companies months from the date of the original (202) 502–8333 or that produce solar PV modules in the waiver issuance). Recipients of EERE [email protected]. United States containing domestically- Recovery Act funds who have taken Kimberly D. Bose, manufactured cells. substantial steps to commit funds for Secretary. This amended public interest waiver the purchase of the items covered in this [FR Doc. 2010–26479 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] determination also resolves questions waiver by February 6, 2011 will not be BILLING CODE 6717–01–P regarding the applicability of the Buy impacted by the expiration of this American provisions to numerous waiver. Furthermore, the Assistant individual manufactured goods that are Secretary reserves the right to revisit incidental in cost and technological DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY and amend this determination based on significance but are ultimately new information or new developments. Office of Energy Efficiency and incorporated into the final solar Renewable Energy installation. These items, including, but Authority: Public Law 111–5, section 1605. not limited to, charge controllers, Issued in Washington, DC, on September Nationwide Categorical Waivers Under combiners and disconnect boxes, 30, 2010. Section 1605 (Buy American) of the breakers and fuses, racks, trackers, lugs, Cathy Zoi, American Recovery and Reinvestment wires, and cables—but excluding Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) inverters and batteries—are generally Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and low-cost incidental items that are Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and incorporated into the installation of PV Energy. Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of modules and arrays on public buildings [FR Doc. 2010–26518 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Energy (DOE). and public works. This public interest BILLING CODE 6450–01–P ACTION: Notice of limited waivers. waiver for all incidental and ancillary items eliminates potential questions and SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of ambiguities concerning whether the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy (DOE) is hereby granting a incidental items are final manufactured nationwide limited waiver of the Buy goods or merely components of a larger Federal Energy Regulatory American requirements of section 1605 solar module, installation or array. Commission of the Recovery Act under the authority Issuance of this nationwide public of Section 1605(b)(2) (iron, steel, and the relevant manufactured goods are not interest waiver recognizes EERE’s [Docket No. AD09–9–000] commitment to expeditious costing of produced in the United States in Recovery Act dollars by enabling Small Hydropower Development in the sufficient and reasonably available recipients to easily ascertain whether a United States; Notice of Small/Low- quantities and of a satisfactory quality) given solar installation complies with Impact Hydropower Webinar with respect to: (1) Motorized automatic the Buy American provision. two wing revolving doors that open via Simultaneously, this waiver advances October 13, 2010. the motor upon a fire alarm to the purpose and the principles of the accommodate smoke evacuation, retract The Federal Energy Regulatory to full open position under Fire Alarm Buy American provision by focusing on Commission will host a Small/Low- the highest-value and most labor- status and remain in the open position Impact Hydropower Webinar on until the alarm is cleared, are compliant intensive pieces of solar PV equipment. November 10, 2010, from 12 noon to 1 In light of the foregoing, and under with the Americans with Disabilities the authority of section 1605(b)(1) of p.m. Eastern Time. The webinar will be Act, and possess both sliding and Public Law 111–5 and Redelegation open to the public and advance swinging door that allows entry/exit Order 00–002–01C, dated November 10, registration is required. through the sliding doors while the 2009, with respect to Recovery Act The purpose of this webinar is to revolving section is being serviced; (2) projects funded by EERE, the Assistant introduce the new Small/Low-Impact self-contained photovoltaic LED area Secretary hereby issues an amended Hydropower Program website and walk lighting systems with a non-corrosive, ‘‘determination of inapplicability’’ (a participants through all phases of the stainless steel, powder-coated anti- waiver under the Recovery Act Buy licensing and exemption processes weathering shell, that do not succumb to the sail effect, possess flat plate lens American provisions) for the following using the Web site. Specifically, the optics with directional lamp lens, dark items: (1) Domestically-manufactured webinar will provide the opportunity modules containing foreign- sky capability, and full cutoff for participants to learn about the small conformity; (3) ultrasonic directional manufactured cells, (2) foreign- hydropower licensing process, find out manufactured modules, when sensors and DC300 facility controllers how to get more information and completely comprised of domestically- for a parking guidance system which assistance from FERC, and ask manufactured cells, and (3) any integrates with American designed ancillary items and equipment questions. intelligent parking guidance system (including, but not limited to, charge To register for this webinar, please go software allowing real-time updates to a controllers, combiners and disconnect to https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/ central location and via the Internet; (4) boxes, breakers and fuses, racks, registration/hydro-form-11-10-10.asp. load Management Ripple Control trackers, lugs, wires, cables and all Space is limited to the first 98 Receivers for an existing load otherwise incidental equipment with reservations. Once registered, you will management system; and (5) LED tube the exception of inverters and batteries) receive a confirmation e-mail containing lights to replace T8 fluorescents that when utilized in a solar installation information about joining the webinar a meet the April 2010 DOE recommended involving a U.S. manufactured PV few days prior to the start of the performance specifications that will be module, or a module manufactured webinar. used on eligible EERE-Recovery Act abroad but comprised exclusively of funded projects. For more information about this domestically-manufactured cells. This DATES: Effective Date: September 30, waiver expires February 6, 2011 (six webinar, please contact Shana Murray at 2010.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65013

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: expedient manner whether or not there Having established a proper Benjamin Goldstein, Energy Technology is domestic manufacturing capacity for justification based on domestic Program Specialist, Office of Energy the items submitted for a waiver of the nonavailability, EERE hereby provides Efficiency and Renewable Energy Recovery Act Buy American provision. notice that on September 30, 2010 five (EERE), (202) 287–1553, Department of This process involves a close nationwide categorical waivers of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, collaboration with the United States section 1605 of the Recovery Act were SW., Mailstop EE–2K, Washington, DC Department of Commerce National issued as detailed supra. This notice 20585. Institute of Standards and Technology constitutes the detailed written SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the (NIST) Manufacturing Extension justification required by Section 1605(c) authority of the Recovery Act, Public Partnership (MEP), in order to scour the for waivers based on a finding under Law 111–5, section 1605(b)(2), the head domestic manufacturing landscape in subsection (b). of a Federal department or agency may search of producers before making any This waiver determination is pursuant issue a ‘‘determination of nonavailability. to the delegation of authority by the inapplicability’’ (a waiver of the Buy The NIST MEP has 59 regional centers Secretary of Energy to the Assistant American provision) if the iron, steel, or with substantial knowledge of, and Secretary for Energy Efficiency and relevant manufactured good is not connections to, the domestic Renewable Energy with respect to produced or manufactured in the United manufacturing sector. MEP uses their expenditures within the purview of her States in sufficient and reasonably regional centers to ‘scout’ for current or responsibility. Consequently, this potential manufacturers of the available quantities and of a satisfactory waiver applies to EERE projects carried product(s) submitted in a waiver quality (‘‘nonavailability’’). On out under the Recovery Act. request. In the course of this interagency November 10, 2009, the Secretary of collaboration, MEP has been able to find Authority: Pub. L. 111–5, section 1605. Energy delegated the authority to make exact or partial matches for all inapplicability determinations to the manufactured goods that EERE grantees Issued in Washington, DC, on September Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency had been unable to locate. As a result, 30, 2010. and Renewable Energy (EERE), for EERE in those cases, EERE was able to work Cathy Zoi, projects under the Recovery Act. with the grantees to procure American- Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Pursuant to this delegation the Assistant made products rather than granting a Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Secretary, EERE, has concluded that (1) waiver. Energy. motorized automatic two wing revolving Upon receipt of completed waiver [FR Doc. 2010–26507 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] doors that open via the motor upon a requests for the five products in the BILLING CODE 6450–01–P fire alarm to accommodate smoke current waiver, EERE reviewed the evacuation, retract to full open position information provided and submitted the under Fire Alarm status and remain in relevant technical information to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION the open position until the alarm is NIST MEP. The MEP then used their AGENCY cleared, are compliant with the network of nationwide centers to scout Americans with Disabilities Act, and for domestic manufacturers. The NIST [FRL–9216–6] possess both sliding and swinging door MEP reported that their scouting that allows entry/exit through the process did not locate any domestic Access in Litigation to Confidential sliding doors while the revolving manufacturers for these exact or Business Information section is being serviced; (2) self- equivalent items. contained photovoltaic LED area In addition to the MEP collaboration AGENCY: Environmental Protection lighting systems with a non-corrosive, outlined above, the EERE Buy American Agency (‘‘EPA’’). stainless steel, powder-coated anti- Coordinator worked with labor unions, ACTION: Notice of Transfer of weathering shell, that do not succumb trade associations and other Information Claimed as Confidential to the sail effect, possess flat plate lens manufacturing stakeholders to scout for Business Information to the United optics with directional lamp lens, dark domestic manufacturing capacity or an States Department of Justice and Parties sky capability, and full cutoff equivalent product for each item to Certain Litigation. conformity; (3) ultrasonic directional contained in this waiver. EERE also sensors and DC300 facility controllers conducted significant amounts of SUMMARY: The EPA has authorized the for a parking guidance system which independent research to supplement United States Department of Justice integrates with American designed MEP’s scouting efforts, including (‘‘DOJ’’) to disclose, in response to intelligent parking guidance system utilizing the solar experts employed by discovery requests received in the software allowing real-time updates to a the Department of Energy’s National litigation styled, Tronox Incorporated, central location and via the Internet; (4) Renewable Energy Laboratory. EERE’s et al., v. Anadarko Petroleum Corp., et Load Management Ripple Control research efforts confirmed the MEP al., Adv. Proc. No. 09–01198 (ALG), Receivers for an existing load findings that the goods included in this pending in the United States management system; and (5) LED tube waiver are not produced in the United Bankruptcy Court for the Southern lights to replace T8 fluorescents that States in sufficient and reasonably District of New York (the ‘‘Litigation’’), meet the April 2010 DOE recommended available quantities and of a satisfactory information which has been submitted performance specifications, available at quality. to EPA by its contractors that is claimed http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ The nonavailability determination is to be, or has been determined to be, publications/pdfs/ssl/t8_replacement- also informed by the inquiries and confidential business information lamps.pdf that will be used on eligible petitions to EERE from recipients of (‘‘CBI’’). The EPA is providing notice of EERE-Recovery Act funded projects EERE Recovery Act funds, and from past disclosure and of ongoing and qualify for the ‘‘nonavailability’’ waiver suppliers, distributors, retailers and contemplated future disclosure. determination. trade associations—all stating that their Interested persons may submit EERE has developed a robust process individual efforts to locate domestic comments on this Notice to the address to ascertain in a systematic and manufacturers have been unsuccessful. noted below.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65014 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

DATES: Access by the DOJ and/or the regulations (40 CFR Part 2) may be Malcolm Pirnie, Incorporated; Metcalf & parties to the Litigation to material included in the information that the DOJ Eddy, Incorporated; Mitkem discussed in this Notice that has been will release to parties in the Litigation Laboratories; NewFields; OHM either claimed or determined to be CBI pursuant to the AGP. Remediation Services Corporation; is ongoing, and is expected to continue As explained by EPA’s Office of Resource Applications, Incorporated; in the future during the pendency of the General Counsel at its Web site, Ronson Management Corporation; Litigation. The EPA will accept http://www.epa.gov/ogc/documents. Routine Analytical Services; Roy F. comments on this Notice through htm, the CBI that may be disclosed in Weston, Incorporated; Science October 30, 2010. the Litigation could include, but is not Applications International Corporation; ADDRESSES: For further information limited to, business information Special Analytical Services; S.S. contact Craig Kaufman, Attorney- submitted by contractors and Papadopulos & Associates, Advisor, Office of Site Remediation prospective contractors, see generally Incorporated; Stevenson; STN Enforcement, U.S. Environmental Class Determination 1–95; business Environmental Joint Venture; TechLaw, Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania information submitted in technical and Incorporated; Tetra Tech EM Ave., NW. (Mail Code 2272A), cost proposals, see generally Class Incorporated; The Conti Group; Toeroek Washington, DC 20460; telephone Determination 2–78; and business Associates, Incorporated; TRC number: (202) 564–4284; e-mail address: information submitted in contract Environmental Corporation; United [email protected]. proposals and related documents, see States Environmental Services, LLC; generally Class Determination 2–79. CBI SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In United States Army Corps of Engineers; may also include information obtained United States Department of the accordance with 40 CFR 2.209(c)(1), the by the EPA under the Comprehensive EPA has disclosed information, Interior; and Westinghouse Remediation Environmental Response, Services, Incorporated; Weston including CBI, to the DOJ in response to Compensation, and Liability Act of a written request for information from Solutions, Incorporated; Wisconsin 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), Department of Natural Resources; WRS the DOJ and/or on the initiative of the including information provided to the EPA because such disclosure was Infrastructure and Environment EPA, directly or indirectly, pursuant to Incorporated; York Laboratories. necessary to enable the DOJ to carry out section 104 of CERCLA. All CBI that is a litigation function on behalf of the disclosed in the Litigation will be Dated: October 18, 2010. EPA. The DOJ has been served with designated ‘‘Confidential’’ pursuant to Sandra Connors, discovery requests seeking, among other the AGP. Acting Deputy Director, Office of Site things, documentation supporting the Information, including CBI, discussed Remediation Enforcement. proofs of claim filed by the United in this Notice may relate to certain [FR Doc. 2010–26524 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] States of America in the bankruptcy companies and agencies that have BILLING CODE 6560–50–P styled, In re Tronox Incorporated, et al., provided services for the EPA at sites Case No. 09–10156 (ALG) (Chapter 11), involved in the Litigation, including but pending in the United Stated not limited to the following: Agency for ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Bankruptcy Court for the Southern Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; AGENCY District of New York (the ‘‘Bankruptcy’’). Alion Science & Technology [FRL–9216–4] Those proofs of claim were filed on Corporation; Alpha Woods Hole behalf of, inter alia, the EPA regarding Laboratories; Arctic Slope Regional Science Advisory Board Staff Office the debtors’ environmental liabilities, Corporation; ASRC Management Request for Nominations of Experts for including liabilities at sites at which the Services, Incorporated; CDM Federal the Consultation on Revisions to the EPA’s contractors may have provided Programs Corporation; CH2M Hill Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and services. Incorporated; Clayton Environmental Site Investigation Manual The parties to the Litigation have Consultants; Columbia Analytical entered into an Agreed Protective Order, Services; Computer Services AGENCY: Environmental Protection see Document No. 248 in the Corporation; Contract Laboratory Agency (EPA). Bankruptcy docket, as amended on Program; Datachem Laboratories, ACTION: Notice. August 12, 2009, see Document No. 622 Incorporated; DynCorp International; (together, the ‘‘AGP’’), that will govern Ecology & Environment, Incorporated; SUMMARY: The EPA Science Advisory the treatment of information, including Environmental Control Technology Board (SAB) Staff Office is requesting CBI, that is designated ‘‘Confidential’’ Corporation; EnviroSystems, public nominations for technical experts pursuant to the AGP. The AGP provides Incorporated; Foster Wheeler to augment the SAB’s Radiation for limited dissemination of confidential Environmental Corporation; GRB Advisory Committee (RAC) to conduct a information and for the return or Environmental Services, Incorporated; consultation on revision to the Multi- destruction of confidential information Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Radiation Survey and Site at the conclusion of the Litigation. See, Agency; Industrial Economics, Investigation Manual. e.g., AGP, at ¶¶ 1, 10, 12–16, 21. Incorporated; InStep Software, LLC; DATES: Nominations should be In accordance with 40 CFR 2.209(d), Integrated Support Systems, submitted by November 12, 2010 per the EPA is hereby giving notice that it Incorporated; Keystone Environmental instructions below. has authorized the DOJ to disclose Resources Incorporated; Lancaster FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any information that originated from the Laboratories; Lata-Kemron Remediation, member of the public wishing further EPA to the extent required to comply LLC; Laucks Testing Laboratories, information regarding this Notice and with the discovery obligations of the Incorporated; Liberty Analytical Request for Nominations may contact United States in the Litigation, Corporation; Lockheed Environment Dr. K. Jack Kooyoomjian, Designated including its obligations under the AGP. Systems and Technologies Company; Federal Officer (DFO), SAB Staff Office, Accordingly, business information that Lockheed Environmental & by telephone/voice mail at (202) 564– is ordinarily entitled to confidential Technologies Remote Sensing Support; 2064, or via e-mail at treatment under existing Agency Lockheed Martin Services Incorporated; [email protected]. General

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65015

information concerning the EPA Science Indoor Air (ORIA), on behalf of the values and welcomes diversity. In an Advisory Board can be found at the EPA Federal Inter-Agency MARSSIM effort to obtain nominations of diverse SAB Web site at http//www.epa.gov/sab. Workgroup, has requested an SAB candidates, EPA encourages SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: consultation to seek advice early in the nominations of women and men of all Background: The SAB (42 U.S.C. 4365) process for technical and scientific racial and ethnic groups. is a chartered Federal Advisory improvements to MARSSIM leading to The EPA SAB Staff Office will Committee that provides independent the issuance of Revision 2. In response acknowledge receipt of nominations. scientific and technical peer review, to ORIA’s request, the SAB Radiation The names and bio-sketches of qualified advice, consultation, and Advisory Committee (RAC) will be nominees identified by respondents to recommendations to the EPA augmented with additional experts to this Federal Register notice, and Administrator on the technical basis for conduct this consultation. additional experts identified by the SAB EPA actions. As a Federal Advisory Request for Nominations: The SAB Staff, will be posted in a List of Committee, the SAB conducts business Staff Office is seeking nominations of Candidates on the SAB Web site at in accordance with the Federal nationally and internationally http://www.epa.gov/sab. Public Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 recognized scientists and engineers with comments on this List of Candidates U.S.C. App. 2) and related regulations. demonstrated expertise and experience will be accepted for 21 calendar days. The SAB will comply with the in one or more of the following areas: The public will be requested to provide provisions of FACA and all appropriate Environmental monitoring and relevant information or other sampling, geology, hydrogeology, SAB Staff Office procedural policies. documentation on nominees that the measurement protocols for The Federal Inter-Agency Multi- SAB Staff Office should consider in radionuclides, metrology, radiation Agency Radiation Survey and Site evaluating candidates. science and statistics. For the EPA SAB Staff Office, a Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) Additional Information: For questions review panel includes candidates who Workgroup plans to issue a Revision 2 concerning ‘‘MARSSIM, Rev. 1(2001),’’ possess the necessary domains of to the MARSSIM. The document to be please contact Dr. Mary E. Clark of the knowledge, the relevant scientific revised, ‘‘MARSSIM, Rev.1 (2001),’’ is U.S. EPA, ORIA by telephone at (202) perspectives (which, among other available at http://www.epa.gov/ 343–9348, fax at (202) 343–2395, or e- factors, can be influenced by work radiation/marssim/obtain.html. The mail at [email protected]. MARSSIM is the official multi-agency Process and Deadline for Submitting history and affiliation), and the (U.S. EPA, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Nominations: Any interested person or collective breadth of experience to Commission, U.S. Department of Energy organization may nominate qualified adequately address the charge. In and U.S. Department of Defense) individuals in the areas of expertise forming this expert panel, the SAB Staff consensus document on planning, described above for possible service on Office will consider public comments coordinating, evaluating and this expert Panel. Nominations should on the List of Candidates, information documenting environmental be submitted in electronic format provided by the candidates themselves, radiological surveys. The MARSSIM, (which is preferred over hard copy) and background information Rev. 1 (2001) provides explicit guidance following the instructions for independently gathered by the SAB to Federal agencies and other parties, ‘‘Nominating Experts to Advisory Panels Staff Office. Selection criteria to be used including states, site owners, and Ad Hoc Committees Being Formed’’ for Panel membership include: (a) contractors and private entities on how provided on the SAB Web site. The Scientific and/or technical expertise, to demonstrate that their site is in instructions can be accessed through the knowledge, and experience (primary compliance with a radiation dose or ‘‘Nomination of Experts’’ link on the factors); (b) availability and willingness risk-based regulation, otherwise known blue navigational bar on the SAB Web to serve; (c) absence of financial as a release criterion. site at http://www.epa.gov/sab. To conflicts of interest; (d) absence of an Specifically, the update to the receive full consideration, nominations appearance of a lack of impartiality; and MARSSIM is anticipated to include should include all of the information (e) skills working in committees, incorporation of an improved treatment requested below. subcommittees and advisory panels; of measurement uncertainty, additional EPA’s SAB Staff Office requests and, (f) for the Panel as a whole, survey methods made possible by contact information about the person diversity of expertise and viewpoints. improvements in technology, more making the nomination; contact The SAB Staff Office’s evaluation of extensive discussion on areas of information about the nominee; the an absence of financial conflicts of elevated activity [hotspots and Uranium disciplinary and specific areas of interest will include a review of the Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act expertise of the nominee; the nominee’s ‘‘Confidential Financial Disclosure Form (UMTRCA) standards], and a variety of curriculum vita; sources of recent grant for Special Government Employees other improvements resulting from and/or contract support; and a Serving on Federal Advisory feedback received from users since biographical sketch of the nominee Committees at the U.S. Environmental issuance of the document. The planned indicating current position, educational Protection Agency’’ (EPA Form 3110– revision reflects changes in science and background, research activities, and 48). This confidential form allows technology, as well as twelve years of recent service on other national Government officials to determine combined Federal experience in advisory committees or national whether there is a statutory conflict utilizing MARSSIM. This effort reflects professional organizations. between that person’s public a major extension of a multi-agency Persons having questions about the responsibilities (which includes initiative to provide Federal guidance nomination procedures, or who are membership on an EPA Federal on determining whether a radioactively- unable to submit nominations through advisory committee) and private contaminated site (including materials the SAB Web site, should contact Dr. K. interests and activities, or the and equipment located on or used at the Jack Kooyoomjian, DFO, as indicated appearance of a lack of impartiality, as site) has been adequately cleaned up. above in this notice. Nominations defined by Federal regulation. The form To support development of this should be submitted in time to arrive no may be viewed and downloaded from update, EPA’s Office of Radiation and later than November 12, 2010. EPA the following URL address http://

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65016 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

www.epa.gov/sab/pdf/epaform3110– 2010. If you anticipate that you will be form of international communications. 48.pdf. submitting PRA comments, but find it More recently, however IFPRS has been The approved policy under which the difficult to do so within the period of limited to point-to-point microwave EPA SAB Office selects subcommittees time allowed by this notice, you should services provided between islands in and review panels is described in the advise the FCC contact listed below as the Caribbean Sea. Therefore, the following document: Overview of the soon as possible. Commission has removed this rule Panel Formation Process at the ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to section from this information collection. Environmental Protection Agency Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of The Commission published a 60-day Science Advisory Board (EPA–SAB–EC– Management and Budget, via fax at 202– delegated notice on September 22, 2010 02–010), which is posted on the SAB 395–5167 or via the Internet at (75 FR 57792) which incorrectly stated Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sab/pdf/ [email protected] and that we would submit this collection as ec02010.pdf. to the Federal Communications an extension (no change in the Dated: October 15, 2010. Commission via e-mail to [email protected]. Commission’s reporting and/or third Vanessa T. Vu, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For party disclosure requirements). However, after publication of this notice Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff additional information, contact Judith B. Office. Herman, OMD, 202–418–0214 or e-mail in the Federal Register, FCC 10–7 was discovered that changed this [FR Doc. 2010–26656 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] [email protected]. information collection. So, the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Commission decided to publish another OMB Control Number: 3060–0698. notice with accurate information on Title: Sections 25.203(i) and how we are treating and submitting this 73.1030(a)(2), Radio Astronomy FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS OMB submission. COMMISSION Coordination Zone in Puerto Rico. Form No.: N/A. The existing requirements for this Notice of Public Information Type of Review: Revision of a information collection are contained in Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the currently approved collection. parts 25 and 73. In a 1997 Report and Federal Communications Commission, Respondents: Business or other for- Order, the Commission established a Comments Requested profit, not-for-profit institutions, and Coordination Zone for new and state, local or tribal government. modified radio facilities in various October 1, 2010. Number of Respondents and communications services that cover the SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Responses: 200 respondents; 1,000 islands of Puerto Rico, Desecheo, Mona, Commission, as part of its continuing responses. Vieques, and Culebra within the effort to reduce paperwork burden Estimated Time per Response: 5–40 Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The invites the general public and other minutes (.0833 hours to .667 hours). coordination zone and notification Federal agencies to take this Frequency of Response: On occasion procedures enable the Arecibo Radio opportunity to comment on the reporting requirement and third party Astronomy Observatory to receive following information collection(s), as disclosure requirement. information needed to assess whether required by the Paperwork Reduction Obligation to Respond: Required to an applicant’s proposed operations will Act (PRA) of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. obtain or retain benefits. Statutory cause harmful interference to the Comments are requested concerning: (a) authority for this information collection Arecibo Observatory’s operations, Whether the proposed collection of is contained in 47 U.S.C. sections 154(i), which also promotes efficient resolution information is necessary for the proper 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), and of coordination problems between the performance of the functions of the 309(j)(13). applicants and the Observatory. The Commission, including whether the Total Annual Burden: 142 hours. Observatory will perform interference information shall have practical utility; Total Annual Cost: N/A. evaluations at no cost to applicants. If (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. potential interference problems are burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: identified, applicants are required to the quality, utility, and clarity of the There is no need for confidentiality. make reasonable attempts to resolve or information collected; (d) ways to Needs and Uses: The Commission mitigate such problems in order to minimize the burden of the collection of will submit this revised collection to the protect the Observatory. information on the respondents, Office of Management and Budget Federal Communications Commission. including the use of automated (OMB) after this comment period to Marlene H. Dortch, collection techniques or other forms of obtain the full three year approval from Secretary. information technology; and (e) ways to them. The Commission is revising this [FR Doc. 2010–26542 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] further reduce the information information collection because Part 23 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P collection burden on small business rules, specifically section 23.20, was concerns with fewer than 25 employees. eliminated because there are no The FCC may not conduct or sponsor International Fixed Public a collection of information unless it Radiocommunication Services (IFPRS) FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION displays a currently valid control licenses in operation. On January 14, Ocean Transportation Intermediary number. No person shall be subject to 2010, a Report and Order, IB Docket No. License Reissuance any penalty for failing to comply with 05–216, FCC 10–7, was adopted that a collection of information subject to the eliminated Part 23 rules and the Notice is hereby given that the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that frequency allocations for IFPRS in the following Ocean Transportation does not display a currently valid OMB Table of Frequency Allocation. Part 23 Intermediary licenses have been control number. was created in the 1930s. IFPRS more reissued by the Federal Maritime DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction recently was made up of point-to-point Commission pursuant to section 19 of Act (PRA) comments should be microwave services. For many years, the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. submitted on or before December 20, these facilities provided an important chapter 409) and the regulations of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65017

Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR part 515.

License No. Name/Address Date reissued

016727NF ...... Cargo Express (Saipan), Inc., Chalan Kiya Industrial Center, P.O. Box 7447 SVRB, Saipan, August 25, 2010. MP 96950. 019428N ...... Delta Trans Logistics, Inc., 15522 Broadway Center Street, Gardena, CA 90248 ...... August 20, 2010. 020883NF ...... Masters Shipping Inc., 12520 Lombard Lane, Alsip, IL 60803 ...... August 22, 2010. 020634NF ...... Sofilink Continental, Inc., 6313 NW 99th Avenue, Miami, FL 33178 ...... September 23, 2010 021503F ...... Global Cargo Group, Inc., dba GCI Logistics, 9300 NW 25th Street, Suite 104, Miami, FL August 30, 2010. 33172. 021953F ...... Express Shipping Company of Illinois, 670 E. Northwest Hwy, 2nd FL., Arlington Heights, IL September 2, 2010. 60004. 022260N ...... EJ Logistic Inc., 2500 NW 79th Avenue, Suite 200, Miami, FL 33122 ...... August 26, 2010.

Sandra L. Kusumoto, License Number: 018717N. Date Revoked: August 30, 2010. Director, Bureau of Certification and Name: IFE Global Logistics Inc. Reason: Failed to maintain valid Licensing. Address: 100 North Hill Drive, #16, bonds. [FR Doc. 2010–26431 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Brisbane, CA 94005. License Number: 021664N. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P Date Revoked: September 18, 2010. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Name: Seaport Int’l Freight bond. Consolidators, Inc. dba Seaport Int’l Freight Consolidators. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION License Number: 019679F. Address: 2003 SW 100th Terrace, Name: Incline International Ocean Transportation Intermediary Miramar, FL 33025. Relocation, Inc. License Revocations Address: 3541 Washington Pike, Date Revoked: September 4, 2010. The Federal Maritime Commission Bridgeville, PA 15017. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid hereby gives notice that the following Date Revoked: September 19, 2010. bond. Ocean Transportation Intermediary Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 021731NF. licenses have been revoked pursuant to bond. Name: RCF International, Inc. section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 License Number: 019763N. Address: 3625 NW 82nd Avenue, (46 U.S.C. chapter 409) and the Name: Cargo Distribution Suite 103, Miami, FL 33166. regulations of the Commission International, Inc. Date Revoked: September 17, 2010. pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Address: 860 Foster Avenue, Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR Reason: Failed to maintain valid Bensenville, IL 60106. bonds. part 515, effective on the corresponding Date Revoked: September 30, 2010. date shown below: Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 021888F. License Number: 002213NF. bond. Name: Harbor Freight Logistics Ltd. Name: Staudt International Services License Number: 020281F. L.L.C. Corp. Name: Freightsolutions LLC dba Address: 346 E. Park Manor Drive, Address: 1000 E. 14th Street, Los Freight Solutions. Lake Charles, LA 70611. Angeles, CA 90021. Address: 1775 NW 70th Avenue, Date Revoked: September 9, 2010. Date Revoked: September 16, 2010. Suite 10, Miami, FL 33126. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Reason: Failed to maintain valid Date Revoked: September 5, 2010. bond. bonds. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 022143F. License Number: 4126F. bond. Name: DTI Group Inc. Name: M.K.C. Customs Brokers License Number: 020931NF. Address: 10913 NW 30th Street, Suite International Inc. Name: Good One Logistics Inc. Address: 9320 S. La Cienega Blvd., 107, Miami, FL 33172. Address: 1001 Nicholas Blvd., #A, Elk Inglewood, CA 90301. Grove Village, IL 60007. Date Revoked: September 16, 2010. Date Revoked: September 13, 2010. Date Revoked: September 10, 2010. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond. bond. Reason: Failed to maintain valid bonds. License Number: 022267N. License Number: 15656N. Name: Raya Navigation, Inc. License Number: 021040N. Name: Integrated Global Logistics, Address: 6701 Moravia Park Drive, Name: Green Line Global LLC. Unit B, Baltimore, MD 21237. International Corporation. Address: 10921 SW 120th Street, Date Revoked: September 17, 2010. Address: 8500 Rex Road, Pico Rivera, Miami, FL 33176. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid CA 90660. Date Revoked: September 27, 2010. bond. Date Revoked: September 12, 2010. Reason: Surrendered license License Number: 18309N. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid voluntarily. Name: Gunter Shipping, Inc. bond. Address: 700 Nostrand Avenue, License Number: 021503NF. Sandra L. Kusumoto, Brooklyn, NY 11216. Name: Global Cargo Group, Inc. dba Director, Bureau of Certification and Date Revoked: September 17, 2010. GCI Logistics. Licensing. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Address: 9300 NW 25th Street, Suite [FR Doc. 2010–26436 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] bond. 104, Miami, FL 33172. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65018 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES

National Institute for Occupational National Institute for Occupational National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; Designation of a Safety and Health; Designation of a Safety and Health; Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition to the Class of Employees for Addition to the Class of Employees for Addition to the Special Exposure Cohort Special Exposure Cohort Special Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for AGENCY: National Institute for AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Occupational Safety and Health Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Department of Health and (NIOSH), Department of Health and (NIOSH), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Human Services (HHS). Human Services (HHS). ACTION: Notice. ACTION: Notice. ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice of a SUMMARY: HHS gives notice of a SUMMARY: HHS gives notice of a decision to designate a class of decision to designate a class of decision to designate a class of employees from the Ames Laboratory, employees from Revere Copper and employees from the Blockson Chemical Ames, Iowa, as an addition to the Brass, Detroit, Michigan, as an addition Company in Joliet, Illinois, as an Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) under to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) addition to the Special Exposure Cohort the Energy Employees Occupational under the Energy Employees (SEC) under the Energy Employees Illness Compensation Program Act of Occupational Illness Compensation Occupational Illness Compensation 2000. On October 6, 2010, the Secretary Program Act of 2000. On October 6, Program Act of 2000. On September 3, of HHS designated the following class of 2010, the Secretary of HHS designated 2010, the Secretary of HHS designated employees as an addition to the SEC: the following class of employees as an the following class of employees as an All employees of the Department of addition to the SEC: addition to the SEC: Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its All Atomic Weapons Employer employees All Atomic Weapons Employer employees contractors and subcontractors who worked who worked at Revere Copper and Brass, who worked at the Blockson Chemical in any area of the Department of Energy Detroit, Michigan, from July 24, 1943 through Company in Joliet, Illinois from March 1, facility at the Ames Laboratory from January December 31, 1954, for a number of work 1951 to June 30, 1960, for a number of work 1, 1955 through December 31, 1960, for a days aggregating at least 250 work days, days aggregating at least 250 work days, number of work days aggregating at least 250 occurring either solely under this occurring either solely under this work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work employment or in combination with work employment, or in combination with work days within the parameters established for days within the parameters established for days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees one or more other classes of employees one or more other classes of employees in the included in the Special Exposure Cohort. included in the Special Exposure Cohort. Special Exposure Cohort. This designation will become This designation will become This designation will become effective effective November 5, 2010, unless effective October 3, 2010, unless November 5, 2010, unless Congress Congress provides otherwise prior to the Congress provides otherwise prior to the provides otherwise prior to the effective effective date. After this effective date, effective date. After this effective date, date. After this effective date, HHS will HHS will publish a notice in the HHS will publish a notice in the publish a notice in the Federal Register Federal Register reporting the addition Federal Register reporting the addition reporting the addition of this class to the of this class to the SEC or the result of of this class to the SEC or the result of SEC or the result of any provision by any provision by Congress regarding the any provision by Congress regarding the Congress regarding the decision by HHS decision by HHS to add the class to the decision by HHS to add the class to the to add the class to the SEC. SEC. SEC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Interim Director, Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Interim Director, Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Interim Director, Division of Compensation Analysis and Division of Compensation Analysis and Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Support, National Institute for Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Occupational Safety and Health Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C–46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone C–46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone C–46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 877–222–7570. Information requests can 877–222–7570. Information requests can 877–222–7570. Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to also be submitted by e-mail to also be submitted by e-mail to [email protected]. [email protected]. [email protected]. John Howard, John Howard, John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Director, National Institute for Occupational Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Safety and Health. Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 2010–26557 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2010–26665 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2010–26562 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163–19–P BILLING CODE 4163–19–P BILLING CODE 4163–19–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65019

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND determine the key factors to longevity of indicators. Performance indicators are a HUMAN SERVICES these projects. way to measure the performance of There is little information available disaster-related water and sanitation Centers for Disease Control and on the longevity of infrastructure and programs. Prevention hygiene behaviors after WASH Four indicators will be used in this [60Day–11–11AA] interventions are provided. evaluation. To measure the water Sustainability of these WASH intervention we will estimate (1) the Proposed Data Collections Submitted interventions is a crucial factor in percent of households with access to an for Public Comment and maintaining the health and well-being improved water source. The sanitation Recommendations of a community. indicator measures (2) the percent of In the Latin American and Caribbean households with access to improved In compliance with the requirement region, 20% of the rural population in sanitation. Hygiene education is of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 2008 had no access to an improved evaluated using two indicators, (3) the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for drinking water source. Forty-five percent of households with appropriate opportunity for public comment on percent of this population also has hand washing behavior and (4) the proposed data collection projects, the unimproved sanitation facilities with percent of the population using hygienic Centers for Disease Control and 20% of that population not using any sanitation facilities. Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic type of sanitation facility. The sustainability evaluation will Sustainability of WASH interventions summaries of proposed projects. To conduct a face-to-face interview with ties in to goal 7 of the Millennium request more information on the the community leaders and/or members Development Goals, to ensure proposed projects or to obtain a copy of of the water board from eight environmental sustainability. the data collection plans and communities. instruments, call 404–639–5960 and Specifically, it is to ‘‘reduce by half the Second, a cross-sectional household send comments to Carol E. Walker, CDC proportion of the population without survey (n = 150) that are randomly Acting Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 sustainable access to safe drinking water selected will be administered. This Clifton Road, MS–D74, Atlanta, GA and basic sanitation’’ by 2015. survey contains questions on water use, 30333 or send an e-mail to In addition to this issue, significant access and availability; sanitation [email protected]. natural disasters such as hurricanes and access, use and maintenance; and Comments are invited on: (a) Whether tropical storms have the potential to hygiene education—when was the last the proposed collection of information completely destroy infrastructure. In time it was presented to the community, is necessary for the proper performance 1998, Central America (El Salvador, what topics were discussed, when was of the functions of the agency, including Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua) it provided and by whom. The whether the information shall have was struck by Hurricane Mitch. After household interview will be done using practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the the hurricane, the American Red Cross a paper survey, reviewed each day and agency’s estimate of the burden of the (ARC) responded to the disaster and then transferred into an electronic proposed collection of information; (c) provided community- and household- database for statistical analysis and ways to enhance the quality, utility, and level water, sanitation, and hygiene calculation of the indicators. The survey clarity of the information to be education to hundreds of communities. will be done with the female head of collected; and (d) ways to minimize the What began as a disaster response/ household and take approximately 30 burden of the collection of information reconstruction program in 1998, has minutes. on respondents, including through the developed into a study of the long-term use of automated collection techniques sustainability of WASH interventions. Third, a qualitative survey with or other forms of information This research will focus on assessing randomly selected female head of technology. Written comments should eight communities that were provided household (n = 30), will be conducted be received within 60 days of this WASH interventions by the ARC post- to gather study participants thoughts notice. Hurricane Mitch. This survey will help and opinions on the WASH services to evaluate the key factors that help provided to them and their community. Proposed Project communities to maintain their This survey will be tape recorded and Central America Water and Sanitation infrastructure. The results will be used take approximately 30 to 45 minutes to Program Sustainability Evaluation and to improve ARC programs as well as to complete. Qualitative Survey—NEW—Global help guide other non-governmental All household surveys will include Water Sanitation and Hygiene (GWASH) agencies on how to best maximize their qualitative testing of drinking water Team, Environmental Health Services investments to ensure long-term (n = 180) stored in the home. Total Branch (EHSB), Division of Emergency community health. coliforms and E. coli will be determined and Environmental Health Services This research includes four using a standard pre-measured Hach test (DEEHS), National Center for components which will be done in each kit. Included in the water sampling Environmental Health (NCEH), Centers community: (1) A community survey portion of this study are the community for Disease Control and Prevention with community leaders and/or the water sources and water samples (CDC). local water board; (2) a cross-sectional (n = 20) within the distribution system. quantitative and qualitative household Additional testing will include Background and Brief Description survey; (3) water sampling and analysis measuring free chlorine in the CDC, under Section 301 of the Public of community water sources/systems community water system if chlorine is Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 241) has and stored household water; and (4) an being used (n = 10). the authority to conduct research infrastructure inspection of the Lastly, an infrastructure evaluation for relating to the sustainability of water, community water system. United States each community will be done by CDC sanitation and hygiene education Agency for International Development personnel using a checklist. This (WASH) programs. An epidemiological (USAID) indicators were used as the evaluation will help to determine the study with statistical methods will be basis for measuring WASH strengths and weaknesses of each used to evaluate these interventions to interventions using performance system for each community.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65020 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

There is no cost to respondents to participate in the sustainability evaluation other than their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden Total burden Respondents/form name respondents responses per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

Quantitative Household interviews ...... 150 1 0.5 75 Qualitative Household interviews ...... 30 1 1 30 Community survey ...... 8 1 1 8 Water Sampling ...... 200 1 0.5 100 Infrastructure survey ...... 8 1 1 8

Total ...... 221

Dated: October 15, 2010. limitations imposed by the review and as amended. The grant applications and Catina Conner, funding cycle. the discussions could disclose Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for Name of Committee: Center for Scientific confidential trade secrets or commercial Disease Control and Prevention. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member property such as patentable material, Conflict: Immunity and Host Defense, and [FR Doc. 2010–26566 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] and personal information concerning Inflammation. individuals associated with the grant BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Date: October 27, 2010. Time: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. applications, the disclosure of which Agenda: To review and evaluate grant would constitute a clearly unwarranted DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND applications. invasion of personal privacy. HUMAN SERVICES Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Review Special Emphasis Panel; National Institutes of Health (Telephone Conference Call). Fellowships: Psychopathology, Contact Person: David B. Winter, PhD, Developmental Disabilities, Stress and Aging. Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: November 12, 2010. Closed Meetings Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4204, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Pursuant to section 10(d) of the MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– applications. 1152, [email protected]. Place: The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, 1150 22nd Federal Advisory Committee Act, as This notice is being published less than 15 amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. days prior to the meeting due to the timing Contact Person: Maribeth Champoux, PhD, hereby given of the following meetings. limitations imposed by the review and Scientific Review Officer, Center for The meetings will be closed to the funding cycle. Scientific Review, National Institutes of public in accordance with the (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3182, provisions set forth in sections Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; MSC 7759, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594– 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 3163, [email protected]. 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Name of Committee: AIDS and Related as amended. The grant applications and 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National the discussions could disclose Research Integrated Review Group; HIV/ Institutes of Health, HHS) AIDS Vaccines Study Section. confidential trade secrets or commercial Dated: October 15, 2010. Date: November 12, 2010. property such as patentable material, Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Jennifer S. Spaeth, and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant individuals associated with the grant Director, Office of Federal Advisory applications. applications, the disclosure of which Committee Policy. Place: InterContinental Mark Hopkins would constitute a clearly unwarranted [FR Doc. 2010–26497 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Hotel, 999 California Street, San Francisco, invasion of personal privacy. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P CA 94108. Contact Person: Mary Clare Walker, PhD, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Center for Review Special Emphasis Panel; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Scientific Review, National Institutes of Neuroinflammation. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5208, Date: October 26, 2010. HUMAN SERVICES MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Time: 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. 1165, [email protected]. National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings Fellowships: Cognition, Language and Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Perception. (Telephone Conference Call). Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Date: November 12, 2010. Contact Person: Peter B. Guthrie, PhD, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Time: 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. Scientific Review Officer, Center for amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, hereby given of the following meetings. Place: Renaissance Washington, DC Hotel, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– The meetings will be closed to the 999 Ninth Street, NW., Washington, DC 1239, [email protected]. public in accordance with the 20001. This notice is being published less than 15 provisions set forth in sections Contact Person: Weijia Ni, PhD, Scientific days prior to the meeting due to the timing 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:10 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65021

National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Contact Person: Raymond R. Schleef, PhD, Massachusetts Avenue, Washington, DC Drive, Room 3184, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review 20529–2020. Comments may also be 20892, (301) 435–1507, [email protected]. Program, Division of Extramural Activities, submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202– Name of Committee: Center for Scientific National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 6700B 272–8352 or via e-mail at Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR10–074: Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892–7616, 301–451–3679, [email protected], and to the OMB USCIS Program Project: Solid-State NMR Desk Officer via facsimile at 202–395– Technologies for Membrane Protein [email protected]. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 5806 or via e-mail at Structure. _ Date: November 16, 2010. Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, oira [email protected]. When Time: 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Transplantation Research; 93.856, submitting comments by e-mail please Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Microbiology and Infectious Diseases make sure to add OMB Control Number applications. Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 1615–0023 in the subject box. Written Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Dated: October 15, 2010. comments and suggestions from the Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Jennifer S. Spaeth, public and affected agencies should (Virtual Meeting) address one or more of the following Contact Person: Mike Radtke, PhD, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. four points: Scientific Review Officer, Center for (1) Evaluate whether the proposed Scientific Review, National Institutes of [FR Doc. 2010–26498 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] collection of information is necessary Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4176, BILLING CODE 4140–01–P MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– for the proper performance of the 1728, [email protected]. functions of the agency, including whether the information will have (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND practical utility; Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; SECURITY 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration agencies estimate of the burden of the 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Services proposed collection of information, Institutes of Health, HHS) including the validity of the Dated: October 15, 2010. Agency Information Collection methodology and assumptions used; Jennifer S. Spaeth, Activities: Form I–485 and (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be Director, Office of Federal Advisory Supplements A and E, Extension of a Committee Policy. Currently Approved Information collected; and Collection; Comment Request (4) Minimize the burden of the [FR Doc. 2010–26499 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] collection of information on those who BILLING CODE 4140–01–P ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information are to respond, including through the Collection Under Review: Form I–485 use of appropriate automated, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND and Supplements A and E, Application electronic, mechanical, or other HUMAN SERVICES to Register Permanent Residence or technological collection techniques or Adjust Status; OMB Control No. 1615– other forms of information technology, National Institutes of Health 0023. e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. National Institute of Allergy and The Department of Homeland Overview of this information Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Security, U.S. Citizenship and collection: Meeting Immigration Services (USCIS) will be (1) Type of Information Collection: submitting the following information Extension of a currently approved Pursuant to section 10(d) of the collection request to the Office of information collection. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Management and Budget (OMB) for (2) Title of the Form/Collection: amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is review and clearance in accordance Application to Register Permanent hereby given of the following meeting. with the Paperwork Reduction Act of Residence or Adjust Status. The meeting will be closed to the 1995. The information collection was (3) Agency form number, if any, and public in accordance with the previously published in the Federal the applicable component of the provisions set forth in sections Register on June 30, 2010, at 75 FR Department of Homeland Security 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., 37820, allowing for a 60-day public sponsoring the collection: Form I–485, as amended. The grant applications and comment period. USCIS did not receive and Supplements A and E; U.S. the discussions could disclose any comments for this information Citizenship and Immigration Services confidential trade secrets or commercial collection. (USCIS). The purpose of this notice is to allow (4) Affected public who will be asked property such as patentable material, an additional 30 days for public or required to respond, as well as a brief and personal information concerning comments. Comments are encouraged abstract: Primary: Individuals or individuals associated with the grant and will be accepted until November 22, Households. The information collected applications, the disclosure of which 2010. This process is conducted in is used to determine eligibility to adjust would constitute a clearly unwarranted accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. status under section 245 of the invasion of personal privacy. Written comments and/or suggestions Immigration and Nationality Act. Name of Committee: National Institute of regarding the item(s) contained in this (5) An estimate of the total number of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special notice, especially regarding the respondents and the amount of time Emphasis Panel; Mechanisms and Prevention estimated public burden and associated estimated for an average respondent to of Sexual Transmission of HIV/SIV. response time, should be directed to the respond: Form I–485—491,112 Date: November 17–18, 2010. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Department of Homeland Security responses at 6 hours and 15 minutes Agenda: To review and evaluate grant (DHS), and to the Office of Management (6.25) per response; Supplement A— applications. and Budget (OMB) USCIS Desk Officer. 3,888 responses at 13 minutes (.216) per Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Comments may be submitted to: USCIS, response; Supplement E—31,000 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. Chief, Regulatory Products Division, 20 responses at one hour per response.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65022 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

(6) An estimate of the total public Massachusetts Avenue, Washington, DC If you need a copy of the information burden (in hours) associated with the 20529–2020. Comments may also be collection instrument, please visit the collection: 3,101,289 annual burden submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202– Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov. hours. 272–8352 or via e-mail at We may also be contacted at: USCIS, If you need a copy of the information [email protected], and to the OMB USCIS Regulatory Products Division, 20 collection instrument, please visit the Desk Officer via facsimile at 202–395– Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov. 5806 or via e-mail at Washington, DC 20529–2020; We may also be contacted at: USCIS, [email protected]. When Telephone 202–272–8377. Regulatory Products Division, 20 submitting comments by e-mail please Dated: October 18, 2010. Massachusetts Avenue, NW., make sure to add OMB Control Number Sunday Aigbe, Washington, DC 20529–2020; 1615–0035 in the subject box. Written Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. Telephone 202–272–8377. comments and suggestions from the Citizenship and Immigration Services, Dated: October 18, 2010. public and affected agencies should Department of Homeland Security. Sunday Aigbe, address one or more of the following [FR Doc. 2010–26512 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. four points: BILLING CODE 9111–97–P Citizenship and Immigration Services, (1) Evaluate whether the proposed Department of Homeland Security. collection of information is necessary [FR Doc. 2010–26510 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] for the proper performance of the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND BILLING CODE 9111–97–P functions of the agency, including SECURITY whether the information will have practical utility; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Services SECURITY agencies estimate of the burden of the [OMB Control No. 1615–0038] proposed collection of information, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration including the validity of the Agency Information Collection Services methodology and assumptions used; Activities: Form I–751, Extension of a (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and Currently Approved Information Agency Information Collection clarity of the information to be Collection; Comment Request Activities: Form I–698, Extension of a collected; and Currently Approved Information (4) Minimize the burden of the ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection; Comment Request collection of information on those who Collection Under Review: Form I–751, are to respond, including through the Petition to Remove Conditions on ACTION: 30-day notice of information use of appropriate automated, Residence; OMB Control No. 1615– collection under review: Form I–698, electronic, mechanical, or other 0038. Application to Adjust Status from technological collection techniques or Temporary to Permanent Resident; OMB The Department of Homeland other forms of information technology, Control No. 1615–0035. Security, U.S. Citizenship and e.g., permitting electronic submission of Immigration Services (USCIS) will be The Department of Homeland responses. submitting the following information Security, U.S. Citizenship and Overview of This Information collection request to the Office of Immigration Services (USCIS) will be Collection Management and Budget (OMB) for submitting the following information review and clearance in accordance collection request to the Office of (1) Type of Information Collection: with the Paperwork Reduction Act of Management and Budget (OMB) for Extension of a currently approved 1995. The information collection was review and clearance in accordance information collection. previously published in the Federal with the Paperwork Reduction Act of (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Register on June 30, 2010, at 75 FR 1995. The information collection was Application to Adjust Status from 37821, allowing for a 60-day public previously published in the Federal Temporary to Permanent Resident. comment period. USCIS did not receive Register on June 23, 2010, at 75 FR (3) Agency form number, if any, and any comments for this information 35825, allowing for a 60-day public the applicable component of the collection. comment period. USCIS did not receive Department of Homeland Security The purpose of this notice is to allow any comments for this information sponsoring the collection: Form I–698; an additional 30 days for public collection. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration comments. Comments are encouraged The purpose of this notice is to allow Services (USCIS). and will be accepted until November 22, an additional 30 days for public (4) Affected public who will be asked 2010. This process is conducted in comments. Comments are encouraged or required to respond, as well as a brief accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. and will be accepted until November 22, abstract: Primary: Individuals or Written comments and/or suggestions 2010. This process is conducted in Households. The data collected on this regarding the item(s) contained in this accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. form is used by USCIS to determine notice, especially regarding the Written comments and/or suggestions eligibility to adjust an applicant’s estimated public burden and associated regarding the item(s) contained in this residence status. response time, should be directed to the notice, especially regarding the (5) An estimate of the total number of Department of Homeland Security estimated public burden and associated respondents and the amount of time (DHS), and to the Office of Management response time, should be directed to the estimated for an average respondent to and Budget (OMB) USCIS Desk Officer. Department of Homeland Security respond: 704 responses at 1 hour per Comments may be submitted to: USCIS, (DHS), and to the Office of Management response. Chief, Regulatory Products Division, 20 and Budget (OMB) USCIS Desk Officer. (6) An estimate of the total public Massachusetts Avenue, Washington, DC Comments may be submitted to: USCIS, burden (in hours) associated with the 20529–2020. Comments may also be Chief, Regulatory Products Division, 20 collection: 704 annual burden hours. submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202–

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65023

272–8352 or via e-mail at If you need a copy of the information determination, CBP concluded that, [email protected], and to the OMB USCIS collection instrument, please visit the based upon the facts presented, the Desk Officer via facsimile at 202–395– Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov. heating boilers, assembled in Canada 5806 or via e-mail at We may also be contacted at: USCIS, from parts made in the United States, [email protected]. When Regulatory Products Division, 20 Canada, and France, are substantially submitting comments by e-mail please Massachusetts Avenue, NW., transformed in Canada, such that make sure to add OMB Control Number Washington, DC 20529–2020; Canada is the country of origin of the 1615–0038 in the subject box. Written Telephone 202–272–8377. finished article for purposes of U.S. comments and suggestions from the Dated: October 18, 2010. Government procurement. Section 177.29, Customs Regulations public and affected agencies should Sunday Aigbe, address one or more of the following (19 CFR 177.29), provides that notice of Chief, Regulatory Products Division, U.S. final determinations shall be published four points: Citizenship and Immigration Services, (1) Evaluate whether the proposed Department of Homeland Security. in the Federal Register within 60 days of the date the final determination is collection of information is necessary [FR Doc. 2010–26511 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] issued. Section 177.30, Customs for the proper performance of the BILLING CODE 9111–97–P functions of the agency, including Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), provides whether the information will have that any party-at-interest, as defined in practical utility; DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the SECURITY review of a final determination within agencies estimate of the burden of the 30 days of publication of such proposed collection of information, U.S. Customs and Border Protection determination in the Federal Register. including the validity of the Dated: October 13, 2010. methodology and assumptions used; Notice of Issuance of Final Sandra L. Bell, Determination Concerning Certain (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Heating Boilers clarity of the information to be Office of International Trade. collected; and AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Attachment (4) Minimize the burden of the Protection, Department of Homeland collection of information on those who Security. HQ H119218 are to respond, including through the ACTION: Notice of final determination. October 13, 2010 use of appropriate automated, OT:RR:CTF:VS H119218 electronic, mechanical, or other SUMMARY: This document provides Ms. Regina Vargo notice that U.S. Customs and Border Greenberg Traurig, LLP technological collection techniques or 2101 L Street NW, Suite 1000 other forms of information technology, Protection (‘‘CBP’’) has issued a final Washington, D.C. 20037 e.g., permitting electronic submission of determination concerning the country of Re: U.S. Government Procurement; Heating responses. origin of certain heating boilers. Based Boilers upon the facts presented, CBP has Dear Ms. Vargo: Overview of This Information concluded in the final determination This is in response to your letter, dated Collection that Canada is the country of origin of August 3, 2010, requesting a final the heating boilers for purposes of U.S. determination on behalf of Camus Hydronics (1) Type of Information Collection: Ltd. (Camus) of Ontario, Canada, pursuant to Extension of a currently approved Government procurement. subpart B of 19 C.F.R. part 177. information collection. DATES: The final determination was Under these regulations, which implement (2) Title of the Form/Collection: issued on October 13, 2010. A copy of Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, Petition to Remove Conditions on the final determination is attached. Any as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), U.S. Residence. party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issues 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of country of origin advisory rulings and final (3) Agency form number, if any, and determinations as to whether an article is or the applicable component of the this final determination on or before would be a product of a designated country Department of Homeland Security November 22, 2010. or instrumentality for the purpose of granting sponsoring the collection: Form I–751; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: waivers of certain ‘‘Buy American’’ U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Barbara Kunzinger, Valuation and restrictions in U.S. law or practice for Services (USCIS). Special Programs Branch: (202) 325– products offered for sale to the U.S. 0359. Government. (4) Affected public who will be asked This final determination concerns the or required to respond, as well as a brief SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is country of origin of certain heating boilers. abstract: Primary: Individuals or hereby given that on October 13, 2010, We note that Camus is a party-at-interest Households. This form is used by USCIS pursuant to subpart B of part 177, within the meaning of 19 C.F.R. 177.22(d)(1) to verify the petitioner’s status and Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 177, and is entitled to request this final determine whether the conditional determination as the manufacturer of these subpart B), CBP issued a final boilers under 19 C.F.R. 177.23(a). resident is eligible to have his or her determination concerning the country of status removed. origin of heating boilers which may be FACTS: (5) An estimate of the total number of offered to the U.S. Government under an This case involves the Camus DynaFlame, respondents and the amount of time undesignated procurement contract. DynaForce, and DynaMax heating boilers estimated for an average respondent to This final determination, in HQ fabricated and assembled in Canada from respond: 183,000 responses at 3 hours H119218, was issued at the request of sheet metal and components primarily of and 20 minutes (3.333) per response. Camus Hydronics Ltd. under procedures United States (U.S.), Canadian, and (in the case of the DynaMax) French origin. All three (6) An estimate of the total public set forth at 19 CFR part 177, subpart B, boilers go through both a sub-assembly stage burden (in hours) associated with the which implements Title III of the Trade and an assembly stage in Canada, as well as collection: 609,939 annual burden Agreements Act of 1979, as amended testing, quality control, and packaging. A bill hours. (19 U.S.C. 2511–18). In the final of materials was submitted with your request.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65024 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

DynaFlame Boilers sheet metal is the same for the DynaMax as components assembled, number of different The DynaFlame boiler is composed of 65 it is for the DynaFlame and DynaForce. The operations, time, skill level required, separate components. Of these, 22 are heat exchanger (along with the burner) is attention to detail, quality control, the value fabricated in Canada from sheet metal imported into Canada from France. The added to the article, and the overall imported from the U.S. Most of the finished controls, sensors, fan, and pump are some of employment generated by the manufacturing components, including the burner, headers, the components of U.S. origin. process. and controls, are also of U.S. origin. The As with the other two boilers, the The courts and CBP have also considered fabrication process includes, among other DynaMax has both a sub-assembly stage and the essential character of the imported article things, shearing the flat stock to the required an assembly stage. The sub-assembly stage is in making these determinations. See size; utilizing punch presses, tools, and dies; composed of three sub-assembly processes: Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 542 F. Supp. bending and welding the steel; and painting the heat exchanger, electronics and controls, 1026, 3 CIT 220, 224–225 (1982) (where it the steel components. and the plate exchanger. Although the heat was determined that imported uppers were Four sub-assembly processes then occur in exchanger is imported from France, it the essence of a completed shoe) and Canada; these include the assembly of the undergoes additional assembly in Canada. National Juice Products Association, et al v. heat exchanger, the gas train, electronics and The heat exchanger sub-assembly consists of, United States, 628 F. Supp. 978, 10 CIT 48, controls, and the combustion fan. Assembly among other things, inspection, attaching the 61 (1986) (where the court addressed each of of the heat exchanger requires, among other pump, installing the burner and ignition, and the factors (name, character, and use) in things, cutting copper finned tube to specific testing the heat exchanger. Assembly of the finding that no substantial transformation lengths, adjusting the tube to the required plate exchanger requires selecting the occurred in the production of retail juice specifications, inserting the tubes into the required plate exchanger, attaching the products from manufacturing concentrate). headers, inserting and attaching a number of fittings and labeling the fittings. In order to determine whether a substantial other components, and hydro testing the heat These three sub-assemblies are then transformation occurs when components of exchanger. The copper tubes used to make assembled together with the fabricated various origins are assembled into completed the heat exchanger are of U.S. origin. The gas components of sheet metal, the combustion products, CBP considers the totality of the train assembly requires fitting the fan, the gas train, and various other parts to circumstances and makes such components together by threading the become the finished DynaMax boiler. determinations on a case-by-case basis. The country of origin of the item’s components, components with nipples and fittings, and ISSUE: then painting all the pipe black. Assembly of extent of the processing that occurs within a What is the country of origin of the subject the electronics and controls requires country, and whether such processing boilers for the purpose of U.S. Government installing and wiring the components renders a product with a new name, procurement? together, and programming certain aspects of character, and use are primary considerations the control box. The combustion fan is LAW AND ANALYSIS: in such cases. Additionally, factors such as the resources expended on product design assembled by separating the fan housing, Pursuant to subpart B of part 177, 19 C.F.R. installing the components, and then and development, extent and nature of post- § 177.21 et seq., which implements Title III assembly inspection and testing procedures, reassembling the housing. of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as The four sub-assemblies, along with the and worker skill required during the actual amended (19 U.S.C. § 2511 et seq.), CBP manufacturing process will be considered fabricated sheet metal parts and various other issues country of origin advisory rulings and components, are then assembled into a when determining whether a substantial final determinations as to whether an article transformation has occurred. No one factor is finished DynaFlame boiler. Final assembly is or would be a product of a designated consists of, among other things, installing, determinative. country or instrumentality for the purpose of In Headquarters Ruling Letter (‘‘HRL’’) wiring, and fastening the sub-assemblies to granting waivers of certain ‘‘Buy American’’ each other and the remaining components. 555532 (September 18, 1990), Customs held restrictions in U.S. law or practice for that electric and gas water heaters imported DynaForce Boilers products offered for sale to the U.S. from Mexico were a product of Mexico. The Government. Mexican manufacturer fabricated the shell The DynaForce boiler contains almost 60 Under the rule of origin set forth under 19 separate components. Of these, 18 are with rolled steel from the U.S. and then U.S.C. § 2518(4)(B): assembled the fabricated shell with other fabricated in Canada from sheet metal An article is a product of a country or imported from the U.S. The sheet metal components of the water heater, many of instrumentality only if (i) it is wholly the which were of U.S. origin. This is very fabrication process for the DynaForce is the growth, product, or manufacture of that same as that for the DynaFlame. The heat similar to the process used by Camus in this country or instrumentality, or (ii) in the case case. Camus uses U.S. originating sheet metal exchanger is purchased already assembled of an article which consists in whole or in from a Canadian supplier, and is assembled to fabricate many parts, such as the boiler part of materials from another country or shell, and then assembles U.S., Canadian, in Canada from U.S. origin stainless steel instrumentality, it has been substantially plates and tubes. The burner, controls, and and (in the case of the DynaMax) French transformed into a new and different article originating components to create the fan kit are some of the U.S. origin of commerce with a name, character, or use components. completed boilers. distinct from that of the article or articles In HRL 561450 (April 14, 2000), a home Like with the DynaFlame, the DynaForce from which it was so transformed. goes through both a sub-assembly stage and espresso machine assembled in Italy from an assembly stage. The sub-assembly stage See also 19 C.F.R. § 177.22(a). over 60 components from both Spain and has three processes: the gas train, electronics In determining whether the combining of Italy was considered to be a product of Italian and controls, and the combustion fan. The parts or materials constitutes a substantial origin. The assembly of the components was assemblies of the gas train, electronics and transformation, the determinative issue is the found to be a substantial transformation controls, and the combustion fan for the extent of operations performed and whether resulting in a new commercial product with DynaForce are very similar to those for the the parts lose their identity and become an a new name, character and use. Similarly, the DynaFlame. integral part of the new article. Belcrest assembly of the U.S., Canadian, and French The three sub-assemblies, the heat Linens v. United States, 573 F. Supp. 1149 components for the boilers involves at least exchanger, the fabricated components of (Ct. Int’l Trade 1983), aff’d, 741 F.2d 1368 50 components. The assembly results in an sheet metal, and the remaining parts are then (Fed. Cir. 1984). Assembly operations that are article with a new name, character and use assembled to create the finished DynaForce minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or from that of the individual components—a boiler. meaningful, will generally not result in a boiler. substantial transformation. See C.S.D. 80– All three boilers undergo a substantial DynaMax Boilers 111, C.S.D. 85–25, C.S.D. 89–110, C.S.D. 89– amount of work in Canada, from the The DynaMax boiler contains over 50 118, C.S.D. 90–51, and C.S.D. 90–97. fabrication of the sheet metal into separate components. Of those, 21 are Whether an operation is complex and components, the assembly of parts into fabricated in Canada from U.S. originating meaningful depends on the nature of the subassemblies, and the final assembly— sheet metal. The fabrication process for the operation, including the number of combining the subassemblies and the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65025

remaining components into the finished Written material and requests to make (8) An update on Standards, Training, boilers. The number of components, the least oral presentations should reach the Certification & Watch keeping (STCW) of which being 50, is a meaningful assembly Coast Guard on or before October 25, involving U.S. vessels operating in of individual components into the finished 2010. Requests to have a copy of your foreign waters and the use of non-U.S. boilers. Although some of the more material distributed to each member of expensive parts are not of Canadian origin, citizens for their manning purposes. no one part could function or run the boiler the committee should reach the Coast (9) International Maritime without the others. Guard on or before October 25, 2010. Organization (IMO) Updates concerning Therefore, based on the totality of the ADDRESSES: The Committee will meet at what regulations have been released or circumstances in this case, we find that the the Crowne Plaza Houston Northpoint, will be released soon that may be of Canadian processing results in a substantial Grand Ballroom 1&2, 425 Sam Houston interest to NOSAC. transformation of the components and that Parkway East, Houston, TX 77060, Tel. (10) Period for public comment. the DynaFlame, DynaForce, and DynaMax (281) 445–9000, on November 9, 2010. boilers should be considered products of Public participation is welcome and Procedural Canada for the purpose of U.S. Government procurement. members of the public wishing to The DFO will use the following participate may contact Commander procedures to facilitate the meeting. HOLDING: P.W. Clark at 202–372–1410. Written (1) The meeting is open to the public. Based on the facts of this case, the country comments should be sent to (2) Persons desiring to present of origin of the Camus DynaFlame, Commander P.W. Clark, Designated statements at the meeting are DynaForce, and DynaMax heating boilers is Federal Officer of NOSAC, Commandant encouraged to notify the DFO listed in Canada for purposes of U.S. Government (CG–5222), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT procurement. Second Street, SW, Stop 7126, section above before October 25, 2010. Notice of this final determination will be Washington, DC 20593–0001; or by fax given in the Federal Register, as required by (3) The DFO will make every effort to 19 C.F.R. § 177.29. Any party-at-interest other to 202–372 1926, at least 15 days prior accommodate all persons who wish to than the party which requested this final to the meeting. This notice is available participate, but admission will be determination may request, pursuant to 19 in our online docket, USCG–2010–0925, subject to availability of space in the C.F.R. § 177.31 that CBP reexamine the at http://www.regulations.gov. meeting room. The meeting may adjourn matter anew and issue a new final FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: early if scheduled speakers complete determination. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. Commander P.W. Clark, Designated their statements or questions in less § 177.30, any party-at-interest may, within 30 Federal Officer (DFO) of NOSAC, or Mr. time than is scheduled for the meeting. days of publication of the Federal Register Kevin Pekarek, Assistant Designated (4) An individual, whether speaking Notice referenced above, seek judicial review Federal Officer (ADFO), telephone 202– of this final determination before the Court in a personal or a representative of International Trade. 372–1386, fax 202–372–1926. capacity on behalf of an organization, Sincerely, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of will be limited to a three-minute Sandra L. Bell this meeting is given under the Federal statement and scheduled on a first- Executive Director Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 come, first-served basis. If a large Office of Regulations and Rulings U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92–463). NOSAC number of persons register to present Office of International Trade provides advice and makes comments, this amount of time may be [FR Doc. 2010–26649 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] recommendations to the Coast Guard on shortened to provide all registered BILLING CODE P safety and other concerns affecting the persons an opportunity to present their offshore oil and gas industry and assists comments. the Coast Guard in formulating U.S. (4) Any speaker prevented by time DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND positions for discussion and constraints from speaking will be SECURITY presentation at the International encouraged to submit written remarks, Maritime Organization (IMO). Coast Guard which will be made part of the record. Agenda of Meeting (5) For information on facilities or [USCG–2010–0925] services for individuals with disabilities The agenda for the November 9, 2010, or to request assistance at the meeting, National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee meeting is as follows: please contact the person listed in the Committee (1) Roll call of committee members. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT (2) Approval of minutes from the AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. section above before October 25, 2010. September 29, 2010, meeting. (6) The meeting will be recorded by ACTION: Notice of meeting. (3) Presentation and discussion of a court reporter. A transcript of the reports, recommendations from the SUMMARY: The National Offshore Safety meeting and any material presented at Advisory Committee (NOSAC) will meet subcommittees on: (a) Medical Evacuation of Injured the meeting will be made available to discuss items related to safety of Divers. through the fido.gov Web site discussed operations and other matters affecting (b) Marine Portable Quarters. in the MINUTES section below. the oil and gas offshore industry. The (4) An update on the NOSAC (7) The meeting is designed to invite purpose of this meeting is to review and recommendations received by the Coast public views and gather information on discuss reports and recommendations Guard and their status. relevant topics being discussed. received from the various NOSAC (5) The Bureau of Ocean Energy, However, the DFO, ADFO, and subcommittees. The Committee will Management, Regulation and Committee members may ask questions then use this information to formulate Enforcement (BOEMRE) organizational to clarify a statement. recommendations to the agency. This and regulatory update. Minutes meeting will be open to the public. (6) A presentation on the DATES: The meeting will take place on DEEPWATER HORIZON ongoing Minutes from the meeting will be Tuesday, November 9, 2010, from 9 a.m. Investigation. available for the public review and to 4:30 p.m. CST. This meeting may (7) An update on current Coast Guard copying 30 days following the meeting close early if all business is finished. regulatory initiatives. and can be accessed from the fido.gov

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65026 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Web site. Use ‘‘code 68’’ to identify Instructions: All submissions received ACTION: Notice of availability; request NOSAC when accessing this material. must include the docket ID: FEMA– for comments. 2007–0008. Comments received will Dated: October 14, 2010. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and F.J. Sturm, also be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including Wildlife Service (Service), announce the Acting Director, Commercial Regulations and availability of a draft comprehensive Standards. any personal information provided. You may want to read the Privacy Act conservation plan (CCP) and [FR Doc. 2010–26545 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Notice, which is found via the Privacy environmental assessment (EA) for the BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Notice link in the footer of http:// Selawik National Wildlife Refuge www.regulations.gov. (Refuge) for public review and Docket: For access to the docket to comment. In this document, we describe DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND read documents or comments received alternatives, including our preferred SECURITY by the National Advisory Council, go to alternative, to manage the Refuge for the 15 years following approval of the final Federal Emergency Management http://www.regulations.gov. CCP. Agency FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alyson Price, Designated Federal DATES: To ensure consideration, please [Docket ID: FEMA–2007–0008] Officer, FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Room send your written comments by January 832, Washington, DC 20472–3100, 15, 2011. We will announce upcoming National Advisory Council public meetings and other opportunities Teleconference Meeting telephone 202–646–3746, fax 202–646– 3930, and e-mail FEMA–[email protected]. for public input in local news media. AGENCY: Federal Emergency The NAC Web site is located at: ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Management Agency, DHS. http://www.fema.gov/about/nac/. or requests for copies of the draft CCP ACTION: Notice of teleconference SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of and the EA or more information by any meeting. this meeting is required under the of the following methods. You may Federal Advisory Committee Act request hard copies or a CD–ROM of the SUMMARY: The National Advisory (FACA), Public Law 92–463, as document. Council (NAC) will be holding a amended (5 U.S.C. App. 1 et seq.). Agency Web Site: Download a copy of teleconference meeting for the purpose The Department of Homeland the document at http://alaska.fws.gov/ of discussing revisions to the National Security/Federal Emergency nwr/planning/plans.htm. Exercise Program (NEP). The Management Agency (DHS/FEMA) is E-mail: [email protected]; teleconference meeting will be open to working to revise the NEP to incorporate please include ‘‘Selawik National the public. key tenets, principles, and structures Wildlife Refuge draft CCP and EA’’ in DATES: Meeting Date: Wednesday, based on the Secretary’s August 17, the subject line of the message. November 10, 2010 from approximately 2010 directive. FEMA will be Fax: Attn: Jeffrey Brooks, (907) 786– 3 p.m. e.s.t. to 5 p.m. e.s.t. conducting a public teleconference with 3965, or Lee Anne Ayres, (907) 442– Comment Date: Written comments the NAC to brief it on the planned 3124. must be received by Wednesday, program revisions and to obtain the U.S. Mail: Jeffrey Brooks, U.S. Fish November 3, 2010. Council’s input on the NEP reform. and Wildlife Service Regional Office, 1011 E. Tudor Road Mailstop 231, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held The meeting is open to the public. via teleconference only. Members of the Although members of the public will Anchorage, AK 99503. In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call public who wish to obtain the listen- not be allowed to comment orally (907) 786–3357 to make an appointment only call-in number, access code, and during the meeting, they may file a during regular business hours at the other information for the public written statement with the NAC before above address; or call (907) 442–3799 to teleconference may contact Alyson Price the date of the meeting. For those make an appointment during regular as listed in the FOR FURTHER wishing to submit written comments, business hours at the Selawik Refuge INFORMATION CONTACT section by please follow the procedure described Headquarters in Kotzebue, AK. Wednesday, November 3, 2010. All in the ADDRESSES section. written comments must be received by Dated: October 15, 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Brooks, Planning Team Leader, at Wednesday, November 3, 2010. All W. Craig Fugate, submissions received must include the the above address, by phone at (907) Administrator, Federal Emergency 786–3839, or by e-mail at Docket ID FEMA–2007–0008 and may Management Agency. [email protected]. be submitted by any one of the [FR Doc. 2010–26593 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] following methods: BILLING CODE 9111–48–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the Introduction With this notice, we continue the CCP instructions for submitting comments DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR on the Web site. process for the Selawik National E-mail: FEMA–[email protected]. Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Refuge. We started this process Include Docket ID FEMA–2007–0008 in through a notice of intent in the Federal the subject line of the message. [FWS–R7–2010–N191; 70133–1265–0000– Register (73 FR 57143; October 1, 2008). Facsimile: (703) 483–2999. S3] The Selawik National Wildlife Refuge Mail: FEMA, Office of Chief Counsel, Draft Comprehensive Conservation was established by the Alaska National 500 C Street, SW., Room 840, Plan and Environmental Assessment, Interest Lands Conservation Act Washington, DC 20472–3100. Selawik National Wildlife Refuge, (ANILCA) in 1980. Selawik Refuge Hand Delivery/Courier: FEMA, Office Kotzebue, AK straddles the Arctic Circle in of Chief Counsel, 500 C Street, SW., northwestern Alaska, encompassing an Room 840, Washington, DC 20472– AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, area approximately the size of 3100. Interior. Connecticut. Refuge boundaries

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65027

encompass approximately 3.2 million 668dd-668ee) (Administration Act), as visiting public; (3) maintaining hunting acres of which approximately 2.5 amended by the National Wildlife opportunities; (4) addressing local million acres are administered by the Refuge System Improvement Act of public use needs; (5) maintaining water U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Section 1997, and the Alaska National Interest quality and quantity; (6) maintaining the 302(7)(B) of ANILCA states the purposes Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (94 wild character of the Refuge and quality for which the Selawik Refuge was Stat. 2371; ANILCA) require us to visitor experiences; (7) proactively established: (1) To conserve fish and develop a CCP for each refuge. The addressing the uncertainties of climate wildlife populations and habitats in purpose for developing a CCP is to change; and (8) providing more outreach their natural diversity; (2) to fulfill provide refuge managers with a 15-year and better communication for the international treaty obligations of the plan for achieving refuge purposes and public. United States with respect to fish and contributing toward the mission of the We have considered and evaluated all wildlife and their habitats; (3) to National Wildlife Refuge System, of these issues and public concerns, provide the opportunity for continued consistent with sound principles of fish with many incorporated into the various subsistence use by local residents; and and wildlife management, conservation, management alternatives, goals, and (4) to ensure water quality and legal mandates, and our policies. We objectives addressed or described in the necessary water quantity within the will review and update the CCP at least draft CCP and the EA. Refuge. every 15 years in accordance with the CCP Alternatives We Are Considering The Selawik River, an important Administration Act and ANILCA. The document describes and feature, meanders through the heart of Public Outreach the Refuge, creating a rich succession of evaluates three alternatives for habitats, including vast wetlands. The We started the CCP for Selawik managing the Refuge for the 15 years names of both the river and the Refuge Refuge in September 2008. At that time following approval of the final CCP. originated from the Inupiaq word and throughout the planning process, These alternatives follow much of the ‘‘siilivik,’’ which means ‘‘place of we requested public comments and same general management direction. sheefish.’’ The sheefish, or inconnu, is a considered and incorporated them in Alternative A (the No-Action member of the whitefish family and numerous ways. We mailed a planning Alternative) is required under NEPA and describes continuation of current provides an important, and highly newsletter to approximately 3,200 management activities. Alternative A desired, food resource for Native individuals, agencies, and serves as a baseline against which to subsistence harvesters in this region of organizations. This newsletter compare the other alternatives. Under Alaska. announced that we were revising the Extensive tundra wetlands containing CCP and seeking input from the public. Alternative A, management of the Refuge would continue to follow grass and sedge meadows dominate the The newsletter informed the public direction described in the 1987 CCP and Refuge landscape, while boreal spruce about issues that were identified by the record of decision as modified by forests, alder, and willow thickets trace planning team and Refuge staff. The subsequent program-specific plans (e.g., stream and river drainages. Multitudes newsletter contained a work sheet that fisheries, cultural resources, and fire of migratory waterfowl and shorebirds provided an opportunity for people to management plans). Alternative A breed on 24,000 lakes and ponds within identify issues that they thought should would continue to protect and maintain the Refuge. Neo-tropical songbirds nest be addressed in the CCP. This newsletter and work sheet were also the existing wildlife values, natural in forests and willow thickets. Moose, made available through the Internet. diversity, and ecological integrity of the wolves, lynx, bears, muskoxen, Arctic Over 70 written comments were Refuge. Human disturbances to fish and and red fox, beavers, and muskrats are received. wildlife habitats and populations would year-round residents. The Western To gather additional input from the be minimal. Private and commercial Arctic Caribou Herd migrates across public, members of the planning team uses of the Refuge would not change, Selawik Refuge. In mild winters, small held an open house meeting in and public uses employing existing bands of caribou remain on the Refuge Kotzebue, which was attended by 18 access methods would continue to be to forage in the lichen-covered foothills. community members. Visits were made allowed. Opportunities would be Many rivers, sloughs, and lakes support to Buckland, Kiana, Noorvik, Selawik, maintained to pursue traditional both freshwater and anadromous and Shungnak where members of the subsistence activities and recreational fisheries, and provide spawning planning team attended city and tribal hunting, fishing, and other wildlife grounds for northern pike, Arctic council meetings to inform residents of dependent activities. Opportunities grayling, and various types of whitefish. the planning process and to hear them would be maintained to pursue research Access to the Refuge is possible only speak about the issues. Nearly 50 village activities. by boat, float- or ski-equipped airplane, elders and community leaders were Alternative B (the Preferred snowmobile, or dogsled team. interviewed during these visits. Alternative) would generally continue Snowmobile trails provide vital links The planning team categorized the to follow management direction among the Alaska Native villages of the comments into four interrelated topics described in the 1987 CCP and record of region in winter and are usually that were of value to the public: (1) decision as modified by subsequent passable to travelers through the end of Subsistence; (2) aesthetics, natural program-specific plans, but some of that April. Several of these villages are habitat, and wildness; (3) fish and management direction has been updated located within or near the Refuge wildlife; and (4) research and education. by changes in policy since the 1987 boundary, including Buckland, Noorvik, Based on this public outreach and the Selawik CCP was approved. Alternative Selawik, Kiana, Ambler, Kobuk, and discussions of the planning team, we B identifies these specific changes in Shungnak. have formulated eight major planning management direction as well as new Background issues which are addressed in the draft goals and objectives for Refuge CCP and the EA: (1) Protection of fish, management that would be adopted The CCP Process wildlife, habitats, and subsistence; (2) regardless of which alternative is The National Wildlife Refuge System management of access to refuge lands selected. Alternative B proposes Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. for community residents and the limiting access to some public lands,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65028 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

which are intermingled with private • How to best conduct a traditional FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: lands, for commercial guides and access study of use for subsistence Bureau of Land Management-Eastern transporters whose clients are big game purposes on Refuge lands; States, 7450 Boston Boulevard, hunting. Alternative B proposes that a • Proactively addressing climate Springfield, Virginia 22153. Attn: formal partnership be created between change; and Cadastral Survey. the Refuge and local entities to jointly • Providing more outreach and better SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The maintain a shared facility of one or more communication for the public. survey was requested by the Bureau of buildings with capacity for office, We consider comments substantive if Indian Affairs. meeting, and storage space in a they: The lands surveyed are: community within the refuge. • Question, with reasonable basis, the Alternative B proposes a study of accuracy of the information in the Swain County, North Carolina traditional access methods for document; The plat of survey represents the subsistence purposes. Alternative B • Question, with reasonable basis, the dependent resurvey of a portion of the proposes that local public use and adequacy of the environmental Qualla Indian Boundary, land held in access needs be addressed by creating assessment; trust for the Eastern Band of Cherokee formal partnerships between the Refuge • Present reasonable alternatives Indians, in Swain County, in the State and various local entities. other than those presented in the draft of North Carolina, and was accepted Alternative C would generally CCP and the EA; and/or September 7, 2010. • We will place a copy of the plat we continue to follow management Provide new or additional described in the open files. It will be direction described in Alternative A as information relevant to the assessment. available to the public as a matter of modified by subsequent program- Next Steps information. specific plans. Alternative C would also If BLM receives a protest against the identify any specific changes or updates After this comment period ends, we survey, as shown on the plat, prior to in management direction as well as will analyze the comments and address the date of the official filing, we will adopt the new goals and objectives for them in the form of a final CCP and stay the filing pending our Refuge management. Alternative C decision document. consideration of the protest. proposes that the Refuge manager could Public Availability of Comments We will not officially file the plat open or close some public lands, which Before including your address, phone until the day after we have accepted or are intermingled with private lands, to number, e-mail address, or other dismissed all protests and they have use by commercial guides and personal identifying information in your become final, including decisions on transporters whose clients are big game comment, you should be aware that appeals. hunting. Alternative C proposes that the your entire comment—including your Refuge independently maintain a Dated: October 12, 2010. personal identifying information—may facility of one or more buildings with John Sroufe, be made publicly available at any time. capacity for office, meeting, and storage Acting Chief Cadastral Surveyor. While you can ask us in your comment space in a community within the refuge. [FR Doc. 2010–26590 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] to withhold your personal identifying Alternative C proposes the same study information from public review, we BILLING CODE 4310–GJ–P of traditional access methods for cannot guarantee that we will be able to subsistence purposes. Alternative C do so. would address local public use and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR access needs slightly different from Dated: October 12, 2010. Alternative B by proposing to expand or Gary Edwards, National Park Service improve some opportunities for public Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural use and access on Refuge lands. Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Items: U.S. Department of Defense, [FR Doc. 2010–26655 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Public Meetings Army Corps of Engineers, Portland BILLING CODE 4310–55–P District, Portland, OR and University of We will involve the public through Oregon Museum of Natural and open houses, meetings, written Cultural History, Eugene, OR comments, and personal interviews DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. with community members. We will mail Bureau of Land Management documents to our national and local ACTION: Notice. Refuge mailing lists. Public meetings [LLES956000–L14200000–BJ0000– Notice is hereby given in accordance will be held in communities in the LXSITRST0000] Refuge area, including Kotzebue, with the Native American Graves Noorvik, and Selawik. Dates, times, and Eastern States: Filing of Plat of Survey Protection and Repatriation Act locations of each meeting or open house (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent will be announced in advance in local AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, to repatriate cultural items, for which media. Interior. the University of Oregon Museum of ACTION: Notice of Filing of Plat of Natural and Cultural History, Eugene, Submitting Comments/Issues for Survey; North Carolina. OR, and U.S. Department of Defense, Comment Army Corps of Engineers, Portland SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land District, Portland, OR, have joint We particularly seek comments on the Management (BLM) will file the plat of responsibility, that meet the definition following issues: survey of the lands described below in of unassociated funerary objects under • Management of use by commercial the BLM–Eastern States office in 25 U.S.C. 3001. guides and transporters to maintain big Springfield, Virginia, 30 calendar days This notice is published as part of the game hunting opportunities while from the date of publication in the National Park Service’s administrative reducing social conflict in the region; Federal Register. responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65029

U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in ochre pieces, 1 shell, 1 grooved slate preponderance of the evidence, to have this notice are the sole responsibility of tool and 3 shell flecks. been removed from specific burial sites the museum, institution, or Federal Site 35–GM–9 is located along the of Native American individuals. agency that has control of the cultural south side shoreline of the Columbia Officials of the U.S. Army Corps of items. The National Park Service is not River, approximately 9.5 river miles east Engineers, Portland District, and responsible for the determinations in of the John Day River confluence. The University of Oregon Museum of this notice. multicomponent site contains multiple Natural and Cultural History, have also Native American cultural items activity areas that are believed to have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. described in this notice were excavated been repeatedly occupied from 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared under Antiquities Act permits by the approximately 9,000 B.P. to A.D. 1750. group identity that can be reasonably University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, on Site 35–GM–9 frequently served as a traced between the unassociated Army Corps of Engineers project land. village, camping area and cemetery. funerary objects and the Confederated Following excavations at the site Area 3 is believed to have primarily Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation described below, and under the served as a burial area. The burial of Oregon and/or Confederated Tribes provisions of the permits, the University pattern observed within Area 3 is and Bands of the Yakama Nation, of Oregon retained the collections for consistent with customs of Columbia Washington. preservation. Plateau Native American groups. Representatives of any other Indian Between 1959 and 1968, cultural Excavation and museum documentation tribe that believes itself to be culturally indicate that the objects are consistent items were removed from site 35–GM– affiliated with the unassociated funerary with cultural items typically found in 9, also known as the Wildcat Canyon objects should contact Daniel Mulligan, context with burials characteristic of the site, Gilliam County, OR, during NAGPRA Coordinator, Environmental Mid-Columbia River Basin. Resources Branch, U.S. Army Corps of excavations by the University of Oregon Oral traditions and ethnographic prior to construction of the John Day Engineers, Portland District, P.O. Box reports indicate that site 35–GM–9 lies 2946, Portland, OR 97208–2946, Dam. The cultural items were within the historic territory of Sahaptin- accessioned by the University of Oregon telephone (503) 808–4768, before speaking Tenino or Warm Springs November 22, 2010. Repatriation of the Museum following each successive field peoples whose descendants are unassociated funerary objects to the season. The 1,420 objects recovered culturally affiliated with the present-day Confederated Tribes of the Warm from Area 3 of site 35–GM–9, a Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon and/or cemetery primarily used from Springs Reservation of Oregon. The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the approximately 2,500–2,000 B.P., are Confederated Tribes of the Warm Yakama Nation, Washington, may categorized as unassociated funerary Springs Reservation are composed of proceed after that date if no additional objects because specific associations three Wasco bands, four Warm Springs claimants come forward. with individual burials cannot be bands, and Northern Paiutes. The determined due to unclear spatial Columbia River-based Wasco were the The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, distributions of the artifacts in relation easternmost group of Chinookan- Portland District, is responsible for to particular sets of human remains. The speaking Indians. The Sahaptin- notifying the Confederated Tribes of the 1,420 unassociated funerary objects are speaking Warm Springs bands lived Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon; 32 projectile points, 25 projectile point farther east along the Columbia River Confederated Tribes and Bands of the fragments, 30 blades, 52 blade and its tributaries. Northern Paiutes, Yakama Nation, Washington; fragments, 1 multipurpose tool, 3 stone who spoke a Uto-Aztecan language, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla mauls, 1 obsidian chopper, 17 pestles, historically occupied much of Indian Reservation, Oregon; and Nez 14 pestle fragments, 1 hammerstone, 10 southeastern Oregon. The Confederated Perce Tribe, Idaho, that this notice has worked/flaked cobbles, 5 river pebbles, Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation been published. 1 flaked pebble, 1 rectangular flat stone, of Oregon peoples also traditionally Dated: October 14, 2010. 1 flake knife, 12 gravers, 7 burins, 1 shared the site area with relatives and Sherry Hutt, spokeshave, 1 core, 12 scrapers, 2 end neighbors whose descendants may be Manager, National NAGPRA Program. scraper fragments, 12 bifacially- culturally affiliated with the 14 [FR Doc. 2010–26466 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] modified flakes, 55 unifacially-modified Sahaptin, Salish and Chinookan- BILLING CODE 4312–50–P flakes, 7 curved flakes, 1 lamellar flake, speaking tribes and bands of the 2 worked chert flakes, 935 unmodified present-day Confederated Tribes and flakes, 3 stone drills, 6 drill fragments, Bands of the Yakama Nation, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 5 stone clinkers, 1 possible metate, 1 Washington. Yakama homelands were galena atlatl weight, 1 bolas stone, 1 traditionally located on the Washington National Park Service polishing stone, 2 worked shale or slate side of the Columbia River between the fragments, 5 abraders, 1 shaft smoother, eastern flanks of the Cascade Range and Flight 93 National Memorial Advisory 2 shaft smoother fragments, 1 antler awl the lower reaches of the Yakima River Commission fragment, 3 bone awl fragments, 1 bone drainage. shaft wrench, 1 bone tube, 17 worked Officials of the U.S. Army Corps of AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. antlers, 10 burned antlers, 1 deer jaw, 19 Engineers, Portland District, and ACTION: Notice of November 13, 2010, worked bones, 1 cut bone, 1 burned University of Oregon Museum of Meeting. bone fragment, 1 notched bone, 2 Natural and Cultural History, have decorated bones, 3 bone strips, 52 determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the date miscellaneous non-human bones and 3001(3)(B), the 1,420 cultural items of the November 13, 2010, meeting of bone fragments, 2 stone pendant described above are reasonably believed the Flight 93 Advisory Commission. fragments, 1 shell pendant, 1 pebble to have been placed with or near DATES: The public meeting of the pendant, 2 dentalia, 1 unspecified bead, individual human remains at the time of Advisory Commission will be held on 14 bone beads, 1 antler bead, 2 nose death or later as part of the death rite Saturday, November 13, 2010, from plugs, 1 worked pumice piece, 8 red or ceremony and are believed, by a 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. (Eastern). The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65030 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Commission will meet jointly with the The National Park Service is soliciting g. Making recommendations regarding Flight 93 Memorial Task Force. nominations for two members of the future care of cultural items that are to Location: The meeting will be held at Native American Graves Protection and be repatriated. the Somerset County Courthouse, Court Repatriation Review Committee. The 3. Seven members make up the Room #1, located at 111 E. Union Street, Secretary of the Interior will appoint the Review Committee. All members are Somerset, PA 15501. two members from nominations appointed by the Secretary of the Agenda submitted by national museum Interior. The Secretary may not appoint organizations and scientific Federal officers or employees to the The November 13, 2010, joint organizations. Review Committee. Commission and Task Force meeting Nominations must— will consist of: 1. Be submitted on organization a. Three members are appointed from 1. Opening of Meeting and Pledge of letterhead, and include the nominator’s nominations submitted by Indian Allegiance. original signature and daytime Tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, 2. Review and Approval of telephone number. Also, the nominator and traditional Native American Commission Minutes from August 7, must be the official authorized by the religious leaders. At least two of these 2010. organization to submit nominations in members must be traditional Indian 3. Reports from the Flight 93 response to this solicitation, and the religious leaders. Memorial Task Force and National Park nomination must include a statement b. Three members are appointed from Service. that the nominator is so authorized. nominations submitted by national 4. Old Business. 2. Include the following information museum organizations and scientific 5. New Business. about the nominee: organizations. 6. Public Comments. a. The nominee’s full legal name, 7. Closing Remarks. c. One member is appointed from a home address, home telephone number, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: list of persons developed and consented and e-mail address; and to by all of the other members. Joanne M. Hanley, Superintendent, b. The nominee’s resume or a brief Flight 93 National Memorial, 109 West biography of the nominee, in which the 4. Members serve as Special Main Street, Somerset, PA 15501. nominee’s NAGPRA experience and Governmental Employees, and are 814.443.4557. ability to work effectively as a member required to submit confidential financial disclosure reports and to complete SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The of a Federal advisory board are ethics training on an annual basis. meeting will be open to the public. Any addressed. 5. Members are appointed for 4-year member of the public may file with the DATES: Nominations must be received terms; incumbent members may be Commission a written statement by December 20, 2010. concerning agenda items. Address all reappointed for 2-year terms. ADDRESSES: Address nominations to statements to: Flight 93 Advisory David Tarler, Designated Federal 6. The Review Committee’s work is Commission, 109 West Main Street, Officer, Native American Graves completed during public meetings. The Somerset, PA 15501. Before including Protection and Repatriation Review Review Committee normally meets face- your address, phone number, e-mail Committee, National NAGPRA Program, to-face two times per year, with each address, or other personal identifying National Park Service, 1201 Eye Street, meeting lasting two or three days. The information in your comment, you NW., 8th Floor (2253), Washington, DC Review Committee also may hold one or should be aware that your entire 20005. more public teleconferences of several comment—including your personal hours duration. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: identifying information—may be made 7. Review Committee members are publicly available at any time. While 1. The Review Committee was established by the Native American compensated for their participation in you can ask us in your comment to Review Committee meetings. withhold your personal identifying Graves Protection and Repatriation Act information from public review, we of 1990 (NAGPRA), at 25 U.S.C. 3006. 8. Review Committee members are cannot guarantee that we will be able to 2. The Review Committee is reimbursed for travel expenses incurred do so. responsible for: in association with Review Committee a. Monitoring the NAGPRA inventory meetings. Dated: September 28, 2010. and identification process; 9. Additional information regarding Joanne M. Hanley, b. Reviewing and making findings the Review Committee—its charter, Superintendent, Flight 93 National Memorial. related to the identity or cultural meeting procedures, findings [FR Doc. 2010–26462 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] affiliation of cultural items, or the return procedures, dispute procedures, and BILLING CODE P of such items; annual reports to the Congress—is c. Facilitating the resolution of available on the National NAGPRA disputes relating to the return of such program Web site, at http:// DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR items; www.nps.gov/nagpra (click ‘‘Review d. Compiling an inventory of Committee’’ in the menu located in the National Park Service culturally unidentifiable human right-hand column). remains and developing a process for Native American Graves Protection disposition of such remains; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Repatriation Review Committee: e. Consulting with Indian Tribes and David Tarler, Designated Federal Nomination Solicitation Native Hawaiian organizations and Officer, Native American Graves AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. museums on matters within the scope of Protection and Repatriation Review the work of the Review Committee Committee, National NAGPRA Program, ACTION: Native American Graves National Park Service, 1201 Eye Street, Protection and Repatriation Review affecting such Tribes or organizations; f. Consulting with the Secretary of the NW., 8th Floor (2253), Washington, DC Committee; Notice of Nomination Interior in the development of 20005; telephone (202) 354–2108; e-mail Solicitation. regulations to carry out NAGPRA; and [email protected].

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65031

Dated: October 15, 2010. for information specific to these implementation of U.S. commitments in David Tarler, investigations. For information on the the World Trade Organization and Designated Federal Officer, Native American legal aspects of these investigations, under U.S. free trade agreements in Graves Protection and Repatriation Review contact William Gearhart of the force between the United States and Committee. Commission’s Office of the General TPP partner countries. The USTR asked [FR Doc. 2010–26464 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Counsel (202–205–3091, that the advice be based on the HTS in BILLING CODE 4312–50–P [email protected]). The media effect during 2010 and trade data for should contact Margaret O’Laughlin, 2008. The USTR also requested that the Office of External Relations (202–205– Commission, in preparing its advice, INTERNATIONAL TRADE 1819, [email protected]). assume that any known U.S. non-tariff COMMISSION Hearing-impaired individuals may barrier will not be applicable to such obtain information on this matter by imports, and that the Commission note [Investigation Nos. TA–131–035 and TA contacting the Commission’s TDD in its report any instance in which the 2104–027] terminal at 202–205–1810. General continued application of a U.S. non- U.S.-Trans-Pacific Partnership Free information concerning the Commission tariff barrier would result in different Trade Agreement Including Malaysia: may also be obtained by accessing its advice with respect to the effect of the removal of the duty. Advice on the Probable Economic Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). Persons with mobility impairments who In addition, the USTR requested that Effect of Providing Duty-Free will need special assistance in gaining the Commission prepare an assessment, Treatment for Imports access to the Commission should pursuant to section 2104(b)(2) of the AGENCY: United States International contact the Office of the Secretary at Trade Act of 2002, of the probable Trade Commission. 202–205–2000. economic effects of eliminating tariffs ACTION: Institution of investigations and Background: In response to an earlier on imports from the TPP countries of scheduling of hearing. request from the USTR, the those agricultural products on the list Commission, on June 2, 2010, delivered attached to his letter on (i) industries in SUMMARY: Following receipt on October a report to the USTR containing its the United States producing the product 5, 2010, of a request from the United advice and assessment in investigation concerned, and (ii) the U.S. economy as States Trade Representative (USTR), the Nos. TA–131–034 and TA–2104–026, a whole. Commission instituted investigation U.S.-Trans-Pacific Partnership Free The USTR asked that the Commission nos. TA–131–035 and TA–2104–027, Trade Agreement: Advice on Probable identify in its report, among other U.S.-Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Economic Effect of Providing Duty-Free things, any changes in its advice from Trade Agreement Including Malaysia: Treatment for Imports, relating to the the advice delivered on June 2, 2010, Advice on the Probable Economic Effect effects of a possible free trade agreement that did not include Malaysia. The of Providing Duty-Free Treatment for with seven countries (Australia, Brunei USTR also stated that the Commission Imports. Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand, Peru, need not repeat analysis and discussion Singapore, and Vietnam). included in that earlier report. The DATES: In his letter of October 5, 2010, the USTR further asked that the November 10, 2010: Deadline for filing USTR advised the Commission that Commission, to the extent appropriate, requests to appear at the public Malaysia has joined the negotiations, draw from discussion and analysis in its hearing. known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership report delivered to USTR on June 30, November 12, 2010: Deadline for filing (TPP) negotiations, and requested that 2006, relating to a U.S.-Malaysia FTA pre-hearing briefs and statements. the Commission provide certain advice (investigation Nos. TA–131–033 and November 17, 2010: Public hearing. under section 131 of the Trade Act of TA–2104–022, U.S.-Malaysia Free November 26, 2010: Deadline for filing 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2151) and an Trade Agreement: Advice Concerning post-hearing briefs and statements. assessment under section 2104(b)(2) of the Probable Economic Effect of November 26, 2010: Deadline for filing the Trade Act of 2002 (19 U.S.C. Providing Duty-Free Treatment for all other written submissions. 3804(b)(2)) with respect to the effects of Imports). January 7, 2011: Transmittal of providing duty-free treatment for As requested, the Commission will Commission report to the United imports from all eight countries. provide its report to the USTR by States Trade Representative. More specifically, the USTR, under January 7, 2011. The USTR indicated ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, authority delegated by the President and that those sections of the Commission’s including the Commission’s hearing pursuant to section 131 of the Trade Act report that relate to the advice and rooms, are located in the United States of 1974, requested that the Commission assessment of probable economic effects International Trade Commission provide a report containing its advice as will be classified. The USTR also Building, 500 E Street, SW., to the probable economic effect of indicated that he considers the Washington, DC. All written providing duty-free treatment for Commission’s report to be an inter- submissions should be addressed to the imports of products from the eight TPP agency memorandum that will contain Secretary, United States International partner countries (Australia, Brunei pre-decisional advice and be subject to Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, New the deliberative process privilege. Washington, DC 20436. The public Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam) Public Hearing: A public hearing in record for this investigation may be on (i) industries in the United States connection with these investigations viewed on the Commission’s electronic producing like or directly competitive will be held at the U.S. International docket (EDIS) at http://www.usitc.gov/ products, and (ii) on consumers. The Trade Commission Building, 500 E secretary/edis.htm. USTR asked that the Commission’s Street, SW., Washington, DC, beginning FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: analysis consider each article in at 9:30 a.m., November 17, 2010. Heidi Colby-Oizumi, Project Leader chapters 1 through 97 of the Requests to appear at the public hearing (202–205–3391, [email protected]), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the should be filed with the Secretary not or Falan Yinug, Deputy Project Leader United States (HTS) for which tariffs later than 5:15 p.m., November 10, 2010, (202–205–2160, [email protected]), will remain, taking into account in accordance with the requirements in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65032 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

the ‘‘Submissions’’ section below. All Issued: October 15, 2010. least 40% of the emissions from an pre-hearing briefs and statements William R. Bishop, absorber vent can be routed to the should be filed not later than 5:15 p.m., Acting Secretary to the Commission. operating incinerator in case of an November 12, 2010; and all post-hearing [FR Doc. 2010–26377 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] incinerator outage. The company has briefs and statements should be filed not BILLING CODE 7020–02–P installed flow meters that will measure later than 5:15 p.m., November 26, 2010. for compliance. Westlake will follow a Written Submissions: In lieu of or in specific protocol for three years in the case of both planned and unplanned addition to participating in the hearing DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE incinerator outages. During all and filing briefs and statements relating incinerator outages, Westlake will to the hearing, interested parties are Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree maintain the absorber vent as a Group invited to file written submissions Notice is hereby given that on 2 process vent under the Hazardous concerning these investigations. All September 17, 2010, an electronic Organic NESHAP regulations. written submissions should be version of a proposed Consent Decree For three years, Westlake will also addressed to the Secretary, and should was lodged in the United States District implement an enhanced Leak Detection be received not later than 5:15 p.m., Court for the Western District of and Repair program to control emissions November 18, 2010. All written Kentucky in United States and the of hazardous air pollutants. In addition, submissions must conform with the Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Westlake Westlake will implement an enhanced provisions of § 201.8 of the Vinyls, Inc. and Westlake PVC daily monitoring for the cooling towers Commission’s Rules of Practice and Corporation, No. 5:10–CV–00168–TBR. according to a protocol approved by Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 The Consent Decree resolves claims of EPA and the Commonwealth. requires that a signed original (or a copy the United States and the Under the consent decree, Westlake so designated) and fourteen (14) copies Commonwealth of Kentucky against will submit revised Leak Detection and of each document be filed. In the event Westlake Vinyls, Inc. and Westlake PVC Elimination Plans, as required by that confidential treatment of a Corporation (‘‘Westlake’’) for civil applicable regulations, for the vinyl document is requested, at least four (4) penalties and injunctive relief based on chloride and the polyvinyl chloride additional copies must be filed, in violations of the Clean Air Act, 42 plants, including a Leak Detection Plan which the confidential information U.S.C. 7401 et seq., as well as the Air and an Area Monitoring Plan, with must be deleted (see the following Implementation Plan for the specific changes as outlined in the paragraph for further information Commonwealth of Kentucky (the consent decree. regarding confidential business ‘‘Kentucky SIP’’) promulgated and Westlake will review the most recent information). The Commission’s rules approved by EPA pursuant to the Clean Total Annual Benzene (‘‘TAB’’) report authorize filing submissions with the Air Act; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. for the vinyl chloride plant to determine Secretary by facsimile or electronic 1251 et seq., and applicable laws and if the TAB report is in compliance with means only to the extent permitted by regulations implementing the Clean the compliance option Westlake has section 201.8 of the rules (see Handbook Water Act; the Resource Conservation selected and will provide a report to for Electronic Filing Procedures, http:// and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. EPA and the Commonwealth. www.usitc.gov/secretary/ and implementing regulations; Sections For purposes of New Source Review fed_reg_notices/rules/documents/ 103(a) and 109(c) of the Comprehensive permitting under the Clean Air Act, the handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). Environmental Response, consent decree specifies that the Persons with questions regarding Compensation, and Liability Act, as polyvinyl chloride plant and the vinyl electronic filing should contact the amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9603(a) chloride plant are under Westlake’s Secretary (202–205–2000). and 9609(c), and implementing common control, and Westlake will not regulations codified at 40 CFR part 302; contest administratively or judicially a Any submissions that contain and sections 304, 313 and 325(b)(3) of finding by the Commonwealth or any confidential business information must the Emergency Planning and other permitting authority under the also conform with the requirements of Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 Clean Air Act that the two plants are a § 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules of (‘‘EPCRA’’), 42 U.S.C. 11004, 11013 and ‘‘single source’’ for purposes of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). 11045(b)(3). permitting. Section 201.6 of the rules requires that The Department of Justice will receive With respect to Resource the cover of the document and the for a period of thirty (30) days from the Conservation and Recovery Act individual pages be clearly marked as to date of this publication comments injunctive relief, Westlake will conduct whether they are the ‘‘confidential’’ or relating to the proposed Consent Decree. a subsurface investigation and will ‘‘non-confidential’’ version, and that the Comments should be addressed to the perform any necessary remediation at confidential business information be Assistant Attorney General, various lift stations at the polyvinyl clearly identified by means of brackets. Environment and Natural Resources chloride plant. Westlake will sample All written submissions, except for Division, and either e-mailed to and test the integrity of lift stations 7 confidential business information, will [email protected] or and 9 pursuant to an approved be made available for inspection by mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. workplan and will perform a subsurface interested parties. The Commission may Department of Justice, Washington, DC investigation of the facility if EPA include some or all of the confidential 20044–7611, and should refer to United decides one is required. In any case, business information submitted in the States et al. v. Westlake Vinyls, Inc. et Westlake will perform an investigation course of the investigations in the report al., No. 5:10–CV–00168–TBR and DOJ for Lift 8 pursuant to an approved work it sends to the USTR. The Commission No. 90–5–2–1–08097. plan. Westlake will implement any will not otherwise publish any Under the proposed consent decree, corrective measures required by EPA, confidential business information in a Westlake will perform injunctive relief. and will post financial assurance. manner that would reveal the operations With regard to Clean Air Act injunctive With regard to reporting of releases of of the firm supplying the information. relief, Westlake will implement a hazardous substances under EPCRA/ By order of the Commission. reroute of certain vent streams so that at CERCLA, Westlake will review its

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65033

training procedures to ensure that all Decree Library, please enclose a check (ICR). All comments, including any personnel are adequately trained and in the amount of $43.25 (25 cents per personal information you provide, are establish standard operating procedures. page reproduction cost) payable to the placed in the public docket without Westlake will modify its Spill/Release U.S. Treasury. change, and may be made available Reporting Policy according to protocol online at http://www.regulations.gov. Maureen Katz, designed by EPA. For further information on submitting For Clean Water Act injunctive relief, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental comments see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ Westlake will update its Spill Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division. heading in the section of this notice Prevention Control and titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Countermeasures Plan ensuring that all [FR Doc. 2010–26415 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Docket: To read or download regulated tanks are included and will BILLING CODE 4410–15–P comments or other material in the comply with the plan. docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov The consent decree resolves the civil or the OSHA Docket Office at the claims in the complaint filed in the case DEPARTMENT OF LABOR address above. All documents in the as well as violations listed in notices of docket (including this Federal Register Occupational Safety and Health violation issued to Westlake through the notice) are listed in the http:// Administration date of lodging of the decree on www.regulations.gov index; however, September 17, 2010. The United States [Docket No. OSHA–2010–0051] some information (e.g., copyrighted will also covenant not to sue or take material) is not publicly available to administrative action under Section Manlifts; Extension of the Office of read or download through the Web site. 3008(a) and (h) of Resource Management and Budget’s (OMB) All submissions, including copyrighted Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 Approval of Information Collection material, are available for inspection U.S.C. 6928(a) and (h), against Westlake (Paperwork) Requirements and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. for performance of the Resource You may also contact Theda Kenney at Conservation and Recovery Act AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor. the address below to obtain a copy of injunctive relief at the polyvinyl the ICR. chloride plant, conditioned upon ACTION: Request for public comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: satisfactory performance. EPA estimates that there will be a SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, substantial reduction in hazardous air comments concerning its proposal to Directorate of Standards and Guidance, pollutant emission under the terms of extend the Office of Management and OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room the proposed consent decree. The Budget’s (OMB) approval of the N–3609, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., incinerator rerouting, along with information collection requirements Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) improved Leak Detection and Repair specified in the Standard on Manlifts 693–2222. compliance, should result reductions of (29 CFR 1910.68). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: Comments must be submitted vinyl chloride emissions by I. Background approximately 2,280 pounds per year, (postmarked, sent, or received) by ethylene emissions by approximately December 20, 2010. The Department of Labor, as part of its 204,687 pounds per year, and 1,2 ADDRESSES: continuing effort to reduce paperwork dichloroethane emissions by Electronically: You may submit and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, approximately 1,284 pounds per year. comments and attachments conducts a preclearance consultation Under the proposed consent decree, electronically at http:// program to provide the public with an Westlake will pay a civil penalty of www.regulations.gov, which is the opportunity to comment on proposed $800,000, of which $700,000 will be Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the and continuing information collection paid to the United States and $100,000 instructions online for submitting requirements in accordance with the will be paid to the Commonwealth. Due comments. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 to the Clean Water Act violations, Facsimile: If your comments, U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program $12,500 of the civil penalty will go to including attachments, are not longer ensures that information is in the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund pursuant than 10 pages, you may fax them to the desired format, reporting burden (time to 33 U.S.C. 132l(s). OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–1648. and costs) is minimal, collection The Consent Decree may be examined Mail, hand delivery, express mail, instruments are clearly understood, and at the Office of the United States messenger, or courier service: When OSHA’s estimate of the information Attorney for the Western District of using this method, you must submit a collection burden is accurate. The Kentucky, 501 Broadway, Room 29, copy of your comments and attachments Occupational Safety and Health Act of Paducah, Kentucky 42001. During the to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et public comment period, the Consent OSHA–2010–0051, U.S. Department of seq.) authorizes information collection Decree may also be examined on the Labor, Occupational Safety and Health by employers as necessary or following Department of Justice: http:// Administration, Room N–2625, 200 appropriate for enforcement of the OSH www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, Act or for developing information Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express regarding the causes and prevention of Consent Decree may also be obtained by mail, messenger, and courier service) occupational injuries, illnesses, and mail from the Consent Decree Library, are accepted during the Department of accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Labor’s and Docket Office’s normal also requires that OSHA obtain such Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, or business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., information with minimum burden by faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia e.t. upon employers, especially those Fleetwood, [email protected], Instructions: All submissions must operating small businesses, and to Fax No. (202) 514–0097, phone include the Agency name and OSHA reduce to the maximum extent feasible confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In docket number (OSHA–2010–0051) for unnecessary duplication of effort in requesting a copy from the Consent the Information Collection Request obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65034 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

The Standard specifies two example, by using automated or other some information (e.g., copyrighted paperwork requirements. The following technological information collection material) is not publicly available to sections describe who uses the and transmission techniques. read or download through this Web site. information collected under each All submissions, including copyrighted III. Proposed Actions requirement, as well as how they use it. material, are available for inspection The purpose of the requirements is to OSHA is requesting to retain its and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. reduce workers’ risk of death or serious current burden hour estimate of 37,801 Information on using the http:// injury by ensuring that manlifts are in hours. www.regulations.gov Web site to submit safe operating condition. Type of Review: Extension of a comments and access the docket is Periodic Inspections and Records currently approved collection. available at the Web site’s ‘‘User Tips’’ (paragraph (e)). This provision requires Title: Manlifts (29 CFR 1910.68). link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office that each manlift be inspected at least OMB Number: 1218–0226. for information about materials not once every 30 days and it also requires Affected Public: Business or other for- available through the Web site, and for that limit switches shall be checked profits. assistance in using the Internet to locate weekly. The manlift inspection is to Number of Respondents: 3,000. docket submissions. cover at least the following items: steps; Frequency: On occasion; Monthly. step fastenings; rails; rail supports and Average Time per Response: Varies V. Authority and Signature fastenings; rollers and slides; belt and from 2 minutes (.03 hour) for an David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, belt tension; handholds and fastenings; employer to disclose the inspection Assistant Secretary of Labor for floor landings; guardrails; lubrication; certification record to 1 hour to inspect Occupational Safety and Health, limit switches; warning signs and lights; a manlift. directed the preparation of this notice. illumination; drive pulley; bottom (boot) Estimated Total Burden Hours: The authority for this notice is the pulley and clearance; pulley supports; 37,801. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 motor; driving mechanism; brake; Estimated Cost (Operation and U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of electrical switches; vibration and Maintenance): $0. Labor’s Order No. 4–2010 (75 FR misalignment; and any ‘‘skip’’ on the up IV. Public Participation—Submission of 55355). or down run when mounting a step Comments on This Notice and Internet Signed at Washington, DC, on October 18, (indicating worn gears). A certification Access to Comments and Submissions 2010. record of the inspection must be You may submit comments in David Michaels, prepared upon completion of the response to this document as follows: Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational inspection. The record must contain the (1) Electronically at http:// Safety and Health. date of the inspection, the signature of www.regulations.gov, which is the [FR Doc. 2010–26500 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] the person who performed the Federal eRulemaking Portal; (2) by BILLING CODE 4510–26–P inspection, and the serial number or facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All other identifier of the inspected manlift. comments, attachments, and other Disclosure of Inspection Certification DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Records. Employers are to maintain the material must identify the Agency name and the OSHA docket number for the certification record and make it Mine Safety and Health Administration available to OSHA compliance officers. ICR (Docket No. OSHA–2010–0051). This record provides assurance to You may supplement electronic Petition for Modification of Existing employers, workers, and compliance submissions by uploading document Mandatory Safety Standard officers that manlifts were inspected as files electronically. If you wish to mail AGENCY: required by the Standard. The additional materials in reference to an Mine Safety and Health inspections are made to keep equipment electronic or facsimile submission, you Administration (MSHA), Labor. in safe operating condition, thereby must submit them to the OSHA Docket ACTION: Notice. Office (see the section of this notice preventing manlift failure while SUMMARY: Section 101(c) of the Federal carrying workers to elevated worksites. titled ADDRESSES). The additional materials must clearly identify your Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and These records also provide the most 30 CFR part 44 govern the application, efficient means for the compliance electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number so the processing, and disposition of petitions officers to determine that an employer is for modification. This notice is a complying with the Standard. Agency can attach them to your comments. summary of a petition for modification II. Special Issues for Comment Because of security procedures, the filed by the party listed below to modify OSHA has a particular interest in use of regular mail may cause a the application of an existing mandatory comments on the following issues: significant delay in the receipt of safety standard published in Title 30 of • Whether the proposed information comments. For information about the Code of Federal Regulations. collection requirements are necessary security procedures concerning the DATES: All comments on the petition for the proper performance of the delivery of materials by hand, express must be received by the Office of Agency’s functions, including whether delivery, messenger, or courier service, Standards, Regulations and Variances the information is useful; please contact the OSHA Docket Office on or before November 22, 2010. • The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of at (202) 693–2350, TTY (877) 889–5627. ADDRESSES: You may submit your the burden (time and costs) of the Comments and submissions are comments, identified by ‘‘docket information collection requirements, posted without change at http:// number’’ on the subject line, by any of including the validity of the www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA the following methods: methodology and assumptions used; cautions commenters about submitting 1. Electronic Mail: zzMSHA- • The quality, utility, and clarity of personal information such as social [email protected]. Include the docket the information collected; and security numbers and date of birth. number of the petition in the subject • Ways to minimize the burden on Although all submissions are listed in line of the message. employers who must comply; for the http://www.regulations.gov index, 2. Facsimile: 1–202–693–9441.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65035

3. Regular Mail: MSHA, Office of standard to permit miners to be hoisted Dated: October 15, 2010. Standards, Regulations and Variances, in open ended buckets at a rate of 1200 Patricia W. Silvey, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2350, feet per minute (FPM). The petitioner Director, Office of Standards, Regulations and Arlington, Virginia 22209–3939, states that: (1) Personnel would ride Variances. Attention: Patricia W. Silvey, Director, inside of a completely empty bucket in [FR Doc. 2010–26483 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Office of Standards, Regulations and accordance with 30 CFR 57.19071 BILLING CODE 4510–43–P Variances. (Riding in skips or buckets), while 4. Hand-Delivery or Courier: MSHA, standing on the bucket floor. The round Office of Standards, Regulations and open bucket is 8.5 feet high and 6 feet NATIONAL CREDIT UNION Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, in diameter. On average, while standing ADMINISTRATION Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209– on the bucket floor, the top of the 3939, Attention: Patricia W. Silvey, miner’s head would be 2.5 feet below Sunshine Act; Notice of a Matter To Be Director, Office of Standards, the open bucket rim; (2) the buckets are Added to the Agenda for Consideration Regulations and Variances. in compliance with 30 CFR 57.19050 at an Agency Meeting MSHA will consider only comments (Bucket requirements) as follows: (a) TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Thursday, postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or Buckets are securely attached to a October 21, 2010. proof of delivery from another delivery crosshead at all times while traveling in PLACE: service such as UPS or Federal Express the shaft; (b) the bucket has overhead Board Room, 7th Floor, Room on or before the deadline for comments. protection by means of a canopy 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314–3428. Individuals who submit comments by permanently installed on the crosshead; hand-delivery are required to check in (c) the buckets have sufficient depth to STATUS: Open. at the receptionist desk on the 21st transport persons safely in a standing floor. Matters To Be Considered position; and (d) the buckets are Individuals may inspect a copy of the 4a. Briefing—NCUSIF Public attached to the crosshead by a ‘‘Dolly petition and comments during normal Education Campaign. Ball’’ at the crosshead and do not have business hours at the address listed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: bails attached to their lower half; (3) all above. Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board, buckets are equipped with engineered Telephone: 703–518–6304. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: anchor points inside the bucket located Barbara Barron, Office of Standards, under the bucket foot wells on the Mary Rupp, Regulations and Variances at 202–693– bucket walls. Personnel are required to Board Secretary. 9447 (Voice), [email protected] be securely anchored to these anchors [FR Doc. 2010–26713 Filed 10–19–10; 4:15 pm] (E-mail), or 202–693–9441 (Telefax). with a full body harness and safety BILLING CODE P [These are not toll-free numbers]. lanyard at all times while traveling in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the bucket; (4) the emergency braking I. Background deceleration rate of the sinking hoist NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION running at 1500 FPM is 11.4 feet per Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine second per second (11.4 ft/s2) when Notice of Permit Applications Received Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine moving up, and 10.7 feet per second per Under the Antarctic Conservation Act Act) allows the mine operator or second (10.7 ft/s2) when moving down. of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541) representative of miners to file a This deceleration is significantly lower AGENCY: National Science Foundation. petition to modify the application of any than the maximum deceleration rate of ACTION: Notice of Permit Applications mandatory safety standard to a coal or 16 feet per second per second (16 ft/s2) other mine if the Secretary determines Received under the Antarctic prescribed in 30 CFR 57.19062. At the that: (1) An alternative method of Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law intended man hoisting speed of 1200 achieving the result of such standard 95–541. FPM the deceleration rates will be much exists which will at all times guarantee lower; (5) the sinking hoist is operated SUMMARY: no less than the same measure of The National Science under computer programmable logical protection afforded the miners of such Foundation (NSF) is required to publish mine by such standard; or (2) that the controls (PLC). There are controls that notice of permit applications received to application of such standard to such verify the crosshead is attached to the conduct activities regulated under the mine will result in a diminution of bucket all times while traveling in the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. safety to the miners in such mine. In shaft; (6) there are 3 sets of safety doors NSF has published regulations under addition, the regulations at 30 CFR in the shaft. The doors are located at the the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 44.10 and 44.11 establish the shaft collar on the surface, the 45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal requirements and procedures for filing ventilation level is 100 feet below the Regulations. This is the required notice petitions for modification. surface, the bucket dump and the Never of permit applications received. Sweat Level is 1190 feet below the DATES: Interested parties are invited to II. Petition for Modification surface, and there is also safety submit written data, comments, or Docket Number: M–2010–003–M. backsplashes located at the bucket views with respect to this permit Petitioner: Resolution Copper Mining, dump which is 800 feet below the application by November 22, 2010. This LLC, Resolution Mine, MSHA I.D. No. surface. Each of these installations have application may be inspected by 02–00152 located in Pinal County, proximity switches and electronic interested parties at the Permit Office, Arizona. monitoring verifying that the crosshead address below. Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.19076 is attached to the bucket when they pass ADDRESSES: Comments should be (Maximum speeds for hoisting persons through these safety systems; and (7) the addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, in buckets). hoist deceleration rates at 1200 FPM Office of Polar Programs, National Modification Request: The petitioner provide at least the same measure of Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson requests a modification of the existing protection as the existing standard. Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65036 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: NUCLEAR REGULATORY from the Web site cited above or by Nadene G. Kennedy at the above COMMISSION contacting the identified DFO. address or (703) 292–7405. Moreover, in view of the possibility that Advisory Committee on Reactor the schedule for ACRS meetings may be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the adjusted by the Chairman as necessary National Science Foundation, as ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability and to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, directed by the Antarctic Conservation PRA; Notice of Meeting persons planning to attend should check Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541), as with these references if such The ACRS Subcommittee on amended by the Antarctic Science, rescheduling would result in a major Reliability and PRA will hold a meeting Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, inconvenience. has developed regulations for the on November 16, 2010, Room T–2B1, Dated: October 14, 2010. establishment of a permit system for 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Antonio F Dias, various activities in Antarctica and The entire meeting will be open to Branch Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, designation of certain animals and public attendance. Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. certain geographic areas a requiring The agenda for the subject meeting [FR Doc. 2010–26494 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] special protection. The regulations shall be as follows: BILLING CODE P establish such a permit system to designate Antarctic Specially Protected November 16, 2010—8:30 a.m. Until 5 Areas. p.m. NUCLEAR REGULATORY The applications received are as The Subcommittee will review the COMMISSION follows: current state of licensee efforts on the fire protection program transition to Advisory Committee on Reactor 1. Applicant National Fire Protection Association Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the (NFPA) Standard 805. The ACRS Subcommittee on AP1000; Permit Application No. 2011–021. Subcommittee will hear presentations Notice of Meeting Ms. Rebecca M. Dickhut, Virginia by and hold discussions with the NRC The ACRS Subcommittee on AP1000 Institute of Marine Sciences, Gloucester staff and other interested persons. The will hold a meeting on November 17– Point, VA 23062. Subcommittee will gather information, 19, 2010, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville analyze relevant issues and facts, and Activity for Which Permit Is Requested Pike, Rockville, Maryland. formulate proposed positions and The entire meeting will be open to Import into the U.S.A. The applicant actions, as appropriate, for deliberation public attendance, with the exception of plans to import frozen seabird tissue by the Full Committee. a portion that may be closed to protect samples, collected by other researchers, Members of the public desiring to information that is proprietary to for use in experiments back at the provide oral statements and/or written Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, comments should notify the Designated institutions laboratories. The applicant and its contractors, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Federal Official (DFO), Girija Shukla hopes to receive tissue samples from 552b(c)(4). (Telephone 301–415–6855 or E-mail: Adelie, Gentoo, Chinstrap, and Emperor The agenda for the subject meeting [email protected]) five days prior to shall be as follows: penguins and Southern Giant Petrels. the meeting, if possible, so that The samples will be used to: (a) Trace appropriate arrangements can be made. Wednesday, November 17, 2010, the movement of persistent organic Thirty-five hard copies of each Thursday, November 19, 2010, Friday, pollutants (POPs) stored in glacier ice presentation or handout should be November 20, 2010—8:30 a.m. Until 5 into the Antarctica marine food web, provided to the DFO thirty minutes p.m. and (b) provide insight into the dietary before the meeting. In addition, one The Subcommittee will review preferences and feeding ecology of electronic copy of each presentation selected chapters of the Final Safety Antarctic seabirds. The research will should be e-mailed to the DFO one day Evaluation Report (FSER) associated provide an understanding of the before the meeting. If an electronic copy with revisions to the AP1000 Design potential coupling between global cannot be provided within this Control Document (DCD) and followup climate change and mobilization of timeframe, presenters should provide items from the previous AP1000 glacier reservoirs of contaminants, and the DFO with a CD containing each subcommittee meetings. The is likely to serve as a case study for presentation at least thirty minutes Subcommittee will hear presentations understanding the potential future before the meeting. Electronic by and hold discussions with NRC staff, impact of contaminants store din recordings will be permitted only Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC, glaciers on regional aquatic ecosystems. during those portions of the meeting and other interested persons. The that are open to the public. Detailed Subcommittee will gather information, Location procedures for the conduct of and analyze relevant issues and facts, and participation in ACRS meetings were Western Antarctica. formulate proposed positions and published in the Federal Register on actions, as appropriate, for deliberation Dates October 14, 2009, (74 FR 58268–58269). by the Full Committee. Detailed meeting agendas and meeting Members of the public desiring to January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012. transcripts are available on the NRC provide oral statements and/or written Nadene G. Kennedy, Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- comments should notify the Designated rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information Federal Official (DFO), Weidong Wang Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs. regarding topics to be discussed, (Telephone 301–415–6279 or E-mail: [FR Doc. 2010–26472 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] changes to the agenda, whether the [email protected]) five days prior BILLING CODE 7555–01–P meeting has been canceled or to the meeting, if possible, so that rescheduled, and the time allotted to appropriate arrangements can be made. present oral statements can be obtained Thirty-five hard copies of each

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65037

presentation or handout should be November 17, 2010—8:30 a.m. Until NUCLEAR REGULATORY provided to the Designated Federal 12:30 p.m. COMMISSION Official thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic The Subcommittee will review the Advisory Committee on Reactor copy of each presentation should be e- staff’s evaluation of RAMONA5–FA, ‘‘A Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the mailed to the DFO one day before Computer Program for BWR Transient ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability and meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be Analysis in the Time Domain.’’ The PRA; Notice of Meeting provided within this timeframe, Subcommittee will hear presentations The ACRS Subcommittee on presenters should provide the DFO with by and hold discussions with NRC staff, Reliability and PRA will hold a meeting a CD containing each presentation at AREVA, and other interested persons. on November 17, 2010, Room T–2B3, least thirty minutes before the meeting. The Subcommittee will gather 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Electronic recordings will be permitted information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions Maryland. only during those portions of the The entire meeting will be open to meeting that are open to the public. and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee. public attendance. Detailed procedures for the conduct of The agenda for the subject meeting and participation in ACRS meetings Members of the public desiring to shall be as follows: were published in the Federal Register provide oral statements and/or written on October 14, 2009, (74 FR 58268– comments should notify the Designated November 17, 2010—1 p.m. Until 5 p.m. 58269). Federal Official (DFO), Zena Abdullahi The Subcommittee will review the Detailed meeting agendas and meeting (Telephone 301–415–8716 or E-mail: plan and schedule for developing a level transcripts are available on the NRC [email protected]) five days prior 3 Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- to the meeting, if possible, so that The Subcommittee will hear rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information appropriate arrangements can be made. presentations by and hold discussions regarding topics to be discussed, Thirty-five hard copies of each with the NRC staff and other interested changes to the agenda, whether the presentation or handout should be persons. The Subcommittee will gather meeting has been canceled or provided to the DFO thirty minutes information, analyze relevant issues and rescheduled, and the time allotted to before the meeting. In addition, one facts, and formulate proposed positions present oral statements can be obtained electronic copy of each presentation and actions, as appropriate, for from the Web site cited above or by should be e-mailed to the DFO one day deliberation by the Full Committee. contacting the identified DFO. before the meeting. If an electronic copy Members of the public desiring to Moreover, in view of the possibility that cannot be provided within this provide oral statements and/or written the schedule for ACRS meetings may be timeframe, presenters should provide comments should notify the Designated adjusted by the Chairman as necessary the DFO with a CD containing each Federal Official (DFO), Hossein to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, presentation at least thirty minutes Nourbakhsh (telephone 301–415–5622 persons planning to attend should check before the meeting. Electronic or e-mail: with these references if such recordings will be permitted only [email protected]) five days rescheduling would result in a major during those portions of the meeting prior to the meeting, if possible, so that inconvenience. that are open to the public. Detailed appropriate arrangements can be made. procedures for the conduct of and Dated: October 14, 2010. Thirty-five hard copies of each participation in ACRS meetings were presentation or handout should be Antonio F. Dias, published in the Federal Register on provided to the DFO thirty minutes Branch Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, October 14, 2009, (74 FR 58268–58269). before the meeting. In addition, one Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. Detailed meeting agendas and meeting electronic copy of each presentation [FR Doc. 2010–26496 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] transcripts are available on the NRC should be emailed to the DFO one day BILLING CODE P Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- before the meeting. If an electronic copy rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information cannot be provided within this regarding topics to be discussed, timeframe, presenters should provide NUCLEAR REGULATORY the DFO with a CD containing each COMMISSION changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or presentation at least thirty minutes Advisory Committee on Reactor rescheduled, and the time allotted to before the meeting. Electronic Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the present oral statements can be obtained recordings will be permitted only ACRS Subcommittee on Power from the Web site cited above or by during those portions of the meeting Uprates; Notice of Meeting contacting the identified DFO. that are open to the public. Detailed Moreover, in view of the possibility that procedures for the conduct of and The ACRS Subcommittee on Power the schedule for ACRS meetings may be participation in ACRS meetings were Uprates will hold a meeting on adjusted by the Chairman as necessary published in the Federal Register on November 17, 2010, Room T–2B3, to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, October 14, 2009, (74 FR 58268–58269). 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, persons planning to attend should check Detailed meeting agendas and meeting Maryland. with these references if such transcripts are available on the NRC rescheduling would result in a major Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- The entire meeting will be open to inconvenience. rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information public attendance, with the exception of regarding topics to be discussed, Dated: October 14, 2010. a portion that may be closed to protect changes to the agenda, whether the information that is proprietary to Cayetano Santos, meeting has been canceled or AREVA and its contractors pursuant to Branch Chief, Reactor Safety Branch A, rescheduled, and the time allotted to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4). Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. present oral statements can be obtained The agenda for the subject meeting [FR Doc. 2010–26502 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] from the Web site cited above or by shall be as follows: BILLING CODE P contacting the identified DFO.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65038 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Moreover, in view of the possibility that to continue the discussion of matters (e) A transcript will be kept for certain the schedule for ACRS meetings may be not completed on the scheduled day on open portions of the meeting and will be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary another day of the same meeting. available in the NRC Public Document to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, Persons planning to attend the meeting Room (PDR), One White Flint North, persons planning to attend should check may contact the Designated Federal Room O–1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike, with these references if such Officer (DFO) specified in the Federal Rockville, MD 20852–2738. A copy of rescheduling would result in a major Register Notice prior to the meeting to the certified minutes of the meeting will inconvenience. be advised of any changes to the agenda be available at the same location 3 Dated: October 14, 2010. that may have occurred. months following the meeting. Copies Antonio F. Dias, The following requirements shall may be obtained upon payment of Branch Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, apply to public participation in ACRS appropriate reproduction charges. ACRS Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. full Committee meetings: meeting agenda, transcripts, and letter [FR Doc. 2010–26495 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] (a) Persons who plan to submit reports are available through the PDR at BILLING CODE P written comments at the meeting should [email protected], by calling the provide 35 copies to the DFO at the PDR at 1–800–397–4209, or from the beginning of the meeting. Persons who Publicly Available Records System NUCLEAR REGULATORY cannot attend the meeting, but wish to (PARS) component of NRC’s document COMMISSION submit written comments regarding the system (ADAMS) which is accessible agenda items may do so by sending a from the NRC Web site at http:// Advisory Committee on Reactor readily reproducible copy addressed to www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- Safeguards; Procedures for Meetings the DFO specified in the Federal collections/acrs/. Register Notice, care of the Advisory Background (f) Video teleconferencing service is Committee on Reactor Safeguards, U.S. available for observing open sessions of This notice describes procedures to be Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use followed with respect to meetings Washington, DC 20555–0001. this service for observing ACRS conducted by the U.S. Nuclear Comments should be limited to items meetings should contact Mr. Theron Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) being considered by the Committee. Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Specialist, Advisory Committee on Reactor Comments should be in the possession (301–415–8066) between 7:30 a.m. and Safeguards (ACRS) pursuant to the of the DFO 5 days prior to the meeting 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time at least 10 days Federal Advisory Committee Act to allow time for reproduction and before the meeting to ensure the (FACA). These procedures are set forth distribution. availability of this service. Individuals so that they may be incorporated by (b) Persons desiring to make oral or organizations requesting this service reference in future notices for statements at the meeting should make will be responsible for telephone line individual meetings. a request to do so to the DFO; if charges and for providing the The ACRS is a statutory group possible, the request should be made 5 equipment and facilities that they use to established by Congress to review and days before the meeting, identifying the establish the video teleconferencing report on nuclear safety matters and topic(s) on which oral statements will link. The availability of video applications for the licensing of nuclear be made and the amount of time needed teleconferencing services is not facilities. The Committee’s reports for presentation so that orderly guaranteed. become a part of the public record. arrangements can be made. The The ACRS meetings are conducted in Committee will hear oral statements on accordance with FACA; they are ACRS Subcommittee Meetings topics being reviewed at an appropriate normally open to the public and provide time during the meeting as scheduled by In accordance with the revised FACA, opportunities for oral or written the Chairman. the agency is no longer required to statements from members of the public apply the FACA requirements to to be considered as part of the (c) Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, meetings conducted by the Committee’s information gathering Subcommittees of the NRC Advisory process. ACRS reviews do not normally whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to Committees, if the Subcommittee’s encompass matters pertaining to recommendations would be environmental impacts other than those present oral statements can be obtained by contacting the DFO. independently reviewed by its parent related to radiological safety. Committee. The ACRS meetings are not (d) The use of still, motion picture, adjudicatory hearings such as those and television cameras will be The ACRS, however, has chosen to conducted by the NRC’s Atomic Safety permitted at the discretion of the conduct its Subcommittee meetings in and Licensing Board Panel as part of the Chairman and subject to the condition accordance with the procedures noted Commission’s licensing process. that the use of such equipment will not above for ACRS full Committee interfere with the conduct of the meetings, as appropriate, to facilitate General Rules Regarding ACRS Full meeting. The DFO will have to be public participation, and to provide a Committee Meetings notified prior to the meeting and will forum for stakeholders to express their An agenda will be published in the authorize the use of such equipment views on regulatory matters being Federal Register for each full after consultation with the Chairman. considered by the ACRS. When Committee meeting. There may be a The use of such equipment will be Subcommittee meetings are held at need to make changes to the agenda to restricted as is necessary to protect locations other than at NRC facilities, facilitate the conduct of the meeting. proprietary or privileged information reproduction facilities may not be The Chairman of the Committee is that may be in documents, folders, etc., available at a reasonable cost. empowered to conduct the meeting in a in the meeting room. Electronic Accordingly, 50 copies of the materials manner that, in his/her judgment, will recordings will be permitted only to be used during the meeting should be facilitate the orderly conduct of during those portions of the meeting provided for distribution at such business, including making provisions that are open to the public. meetings.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65039

Special Provisions When Proprietary OFFICE OF PERSONNEL via electronic mail to Sessions Are To Be Held MANAGEMENT [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395–6974. If it is necessary to hold closed Submission for Review: Program FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A sessions for the purpose of discussing Services Evaluation Surveys, OMB copy of this ICR, with applicable matters involving proprietary Control No. 3206–NEW supporting documentation, may be information, persons with agreements AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel obtained by contacting the Office of permitting access to such information Management. Information and Regulatory Affairs, may attend those portions of the ACRS ACTION: Office of Management Budget, 725 17th meetings where this material is being 30-Day Notice and request for comments. Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, discussed upon confirmation that such Attention: Desk Officer for the Office of agreements are effective and related to SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Personnel Management or sent via the material being discussed. Management (OPM) offers the general electronic mail to _ The DFO should be informed of such public and other federal agencies the oira [email protected] or faxed an agreement at least 5 working days opportunity to comment on a new to (202) 395–6974. prior to the meeting so that it can be information collection request (ICR) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office confirmed, and a determination can be 3206–NEW, Program Services of Personnel Management (OPM) leads made regarding the applicability of the Evaluation Surveys. As required by the Federal agencies in shaping human agreement to the material that will be Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (Pub. resources management systems to L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35) as discussed during the meeting. The effectively recruit, develop, manage and amended by the Clinger-Cohen Act minimum information provided should retain a high quality and diverse (Pub. L. 104–106), OPM is soliciting include information regarding the date workforce. Program services evaluation comments for this collection. The of the agreement, the scope of material surveys are valuable tools to gather information collection was previously information from our customers so we included in the agreement, the project published in the Federal Register on can design and implement new ways to or projects involved, and the names and June 21, 2010 at 75 FR 35092 allowing improve our programs to meet their titles of the persons signing the for a 60-day public comment period. No needs. This collection request includes agreement. Additional information may comments were received for this surveys that we currently use or plan to be requested to identify the specific information collection. The purpose of use during the next three years to agreement involved. A copy of the this notice is to allow an additional 30 measure our ability to deliver program executed agreement should be provided days for public comments. The Office of services to meet our customer needs. to the DFO prior to the beginning of the Management and Budget is particularly The survey instruments include direct meeting for admittance to the closed interested in comments that: mail, telephone contact, focus groups session. 1. Evaluate whether the proposed and web exit surveys. Our customers collection of information is necessary Meeting Dates for Calendar Year 2010 include the general public, Federal for the proper performance of the benefit recipients, Federal agencies and The ACRS meeting dates for Calendar functions of the agency, including Federal employees. We estimate 4,310 Year 2011 are provided below: whether the information will have program services evaluation surveys practical utility; will be completed in the next 3 years. 579 ...... January 13– Thursday–Friday 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the The time estimate varies from 1 minute 14, 2011. agency’s estimate of the burden of the to 40 minutes to complete. The 580 ...... February 10– Thursday–Satur- proposed collection of information, estimated burden is 1,126 hours. 12, 2011. day including the validity of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. 581 ...... March 10–12, Thursday–Satur- methodology and assumptions used; 2011. day 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and John Berry, 582 ...... April 7–9, Thursday–Satur- clarity of the information to be Director. 2011. day collected; and [FR Doc. 2010–26539 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 583 ...... May 12–14, Thursday–Satur- 4. Minimize the burden of the BILLING CODE 6325–47–P 2011. day collection of information on those who 584 ...... June 8–10, Wednesday–Fri- are to respond, including through the 2011. day use of appropriate automated, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 585 ...... July 13–15, Wednesday–Fri- electronic, mechanical, or other MANAGEMENT 2011. day technological collection techniques or August 2011 (No Meeting) other forms of information technology, Submission for Review: Performance 586 ...... September 8– Thursday–Satur- e.g., permitting electronic submissions Measurement Surveys, OMB Control 10, 2011. day of responses. No. 3206–NEW 587 ...... October 6–8, Thursday–Satur- 2011. day DATES: Comments are encouraged and AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel 588 ...... November 3– Thursday–Satur- will be accepted until November 22, Management. 2010. This process is conducted in 5, 2011. day ACTION: 30-Day notice and request for 589 ...... December 1– Thursday–Satur- accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1. comments. 3, 2011. day ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Dated: October 14, 2010. the proposed information collection to Management (OPM) offers the general the Office of Information and Regulatory public and other federal agencies the Andrew L. Bates, Affairs, Office of Management Budget, opportunity to comment on a new Advisory Committee Management Officer. 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC information collection request (ICR) [FR Doc. 2010–26503 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the 3206–NEW, Performance Measurement BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Office of Personnel Management or sent Surveys. As required by the Paperwork

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65040 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Reduction Act of 1995, (Pub. L. 104–13, resources management systems to whether the information will have 44 U.S.C. chapter 35) as amended by the effectively recruit, develop, manage and practical utility; Clinger-Cohen Act (Pub. L. 104–106), retain a high quality and diverse 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the OPM is soliciting comments for this workforce. Performance measurement agency’s estimate of the burden of the collection. The information collection surveys are valuable tools to gather proposed collection of information, was previously published in the Federal information from our customers so we including the validity of the Register on June 21, 2010 at 75 FR can design and implement new ways to methodology and assumptions used; 35092 allowing for a 60-day public improve our performance to meet their 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and comment period. No comments were needs. This collection request includes clarity of the information to be received for this information collection. surveys that we currently use or plan to collected; and The purpose of this notice is to allow an use during the next three years to 4. Minimize the burden of the additional 30 days for public comments. measure our performance in providing collection of information on those who The Office of Management and Budget services to meet our customer needs. are to respond, including through the is particularly interested in comments The survey instruments include direct use of appropriate automated, that: mail, telephone contact, focus groups electronic, mechanical, or other 1. Evaluate whether the proposed and web exit surveys. Our customers technological collection techniques or collection of information is necessary include the general public, Federal other forms of information technology, for the proper performance of the benefit recipients, Federal agencies and e.g., permitting electronic submissions functions of the agency, including Federal employees. We estimate 210,900 of responses. whether the information will have performance measurement surveys will DATES: Comments are encouraged and practical utility; be completed in the next 3 years. The will be accepted until November 22, 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the time estimate varies from 15 minutes to 2010. This process is conducted in agency’s estimate of the burden of the 20 minutes to complete. The estimated accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1. proposed collection of information, burden is 70,275 hours. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are including the validity of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. invited to submit written comments on methodology and assumptions used; John Berry, the proposed information collection to 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and Director. the Office of Information and Regulatory clarity of the information to be [FR Doc. 2010–26540 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Affairs, Office of Management Budget, collected; and 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC BILLING CODE 6325–47–P 4. Minimize the burden of the 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the collection of information on those who Office of Personnel Management or sent are to respond, including through the OFFICE OF PERSONNEL via electronic mail to use of appropriate automated, _ MANAGEMENT oira [email protected] or faxed electronic, mechanical, or other to (202) 395–6974. technological collection techniques or Submission for Review: Customer FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A other forms of information technology, Satisfaction Surveys, OMB Control No. copy of this ICR, with applicable e.g., permitting electronic submissions 3206–0236 supporting documentation, may be of responses. obtained by contacting the Office of AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel DATES: Comments are encouraged and Information and Regulatory Affairs, Management. will be accepted until December 20, Office of Management Budget, 725 17th ACTION: 2010. This process is conducted in 30-Day Notice and request for Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1. comments. Attention: Desk Officer for the Office of ADDRESSES: Interested persons are SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Personnel Management or sent via invited to submit written comments on Management (OPM) offers the general electronic mail to the proposed information collection to public and other Federal agencies the [email protected] or faxed the Office of Information and Regulatory opportunity to comment on a revised to (202) 395–6974. Affairs, Office of Management and information collection request (ICR) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., 3206–0236, Customer Satisfaction of Personnel Management (OPM) leads Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Surveys. As required by the Paperwork Federal agencies in shaping human Officer for the Office of Personnel Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, resources management systems to Management or sent via electronic mail effectively recruit, develop, manage and _ 44 U.S.C. chapter 35), as amended by to oira [email protected] or the Clinger-Cohen Act (Pub. L. 104– retain a high quality and diverse faxed to (202) 395–6974. 106), OPM is soliciting comments for workforce. We need to solicit input from FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A this collection. The information our customers to evaluate our copy of this ICR, with applicable collection was previously published in performance in providing services. supporting documentation, may be the Federal Register on June 21, 2010 at Customer satisfaction surveys are obtained by contacting the Office of 75 FR 35093 allowing for a 60-day valuable tools to gather information Information and Regulatory Affairs, public comment period. One comment from our customers so we can design Office of Management and Budget, 725 was received for this information and implement new ways to improve 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC collection. The purpose of this notice is our service to meet their needs. This 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the to allow an additional 30 days for public collection request includes surveys that Office of Personnel Management or sent comments. The Office of Management we currently use or plan to use during via electronic mail to and Budget is particularly interested in the next three years to measure our [email protected] or faxed comments that: ability to meet our customer needs. The to (202) 395–6974. 1. Evaluate whether the proposed survey instruments include direct mail, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office collection of information is necessary telephone contact, focus groups and of Personnel Management (OPM) leads for the proper performance of the web exit surveys. Our customers Federal agencies in shaping human functions of the agency, including include the general public, Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65041

benefit recipients, Federal agencies and Web site at http://www.sec.gov, and Section 6(b)(5) 4 in particular in that it Federal employees. The currently http://www.nyse.com. is designed to prevent fraudulent and approved collection has been revised to manipulative acts and practices, to II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s exclude performance measurement promote just and equitable principles of Statement of the Purpose of, and surveys and program services evaluation Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule trade, to foster cooperation and surveys. Only those surveys relating Change coordination with persons engaged in specifically to customer satisfaction will facilitating transactions in securities, be associated with OMB Control No. In its filing with the Commission, the and to remove impediments to and 3206–0236. We estimate 495,182 self-regulatory organization included perfect the mechanism of a free and customer satisfaction surveys will be statements concerning the purpose of, open market and a national market completed in the next 3 years. The time and basis for, the proposed rule change system. The Exchange believes that the estimate varies from 2 minutes to 30 and discussed any comments it received proposed amendment is consistent with minutes to complete. The estimated on the proposed rule change. The text the goal of removing impediments to a burden is 34,152 hours. of those statements may be examined at free and open market because the the places specified in Item IV below. changes proposed herein will clarify U.S. Office of Personnel Management. The Exchange has prepared summaries, John Berry, currently existing routing options set forth in sections A, B, and C below, designed to give Users flexibility and Director. of the most significant parts of such control over how their orders route to [FR Doc. 2010–26541 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] statements. away market centers. BILLING CODE 6325–47–P A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statement on Burden on Competition Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Change The Exchange does not believe that COMMISSION the proposed rule change will impose 1. Purpose [Release No. 34–63116; File No. SR– any burden on competition that is not NYSEArca–2010–89] The Exchange proposes to amend necessary or appropriate in furtherance NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.37, Order of the purposes of the Act. Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Execution, to clarify Users’ ability to Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and instruct NYSE Arca when routing C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed eligible unexecuted orders to bypass any Statement on Comments on the Rule Change Amending NYSE Arca market centers that are not posting Proposed Rule Change Received From Equities Rule 7.37, Order Execution, To Protected Quotations within the Members, Participants or Others Clarify Users’ Ability To Instruct NYSE meaning of Regulation NMS. No written comments were solicited Arca To Bypass Non-Regulation NMS In March 2008, NYSE Arca Equities or received with respect to the proposed Protected Market Centers When began offering clients access to rule change. Routing Away undisplayed liquidity via Indications of Interest by adding several new routing III. Date of Effectiveness of the October 15, 2010. venues (‘‘IOI Routing Functionality’’). In Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the May 2008, NYSE Arca Equities provided Commission Action Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Users the ability to opt out of this IOI Because the foregoing proposed rule ‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Routing Functionality. Users are change does not: (i) Significantly affect notice is hereby given that, on October currently able to opt out of IOI Routing the protection of investors or the public 13, 2010, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the Functionality while retaining the ability interest; (ii) impose any significant ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed with to use the full array of routable orders burden on competition; and (iii) become the Securities and Exchange by marking any routable order as not operative for 30 days from the date on Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the eligible to route to market centers that which it was filed, or such shorter time proposed rule change as described in are not posting Protected Quotations. as the Commission may designate, it has Items I and II below, which Items have In order to increase awareness of this become effective pursuant to Section been prepared by the self-regulatory option, the Exchange now proposes to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 5 and Rule 19b– organization. The Commission is add the following text to proposed Rule 4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.6 publishing this notice to solicit 7.37(d)(4): comments on the proposed rule change For an order that has not been At any time within 60 days of the from interested persons. executed in its entirety pursuant to filing of the proposed rule change, the paragraphs (a) through (c) of this Rule, Commission summarily may I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and which is otherwise eligible to route temporarily suspend such rule change if Statement of the Terms of Substance of away, Users may instruct NYSE Arca to it appears to the Commission that such the Proposed Rule Change bypass any market centers that are not action is necessary or appropriate in the The Exchange proposes to amend posting Protected Quotations within the public interest, for the protection of NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.37, Order meaning of Regulation NMS. Execution, to clarify Users’ ability to The Exchange also notes that the 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). instruct NYSE Arca to bypass non- proposed rule is substantially similar to 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). Regulation NMS protected market 6 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– Nasdaq Rule 4758 (1)(A)(iv). 4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory centers when routing away. The text of 2. Statutory Basis organization submit to the Commission written the proposed rule change is available at notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, the Exchange, the Commission’s Public The proposed rule change is along with a brief description and text of the Reference Room, at the Commission’s consistent with Section 6(b) 3 of the Act, proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule in general, and furthers the objectives of change, or such shorter time as designated by the 1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1). Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). requirement.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65042 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of For the Commission, by the Division of concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the purposes of the Act. Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated the proposed rule change and discussed authority.7 any comments it received on the IV. Solicitation of Comments Florence E. Harmon, proposed rule change. The text of these Interested persons are invited to Deputy Secretary. statements may be examined at the submit written data, views and [FR Doc. 2010–26508 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] places specified in Item IV below. The arguments concerning the foregoing, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P self-regulatory organization has including whether the proposed rule prepared summaries, set forth in change is consistent with the Act. Sections A, B and C below, of the most SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Comments may be submitted by any of significant aspects of such statements. COMMISSION the following methods: A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s [Release No. 34–63117; File No. SR–ISE– Statement of the Purpose of, and Electronic Comments 2010–101] Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule • Change Use the Commission’s Internet Self-Regulatory Organizations; comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ International Securities Exchange, 1. Purpose rules/sro.shtml); or LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate The Exchange has developed an • Send an e-mail to rule- Effectiveness of Proposed Rule enhanced technology trading platform. [email protected]. Please include File Change Relating to Enhancements to To assure a smooth transition, the No. SR–NYSEArca–2010–89 on the the Exchange’s Electronic Trading Exchange will migrate option classes subject line. Platform from its current trading system to the new trading system over time (the Paper Comments October 15, 2010. ‘‘Transition Period’’).5 While the new Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the • Send paper comments in triplicate trading platform will conform to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, ISE’s current trading rules, with a few (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 2 thereunder, Securities and Exchange Commission, proposed changes discussed below, notice is hereby given that on October 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC some functionality offered on the 7, 2010, International Securities 20549–1090. current system will be phased-in during Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) the initial implementation of the new All submissions should refer to File No. filed with the Securities and Exchange trading platform. Accordingly, the SR–NYSEArca–2010–89. This file Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the Exchange seeks to identify in its rules number should be included on the proposed rule change as described in any differences in the execution of subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Items I and II below, which Items have orders on the new trading platform Commission process and review your been prepared by the Exchange. The during the Transition Period. The comments more efficiently, please use Exchange has filed the proposal as a Exchange will issue an information only one method. The Commission will ‘‘non-controversial’’ proposed rule circular regarding these rule changes, post all comments on the Commission’s change pursuant to Section and will also issue information circulars Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule prior to transferring options classes to rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.4 The the new trading platform during the submission, all subsequent Commission is publishing this notice to Transition Period. amendments, all written statements solicit comments on the proposed rule Changes to Existing ISE Rules with respect to the proposed rule change from interested persons. The Exchange proposes to implement change that are filed with the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission, and all written two new order types, Opening Only Statement of the Terms of Substance of Orders and Good-Till-Date Orders on communications relating to the the Proposed Rule Change proposed rule change between the the new trading platform. An Opening Commission and any person, other than The Exchange proposes to amend Only order is a limit order that can be those that may be withheld from the certain rules to facilitate enhancements entered for the opening rotation only. public in accordance with the to its electronic options trading system. Any portion of the order that is not provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be The text of the proposed rule change is executed during the opening rotation is available for Web site viewing and available on the Exchange’s Web site cancelled. This order type currently is printing in the Commission’s Public http://www.ise.com, at the principal available on other options exchanges.6 Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., office of the Exchange, at the Washington, DC 20549, on official Commission’s Public Reference Room, 5 Options classes will be transferred from the and on the Commission’s Web site at current trading platform to the new trading business days between the hours of 10 platform. The same options cannot trade on both a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing http://www.sec.gov. systems at the same time. The Exchange has been also will be available for inspection and II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s working with its members to assure a smooth copying at the principal office of NYSE transition to the new trading platform and will Statement of the Purpose of, and continue to do so up to the launch of the new Arca. All comments received will be Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule technology and during the Transition Period. The posted without change; the Commission Change name of the new trading platform, which as yet does not edit personal identifying remains unannounced, will be communicated to information from submissions. You In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange members via circular. Exchange included statements 6 See NYSE Arca Rule 6.62(r) which defines an should submit only information that ‘‘Opening Only Order’’ as ‘‘a market order or limit you wish to make available publicly. All order which is to be executed in whole or in part 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). submissions should refer to File No. during the opening auction of an options series or 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). SR–NYSEArca–2010–89 and should be not at all. Any portion not so executed is to be 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. treated as cancelled.’’ See also NASDAQ OMX submitted on or before November 12, 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). PHLX (‘‘PHLX’’) Rule 1066(c)(5), which defines an 2010. 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). ‘‘Opening-Only-Market Order’’ as ‘‘a market order

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65043

A Good-Till-Date Order is a limit order quotations.9 ISE market makers are not (i) The Exchange proposes to adopt to buy or sell which, if not executed, required to use the ISE-provided Supplementary Material .10 to Rule 716 will be cancelled at the sooner of the functionality and can program their own to specify that the Block, Facilitation end of the expiration date assigned to systems to perform the same functions and Solicited Order Mechanisms will the order, or the expiration of the series. if they prefer. not be available for options traded on BATS Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BATS’’) offers an On the new trading platform, the the new trading platform. Exchange proposes to expand on the so order type that is similar in all respect (ii) The Exchange proposes to adopt call ‘‘speed bump’’ functionality but for the time when the order Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 718, 7 contained in Rule 804(g)(1), which terminates. ISE proposes to adopt new to specify that Cabinet trading will not Supplementary Material .02 to Rule 715 helps market makers manage their exposure across all series of a class. be available for options traded on the to specify that these two new order new trading platform. types are applicable only to option Currently, this functionality permits a classes that trade on the new trading market maker to establish parameters in (iii) The Exchange proposes to adopt platform. the central system to move its Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 722 The Exchange also proposes to modify quotations in all series of an option to to specify that Complex Orders will not the Minimum Quantity order type on an inferior price when the market maker be available for options traded on the the new trading platform. Currently, a trades a specified number of contracts in new trading platform. minimum quantity order is an order that that class as a whole within a fixed time (iv) The Exchange proposes to adopt is available for partial execution, but period. On the new trading platform, a Supplementary Material .08 to Rule 723 each partial execution must be for the market maker will have the ability to to specify that the Price Improvement specified number of contracts or greater. have its quotations removed based on Mechanism will not be available for If the balance of the order after one or the number of contracts traded, the options traded on the new trading more partial executions is less than the percentage of the total of the market platform. minimum, such balance is treated as all- maker quotes that have traded, the or-none.8 On the new trading platform, absolute value of the net between 2. Statutory Basis the Exchange proposes to offer an contracts bought and contracts sold, The basis under the Securities enhanced version of this order type, one and/or the absolute value of the net Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’) for this that will allow members to determine, between (a) calls purchased plus puts proposed rule change is the requirement after the initial minimum quantity is sold, and (b) calls sold plus puts under Section 6(b),11 in general, and executed, whether they want any purchased. The Exchange will not offer Section 6(b)(5)12 in particular, that an subsequent execution to be subject to the so called ‘‘step-up’’ functionality on exchange have rules that are designed to the specified minimum quantity or not. the new trading platform contained in prevent fraudulent and manipulative If the member chooses not to have the Rule 804(g)(3), which was designed to acts and practices, to promote just and minimum quantity applied after the first replenish the size of a market maker’s equitable principles of trade, to remove partial execution, the remaining balance quotation when it fell below an impediments to and perfect the of the order will trade as a regular order. exchange-established minimum mechanism for a free and open market ISE proposes to include the enhanced quotation size. This functionality has and a national market system, and, in functionality of the Minimum Quantity not proved useful to market makers. The general, to protect investors and the Order in new Supplementary Material Exchange proposes to include the public interest. In particular, the .02 to Rule 715, specifying that it is only services offered on the new trading Exchange believes the new trading available to options traded on the new platform in Supplementary Material .01 platform will improve the efficiency and trading platform. to Rule 804. Finally, the Exchange proposes to The Exchange notes that using the quality of options executions on the enhance one of the services the ISE speed bump functionality offered by the Exchange, and that the proposed new offers market makers to help them Exchange does not alleviate market order types and enhanced speed bump manage their quotations on the new makers from any of the quotation functionality on the new trading trading platform and to discontinue one requirements contained in the platform will provide greater flexibility that is no longer necessary. While each Exchanges rules. for Exchange users in how they quote and trade, while also enhancing the ISE market maker employs its own Phased-In Functionality sophisticated proprietary quotation and overall market quality for options traded risk management systems to determine Certain functionality currently on the Exchange. The Exchange further the prices and sizes at which its quotes, available on the ISE will not believes that the proposed rule change ISE rule 804(g) contains several immediately be available on the new will facilitate an orderly transition from voluntary tools that market makers can trading platform. This functionality will the Exchange’s current technology use to assist them in managing their be phased-in by the Exchange shortly trading platform to the new trading after the initial launch of the system. platform. which is to be executed in whole or in part during Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to add supplementary material to the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the opening rotation of an options series or not at Statement on Burden on Competition all’’ and Rule 1066(c)(9), which defines a ‘‘Limit on applicable rules to specify that such Opening Order’’ as ‘‘a limit order which is to be functionality is not available for options The proposed rule change does not executed in whole or in part during the opening 10 rotation of an options series or not at all. traded on the new trading platform, as impose any burden on competition that 7 See BATS Rule 11.9(b)(4), which defines a follows: is not necessary or appropriate in ‘‘Good ‘til Day Order’’ as a limit order to buy or sell furtherance of the purposes of the Act. which, if not executed, will be cancelled at the 9 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51050 expiration time assigned to the order, which can be (January 18, 2005), 70 FR 3758 (January 26, 2005) no later than the close of the After Hours Trading (order approving SR–ISE–2004–31). The Exchange will also notify members via circular Session.’’ 10 As the functionality is phased-in, the Exchange as the functionality is made available on the new 8 See ISE Rule 715(l). See Also Securities will file a proposal under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the trading platform. Exchange Act Release No. 61640 (March 3, 2010), Exchange Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(5) thereunder and 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 75 FR 11608 (March 11, 2010) (SR–ISE–2010–13). delete the supplementary material from its rules. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65044 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Securities and Exchange Commission, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement on Comments on the 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC COMMISSION Proposed Rule Change Received From 20549–1090. Members, Participants or Others All submissions should refer to File [Release No. 34–63110; File No. SR– NASDAQ–2010–107] The Exchange has not solicited, and Number SR–ISE–2010–101. This file does not intend to solicit, comments on number should be included on the this proposed rule change. The Self-Regulatory Organizations; The subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Exchange has not received any NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order unsolicited written comments from Commission process and review your Granting Approval to a Proposed Rule members or other interested parties. comments more efficiently, please use Change To Modify the Eligibility only one method. The Commission will Criteria for the Second Compliance III. Date of Effectiveness of the post all comments on the Commission’s Period for a Bid Price Deficiency on Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ the Nasdaq Capital Market Commission Action rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Because the foregoing proposed rule submission, all subsequent October 14, 2010. change does not: (1) Significantly affect amendments, all written statements I. Introduction the protection of investors or the public with respect to the proposed rule interest; (2) impose any significant change that are filed with the On August 25, 2010, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’) filed with burden on competition; and (3) become Commission, and all written the Securities and Exchange operative for 30 days from the date on communications relating to the Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant which it was filed, or such shorter time proposed rule change between the as the Commission may designate if to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Commission and any person, other than 1 consistent with the protection of Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’), and Rule those that may be withheld from the 2 investors and the public interest, it has 19b–4 thereunder, a proposed rule public in accordance with the change to modify the eligibility criteria become effective pursuant to Section provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 13 in order for a listed company to qualify 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b– available for website viewing and 4(f)(6) thereunder.14 for the second compliance period for a printing in the Commission’s Public At any time within 60 days of the bid price deficiency on the Nasdaq filing of the proposed rule change, the Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Capital Market. The proposed rule Commission summarily may Washington, DC 20549, on official change was published for comment in temporarily suspend such rule change if business days between the hours of 10 the Federal Register on September 2, it appears to the Commission that such a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 2010.3 The Commission received no action is necessary or appropriate in the will be available for inspection and comment letters on the proposal. This public interest, for the protection of copying at the principal office of the order approves the proposed rule investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Exchange. All comments received will change. the purposes of the Act. be posted without change; the II. Description of the Proposal Commission does not edit personal IV. Solicitation of Comments identifying information from Nasdaq is proposing, in order for a Interested persons are invited to submissions. You should submit only company to receive a second submit written data, views, and information that you wish to make compliance period for a bid price arguments concerning the foregoing, available publicly. All submissions deficiency on the Nasdaq Capital Market including whether the proposed rule should refer to File Number SR–ISE– (‘‘Capital Market’’), to modify the change is consistent with the Act. 2010–101 and should be submitted on eligibility criteria concerning market Comments may be submitted by any of or before November 12, 2010. value of publicly held shares. Under the the following methods: current Nasdaq rules, when a company For the Commission, by the Division of Electronic Comments has a closing bid price below $1 for 30 Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated consecutive days, it is deemed deficient • 15 Use the Commission’s Internet authority. under Nasdaq’s bid price continued comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Florence E. Harmon, listing standard, and promptly receives rules/sro.shtml); or Deputy Secretary. written notice that it has 180 calendar • Send an e-mail to rule- [FR Doc. 2010–26509 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] days from such notification to regain [email protected]. Please include File 4 BILLING CODE 8011–01–P compliance. Compliance can be Number SR–ISE–2010–101 on the achieved by maintaining a minimum $1 subject line. closing bid price for ten consecutive Paper Comments days. At the expiration of the 180-day • Send paper comments in triplicate compliance period, a company can to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, receive an additional 180-day compliance period,5 provided it is 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). either already listed on the Capital 14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). When filing a proposed Market or transfers to that market and rule change pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the satisfies all of the Capital Market’s Act, an exchange is required to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). proposed rule change, along with a brief description 2 and text of the proposed rule change, at least five 17 CFR 240.19b–4. business days prior to the date of filing of the 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62782 proposed rule change, or such shorter time as (August 27, 2010), 75 FR 53994 (‘‘Notice’’). designated by the Commission. The Commission 4 See Nasdaq Rule 5810(c)(3)(A). notes that the Exchange has satisfied this 5 In its filing, Nasdaq refers to the 180-day requirement. 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). compliance period as a ‘‘grace’’ period.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65045

initial listing criteria, except for bid that under the proposal, while certain have, sufficient public float, investor price.6 companies that do not currently qualify base, and trading interest to provide the Nasdaq has observed that many for the second compliance period could depth and liquidity necessary to companies fail to qualify for the second receive an additional 180 days to promote fair and orderly markets. compliance period because they do not comply with the bid price requirement, Adequate standards are especially meet the market value of publicly held the proposed rule change would not important given the expectations of shares requirement for initial listing on extend the overall maximum time of 360 investors regarding exchange trading the Capital Market. Nasdaq therefore is days that is currently available to and the imprimatur of listing on a proposing to ease the requirements for qualifying companies. particular market. Once a security has the second compliance period on the Nasdaq also proposes to remove been approved for initial listing, Capital Market by allowing a company language in Rule 5810(c)(3) referencing maintenance criteria allow an exchange to qualify if it satisfies the lower the payment of fees by a company to monitor the status and trading continued listing requirement for which transfers to the Capital Market. characteristics of that issue to ensure market value of publicly held shares, The current language implies that there that it continues to meet the exchange’s thereby enabling more companies to be are fees applicable to such a company. standards for market depth and liquidity eligible for the second compliance However, no fees are applicable under so that fair and orderly markets can be period.7 The company would still need Rule 5920(a) to such a company. Nasdaq maintained, and so that only companies to meet all of the other initial listing is proposing to delete the language, to suitable for listing remain listed on a criteria for Capital Market other than bid remove any confusion, and has also national securities exchange. price.8 proposed some other clarifying and non- The Commission believes that the Under the proposal, the company will substantive changes to the rule.11 proposal to modify the eligibility need to notify Nasdaq of its intent to criteria for the second compliance III. Discussion and Commission cure the bid price deficiency. If a period for a bid price deficiency on the Findings company does not indicate its intent to Capital Market is reasonable and cure the deficiency, or if it does not After careful consideration, the consistent with the Act, and furthers appear to Nasdaq staff that it is possible Commission finds that the proposed investor protection and the public for the company to cure the deficiency, rule change is consistent with the interest. As stated above, Nasdaq has the company would not be eligible for requirements of the Act and the rules observed that many companies fail to the second compliance period under the and regulations thereunder applicable to qualify for the second compliance Capital Market rules. Under the a national securities exchange 12 and, in period because they do not meet the proposal, a company listed on Nasdaq’s particular, the requirements of Section 6 market value of publicly held shares Global or Global Select Markets would of the Act.13 Specifically, the requirement for initial listing on the be permitted to transfer to the Capital Commission finds that the proposed Capital Market. The Commission notes Market if it meets the applicable market rule change is consistent with Section that to qualify for a second compliance value of publicly held shares 6(b)(5) of the Act,14 which requires, period, the company would still need to requirement for continued listing and among other things, that the rules of a meet all of the other initial listing all other applicable requirements for national securities exchange be criteria for Capital Market other than bid initial listing on the Capital Market designed to prevent fraudulent and price, as well as the continued listing (except for the bid price requirement), manipulative acts and practices, to requirement for market value of publicly and notifies Nasdaq of its intent to cure promote just and equitable principles of held shares.15 These standards should the bid price deficiency.9 Once on the trade, to foster cooperation and help continue to ensure that only Capital Market, the company would be coordination with persons engaged in companies that meet the minimum eligible for the second compliance regulating, clearing, settling, processing requirements for adequate depth and period on the Capital Market, unless it information with respect to, and liquidity remain listed for an extended does not appear to Nasdaq staff that it facilitating transactions in securities, to period of time on the Capital Market. is possible for the Company to cure the remove impediments to and perfect the In addition, the company will need to deficiency.10 In its filing, Nasdaq noted mechanism of a free and open market notify Nasdaq of its intent to cure the and a national market system, and, in bid price deficiency. If a Capital Market 6 See Nasdaq Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(i)–(ii). general, to protect investors and the company does not indicate its intent to 7 The initial listing requirements for market value public interest and are not designed to cure the deficiency, or if it does not of publicly held shares for common stock on the permit unfair discrimination between appear to Nasdaq staff that it is possible Capital Market range from $5 million to $15 customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. for the company to cure the deficiency, million, depending on the listing standard under The development and enforcement of which the company qualifies; the continued listing the company would not be eligible for requirement is $1 million. See Nasdaq Rules adequate standards governing the initial the second compliance period. 5505(b) and 5555(a)(4). and continued listing of securities on an Similarly, a company listed on the 8 The initial listing standards for the Capital exchange is an activity of critical Global or Global Select Markets would Market are set forth in Nasdaq Rule 5505 and importance to financial markets and the be permitted to transfer to the Capital include an equity standard, market value of listed investing public. Listing standards serve securities standard, and a net income standard. See Market if it meets the applicable market Nasdaq Rule 5505. as a means for an exchange to screen value of publicly held shares 9 As noted above, Nasdaq Global and Global issuers and to provide listed status only requirement for continued listing and Select companies can currently receive the to bona fide companies that have, or in all other applicable requirements for additional 180 day compliance period, provided the case of an initial public offering will initial listing on the Capital Market they meet all the applicable Capital Market initial requirements and transfer to that market. (except for the bid price requirement) 11 10 According to Nasdaq, once a company transfers See Notice, supra note 3. and notifies Nasdaq of its intent to cure to the Capital Market, Nasdaq would assess whether 12 In approving this proposed rule change the the bid price deficiency. Once on the it is possible for the company to cure the Commission has considered the proposed rule’s Capital Market, the company would be deficiency. If not, the company would be denied the impact on efficiency, competition, and capital second 180 day compliance period, and Nasdaq formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). eligible for the second compliance would commence delisting proceedings for the 13 15 U.S.C. 78f. company as a Capital Market listing. 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 15 See supra note 8.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65046 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

period on the Capital Market, unless it IV. Conclusion lack of current and accurate information does not appear to Nasdaq staff that it It is therefore ordered, pursuant to concerning the securities of Cellular is possible for the Company to cure the Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,16 that the Products, Inc. (n/k/a 872 Main Street deficiency. proposed rule change (SR–NASDAQ– Corp.) because it has not filed any The Commission believes that 2010–107), be, and hereby is, approved. periodic reports since the period ended requiring a company to affirmatively December 31, 1994. state its intent to cure the bid price For the Commission, by the Division of It appears to the Securities and deficiency and Nasdaq staff to Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.17 Exchange Commission that there is a determine whether it is possible for the Florence E. Harmon, lack of current and accurate information company to cure that deficiency, concerning the securities of Ceptor Deputy Secretary. provides further protections to Corp. because it has not filed any investors, by helping to ensure that only [FR Doc. 2010–26474 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] periodic reports since the period ended companies that are serious and capable BILLING CODE 8011–01–P September 30, 2007. of gaining compliance with the Capital It appears to the Securities and Market listing standards within the Exchange Commission that there is a timeframe provided qualify for the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION lack of current and accurate information second compliance period. In this concerning the securities of CGS regard, the Commission would expect a In the Matter of Cape Systems Group, Scientific Corp. because it has not filed thorough review to ensure that it is Inc., Caribbean Cigar Company, Casual any periodic reports since the period possible for the bid price deficiency to Male Corp., Cell Power Technologies, ended February 29, 2000. be cured at the end of the second 180 Inc., Cellmetrix, Inc. (f/k/a BCAM It appears to the Securities and day compliance period and, if not, International, Inc.), Cellular Products, Exchange Commission that there is a would expect Nasdaq to immediately Inc. (n/k/a 872 Main Street Corp.), lack of current and accurate information commence delisting proceedings. Ceptor Corp., CGS Scientific Corp., concerning the securities of Ciprico, Inc. In approving the Nasdaq’s proposal, and Ciprico, Inc., File No. 500–1; Order because it has not filed any periodic the Commission recognizes that certain of Suspension of Trading reports since the period ended companies that do not currently qualify December 31, 2007. for the second compliance period could October 19, 2010. The Commission is of the opinion that receive additional time to remain listed It appears to the Securities and the public interest and the protection of on a public market. The proposal, Exchange Commission that there is a investors require a suspension of trading however, does not extend the overall lack of current and accurate information in the securities of the above-listed maximum time of 360 days that a concerning the securities of Cape companies. company may remain listed before Systems Group, Inc. because it has not Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to delisting proceedings will commence. filed any periodic reports since the Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Moreover, the proposal eliminates the period ended December 31, 2006. Act of 1934, that trading in the automatic nature of the second 180 day It appears to the Securities and securities of the above-listed companies bid price compliance period that exists Exchange Commission that there is a is suspended for the period from 9:30 under the current rules. Further, lack of current and accurate information a.m. EDT on October 19, 2010, through notwithstanding the change in concerning the securities of Caribbean 11:59 p.m. EDT on November 1, 2010. eligibility criteria for a second Cigar Company because it has not filed compliance period, the Commission any periodic reports since the period By the Commission. expects Nasdaq to monitor companies ended September 30, 1998. Elizabeth M. Murphy, closely that are out of compliance and It appears to the Securities and Secretary. use its authority to delist issuers in a Exchange Commission that there is a [FR Doc. 2010–26698 Filed 10–19–10; 11:15 am] prompt, efficient, and fair manner lack of current and accurate information BILLING CODE 8011–01–P where necessary and appropriate, in concerning the securities of Casual Male accordance with Nasdaq Rule 5100, Corp. because it has not filed any including where there are public periodic reports since the period ended SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION interest or other concerns such as low February 3, 2001. price or market value, that make It appears to the Securities and Agency Information Collection continued listing unwarranted. Exchange Commission that there is a Activities: Comment Request Finally, the Commission finds that lack of current and accurate information Nasdaq’s proposal to remove language concerning the securities of Cell Power The Social Security Administration in Rule 5810(c)(3) will reduce confusion Technologies, Inc. because it has not (SSA) publishes a list of information regarding the application of the rule by filed any periodic reports since the collection packages requiring clearance clarifying that there are no fees period ended April 30, 2006. by the Office of Management and applicable to a company which transfer It appears to the Securities and Budget (OMB) in compliance with to the Capital Market. The additional Exchange Commission that there is a Public Law (Pub. L.) 104–13, the changes proposed by Nasdaq to the text lack of current and accurate information Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, of Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(i)–(ii) conform the concerning the securities of Cellmetrix, effective October 1, 1995. This notice rule language and format of the two Inc. (f/k/a BCAM International, Inc.) includes a new information collection paragraphs and clarify that Nasdaq will because it has not filed any periodic for OMB approval. assess a company for compliance with reports since the period ended June 30, SSA is soliciting comments on the applicable listing requirements based on 2000. accuracy of the agency’s burden the company’s most recent public filings It appears to the Securities and estimate; the need for the information; and market information. The Exchange Commission that there is a its practical utility; ways to enhance its Commission believes that these changes quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to either clarify the rule or are non- 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). minimize burden on respondents, substantive. 17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). including the use of automated

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65047

collection techniques or other forms of changes and services on the Social study. The data collections are a information technology. Mail, e-mail, or Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) primary source for data to measure the fax your comments and program—in an effort to produce strong effects of a more generous benefit offset recommendations on the information evidence about the effectiveness of and the provision of enhanced work collection to the OMB Desk Officer and potential solutions that would improve incentives counseling on SSDI SSA Reports Clearance Officer to the the historically very low rate of return beneficiaries’ work efforts and earnings. following addresses or fax numbers. to work among SSDI beneficiaries. Ultimately, these data will benefit (OMB), Office of Management and Under current law, Social Security researchers, policy analysts, policy Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA. beneficiaries lose their SSDI benefit if makers and the United States Congress Fax: 202–395–6974. E-mail address: they have earnings and/or work activity in a wide range of program areas. The [email protected]. above the threshold of Substantial effects of BOND on the well-being of (SSA), Social Security Administration, Gainful Activity after completing the SSDI beneficiaries could manifest DCBFM, Attn: Reports Clearance Trial Work Period and two-month grace themselves in many dimensions and Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 period. The benefit-offset component of could be relevant to an array of other Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235. this demonstration will reduce benefits public programs. This project offers the Fax: 410–965–6400. E-mail address: by $1 for each $2 in earnings above the first opportunity to obtain reliable [email protected]. BOND threshold, resulting in a gradual measures of these effects based upon a SSA has submitted the information reduction in benefits as earnings nationally representative sample. The collection listed below to OMB for increase. long-term indirect benefits of this clearance. Your comments on the The experimental design for BOND research are therefore likely to be information collection would be most will test a benefit offset alone and in substantial. Respondents are SSDI useful if OMB and SSA receive them conjunction with enhanced work beneficiaries and concurrent SSDI and within 30 days from the date of this incentives counseling. The central Supplemental Security Income publication. To be sure we consider research questions include: beneficiaries who we randomly assign • your comments, we must receive them What is the effect of the benefit to the study (Stage 1), and SSDI no later than November 22, 2010. You offset alone on employment and other beneficiaries who agree to participate in can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance outcomes? the study (Stage 2). package by calling the SSA Reports • What is the effect of the benefit Clearance Officer at 410–965–8783 or by offset in combination with enhanced Type of Request: Request for a new writing to the above e-mail address. work incentives counseling on information collection. Benefit Offset National employment and other outcomes? Note: This is a correction notice. We Demonstration—0960–NEW. SSA is The proposed public survey data updated the burden figures, shown below, undertaking the Benefit Offset National collections will have four components— since we published the 60-day Federal Demonstration (BOND)—a an impact study, a cost-benefit analysis, Register Notice for this collection on August demonstration and evaluation of policy a participation analysis, and a process 12, 2010 at 75 FR 49013.

Average burden Total annual Survey Number of Frequency of Number of per response burden respondents response responses (minutes) (hours)

Participation Agreement ...... 12,600 1 12,600 20 4,200 Baseline Survey ...... 12,600 1 12,600 41 8,610 Interim Survey ...... 10,080 1 10,080 29 4,872 Stage 1 36-month Survey ...... 8,000 1 8,000 49 6,533 Stage 2 36-month Survey ...... 10,080 1 10,080 60 10,080 Enhanced Work Incentives Assessment ...... 3,000 1 3,000 35 1,750 Key Informant Interviews ...... 100 7 700 60 700 Stage 2 Participant Focus Groups ...... 600 1 600 90 900

Totals ...... 57,060 ...... 57,660 ...... 37,645

Dated: October 15, 2010. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION in Pulaski County, Ark.1 The line Faye Lipsky, traverses United States Postal Service Reports Clearance Officer, Center for Reports Surface Transportation Board Zip Code 72118. Clearance, Social Security Administration. UP has certified that: (1) No local [FR Doc. 2010–26384 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] [Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 289X)] traffic has moved over the line for at least 2 years; (2) there is no overhead BILLING CODE 4191–02–P Union Pacific Railroad Company— traffic on the line to be rerouted; (3) no Abandonment Exemption—in Pulaski formal complaint filed by a user of rail County, AR service on the line (or by a State or local government entity acting on behalf of Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) such user) regarding cessation of service filed a verified notice of exemption over the line either is pending with the under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F– Surface Transportation Board (Board) or Exempt Abandonments to abandon a with any U.S. District Court or has been 4.04-mile portion of its Camp Robinson decided in favor of complainant within Spur extending from milepost 345.64 to the end of the line at milepost 349.68, 1 On October 7, 2010, UP supplemented its notice of exemption.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65048 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

the 2-year period; and (4) the impaired is available through the CSXT states that, following requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7(c) Federal Information Relay Service abandonment of the line, CSXT intends (environmental report), 49 CFR 1105.11 (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339.] Comments to reclassify the line as spur track and (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 on environmental and historic sell or lease it to Progress Energy (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR preservation matters must be filed Carolinas, Inc. (PEC), the sole shipper 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental within 15 days after the EA becomes on the line, which will then use the line agencies) have been met. available to the public. for expanded intra-plant operations. As a condition to this exemption, any Environmental, historic preservation, This request will be addressed in the employee adversely affected by the public use, or trail use/rail banking final decision. In order to facilitate the abandonment shall be protected under conditions will be imposed, where reclassification of the line as spur track Oregon Short Line—Abandonment appropriate, in a subsequent decision. and the subsequent sale or lease of the Portion Goshen Branch Between Firth & Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR line to PEC, CSXT has requested that the Ammon, in Bingham & Bonneville 1152.29(e)(2), UP shall file a notice of Board condition the abandonment upon Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). To consummation with the Board to signify CSXT and PEC entering an agreement address whether this condition that it has exercised the authority providing for the sale or lease of the line adequately protects affected employees, granted and fully abandoned the line. If from CSXT to PEC within 30 days after a petition for partial revocation under consummation has not been effected by CSXT has consummated the 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) must be filed. UP’s filing of a notice of consummation abandonment and reclassified the line Provided no formal expression of by October 21, 2011, and there are no as spur track. This request will also be intent to file an offer of financial legal or regulatory barriers to addressed in the final decision. assistance (OFA) has been received, this consummation, the authority to The line does not contain federally exemption will be effective on abandon will automatically expire. granted rights-of-way. Any November 20, 2010, unless stayed Board decisions and notices are documentation in CSXT’s possession pending reconsideration. Petitions to available on our Web site at http:// concerning this matter will be made stay that do not involve environmental www.stb.dot.gov. available promptly to those requesting 2 it. issues, formal expressions of intent to Decided: October 18, 2010. file an OFA under 49 CFR The interest of railroad employees By the Board. 1152.27(c)(2),3 and trail use/rail banking will be protected by the conditions set requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be Rachel D. Campbell, forth in Oregon Short Line Railroad— filed by November 1, 2010. Petitions to Director, Office of Proceedings. Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch reopen or requests for public use Andrea Pope-Matheson, Between Firth & Ammon, In Bingham & conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must Clearance Clerk. Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. be filed by November 10, 2010, with the [FR Doc. 2010–26543 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 91 (1979). Surface Transportation Board, 395 E BILLING CODE 4915–01–P By issuing this notice, the Board is Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423– instituting an exemption proceeding 0001. pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final A copy of any petition filed with the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION decision will be issued by January 19, Board should be sent to UP’s 2011. representative: Mack H. Shumate, Jr., Surface Transportation Board Any offer of financial assistance (OFA) under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will Senior General Attorney, Union Pacific [STB Docket No. AB 55 (Sub-No. 703X)] Railroad Company, 101 N. Wacker be due no later than 10 days after Drive, #1920, Chicago, IL 60606–1718. CSX Transportation, Inc.— service of a decision granting the If the verified notice contains false or Abandonment Exemption—in petition for exemption. Each OFA must misleading information, the exemption Chesterfield and Darlington Counties, be accompanied by a $1,500 filing fee. is void ab initio. SC See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). UP has filed a combined All interested persons should be environmental and historic report On October 1, 2010, CSX aware that, following abandonment of which addresses the effects, if any, of Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), filed with rail service and salvage of the line, the the abandonment on the environment the Surface Transportation Board a line may be suitable for other public and historic resources. OEA will issue petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for use, including interim trail use. Any an environmental assessment (EA) by exemption from the provisions of 49 request for a public use condition under October 26, 2010. Interested persons U.S.C. 10903 to abandon a 2.71-mile 49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail may obtain a copy of the EA by writing line of railroad on its Southern Region, banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be to OEA (Room 1100, Surface Florence Division, Hamlet Subdivision, due no later than November 10, 2010. Transportation Board, Washington, DC between milepost SJ 304.75, at Each trail use request must be 20423–0001) or by calling OEA, at (202) Tabernacle Road, and milepost SJ accompanied by a $250 filing fee. See 49 245–0305. [Assistance for the hearing 307.46, at Bobo Newsome Highway, in CFR 1002.2(f)(27). Chesterfield and Darlington Counties, All filings in response to this notice 2 The Board will grant a stay if an informed S.C. (the line). The line traverses United must refer to Docket No. AB 55 (Sub-No. decision on environmental issues (whether raised States Postal Service Zip Codes 29101 703X), and must be sent to: (1) Surface by a party or by the Board’s Office of Environmental and 29550 and includes stations at Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW., Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) Darlco, FSAC 71202366, OPSL 2638, Washington, DC 20423–0001; and (2) cannot be made before the exemption’s effective date. See Exemption of Out-of-Serv. Rail Lines, 5 milepost SJ 306, and Robinson, FSAC Louis E. Gitomer, Law Offices of Louis I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should 71202370, OPSL 2640, milepost SJ 307. E. Gitomer, 600 Baltimore Avenue, Suite be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may In addition to an exemption from the 301, Towson, MD 21204. Replies to take appropriate action before the exemption’s prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. CSXT’s petition are due on or before effective date. 3 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing 10903, CSXT seeks an exemption from November 10, 2010. fee, which is currently set at $1,500. See 49 CFR 49 U.S.C. 10904 (offer of financial Persons seeking further information 1002.2(f)(25). assistance procedures). In support, concerning abandonment procedures

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65049

may contact the Board’s Office of Public such user) regarding cessation of service to OEA (Room 1100, Surface Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and over the line either is pending with the Transportation Board, Washington, DC Compliance at (202) 245–0238 or refer Board or with any U.S. District Court or 20423–0001) or by calling OEA, at (202) to the full abandonment or has been decided in favor of 245–0305. Assistance for the hearing discontinuance regulations at 49 CFR complainant within the 2-year period; impaired is available through the part 1152. Questions concerning and (4) the requirements at 49 CFR Federal Information Relay Service environmental issues may be directed to 1105.7(c) (environmental report), 49 (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339. Comments the Board’s Office of Environmental CFR 1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR on environmental and historic Analysis (OEA) at (202) 245–0305. 1105.12 (newspaper publication), and preservation matters must be filed Assistance for the hearing impaired is 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to within 15 days after the EA becomes available through the Federal governmental agencies) have been met. available to the public. Information Relay Service (FIRS) at As a condition to this exemption, any Environmental, historic preservation, 1–800–877–8339. employee adversely affected by the public use, or trail use/rail banking An environmental assessment (EA) (or abandonment shall be protected under conditions will be imposed, where environmental impact statement (EIS), if Oregon Short Line Railroad— appropriate, in a subsequent decision. necessary) prepared by OEA will be Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR served upon all parties of record and Between Firth & Ammon, In Bingham & 1152.29(e)(2), UP shall file a notice of upon any agencies or other persons who Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. consummation with the Board to signify commented during its preparation. 91 (1979). To address whether this that it has exercised the authority Other interested persons may contact condition adequately protects affected granted and fully abandoned the line. If OEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS). employees, a petition for partial consummation has not been effected by EAs in these abandonment proceedings revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) UP’s filing of a notice of consummation normally will be made available within must be filed. by October 21, 2011, and there are no 60 days of the filing of the petition. The Provided no formal expression of legal or regulatory barriers to deadline for submission of comments on intent to file an offer of financial consummation, the authority to the EA will generally be within 30 days assistance (OFA) has been received, this abandon will automatically expire. of its service. exemption will be effective on Board decisions and notices are This action will not significantly November 20, 2010, unless stayed available on our Web site at http:// affect either the quality of the human pending reconsideration. Petitions to www.stb.dot.gov. environment or the conservation of stay that do not involve environmental Decided: October 12, 2010. 1 energy resources. issues, formal expressions of intent to By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, file an OFA under 49 CFR Director, Office of Proceedings. Decided: October 18, 2010. 2 1152.27(c)(2), and trail use/rail banking Jeffrey Herzig, By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be Director, Office of Proceedings. Clearance Clerk. filed by November 1, 2010. Petitions to Andrea Pope-Matheson, reopen or requests for public use [FR Doc. 2010–26239 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Clearance Clerk. conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must BILLING CODE 4915–01–P [FR Doc. 2010–26544 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] be filed by November 10, 2010, with the BILLING CODE 4915–01–P Surface Transportation Board, 395 E DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423– 0001. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Research and Innovative Technology A copy of any petition filed with the Administration Board should be sent to UP’s Surface Transportation Board representative: Mack H. Shumate, Jr., Agency Information Collection; [Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 290X)] Senior General Attorney, 101 North Activity Under OMB Review; Omnibus Wacker Drive, #1920, Chicago, IL 60606. Household Survey Program Union Pacific Railroad Company— If the verified notice contains false or Abandonment Exemption—in Pulaski misleading information, the exemption AGENCY: Research & Innovative County, AR is void ab initio. Technology Administration (RITA), UP has filed a combined Bureau of Transportation Statistics Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) environmental and historic report (BTS), DOT. filed a verified notice of exemption which addresses the effects, if any, of ACTION: Notice. under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F– the abandonment on the environment Exempt Abandonments to abandon a and historic resources. OEA will issue SUMMARY: In accordance with the line of railroad known as the North an environmental assessment (EA) by requirements of section 3506(c) (2) (A) Little Rock Junction Bridge Line, October 26, 2010. Interested persons of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, extending from milepost 343.65 to the may obtain a copy of the EA by writing this notice announces that the end of the line at milepost 343.97, a Information Collection Request (ICR) distance of .32 miles, in North Little 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed described below is being forwarded to Rock, in Pulaski County, Ark. The line decision on environmental issues (whether raised the Office of Management and Budget traverses United States Postal Service by a party or by the Board’s Office of Environmental (OMB) for approval for an extension of Zip Code 72118. Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) a currently approved information cannot be made before the exemption’s effective UP has certified that: (1) No local date. See Exemption of Out-of-Service Rail Lines, 5 collection related to the use of and traffic has moved over the line for at I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should satisfaction with the nation’s least 2 years; (2) there is no overhead be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may transportation system. The ICR traffic to be rerouted; (3) no formal take appropriate action before the exemption’s describes the nature of the information effective date. complaint filed by a user of rail service 2 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing collection and its expected burden. The on the line (or by a state or local fee, which is currently set at $1,500. See 49 CFR Federal Register notice with a 60-day government entity acting on behalf of 1002.2(f)(25). comment period soliciting comments on

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65050 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

the following collection of information providing data, statistics and analyses to Transit (local) and intercity (long was published on February 2, 2010 (75 transportation decision-makers. The distance) bus; FR 5370) and the comment period Research and Innovative Technology Intercity Rail (Amtrak). ended on April 5, 2010. The 60-day Administration, Bureau of Assessment of/satisfaction with notice produced no comments. Transportation Statistics (RITA/BTS) security procedures for the following DATES: Written comments should be was tasked to accomplish this legislative modes of transportation: submitted by November 22, 2010. mandate under 49 U.S.C. 111 (c) (1). Commercial air; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. RITA/BTS plans to use the Omnibus Charter/general aviation; Household Survey (OHS) to: Pheny Weidman, OHS Program • Rail transit (subway, streetcar, or light Manager, BTS, RITA, Department of Assess the public’s evaluation of rail); Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. the nation’s transportation system in Commuter rail; SE., Room E32–318, Washington, DC light of the DOT’s strategic goals (safety, Water transportation (taxis, ferries, 20590. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to reduced congestion, global connectivity, ships); 5 p.m., E.T., Monday through Friday, environmental stewardship and Transit (local) and intercity (long security, preparedness and response), except Federal holidays. Telephone • distance) bus; (202) 366–2817, Fax (202) 493–0568 or Provide a vehicle for the operating Intercity Rail (Amtrak). e-mail [email protected]. administrations within the DOT as well as other governmental agencies, to Processing through security at: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: survey the public about current Commercial airports; Train stations; Title: Omnibus Household Survey transportation issues, and (OHS) Program. • Provide national estimates of Waterway entry points for ferries, water Type of Request: Approval of an transportation mode usage. taxis, cruises. extension of a currently approved Knowledge of current check-in information collection. Each version of the OHS will focus on some subset of topics taken from the list procedures at: OMB Control Number: 2139–0012. Commercial airports; Affected Public: The target population below. Topics may vary from survey to Train stations; for the OHS Program is the non- survey since covering all topics in one questionnaire would make the Waterway entry points for ferries, water institutionalized population, aged 18 taxis, cruises. and older, who live in the United States. respondent burden unacceptable: A national probability sample of Choices and frequency of mode use in Knowledge of/confidence in the Alien households generated using list-assisted the month and the week prior to the Flight Student Program. random digit dialing (RDD) survey data collection: Experiences with transit delays methodology will be employed by the Commercial air; related to suspicious/unattended survey. Individual survey respondents Privately owned vehicle; baggage. within selected households will be Taxi; Willingness/tolerance of chosen at random. Rail transit (subway, streetcar, or light transportation security risk management Number of Respondents: 1,500. rail); procedures. Number of Responses: 1,500. Commuter rail; Information on journey to work: Total Annual Burden: 625 hours Transit (local) and intercity (long Transportation used (single mode/ (Based on previous data collections, we distance) bus; multiple mode); estimate the average time to complete Intercity Rail (Amtrak); Time required for one-way trip; the survey is 25 minutes. 25 minutes × Other modes such as biking and Number of days traveled; 1,500 respondents = 37,500 minutes/60 walking. Assessment of congestion; minutes = 625 hours). The estimated Confidence in the safety of the Methods for dealing with congestion; average time to complete the survey has following modes of transportation: Telecommuting information; increased from the 10 minutes stated for Commercial air; Commuting costs; previous data collections to 25 minutes. Privately owned vehicle; Availability of transportation subsidies. The increase is largely due to the Taxi; Impact of congestion on commute. increase in the length of questionnaire. Rail transit (subway, streetcar, or light Impact of on-line shopping on The survey sample size also will rail); passenger and freight travel. increase from the 1,000 respondents Commuter rail; Impact of accessibility of used by previous data collections to Water transportation (taxis, ferries, transportation on livability of 1,500. The increase in sample size is ships); communities. due to the inclusion of questions Transit (local) and intercity (long Assessment of/opinions regarding regarding the safety of public transit. In distance) bus; distracted driving behaviors. order to ensure that there will be Intercity Rail (Amtrak); Public Comments Invited: Interested enough samples to produce reliable Other modes such as biking/walking/ parties are invited to send comments estimates for those questions, a total of ferries. regarding any aspect of this information 500 individuals will be oversampled Confidence in the security procedures collection, including, but not limited to: from selected Metropolitan Statistical for the following modes of (1) The necessity and utility of the Areas that provide public transit transportation: information collection for the proper services. Commercial air; performance of the functions of the Abstract: In 2005, Congress passed, Charter/general aviation; DOT; (2) the accuracy of the estimated and the President signed, the Safe, Privately owned vehicle; burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Rail transit (subway, streetcar, or light utility, and clarity of the collected Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for rail); information; and (4) ways to minimize Users (SAFETEA–LU; Pub. L. 109–59). Commuter rail; the collection burden without reducing SAFETEA–LU contained a number of Water transportation (taxis, ferries, the quality of the collected information. legislative mandates including ships); Send comments to the Office of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65051

Information and Regulatory Affairs, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This government and industry discussion Office of Management and Budget, 725 notice announces the availability of and agreement on appropriate standards 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC consensus standards. The FAA expects for the required level of safety. 20503, Attention: BTS Desk Officer. a suitable consensus standard to be reviewed at least every two years. The Consensus Standards in This Notice of Issued in Washington, DC on this 14th day Availability of October, 2010. two-year review cycle will result in a standard revision or reapproval. A Steven K. Smith, The FAA has reviewed the standards standard is issued under a fixed Acting Director, Bureau of Transportation presented in this NOA for compliance Statistics, Research and Innovative designation (i.e., F2696–08); the number immediately following the designation with the regulatory requirements of the Technology Administration. rule. Any normal, utility, acrobatic, and [FR Doc. 2010–26488 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] indicates the year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of commuter aircraft issued an BILLING CODE 4910–HY–P last revision. A number in parentheses airworthiness certificate, which has indicates the year of last reapproval. A been designed, manufactured, operated, and maintained, in accordance with this DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION reapproval indicates a two-year review cycle completed with no technical and previously accepted ASTM Federal Aviation Administration changes. A superscript epsilon (e) consensus standards provides the public indicates an editorial change since the with the appropriate level of safety Consensus Standards, Standard last revision or reapproval. A notice of established under the regulations. The Practice for Inspection of Airplane availability (NOA) will only be issued FAA maintains a listing of all accepted Electrical Wiring Systems for new or revised standards. standards on the FAA Web site. Reapproved standards issued with no The FAA finds the following new AGENCY: Federal Aviation technical changes or standards issued consensus standards acceptable for Administration, DOT. with editorial changes only (i.e., superscript epsilon (e)) are considered inspection of the specified aircraft. The ACTION: Notice of availability; request consensus standard listed below may be for comments. accepted by the FAA without need for an NOA. used unless the FAA publishes a specific notification otherwise. SUMMARY: This notice announces the Comments Invited: Interested persons availability of consensus standards and are invited to submit such written data, ASTM Designation F2696–08, titled: the Federal Aviation Administration views, or arguments, as they may desire. Standard Practice for Inspection of (FAA) intention to accept the ASTM Communications should identify the Airplane Electrical Wiring Systems. International’s F2696–08 Standard consensus standard number and be Practice for Inspection of Airplane submitted to the address specified Availability above. All communications received on Electrical Wiring Systems (Standard These consensus standards are Practice) as an acceptable means of or before the closing date for comments will be forwarded to ASTM copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 compliance to 14 CFR part 23 sections Barr Harbor Drive, Post Office Box C700, concerning electrical wiring systems. By International Committee F39 for consideration. The standard may be West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. this notice, the FAA finds the standards Individual reprints of this standard to be acceptable methods and changed in light of the comments (single or multiple copies, or special procedures for inspection of electrical received. The FAA will address all compilations and other related technical wiring systems for normal, utility, comments received during the recurring acrobatic, and commuter category review of the consensus standard and information) may be obtained by airplanes. will participate in the consensus contacting ASTM at this address, or at standard revision process. (610) 832–9585 (phone), (610) 832–9555 DATES: Comments must be received on Background: Under the provisions of (fax), through [email protected] (e-mail), or before November 22, 2010. the revised Office of Management and or through the ASTM Web site at Budget (OMB) Circular A–119, ‘‘Federal ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed http://www.astm.org. To inquire about to: Federal Aviation Administration, Participation in the Development and standard content and/or membership or Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards Small Airplane Directorate, Continued about ASTM International Offices and in Conformity Assessment Operational Safety, ACE–111, Attention: abroad, contact Daniel Schultz, Staff Activities,’’ dated February 10, 1998, James Brady, Room 301, 901 Locust, Manager for Committee F39 on Normal industry and the FAA have been Kansas City, Missouri 64106, or by and Utility Category Airplane Electrical working with ASTM International to e-mail to: [email protected]. All develop consensus standards for the Wiring Systems: (610) 832–9716, comments must be marked: Consensus design, fabrication, modification, [email protected]. Standards Comments, and must specify inspection, and maintenance of Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on the standard being addressed by ASTM electrical systems installed on normal October 13, 2010. F2696–08 Standard Practice for and utility category airplanes. John Colomy, Inspection of Airplane Electrical Wiring These consensus standards satisfy the Systems. Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, FAA’s goal for airworthiness Aircraft Certification Service. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: certification and a verifiable minimum [FR Doc. 2010–26537 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] James Brady, Aerospace Engineer, safety level for normal, utility, acrobatic, Regulations and Policy Branch (ACE– and commuter category airplanes. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 111), Small Airplane Directorate, Instead of developing airworthiness Aircraft Certification Service, Federal standards through the rulemaking Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, process, the FAA participates as a Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; member of Committee F39 in telephone (816) 329–4132; e-mail: developing these standards. The use of [email protected]. the consensus standard process assures

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65052 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION cycle completed with no technical consensus standards provides the public changes. A superscript epsilon (e) with the appropriate level of safety Federal Aviation Administration indicates an editorial change since the established under the regulations. The last revision or reapproval. A notice of FAA maintains a listing of all accepted Consensus Standards, Standard availability (NOA) will only be issued standards on the FAA Web site. Practice for Maintenance of Airplane for new or revised standards. The FAA finds the following new Electrical Wiring Systems Reapproved standards issued with no consensus standards acceptable for AGENCY: Federal Aviation technical changes or standards issued maintenance of the specified aircraft. Administration, DOT. with editorial changes only (i.e., The consensus standard listed below superscript epsilon (e)) are considered may be used unless the FAA publishes ACTION: Notice of availability; request accepted by the FAA without need for a specific notification otherwise. for comments. an NOA. ASTM Designation F2799–09, titled: SUMMARY: This notice announces the Comments Invited: Interested persons Standard Practice for Maintenance of availability of consensus standards and are invited to submit such written data, Airplane Electrical Wiring Systems. views, or arguments, as they may desire. the Federal Aviation Administration Availability (FAA) intention to accept the ASTM Communications should identify the International’s F2799–09 Standard consensus standard number and be These consensus standards are Practice for Maintenance of Airplane submitted to the address specified copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Electrical Wiring Systems (Standard above. All communications received on Barr Harbor Drive, Post Office Box C700, Practice) as an acceptable means of or before the closing date for comments West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. compliance to 14 CFR part 23 sections will be forwarded to ASTM Individual reprints of this standard concerning electrical wiring systems. By International Committee F39 for (single or multiple copies, or special this notice, the FAA finds the standards consideration. The standard may be compilations and other related technical to be acceptable methods and changed in light of the comments information) may be obtained by procedures for maintenance of electrical received. The FAA will address all contacting ASTM at this address, or at wiring systems for normal, utility, comments received during the recurring (610) 832–9585 (phone), (610) 832–9555 review of the consensus standard and acrobatic, and commuter category (fax), through [email protected] (e-mail), will participate in the consensus airplanes. or through the ASTM Web site at standard revision process. http://www.astm.org. To inquire about DATE: Comments must be received on or Background: Under the provisions of standard content and/or membership or before November 22, 2010. the revised Office of Management and about ASTM International Offices ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed Budget (OMB) Circular A–119, ‘‘Federal abroad, contact Daniel Schultz, Staff to: Federal Aviation Administration, Participation in the Development and Manager for Committee F39 on Normal Small Airplane Directorate, Continued Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and Utility Category Airplane Electrical Operational Safety, ACE–111, Attention: and in Conformity Assessment Wiring Systems: (610) 832–9716, James Brady, Room 301, 901 Locust, Activities,’’ dated February 10, 1998, [email protected]. Kansas City, Missouri 64106, or by e- industry and the FAA have been working with ASTM International to Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on mail to: [email protected]. All October 13, 2010. comments must be marked: Consensus develop consensus standards for the John Colomy, Standards Comments, and must specify design, fabrication, modification, the standard being addressed by ASTM inspection, and maintenance of Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. F2799–09 Standard Practice for electrical systems installed on normal Maintenance of Airplane Electrical and utility category airplanes. [FR Doc. 2010–26534 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Wiring Systems. These consensus standards satisfy the BILLING CODE 4910–13–P FAA’s goal for airworthiness FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: certification and a verifiable minimum James Brady, Aerospace Engineer, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Regulations and Policy Branch (ACE– safety level for normal, utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes. 111), Small Airplane Directorate, Federal Highway Administration Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Instead of developing airworthiness Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, standards through the rulemaking Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; process, the FAA participates as a on Proposed Highway in California telephone (816) 329–4132; e-mail: member of Committee F39 in AGENCY: Federal Highway [email protected]. developing these standards. The use of the consensus standard process assures Administration (FHWA), DOT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This government and industry discussion ACTION: Notice of Limitation on Claims notice announces the availability of and agreement on appropriate standards for Judicial Review of Actions by the consensus standards. The FAA expects for the required level of safety. California Department of Transportation a suitable consensus standard to be (Caltrans), pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. reviewed at least every two years. The Consensus Standards in This Notice of two-year review cycle will result in a Availability SUMMARY: The FHWA, on behalf of standard revision or reapproval. A The FAA has reviewed the standards Caltrans, is issuing this notice to standard is issued under a fixed presented in this NOA for compliance announce actions taken by Caltrans and designation (i.e., F2799–09); the number with the regulatory requirements of the other Federal agencies that are final immediately following the designation rule. Any normal, utility, acrobatic, and within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. indicates the year of original adoption commuter aircraft issued an 139(l)(1). The actions relate to a or, in the case of revision, the year of airworthiness certificate, which has proposed highway interchange project, last revision. A number in parentheses been designed, manufactured, operated, improvements along State Route 163 indicates the year of last reapproval. A and maintained, in accordance with this (SR–163) at the Friars Road Interchange reapproval indicates a two-year review and previously accepted ASTM in the County of San Diego, State of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65053

California. Those actions grant licenses, in the project files. The Categorical Corporation of Hiroshima, Japan permits, and approvals for the project. Exclusion, approved on 09/30/2010, and (Mazda), has determined the lens of the DATES: By this notice, the FHWA, on other project records are available by headlamps equipped on certain 2004 behalf of Caltrans, is advising the public contacting Caltrans at the addresses through 2009 Mazda RX–8 model of final agency actions subject to 23 provided above. passenger cars, manufactured from U.S.C. 139(l)(1). A claim seeking This notice applies to all Federal April 1, 2003, to May 29, 2009, and judicial review of the Federal agency agency decisions as of the issuance date certain 2006 through 2008 MX–5 model actions on the highway project will be of this notice and all laws under which passenger cars, built from May 17, 2005, barred unless the claim is filed on or such actions were taken, including but to November 27, 2008, failed to meet the before April 19, 2011. If the Federal law not limited to: requirements of paragraph S7.2(b) of that authorizes judicial review of a 1. Council on Environmental Quality Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard claim provides a time period of less regulations; (FMVSS) No. 108 Lamps, Reflective than 180 days for filing such claim, then 2. National Environmental Policy Act Devices, and Associated Equipment. the shorter time period still applies. (NEPA); Mazda has filed an appropriate report FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 3. Safe, Accountable, Flexible, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Kevin Hovey, Senior Environmental Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Noncompliance Responsibility and Planner, Division of Environmental Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU); Reports, dated December 18, 2009. Analysis, California Department of 4. Department of Transportation Act Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and Transportation, 4050 Taylor Street, San of 1966; 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 Diego, CA 92110, Regular Office Hours 5. Federal Aid Highway Act of 1970; CFR part 556), Mazda has petitioned for 6. Clean Air Act Amendments of 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., Telephone number an exemption from the notification and 1990; 619–688–0240, e-mail remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 7. Clean Water Act of 1977 and 1987; chapter 301 on the basis that this [email protected]. 8. Endangered Species Act of 1973; noncompliance is inconsequential to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective 9. Migratory Bird Treaty Act; July 1, 2007, the FHWA assigned, and 10. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of motor vehicle safety. This notice of receipt of Mazda’s the California Department of 1964; petition is published under 49 U.S.C. Transportation (Caltrans) assumed, 11. Uniform Relocation Assistance 30118 and 30120 and does not represent environmental responsibilities for this and Real Property Acquisition Act of any agency decision or other exercise of project pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. 1970; judgment concerning the merits of the Notice is hereby given that Caltrans has 12. National Historic Preservation Act petition. taken final agency actions subject to 23 of 1966; Mazda estimates approximately U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by issuing licenses, 13. Executive Order 11990, Protection 123,000 2004 through 2009 Mazda RX– permits, and approvals for the following of Wetlands; 8 model passenger cars, manufactured project in the State of California: The 14. Executive Order 13112, Invasive from April 1, 2003 to May 29, 2009, and project is located in the Mission Valley Species; and 2006 through 2008 MX–5 model Community of the City of San Diego 15. Executive Order 11988, passenger cars, built from May 17, 2005 along SR–163. The proposed project Floodplain Management. to November 27, 2008, are affected. All will: Construct new at grade lanes on (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance of the affected vehicles were built at the west-side of southbound SR–163 Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning Mazda’s plant in Hiroshima Japan. approaching Friars Road with and Construction. The regulations Paragraph 7.2(b) of FMVSS No. 108 connection to westbound Interstate 8/ implementing Executive Order 12372 requires: Hotel Circle North; modify the existing regarding intergovernmental consultation on SR–163/Friars Road interchange partial Federal programs and activities apply to this S7.2(b) The lens of each headlamp and of cloverleaf, including the addition of a program.) each beam contributor manufactured on or after December 1, 1989, to which paragraph flyover bridge from Ulric Street to Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). (a) of this section applies shall be marked southbound SR–163; widen Friars Road Issued on: October 13th, 2010. with the name and/or trademark registered bridge from 6 lanes to 10 lanes with with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office of added sidewalks on both sides of the Karen Bobo, the manufacturer of such headlamp or beam bridge; widen the eastern portion of Director, Local Programs, Federal Highway contributor, or its importer, or any Friars Road past the northbound SR–163 Administration, Sacramento, California. manufacturer of a vehicle equipped with on-ramp; widen the western portion of [FR Doc. 2010–26662 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] such headlamp or beam contributor. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to Frazee Road immediately north and BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P authorize the marking of any such name and/ south of Friars Road; remove the median or trademark by one who is not the owner, on Avenida de las Tiendas (south of unless the owner has consented to it. Friars Road) and restripe the roadway to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Mazda states that the noncompliance provide three southbound and three National Highway Traffic Safety is that the lenses of the headlamps on northbound lanes; install or upgrade Administration the affected vehicles are not marked traffic signals at Friars Road/Ulric with the name or trademark of the Street, Ulric Street/southbound SR–163 [Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0141; Notice 1] manufacturer of the headlamp, the on-ramp; Friars Road/northbound SR– manufacturer of the vehicle, or the 163 on-ramp; and Frazee Road/Murray Mazda North American Operations, importer of the vehicle. Canyon Road; and construct 15 Receipt of Petition for Decision of Mazda was notified by its headlamp retaining walls and 9 noise attenuation Inconsequential Noncompliance manufacturer, Koito Manufacturing barriers along SR–163 and Friars Road. Mazda North American Operations Company, Ltd. (Koito) of the apparent The project will be constructed in three (MNAO),1 on behalf of Mazda Motor phases. The actions by the Federal and Mazda North American Operations (MNAO) is agencies, and the laws under which 1 Mazda Motor Corporation of Hiroshima, Japan the importer of the vehicles as well as the registered such actions were taken, are described (Mazda) is the manufacturer of the subject vehicles agent for Mazda.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

noncompliance. Mazda then concluded b. By hand delivery to U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION that the vehicles equipped with the Department of Transportation, Docket affected headlamps failed to comply Operations, M–30, West Building National Highway Traffic Safety with paragraph S7.2(b) of FMVSS No. Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 Administration 108. New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, [Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0137; Notice 1] Mazda stated the following reasons DC 20590. The Docket Section is open why they believe the noncompliance is on weekdays from 10 am to 5 pm except General Motors, LLC, Receipt of inconsequential to vehicle safety and Federal Holidays. Petition for Decision of does not present a risk to motor vehicle Inconsequential Noncompliance safety: c. Electronically: By logging onto the Federal Docket Management System General Motors, LLC (GM),1 has The affected headlamps fulfill all the determined that certain 2008 through relevant performance requirements of (FDMS) Web site at http:// FMVSS No. 108, except that trade name and/ www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online 2010 Model Year Chevrolet Malibu or trademark of the manufacturer or importer instructions for submitting comments. passenger cars equipped with automatic is missing on the lens. However, the affected Comments may also be faxed to 1–202– transmissions and manufactured headlamps have the trademark of the 493–2251. between May 2007 through March 2010 headlamp manufacturer on the rim of the do not fully meet the requirements of headlamp housing. Thus, Mazda contends Comments must be written in the paragraph S3.1.4.1 of Federal Motor that this marking on the rim is visible with English language, and be no greater than Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. the vehicle’s front hood open and states that 15 pages in length, although there is no 102, Transmission Shift Position it believes that the rim marking could assist limit to the length of necessary Sequence, Starter Interlock, and the easy identification of the headlamp attachments to the comments. If manufacturer by the users of the vehicles. Transmission Braking Effect. GM filed Mazda has not received any complaints or comments are submitted in hard copy an appropriate report pursuant to 49 claims related to the noncompliance nor is it form, please ensure that two copies are CFR part 573 Defect and aware of any known reports of accidents or provided. If you wish to receive Noncompliance Responsibility and injuries attributed to the noncompliance. confirmation that your comments were Reports, dated March 30, 2010. In summary, Mazda states that it received, please enclose a stamped, self- Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and believes the noncompliance is addressed postcard with the comments. 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 inconsequential to motor vehicle safety Note that all comments received will be CFR part 556), GM has petitioned for an because the affected headlamps fulfill posted without change to http:// exemption from the notification and all other relevant requirements of www.regulations.gov, including any remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. FMVSS No. 108. personal information provided. Chapter 301 on the basis that this The company also states that it has noncompliance is inconsequential to Documents submitted to a docket may taken steps to correct the motor vehicle safety. noncompliance in future production. be viewed by anyone at the address and This notice of receipt of GM’s petition Supported by the above stated times given above. The documents may is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and reasons, Mazda believes that the subject also be viewed on the Internet at http: 30120 and does not represent any noncompliance is inconsequential to //www.regulations.gov by following the agency decision or other exercise of motor vehicle safety, and that its online instructions for accessing the judgment concerning the merits of the petition, to exempt it from providing dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act petition. 2 recall notification of noncompliance as Statement is available for review in the A total of 462,227 model year 2008, required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and Federal Register published on April 11, 2009 and 2010 Chevrolet Malibu remedying the recall noncompliance as 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). passenger cars manufactured during the required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be period May 2007 through March 2010 The petition, supporting materials, are potentially affected by the subject granted. and all comments received before the NHTSA notes that the statutory noncompliance. close of business on the closing date provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and Paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102 indicated below will be filed and will be 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to requires: considered. All comments and file petitions for a determination of Except as specified in S3.1.4.3, if the inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to supporting materials received after the transmission shift position sequence includes exempt manufacturers only from the closing date will also be filed and will a park position, identification of shift positions, including the positions in relation duties found in sections 30118 and be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, to each other and the position selected, shall 30120, respectively, to notify owners, be displayed in view of the driver whenever purchasers, and dealers of a defect or notice of the decision will be published any of the following conditions exist: noncompliance and to remedy the in the Federal Register pursuant to the (a) The ignition is in a position where the defect or noncompliance. authority indicated below. transmission can be shifted; or Interested persons are invited to Comment Closing Date: November 22, submit written data, views, and 2010. 1 General Motors, LLC (GM) is a Michigan arguments on this petition. Comments corporation that manufactures motor vehicles. 2 must refer to the docket and notice Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: GM’s petition, which was filed under 49 CFR Delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and part 556, requests an agency decision to exempt GM number cited at the beginning of this from the notification and recall responsibilities of notice and be submitted by any of the 501.8) 49 CFR part 573 for as many as 462,227 of the following methods: Issued on: October 15, 2010. affected vehicles. However, the agency cannot relieve GM’s distributors and dealers of the a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Claude H. Harris, prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or Department of Transportation, Docket Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. introduction or delivery for introduction into Operations, M–30, West Building interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 [FR Doc. 2010–26425 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] under their control after GM recognized that the BILLING CODE 4910–59–P subject noncompliance existed. Those vehicles New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, must be brought into conformance, exported, or DC 20590. destroyed.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65055

(b) The transmission is not in park. As required by S5.1.3 of FMVSS 114, GM risk to motor vehicle safety. Thus, GM GM described the noncompliance as provides an audible warning to the driver requests that its petition, to exempt it that activates whenever the key has been left from providing recall notification of the absence of the required transmission in the ignition locking system and the shift position display for a certain noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. driver’s door is opened. 30118 and remedying the recall ignition key cylinder position. GM The Owner’s Manual supplied with the explained that while the key is in the vehicle provides specific warnings and noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. ignition there is a narrow ignition key instructions on ensuring the vehicle is in 30120, should be granted. cylinder position between the ‘‘ACC’’ ‘‘PARK’’ and the key is removed before NHTSA notes that the statutory and ‘‘OFF’’ positions within which the exiting the vehicle. provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and transmission shift lever can be moved 2. The driver remains in the vehicle: 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to and the indicator light that illuminates If the driver remains in the vehicle, he or file petitions for a determination of the transmission shift position display she would likely either restart the vehicle’s inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to engine or attempt to remove the key to exit exempt manufacturers only from the is inoperative. The Company added that the vehicle. this noncompliance only occurs when duties found in sections 30118 and If the driver attempts to restart the engine, 30120, respectively, to notify owners, the engine is not running. paragraph S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102 requires GM additionally stated that in all that the starter be inoperative whenever the purchasers, and dealers of a defect or other ignition activation and operation vehicle’s transmission shift position is in a noncompliance and to remedy the positions, all of the subject vehicles forward or reverse drive position. The driver defect or noncompliance. comply with paragraph S3.1.4.1 of rotating the ignition switch forward Interested persons are invited to FMVSS No. 102. attempting to start the engine will definitely submit written data, views, and GM argued its belief that the subject activate the PRNDM display. Therefore, the arguments on this petition. Comments noncompliance is inconsequential to PRNDM information will be available to the must refer to the docket and notice motor vehicle safety because: driver who can see that the vehicle did not number cited at the beginning of this start because the transmission was not in notice and be submitted by any of the As NHTSA recognized in proposing the ‘‘Park’’ or ‘‘Neutral’’. following methods: standard (49 FR 32409–32411 (August 25, GM says that because both of these 1988)), the purpose of the display a. By mail addressed to: U.S. situations are addressed by FMVSS Department of Transportation, Docket requirement for PRNDM information is to requirements, a lack of a transmission shift ‘‘provide the driver with transmission position display in either of these cases may Operations, M–30, West Building position information for the vehicle constitute a minor inconvenience, but will Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 conditions where such information can have no consequence to safety. In addition, New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, reduce the likelihood of shifting errors.’’ GM stated that NHTSA has previously DC 20590. Thus, in all but the rarest circumstances, the granted similar petitions on 3 occasions. b. By hand delivery to U.S. primary function of the PRNDM display is to Furthermore, GM also stated the Department of Transportation, Docket inform the driver of gear selection and Operations, M–30, West Building relative position of the gears while the engine following: is running. All of the subject vehicles display Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 GM recognizes that there may be isolated New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, PRNDM information whenever the ignition non-driving situations in which a person may ‘‘ ’’ ‘‘ ’’ DC 20590. The Docket Section is open switch is in the On or Run position. desire to know gear selection or the relative With the exception of the absence of the position of the gears with the engine off, such on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. required transmission shift position display as when placing the vehicle in tow. However, except Federal Holidays. for one narrow ignition key cylinder position, these cases occur infrequently and do not c. Electronically: by logging onto the the system meets all other applicable occur during normal ignition activation and Federal Docket Management System requirements of FMVSS No. 102. (FDMS) Web site at http:// GM has no record of any incidents, vehicle operation. If the subject condition injuries, owner complaints or field reports [noncompliance] is present during these www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online related to this noncompliance. GM added infrequent non-driving situations when instructions for submitting comments. that if a customer reports this problem to PRNDM information may be desired, gear Comments may also be faxed to 1–202– them and requests a remedy, the Company selection and relative positioning can easily 493–2251. will replace the ignition switch with a be determined by rotating the ignition switch Comments must be written in the ‘‘ ’’ conforming component. slightly clockwise past the accessory ACC English language, and be no greater than Since this noncompliance only occurs detent to activate the shift indicator display without starting the vehicle’s engine. Given 15 pages in length, although there is no during an atypical operation, the limit to the length of necessary noncompliance is not likely to occur under the nature of these non-driving situations and normal driving conditions. The only since the information can be readily obtained attachments to the comments. If circumstance where the noncompliance with a slight key rotation, GM believes that comments are submitted in hard copy would appear is if the ignition switch is in the subject condition [noncompliance] will form, please ensure that two copies are the intermediary position between the ‘‘OFF’’ have no real or implied degradation of motor provided. If you wish to receive and ‘‘ACC’’ detent positions prior to the vehicle safety. confirmation that your comments were interlock. In order for this condition to be GM stated that previous rulemakings received, please enclose a stamped, self- present, a driver would have to first move the addressed postcard with the comments. transmission control to ‘‘PARK.’’ In such a and NHTSA decisions on several case, there are two possible scenarios for the previous inconsequential Note that all comments received will be driver: 1) leaving the vehicle with the key in noncompliance petitions further posted without change to http:// the ignition or 2) remaining in the vehicle. support its position that the subject www.regulations.gov, including any GM provides the following analysis for both noncompliances are inconsequential to personal information provided. scenarios: motor vehicle safety. Documents submitted to a docket may 1. The driver exits the vehicle while GM also indicated that it has be viewed by anyone at the address and leaving the key in the ignition: corrected the problem that caused the times given above. The documents may If the driver attempted to remove the key also be viewed on the Internet at http:// before exiting the vehicle, the key would not subject noncompliance so that it cannot be capable of removal. The doors may also reoccur in future production. www.regulations.gov by following the still be locked if they are in the factory In view of the above, GM believes that online instructions for accessing the default setting to unlock in the ‘‘PARK’’ the described noncompliance is dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act position. inconsequential and does not present a Statement is available for review in the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65056 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Federal Register published on April 11, Docket: For access to the docket to Federal Register notice in conjunction 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). read background documents or with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR The petition, supporting materials, comments, go to http:// 67777) Federal Register notice provides and all comments received before the www.regulations.gov and/or Room the current protocol for allowing such close of business on the closing date W12–140 on the ground level of the drivers to operate CMVs in interstate indicated below will be filed and will be West Building, 1200 New Jersey commerce. considered. All comments and Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between These thirty-nine applicants have had supporting materials received after the 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through ITDM over a range of 1 to 33 years. closing date will also be filed and will Friday, except Federal holidays. These applicants report no severe be considered to the extent possible. Privacy Act: Anyone may search the hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss When the petition is granted or denied, electronic form of all comments of consciousness or seizure, requiring notice of the decision will be published received into any of DOT’s dockets by the assistance of another person, or in the Federal Register pursuant to the the name of the individual submitting resulting in impaired cognitive function authority indicated below. the comment (or of the person signing that occurred without warning Comment closing date: November 22, the comment, if submitted on behalf of symptoms, in the past 12 months and no 2010. an association, business, labor union, or recurrent (2 or more) severe Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: other entity). You may review DOT’s hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and Privacy Act Statement for the Federal years. In each case, an endocrinologist 501.8. Docket Management System (FDMS) verified that the driver has published in the Federal Register on Issued on: October 14, 2010. demonstrated a willingness to properly January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you monitor and manage his/her diabetes Claude H. Harris, may visit http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/ mellitus, received education related to Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 2008/pdf/E8–785.pdf. diabetes management, and is on a stable [FR Doc. 2010–26426 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Background insulin regimen. These drivers report no BILLING CODE 4910–59–P other disqualifying conditions, On August 27, 2010, FMCSA including diabetes-related published a notice of receipt of Federal complications. Each meets the vision DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION diabetes exemption applications from standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). thirty-nine individuals and requested The qualifications and medical Federal Motor Carrier Safety comments from the public (75 FR Administration condition of each applicant were stated 52809). The public comment period and discussed in detail in the August [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2010–0202] closed on September 27, 2010 and no 27, 2010, Federal Register notice and comments were received. they will not be repeated in this notice. Qualification of Drivers; Exemption FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility Applications; Diabetes Mellitus of the thirty-nine applicants and Discussion of Comment determined that granting the FMCSA did not receive any AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety exemptions to these individuals would comments in this proceeding. Administration (FMCSA), DOT. achieve a level of safety equivalent to, ACTION: Notice of final disposition. or greater than, the level that would be Basis for Exemption Determination achieved by complying with the current SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, decision to exempt thirty-nine regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). FMCSA may grant an exemption from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR individuals from its rule prohibiting Diabetes Mellitus and Driving 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to persons with insulin-treated diabetes Experience of the Applicants mellitus (ITDM) from operating achieve an equivalent or greater level of The Agency established the current safety than would be achieved without commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in standard for diabetes in 1970 because interstate commerce. The exemptions the exemption. The exemption allows several risk studies indicated that the applicants to operate CMVs in will enable these individuals to operate drivers with diabetes had a higher rate CMVs in interstate commerce. interstate commerce. of crash involvement than the general To evaluate the effect of these DATES: The exemptions are effective population. The diabetes rule provides exemptions on safety, FMCSA October 21, 2010. The exemptions that ‘‘A person is physically qualified to considered medical reports about the expire on October 22, 2012. drive a commercial motor vehicle if that applicants’ ITDM and vision, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. person has no established medical reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes medical opinion related to the ability of Programs, (202) 366–4001, mellitus currently requiring insulin for the driver to safely operate a CMV while [email protected], FMCSA, Room control’’ (49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)). using insulin. W64–224, Department of FMCSA established its diabetes Consequently, FMCSA finds that in Transportation, 1200 New Jersey exemption program, based on the each case exempting these applicants Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– Agency’s July 2000 study entitled ‘‘A from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to Report to Congress on the Feasibility of 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except a Program To Qualify Individuals with of safety equal to that existing without Federal holidays. Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus To the exemption. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the Transportation Act for Conditions and Requirements Electronic Access the 21st Century.’’ The report concluded The terms and conditions of the You may see all the comments online that a safe and practicable protocol to exemption will be provided to the through the Federal Document allow some drivers with ITDM to applicants in the exemption document Management System (FDMS) at: http:// operate CMVs is feasible. The and they include the following: (1) That www.regulations.gov. September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441) each individual submit a quarterly

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65057

monitoring checklist completed by the person may apply to FMCSA for a comments, go to http:// treating endocrinologist as well as an renewal under procedures in effect at www.regulations.gov at any time or annual checklist with a comprehensive that time. Room W12–140 on the ground level of medical evaluation; (2) that each Issued on: October 14, 2010. the West Building, 1200 New Jersey individual reports within 2 business Larry W. Minor, Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between days of occurrence, all episodes of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through severe hypoglycemia, significant Associate Administrator, Office of Policy and Program Development. Friday, except Federal holidays. The complications, or inability to manage FDMS is available 24 hours each day, diabetes; also, any involvement in an [FR Doc. 2010–26654 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 365 days each year. If you want accident or any other adverse event in BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P acknowledgment that we received your a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or comments, please include a self- not it is related to an episode of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION addressed, stamped envelope or hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual postcard or print the acknowledgement provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety page that appears after submitting or optometrist’s report to the medical Administration comments on-line. examiner at the time of the annual Privacy Act: Anyone may search the medical examination; and (4) that each [Docket No. FMCSA–2010–0327] electronic form of all comments individual provide a copy of the annual received into any of our dockets by the Qualification of Drivers; Exemption medical certification to the employer for name of the individual submitting the Applications; Vision retention in the driver’s qualification comment (or of the person signing the file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety comment, if submitted on behalf of an qualification file if he/she is self- Administration (FMCSA), DOT. association, business, labor union, etc.). employed. The driver must also have a ACTION: Notice of applications for You may review DOT’s Privacy Act copy of the certification when driving, exemptions; request for comments. Statement for the FDMS published in for presentation to a duly authorized the Federal Register on January 17, Federal, State, or local enforcement SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit official. applications from 16 individuals for http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/ Conclusion exemption from the vision requirement E8–785.pdf. in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Based upon its evaluation of the Regulations. If granted, the exemptions Mary D. Gunnels, Director, thirty-nine exemption applications, would enable these individuals to Medical Programs, (202) 366–4001, FMCSA exempts, Angel Bergendale, qualify as drivers of commercial motor [email protected], FMCSA, Charles K. Bond, Dennis J. Callanan, vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce Department of Transportation, 1200 Philip F. Carpenter, Brandon M. without meeting the Federal vision New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64– Coleman, George B. Ferris, John B. standard. 224, Washington, DC 20590–0001. Flood, John F. Galione, Jeffrey G. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 Giguere, Allen C. Hartshaw, Michael DATES: Comments must be received on p.m., Monday through Friday, except Hawkins, Timothy U. Herring, Richard or before November 22, 2010. Federal holidays. L. Hines, David M. Hughes, Eugene G. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Hunter, William F. Kanable, William C. bearing the Federal Docket Management SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Kenney, Paul D. Kimmel, Gregory L. System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA– Background Kuharski, Joe D. Lammey, Robert B. 2010–0327 using any of the following Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Langston, III, Mark W. Lavorini, Justin methods: FMCSA may grant an exemption from T. Mattice, Leldon W. McCutcheon, Ray • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety A. May, Richard E. Moore, Robert F. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Regulations for a 2-year period if it finds Naples, Jr., Robert C. Nemeth, Mark P. on-line instructions for submitting ‘‘such exemption would likely achieve a Norwood, Todd H. Pack, Christopher M. comments. level of safety that is equivalent to, or Provance, Michael E. Reck, Warren A. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; greater than, the level that would be Richter, James E. Seymour, Karl G. U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 ’’ Skweres, Kyle N. Stach, William R. New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building achieved absent such exemption. Thome, Richard T. Whitney and Allan Ground Floor, Room W12–140, FMCSA can renew exemptions at the M. Younglas from the ITDM standard in Washington, DC 20590–0001. end of each 2-year period. The 16 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject to the • Hand Delivery: West Building individuals listed in this notice have conditions listed under ‘‘Conditions and Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 each requested such an exemption from Requirements’’ above. New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, the vision requirement in 49 CFR In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers and 31315 each exemption will be valid through Friday, except Federal holidays. of CMVs in interstate commerce. for two years unless revoked earlier by • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked Instructions: Each submission must the qualifications of each applicant to if: (1) The person fails to comply with include the Agency name and the determine whether granting an the terms and conditions of the docket numbers for this notice. Note exemption will achieve the required exemption; (2) the exemption has that all comments received will be level of safety mandated by statute. resulted in a lower level of safety than posted without change to http:// Qualifications of Applicants was maintained before it was granted; or www.regulations.gov, including any (3) continuation of the exemption would personal information provided. Please Jeisson Agudelo-Ortiz not be consistent with the goals and see the Privacy Act heading below for Mr. Agudelo-Ortiz, age 31, has had a objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and further information. prosthetic left eye since birth. The best 31315. If the exemption is still effective Docket: For access to the docket to corrected visual acuity in his right eye at the end of the 2-year period, the read background documents or is 20/20. Following an examination in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65058 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

2010, his ophthalmologist noted, ‘‘I Her driving record for the last 3 years Mr. Lanning reported that he has driven believe the patient has the ability to shows no crashes and no convictions for tractor-trailer combinations for 20 years, operate a commercial vehicle despite moving violations in a CMV. accumulating 2 million miles. He holds loss of the left eye and has done so a Class A CDL from California. His Nathan A. Buckles successfully for many years.’’ Mr. driving record for the last 3 years shows Agudelo-Ortiz reported that he has Mr. Buckles, 34, has had choreoretinal no crashes and no convictions for driven straight trucks for 2 years, scarring in his right eye since 1998 due moving violations in a CMV. accumulating 9,600 miles and buses for to trauma. The best corrected visual Cynthia K. Linson 2 years, accumulating 14,000 miles. He acuity in his right eye is 20/200 and in holds a Class C Commercial Driver’s his left eye, 20/20. Following an Ms. Linson, 47, has had amblyopia in License (CDL) from New York. His examination in 2010, his optometrist her right eye since childhood. The best driving record for the last 3 years shows noted, ‘‘In my opinion, Nathan has corrected visual acuity in her right eye no crashes and no convictions for sufficient vision to perform the driving is 20/300 and in her left eye, 20/20. moving violations in a CMV. tasks required of a commercial driver.’’ Following an examination in 2010, her Mr. Buckles reported that he has driven ophthalmologist noted, ‘‘In my medical Charles L. Alsager, Jr. straight trucks for 13 years, opinion she has sufficient vision to Mr. Alsager, 47, has had retinal accumulating 25,000 miles. He holds a perform the driving tasks required to scarring in his left eye since 1985. The Class A CDL from Indiana. His driving operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Ms. best corrected visual acuity in his right record for the last 3 years shows no Linson reported that she has driven eye is 20/20 and in his left eye, 20/400. crashes and no convictions for moving buses for 5 years, accumulating 52,000 Following an examination in 2010, his violations in a CMV. miles. She holds a Class B CDL from optometrist noted, ‘‘I certify that Charles Illinois. Her driving record for the last has sufficient vision to operate a Dale H. Dattler 3 years shows no crashes and no commercial vehicle, in my opinion.’’ Mr. Mr. Dattler, 55, has had complete loss convictions for moving violations in a Alsager reported that he has driven of vision in his right eye since CMV. straight trucks for 3 years, accumulating childhood due trauma. The best Charles M. McDaris 78,000 miles and tractor-trailer corrected visual acuity in his left eye is combinations for 6 months, 20/20. Following an examination in Mr. McDaris, 47, has had corneal accumulating 1,500 miles. He holds a 2010, his ophthalmologist noted, ‘‘In my scarring in his right eye since 1970. The Class A CDL from Iowa. His driving medical opinion, he has sufficient best corrected visual acuity in his right record for the last 3 years shows no vision to perform driving tasks to eye is 20/50 only and in his left eye, 20/ crashes and no convictions for moving operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. 20. Following an examination in 2010, violations in a CMV. Dattler reported that he has driven his optometrist noted, ‘‘In my opinion, straight trucks for 25 years, Mr. McDaris has sufficient vision to Eddie A. Branham accumulating 75,000 miles, and tractor- perform the driving tasks required to Mr. Branham, 42, has had loss of trailer combinations for 6 years, operate a commercial vehicle in that his vision in his right eye since childhood. accumulating 15,000 miles. He holds a vision has remained stable at 20/50 in The best corrected visual acuity in his Class A CDL from New York. His the right eye and 20/20 in the left eye right eye is count-finger vision only, in driving record for the last 3 years shows for many years, and he has continued to his left eye, 20/20. Following an no crashes and no convictions for function without any difficulties.’’ Mr. examination in 2010, his optometrist moving violations in a CMV. McDaris reported that he has driven noted, ‘‘He has been driving safely for straight trucks for 13 years, many years with glasses and should Daryl Jonescheit accumulating 733,200 miles and tractor- continue to be able to operate a Mr. Jonescheit, 68, has had amblyopia trailer combinations for 13 years, commercial vehicle safely in this in his right eye since birth. The best accumulating 733,200 miles. He holds a manner.’’ Mr. Branham reported that he corrected visual acuity in his right eye Class A CDL from Georgia. His driving has driven straight trucks for 14 years, is 20/80 and in his left eye, 20/25. record for the last 3 years shows no accumulating 280,000 miles and tractor- Following an examination in 2010, his crashes and no convictions for moving trailer combinations for 14 years, optometrist noted, ‘‘There is no reason violations in a CMV. accumulating 140,000 miles. He holds a visually why Mr. Jonescheit cannot Calvin J. Schaap Class A CDL from North Carolina. His operate a commercial vehicle with his driving record for the last 3 years shows current stable ocular condition.’’ Mr. Mr. Schaap, 65, has had amblyopia in no crashes and no convictions for Jonescheit reported that he has driven his right eye since birth. The best moving violations in a CMV. tractor-trailer combinations for 42 years, corrected visual acuity in his right eye accumulating 5 million miles. He holds is 20/200 only and in his left eye, 20/ Charlene Brown a Class A CDL from South Dakota. His 15. Following an examination in 2010, Ms. Brown, 47, has had amblyopia in driving record for the last 3 years shows his optometrist noted, ‘‘In my opinion, her left eye since childhood. The best no crashes and no convictions for Mr. Schaap’s vision is sufficient to corrected visual acuity in her right eye moving violations in a CMV. perform the driving tasks required to is 20/20 and in her left eye, 20/200. operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. Following an examination in 2010, her John N. Lanning Schaap reported that he has driven optometrist noted, ‘‘It is this offices Mr. Lanning, 52, has had amblyopia straight trucks for 47 years, finding that Charlene Brown has in his right eye since childhood. The accumulating 3.7 million miles and sufficient vision to perform the driving best corrected visual acuity in his right tractor-trailer combinations for 46 years, tasks required to operate a commercial eye is 20/70 and in his left eye, 20/20. accumulating 460,000 miles. He holds a vehicle.’’ Ms. Brown reported that she Following an examination in 2010, his Class A CDL from Minnesota. His has driven straight trucks for 3 years, optometrist noted, ‘‘It appears that Mr. driving record for the last 3 years shows accumulating 129,000 miles. She holds Lanning’s vision would not hinder him no crashes and no convictions for a Class C operator’s license from Kansas. from operating a commercial vehicle.’’ moving violations in a CMV.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65059

Frederick C. Schultz, Jr. optometrist noted, ‘‘According to these DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Mr. Schultz, 38, has had a prosthetic guidelines his best-corrected visual AFFAIRS left eye since 1996. The best corrected acuity in the right eye is sufficient to visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20. perform driving tasks required to Advisory Committee on Disability Following an examination in 2010, his operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. Compensation; Notice of Meeting ophthalmologist noted, ‘‘Mr. Schultz has Veselitza reported that he has driven sufficient vision to operate a straight trucks for 3 years, accumulating The Department of Veterans Affairs commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. Schultz 33,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92– reported that he has driven straight from Nevada. His driving record for the 463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) trucks for 16 years, accumulating last 3 years shows no crashes and no that the Advisory Committee on 166,400 miles, tractor-trailer convictions for moving violations in a Disability Compensation will meet on combinations for 15 years, accumulating CMV. October 25–26, 2010, in the Chandelier 156,000 miles, and buses for 2 years, Ballroom at the St. Regis Hotel, 923 16th accumulating 20,000 miles. He holds a John E. Westbrook Street, NW., Washington, DC, from 8 Class A CDL from New York. His Mr. Westbrook, 60, has had amblyopia a.m. to 3 p.m. The meeting is open to driving record for the last 3 years shows the public. one crash and no convictions for in his right eye since childhood and a The purpose of the Committee is to moving violations in a CMV. prosthetic left eye since childhood. The best corrected visual acuity in his right advise the Secretary of Veterans Affairs Steve C. Sinclair eye is 20/30. Following an examination on the maintenance and periodic Mr. Sinclair, 60, has had amblyopia in in 2010, his optometrist noted, ‘‘Patient, readjustment of the VA Schedule for his right eye since birth. The best John Westbrook, does have sufficient Rating Disabilities. The Committee is to corrected visual acuity in his right eye vision to perform the driving tasks assemble and review relevant is 20/200 only and in his left eye, 20/ required to operate a commercial information relating to the nature and 15. Following an examination in 2010, vehicle.’’ Mr. Westbrook reported that he character of disabilities arising from his optometrist noted, ‘‘In my opinion, has driven straight trucks for 15 years, service in the Armed Forces, provide an Mr. Sinclair has demonstrated with his accumulating 900,000 miles and tractor- ongoing assessment of the effectiveness many long years of driving that his trailer combinations for 10 years, of the rating schedule, and give advice vision is sufficient to perform the accumulating 800,000 miles. He holds a on the most appropriate means of driving tasks required to operate a Class A CDL from Louisiana. His driving responding to the needs of Veterans commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. Sinclair record for the last 3 years shows no relating to disability compensation. reported that he has driven straight crashes and no convictions for moving trucks for 30 years, accumulating 1.5 The Committee will receive briefings million miles. He holds a Class C violations in a CMV. on issues related to compensation for operator’s license from Iowa. His Request for Comments Veterans with service-connected driving record for the last 3 years shows disabilities and other VA benefits one crash and no convictions for In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) programs. Public comments will be moving violations in a CMV. and 31315, FMCSA requests public received at 2 p.m. each day. Public comment from all interested persons on comments will be limited to three Eugene J. Smith, Jr. the exemption petitions described in minutes each. Individuals wishing to Mr. Smith, 57, has had histoplasmosis this notice. The Agency will consider all make oral statements before the in his left eye since 1999. The best comments received before the close of Committee will be accommodated on a corrected visual acuity in his right eye business November 22, 2010. Comments first-come, first-served basis. is 20/15 only and in his left eye, 20/150. will be available for examination in the Individuals who speak are invited to Following an examination in 2010, his docket at the location listed under the submit 1–2 page summaries of their ophthalmologist noted, ‘‘The vision ADDRESSES section of this notice. The comments at the time of the meeting for deficiency is stable at this time and is not expected to worsen. His right eye is Agency will file comments received inclusion in the official meeting record. entirely normal and he has 160 degrees after the comment closing date in the The public may submit written of horizontal field in both eyes. This public docket, and will consider them to statements for the Committee’s review certifies medically that the patient has the extent practicable. In addition to late to Robert Watkins, Designated Federal sufficient vision to perform any driving comments, FMCSA will also continue to Officer, Department of Veterans Affairs, tasks and operate a commercial vehicle file, in the public docket, relevant Veterans Benefits Administration, and should be allowed to perform these information that becomes available after Compensation and Pension Service, tasks.’’ Mr. Smith reported that he has the comment closing date. Interested Regulation Staff (211D), 810 Vermont driven tractor-trailer combinations for persons should monitor the public Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420 or 35 years, accumulating 5.2 million docket for new material. e-mail at Robert.Watkins2@va,gov. Any miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Issued on: October 14, 2010. member of the public wishing to attend Wisconsin. His driving record for the Larry W. Minor, the meeting or seeking additional last 3 years shows no crashes and no information should contact Mr. Watkins convictions for moving violations in a Associate Administrator, Office of Policy and at (202) 461–9214. CMV. Program Development. [FR Doc. 2010–26653 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Dated: October 17, 2010. Daniel M. Veselitza BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P By Direction of the Secretary. Mr. Veselitza, 70, has had amblyopia Vivian Drake, in his left eye since childhood. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye Acting Committee Management Officer. is 20/25 only and in his left eye, 20/80. [FR Doc. 2010–26484 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] Following an examination in 2010, his BILLING CODE P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65060 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS By Direction of the Secretary. database that stores information from a AFFAIRS Vivian Drake, Hotline call. In addition to the ability to Acting Committee Management Officer. retrieve and view information obtained Advisory Committee on Prosthetics [FR Doc. 2010–26485 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] from the calls the Web Interface and Special-Disabilities Programs; BILLING CODE P program performs the following Notice of Meeting functions: 1. The system accepts Hotline calls The Department of Veterans Affairs DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS and stores them according to the (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92– AFFAIRS following: 463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) a. Anonymous persons with that a meeting of the Advisory Privacy Act of 1974; System of incomplete identification information; Committee on Prosthetics and Special- Records b. All Veterans, including Veterans who are not registered in the VA health Disabilities Programs will be held on AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs November 9–10, 2010, in room 730, at care system (non-VA); (VA). c. From family and friends of the VA Central Office, 810 Vermont ACTION: Notice of Establishment of New affected Veteran: Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The System of Records. Æ In this case, the system shall sessions will convene at 8:30 a.m. on indicate that the call was not made from both days, and will adjourn at 4:30 p.m. SUMMARY: The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 the affected Veteran. on November 9 and at 12 noon on U.S.C. 552(e) (4)) requires that all 2. The system provides a mechanism November 10. The meeting is open to agencies publish in the Federal Register for Hotline staff to identify the VA the public. a notice of the existence and character Medical Center closest to the caller’s of their systems of records. Notice is physical location; The purpose of the Committee is to hereby given that the Department of advise the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 3. The system provides a means for Veterans Affairs (VA) is establishing a recording Hotline referrals in the on VA’s prosthetics programs designed new system of records entitled ‘‘Suicide to provide state-of-the-art prosthetics Veteran’s electronic medical record Prevention Database-VA’’ (158VA11). when the referral is made to a VA and the associated rehabilitation DATES: Comments on this new system of Medical Center for follow-up care; research, development, and evaluation records must be received no later than 4. The system provides a means for of such technology. The Committee also November 22, 2010. If no public Suicide Prevention Coordinators to provides advice to the Secretary on comment is received, the new system document their follow-up measures; special disabilities programs which are will become effective November 22, 5. The system provides access to call defined as any program administered by 2010. log data for reporting purposes. The data the Secretary to serve Veterans with ADDRESSES: Written comments will be used to provide information spinal cord injuries, blindness or visual concerning the proposed amended related to the number of calls, caller’s impairments, loss of extremities or loss system of records may be submitted by: demographic information, the types of of function, deafness or hearing mail or hand-delivery to Director, calls, and follow-up care. impairment, and other serious Regulations Management (02REG), In addition to the National Suicide incapacities in terms of daily life Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Hotline call logs via the National functions. Vermont Avenue, NW., Room 1068, Suicide Hotline Web Application ‘‘ On November 9, the Committee will Washington, DC 20420; fax to (202) Program, the Suicide Prevention ’’ be briefed by the Director of Physical 273–9026; or e-mail to http:// Database-VA will maintain Suicide Attempts and Completions information. Medicine and Rehabilitation; Chief www.Regulations.gov. All comments This information is documented using Consultant for Women Veterans received will be available for public the Statistical Package for the Social Strategic Healthcare Group; Director of inspection in the Office of Regulation Sciences (SPSS). Information collected Optometry Service; and Chief Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 in SPSS includes attempt or completion, Consultant for Dental Services. On military conflict, VA enrolled, gender, November 10, the Committee will be p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 age, mental health diagnosis, medical briefed by the Chief Consultant for diagnosis, previous attempts, month of Prosthetics and Sensory Aids Service. (this is not a toll-free number) for an appointment. event, method used, outcome, intent, No time will be allocated for receiving seen at a VA within 7 days of attempt, oral presentations from the public. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: seen at VA within 30 days of attempt, However, members of the public may Janet Kemp RN, Ph.D., Department of where seen, had suicide been addressed, direct questions or submit written Veterans Affairs, 400 Fort Hill Avenue, and last recorded pain score. The data statements for review by the Committee Canandaigua, NY 14424; telephone will be used to generate national in advance of the meeting to Mr. Larry (585) 393–7939. reports. In addition, the information N. Long, Designated Federal Officer, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: obtained will be used to develop further VA educational programs and research Veterans Health Administration, Patient I. Description of Proposed Systems of opportunities surrounding suicide Care Services, Rehabilitation Services Records (117D), Department of Veterans Affairs, prevention. The Suicide Prevention Database will 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., serve two purposes. First, the database II. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures of Washington, DC 20420, or by e-mail at will store records associated with the Data in the System [email protected]. Any member of the National Suicide Hotline call logs via We are proposing to establish the public wishing to attend the meeting the National Suicide Hotline Web following Routine Use disclosures of should contact Mr. Long at (202) 461– Application Program. The National information maintained in the system: 7354. Suicide Hotline Web Application 1. The record of an individual who is Dated: October 17, 2010. Program is an electronic call log covered by a system of records may be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65061

disclosed to a Member of Congress, or administrative body after determining alleged or possible prohibited personnel a staff person acting for the Member, that the disclosure of the records to the practices, and such other functions, when the Member or staff person court or administrative body is a use of promulgated in 5 U.S.C. 1205 and 1206, requests the record on behalf of and at the information contained in the records or as authorized by law. the written request of the individual. that is compatible with the purpose for 11. VA may, on its own initiative, 2. Disclosure may be made to National which VA collected the records. disclose any information or records to Archives and Records Administration 6. Disclosures of relevant information appropriate agencies, entities, and (NARA) and the General Services may be made to individuals, persons when (1) VA suspects or has Administration (GSA) in records organizations, private or public confirmed that the integrity or management inspections conducted agencies, or other entities with whom confidentiality of information in the under authority of Title 44, Chapter 29, VA has a contract or agreement or where system of records has been of the United States Code (U.S.C). there is a subcontract to perform the compromised; (2) the Department has NARA and GSA are responsible for services as VA may deem practicable for determined that as a result of the management of old records no longer the purposes of laws administered by suspected or confirmed compromise, actively used, but which may be VA, in order for the contractor or there is a risk of embarrassment or harm appropriate for preservation, and for the subcontractor to perform the services of to the reputations of the record subjects, physical maintenance of the Federal the contract or agreement. This routine harm to economic or property interests, government’s records. VA must be able use includes disclosures by the identity theft or fraud, or harm to the to provide the records to NARA and individual or entity performing the security, confidentiality, or integrity of GSA in order to determine the proper service for VA to any secondary entity this system or other systems or disposition of such records. or individual to perform an activity that programs (whether maintained by the 3. Disclosure may be made to other is necessary for individuals, Department or another agency or Government agencies in support of data organizations, private or public disclosure is to agencies, entities, or exchanges of electronic medical record agencies, or other entities or individuals persons whom VA determines are information approved by the individual. with whom VA has a contract or reasonably necessary to assist or carry 4. VA may disclose on its own agreement to provide the service to VA. out the Department’s efforts to respond initiative any information in this 7. Disclosure to other Federal agencies to the suspected or confirmed system, except the names and home may be made to assist such agencies in compromise and prevent, minimize, or addresses of Veterans and their preventing and detecting possible fraud remedy such harm. This routine use dependents, that is relevant to a or abuse by individuals in their permits disclosures by the Department suspected or reasonably imminent operations and programs. to respond to a suspected or confirmed violation of law, whether civil, criminal 8. VA may disclose information to the data breach, including the conduct of or regulatory in nature and whether Equal Employment Opportunity any risk analysis or provision of credit arising by general or program statute or Commission when requested in protection services as provided in 38 by regulation, rule or order issued connection with investigations of U.S.C. 5724, as the terms are defined in pursuant thereto, to a Federal, State, alleged or possible discriminatory 38 U.S.C. 5727. local, tribal, or foreign agency charged practices, examination of Federal with the responsibility of investigating affirmative employment programs, or for III. Compatibility of the Proposed or prosecuting such violation, or other functions of the Commission as Routine Uses charged with enforcing or implementing authorized by law or regulation. VA The Privacy Act permits VA to the statute, regulation, rule or order. VA must be able to provide information to disclose information about individuals may also disclose on its own initiative the Commission to assist it in fulfilling without their consent for a routine use the names and addresses of veterans and its duties to protect employee’s rights, when the information will be used for their dependents to a Federal agency as required by statute and regulation. a purpose that is compatible with the charged with the responsibility of 9. VA may disclose to the Fair Labor purpose for which we collected the investigating or prosecuting civil, Relations Authority (FLRA) (including information. In all of the routine use criminal or regulatory violations of law, its General Counsel) information related disclosures described above, the or charged with enforcing or to the establishment of jurisdiction, the recipient of the information will use the implementing the statute, regulation, investigation and resolution of information in connection with a matter rule or order issued pursuant thereto. allegations of unfair labor practices, or relating to one of VA’s programs, will 5. VA may disclose information from information in connection with the use the information to provide a benefit this system of records to the Department resolution of exceptions to arbitration to VA, or disclosure is required by law. of Justice (DoJ), either on VA’s initiative awards when a question of material fact The notice of intent to publish and an or in response to DoJ’s request for the is raised; to disclose information in advance copy of the system notice have information, after either VA or DoJ matters properly before the Federal been sent to the appropriate determines that such information is Services Impasse Panel, and to Congressional committees and to the relevant to DoJ’s representation of the investigate representation petitions and Director of the Office of Management United States or any of its components conduct or supervise representation and Budget (OMB) as required by 5 in legal proceedings before a court or elections. VA must be able to provide U.S.C. 552a(r) (Privacy Act) and adjudicative body, provided that, in information to FLRA to comply with the guidelines issued by OMB (65 FR each case, the agency also determines statutory mandate under which it 77677), December 12, 2000. prior to disclosure that release of the operates. records to the DoJ is a use of the 10. VA may disclose information to Approved: September 28, 2010. information contained in the records officials of the Merit Systems Protection John R. Gingrich, that is compatible with the purpose for Board (MSPB), or the Office of Special Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs. which VA collected the records. VA, on Counsel, when requested in connection 158VA11 its own initiative, may disclose records with appeals, special studies of the civil in this system of records in legal service and other merit systems, review SYSTEM NAME: proceedings before a court or of rules and regulations, investigation of ‘‘Suicide Prevention Database—VA’’.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65062 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

SYSTEM LOCATION: outcome, intent, seen at a VA within 7 violation of law, whether civil, criminal The ‘‘Suicide Prevention Database— days of attempt, seen at VA within 30 or regulatory in nature and whether VA’’ will be maintained at Canandaigua days of attempt, where seen, had suicide arising by general or program statute or VA Medical Center, 400 Fort Hill been addressed, and last recorded pain by regulation, rule or order issued Avenue, Canandaigua, NY 14424. The score. pursuant thereto, to a Federal, State, back-up computer tape information is local, tribal, or foreign agency charged AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: stored off-site at Albany VA Medical with the responsibility of investigating Center. Title 38, United States Code, section or prosecuting such violation, or In addition, information from these 501. charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, regulation, rule or order. VA records or copies of records may be PURPOSE(S): maintained at the Department of may also disclose on its own initiative Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, The records and information may be the names and addresses of Veterans NW., Washington, DC. used for ensuring appropriate follow-up and their dependents to a Federal care is provided to those who telephone agency charged with the responsibility CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE the National Suicide Hotline. In of investigating or prosecuting civil, SYSTEM: addition, the information will be used criminal or regulatory violations of law, The records include information for statistical reports for the purpose of or charged with enforcing or concerning Veterans and friends and evaluating the need for development of implementing the statute, regulation, family of Veterans who access the further suicide prevention efforts to rule or order issued pursuant thereto. National Suicide Hotline. In addition, include education and research. 5. VA may disclose information from records include the name of the Hotline Additionally, the statistical reports will this system of records to the Department call responder and the name of the be used to provide information related of Justice (DoJ), either on VA’s initiative Suicide Prevention Coordinator. to suicide to VA officials, congressional or in response to DoJ’s request for the members, and the public. information, after either VA or DoJ CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: determines that such information is ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE The records may include information relevant to DoJ’s representation of the related to: SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: United States or any of its components 1. The National Suicide Hotline call in legal proceedings before a court or logs via the National Suicide Hotline To the extent that records contained adjudicative body, provided that, in Web Application Program includes the in the system include information each case, the agency also determines following information: protected by 45 CFR parts 160 and 164, prior to disclosure that release of the a. Identifies, by full name, the Hotline i.e., individually identifiable health records to the DoJ is a use of the call responder; information, and 38 U.S.C. 7332, i.e., information contained in the records b. Identifies, by full name, the Suicide medical treatment information related to that is compatible with the purpose for Prevention Coordinator; drug abuse, alcoholism or alcohol abuse, which VA collected the records. VA, on c. Records calls to the National sickle cell anemia or infection with the its own initiative, may disclose records Suicide Hotline which may be: human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), in this system of records in legal (1) Calls from an anonymous person that information cannot be disclosed proceedings before a court or with incomplete identification under a routine use unless there is also administrative body after determining information; specific statutory authority in 38 U.S.C. that the disclosure of the records to the (2) Calls from a Veteran, including 7332 and regulatory authority in 45 CFR court or administrative body is a use of Veterans who are not registered in VA parts 160 and 164 permitting disclosure. the information contained in the records health care system (non-VA); The Suicide Prevention-VA system of that is compatible with the purpose for (3) Calls from family and friends of record will be routinely used for the which VA collected the records. the affected Veteran (In this case, the following: 6. Disclosures of relevant information system shall indicate that the call was 1. The record of an individual who is may be made to individuals, not made from the affected Veteran). covered by a system of records may be organizations, private or public d. Identifies the VA Medical Center disclosed to a Member of Congress, or agencies, or other entities with whom closest to the caller’s physical location; a staff person acting for the Member, VA has a contract or agreement or where e. Records Hotline referrals in the when the Member or staff person there is a subcontract to perform the Veteran’s electronic medical record requests the record on behalf of and at services as VA may deem practicable for when the referral is made to a VA the written request of the individual. the purposes of laws administered by Medical Center for follow-up care; 2. Disclosure may be made to National VA, in order for the contractor or f. Provides a means for Suicide Archives and Records Administration subcontractor to perform the services of Prevention Coordinators to document (NARA) and the General Services the contract or agreement. This routine their follow-up measures; Administration (GSA) in records use includes disclosures by the g. Provides access to call log data for management inspections conducted individual or entity performing the reporting purposes: Provides under authority of Title 44, Chapter 29, service for VA to any secondary entity information related to the number of of the United States Code (U.S.C.). or individual to perform an activity that calls, callers demographic information, 3. Disclosure may be made to other is necessary for individuals, the types of calls, and follow-up care. Government agencies in support of data organizations, private or public 2. The Suicide Attempts and exchanges of electronic medical record agencies, or other entities or individuals Completions data is collected in the information approved by the individual. with whom VA has a contract or SPSS statistical package. The 4. VA may disclose on its own agreement to provide the service to VA. information includes attempt or initiative any information in this 7. Disclosure to other Federal agencies completion, military conflict, VA system, except the names and home may be made to assist such agencies in enrolled, gender, age, mental health addresses of Veterans and their preventing and detecting possible fraud diagnosis, medical diagnosis, previous dependents, that is relevant to a or abuse by individuals in their attempts, month of event, method used, suspected or reasonably imminent operations and programs.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65063

8. VA may disclose information to the POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: Equal Employment Opportunity RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND Paper records and information are Commission when requested in DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: maintained and disposed of in connection with investigations of STORAGE: accordance with records disposition alleged or possible discriminatory authority approved by the Archivist of practices, examination of Federal Records are maintained on the the United States. affirmative employment programs, or for Canandaigua VA Medical Center’s other functions of the Commission as secure computer server. SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: authorized by law or regulation. Official responsible for policies and RETRIEVABILITY: procedures; VISN 2 Center of Excellence 9. VA may disclose to the Fair Labor Records are retrieved by name, social at Canandaigua VA Medical Center Relations Authority (FLRA) (including security number or other assigned (528A5), 400 Fort Hill Avenue, its General Counsel) information related identifiers of the individuals on whom Canandaigua, NY 14424. Officials to the establishment of jurisdiction, the they are maintained. responsible for the system of records investigation and resolution of include Craig S. Howard, Director, allegations of unfair labor practices, or SAFEGUARDS: Canandaigua VA Medical Center; Kerry information in connection with the L. Knox, Ph.D., Director, VISN 2 Center resolution of exceptions to arbitration 1. VA will maintain the data in compliance with applicable VA security of Excellence; Janet Kemp, RN, Ph.D., awards when a question of material fact policy directives that specify the Associate Director Education and is raised; to disclose information in standards that will be applied to protect Training, VISN 2 Center of Excellence. matters properly before the Federal sensitive personal information. VA’s Services Impasse Panel, and to NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: security measures complies with investigate representation petitions and Individuals who wish to determine applicable Federal Information conduct or supervise representation whether this system of records contains Processing Standards (FIPS) issued by elections. information about them should contact the National Institute of Standards and the Canandaigua VA Medical Center. 10. VA may disclose information to Technology (NIST). Access to VA Inquiries should include the person’s officials of the Merit Systems Protection working and storage areas is restricted full name, social security number, dates Board (MSPB), or the Office of Special to VA employees on a ‘‘need-to-know’’ of employment, date(s) of contact, and Counsel, when requested in connection basis; strict control measures are return address. with appeals, special studies of the civil enforced to ensure that disclosure to service and other merit systems, review these individuals is also based on this RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURE: of rules and regulations, investigation of same principle. They are required to Individuals seeking information alleged or possible prohibited personnel take annual VA mandatory data privacy regarding access to and contesting of practices, and such other functions, and security training. Generally, VA file records in this system may write, call or promulgated in 5 U.S.C. 1205 and 1206, areas are locked after normal duty hours visit the Canandaigua VA Medical or as authorized by law. and the facilities are protected from Center. 11. VA may, on its own initiative, outside access by the Federal Protective disclose any information or records to Service or other security personnel. CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: appropriate agencies, entities, and 2. Access to computer rooms at the (See Record Access Procedures persons when (1) VA suspects or has Canandaigua VA Medical Center is above.) confirmed that the integrity or limited by appropriate locking devices RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: confidentiality of information in the and restricted to authorized VA system of records has been employees and vendor personnel. Information in this system of records compromised; (2) the Department has Peripheral devices are placed in secure is provided by VHA employees. determined that as a result of the areas (areas that are locked or have [FR Doc. 2010–26489 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] suspected or confirmed compromise, limited access) or are otherwise BILLING CODE 8320–01–P there is a risk of embarrassment or harm protected. Information stored on the to the reputations of the record subjects, Suicide Prevention Database–VA may harm to economic or property interests, be accessed by authorized VA DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS identity theft or fraud, or harm to the employees. Access to file information is AFFAIRS security, confidentiality, or integrity of controlled at two levels; the systems Privacy Act of 1974; System of this system or other systems or recognize authorized employees by Records programs (whether maintained by the series of individually unique Department or another agency or passwords/codes as a part of each data AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. disclosure is to agencies, entities, or message, and the employees are limited ACTION: Notice of amendment and persons whom VA determines are to only that information in the file republication of an existing system of reasonably necessary to assist or carry which is needed in the performance of records. out the Department’s efforts to respond their official duties. Information that is to the suspected or confirmed downloaded from the Suicide SUMMARY: As required by the Privacy compromise and prevent, minimize, or Prevention Database–VA and Act of 1974 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)4, notice is remedy such harm. This routine use maintained on personal computers is hereby given that the Department of permits disclosures by the Department afforded similar storage and access Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending the to respond to a suspected or confirmed protections as the data that is system of records in its inventory data breach, including the conduct of maintained in the original files. Access entitled ‘‘Veterans (Deceased) Headstone any risk analysis or provision of credit to information stored on automated or Marker Records—VA’’ (48VA40B) as protection services as provided in 38 storage media at other VA locations is set forth in Public Law 93–43. VA is U.S.C. 5724, as the terms are defined in controlled by individually unique amending the system of records by 38 U.S.C. 5727. passwords/codes. revising the Purpose, Routine Uses of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65064 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

Records Maintained in the System, wishes to access information within the and at the written request of the Safeguards, Categories of Individuals system may submit a written request to individual. Covered by the System and Notification the Privacy Officer. Routine use number 6 is revised to Procedures. VA is republishing the Routine Use of Records Maintained in better allow disclosure to the National system notice in its entirety. the System is being amended to reflect Archives and Records Administration in DATES: Comments on this amended the Departmental requirement of adding records management inspections system of records must be received no seven routine uses to further clarify conducted under authority of Title 44 later than November 22, 2010. If no appropriate and necessary disclosures. U.S.C. public comment is received during the Former routine use numbers 1, 3, and 4 Routine use number 7 is added and period allowed for comment or unless remain the same. allows VA to disclose records to the otherwise published in the Federal Routine use number 1 remains the Department of Justice (DoJ), either on same and allows for use in connection VA’s initiative or in response to DoJ’s Register by VA, the amended system with the issuance of a government request for the information, after either will become effective November 22, headstone or marker in a National VA or DoJ determines that such 2010. Cemetery or a private cemetery. information is relevant to DoJ’s ADDRESSES: Written comments Routine use number 2 is revised to representation of the United States or concerning the proposed amended better allow the disclosure by VA, on its any of its components in legal system of records may be submitted own initiative, any information in the proceedings before a court or through http://www.Regulations.gov; by system, except the names and home adjudicative body, provided that, in mail or hand-delivery to Director, addresses of Veterans and their each case, the agency also determines Regulations Management (02REG), dependents, that is relevant to a prior to disclosure that release of the Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 suspected or reasonably imminent records to the DoJ is a use of the Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC violation of the law whether civil, information contained in the records 20420; by fax to (202) 273–9026. criminal, or regulatory in nature and that is compatible with the purpose for Comments received will be available for whether arising by general or program which VA collected the records. VA, on public inspection in the Office of statute or by regulation, rule, or order its own initiative, may disclose records Regulation Policy and Management, issued pursuant thereto, to a Federal, in this system of records in legal Room 1063B, between the hours of state, local, tribal, or foreign agency proceedings before a court or 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through charged with the responsibility of administrative body after determining Friday (except holidays). Please call investigating or prosecuting such that the disclosure of the records to the (202) 461–4902 for an appointment, violation, or charged with enforcing or court or administrative body is a use of (this is not a toll free number). In implementing the statute, regulation, the information contained in the records addition, during the comment period, rule, or order. VA may also disclose on that is compatible with the purpose for comments may be viewed online its own initiative the names and which VA collected the records. through the Federal Docket Management addresses of Veterans and their Routine use number 8 is added and System (FDMS) at http:// dependents to a Federal agency charged allows for the disclosure of relevant www.Regulations.gov. with the responsibility of investigating information to individuals, or prosecuting civil, criminal, or organizations, private or public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: regulatory violations of law, or charged agencies, or other entities with whom Privacy Officer, National Cemetery with enforcing or implementing the VA has a contract or agreement or where Administration, Department of Veterans statute, regulation, or order issued there is a subcontract to perform such Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., pursuant thereto. services VA may deem practicable for Washington, DC 20420, or fax comments Routine use number 3 remains the the purposes of laws administered by to telephone (202) 273–6699. same and allows for disclosure to a VA, in order for the contractor or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This foreign government allied with the U.S. subcontractor to perform the services of publication is in accordance with the during war, or a Federal, State or local the contract or agreement. Privacy Act requirement that agencies agency maintaining civil, criminal or Routine use number 9 is added and publish their amended system of other pertinent information or military allows disclosure to other Federal records in the Federal Register when service data, if necessary to obtain agencies to assist such agencies in there is revision, change, or addition. information relevant to an agency preventing and detecting possible fraud VA’s National Cemetery Administration decision concerning eligibility for burial or abuse by individuals in their (NCA) has reviewed its systems of or a reservation in a national cemetery operations and programs. records notices and has determined its or the issuance of a government Routine use number 10 is added to record system, ‘‘Veterans (Deceased) headstone to mark a grave. allow for the appropriate mitigation of Headstone or Marker Records— VA’’ Routine use number 4 remains the a possible data breach. This routine use (48VA40B) should be amended to reflect same and allows disclosure to a Federal permits disclosures by including the evolving technology and procedures and agency in response to its request in conduct of any risk analysis or to conform to current practice. connection with the granting of a benefit provision of credit protection services as This system of records is also to a veteran (including active duty provided in 38 U.S.C. 5724, as the terms amended by revising the Purpose personnel) or a dependent by the are defined in 38 U.S.C. 5727. section. The Purposes section more fully requesting agency, to the extent that the The notice of amendment and an explains the mission of the VA NCA information is relevant and necessary to advance copy of the system notice have Interment Records system. the requesting agency’s decision on the been sent to the appropriate The Safeguards section is being matter. Congressional committees and to the amended to list specific standards that Routine use number 5 is revised to Director of Office of Management and will be applied to protect sensitive better allow for disclosure to a Member Budget (OMB) as required by 5 U.S.C. personal information. of Congress, or a staff person acting for 552a(r) (Privacy Act) and guidelines The Notification Procedures are the Member, when the Member or staff issued by OMB (65 FR 77677), amended to reflect any individual who person requests the record on behalf of December 12, 2000.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 65065

Approved: September 16, 2010. agency charged with the responsibility court or administrative body is a use of John R. Gingrich, of investigating or prosecuting such the information contained in the records Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs. violation, or charged with enforcing or that is compatible with the purpose for implementing the statute, regulation, which VA collected the records. 48VA40B rule, or order. VA may also disclose on 8. Disclosure of relevant information SYSTEM NAME: its own initiative the names and may be made to individuals, addresses of Veterans and their organizations, private or public ‘‘Veterans (Deceased) Headstone or dependents to a Federal agency charged agencies, or other entities with whom Marker Records—VA’’. with the responsibility of investigating VA has a contract or agreement or where SYSTEM LOCATION: or prosecuting civil, criminal, or there is a subcontract to perform such Records are maintained at the regulatory violations of law, or charged services as VA may deem practicable for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with enforcing or implementing the the purposes of laws administered by Central Office, Washington, DC. statute, regulation, or order issued VA, in order for the contractor or pursuant thereto. subcontractor to perform the services of CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE 3. A record from this system of the contract or agreement. SYSTEM: records may be disclosed as a ‘‘routine 9. Disclosure to other Federal agencies Deceased Veterans and eligible family use’’ to a foreign government allied with may be made to assist such agencies in members. the U.S. during war, or a Federal, State preventing and detecting possible fraud or local agency maintaining civil, or abuse by individuals in their CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: criminal or other pertinent information operations and programs. The records in the system are the or military service data, if necessary to 10. VA may, on its own initiative primary records and may contain the obtain information relevant to an agency disclose any information or records to following types of information: decision concerning eligibility for burial appropriate agencies, entities, and 1. Military Service Data. or a reservation in a national cemetery persons when (1) VA suspects or has 2. Applicant’s name and address. or the issuance of a government confirmed that the integrity or 3. Place of burial. headstone to mark a grave. confidentiality of information in the 4. Data on headstone or marker. 4. A record from this system of system of records has been 5. Consignee’s name, address and records may be disclosed to a Federal compromised; (2) the Department has phone number. agency, in response to its request, in determined that as a result of the AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: connection with the granting of a benefit suspected or confirmed compromise, Public Law 93–43. to a Veteran (including active duty there is a risk of embarrassment or harm personnel) or a dependent by the to the reputations of the record subjects, PURPOSE: requesting agency, to the extent that the harm to economic or property interests, National Cemetery Administration information is relevant and necessary to identity theft or fraud, or harm to the (NCA) collects a limited amount of the requesting agency’s decision on the security, confidentiality, or integrity of personally Identifiable information in matter. this system or other systems or order to provide authorized individual’s 5. The record of an individual who is programs (whether maintained by the access to or interact with the covered by a system of records may be Department or another agency or entity) Department of Veterans Affairs. The disclosed to a Member of congress, or a that rely upon the potentially system enables VA to maintain lists of staff person acting for the Member, compromised information; and (3) the individuals who receive a variety of when the Member or staff person disclosure is to agencies, entities, or Federal Veteran’s Benefits administered requests the record on behalf of and at persons whom VA determines are by VA at VA facilities located the written request of the individual. reasonably necessary to assist or carry 6. Disclosure may be made to the throughout the country. VA gathers or out the Department’s efforts to respond National Archives and Records creates these records in order to enable to the suspected or confirmed Administration in records management it to administer these statutory benefits compromise and prevent, minimize, or inspections conducted under authority programs. remedy such harm. This routine use of Title 44 U.S.C. permits disclosures by the Department ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE 7. VA may disclose records to the to respond to a suspected or confirmed SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND Department of Justice (DoJ), either on data breach, including the conduct of THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: VA’s initiative or in response to DoJ’s any risk analysis or provision of credit Information from this system also may request for the information, after either protection services as provided in 38 be disclosed as a routine use for the VA or DoJ determines that such U.S.C. 5724, as the terms are defined in following purposes: information is relevant to DoJ’s 38 U.S.C. 5727. 1. For use in connection with the representation of the United States or issuance of a government headstone or any of its components in legal POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, marker in a National Cemetery or a proceedings before a court or RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND private cemetery. adjudicative body, provided that, in DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 2. VA on its own initiative may each case, the agency also determines STORAGE: disclose any information in the system, prior to disclosure that release of the The information contained in the except the names and home addresses of records to the DoJ is a use of the Veterans (Deceased) Headstone and Veterans and their dependents, that is information contained in the records Marker Records are maintained in paper relevant to a suspected or reasonably that is compatible with the purpose for documents and are stored at Veterans imminent violation of the law whether which VA collected the records. VA, on Administration Central Office. civil, criminal, or regulatory in nature its own initiative, may disclose records and whether arising by general or in this system of records in legal RETRIEVABILITY: program statute or by regulation, rule, or proceedings before a court or Paper documents are indexed and order issued pursuant thereto, to a administrative body after determining retrievable by name of VA beneficiary or Federal, State, local, tribal, or foreign that the disclosure of the records to the eligible family member.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 65066 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices

SAFEGUARDS: SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: records involved. Inquiries should NCA will maintain the data in Director, National Cemetery include the individual’s full name, Administration (41), Department of branch of service, dates of service, compliance with applicable VA security Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., service numbers, social security policy Directives that specify the NW., Washington, DC 20420. number, and date of birth. standards that will be applied to protect sensitive personal information. Further, NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: only authorized individuals may have Any individual who wishes to access See ‘‘Notification Procedures’’ above. access to the data and only when information in order to determine needed to perform their duties. They are whether a record is being maintained in CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: required to take annual VA mandatory this system under his or her name or See ‘‘Notification Procedures’’ above. data privacy and security training. other personal identifier, or wants to determine the content of such records RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: should submit a written request to the Privacy Officer, National Cemetery Include family members of the Because the information is related to Administration, Department of Veterans deceased, official military records and deceased veterans, the paper documents Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., VA claims records. are retained indefinitely. Washington, DC 20420. All inquiries [FR Doc. 2010–26490 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] must reasonably identify the type of BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Thursday, October 21, 2010

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing Tanks; Group I Polymers and Resins; Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations; Pharmaceuticals Production; The Printing and Publishing Industry; and Steel Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65068 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0600, by one of cannot read your comment due to AGENCY the following methods: technical difficulties and cannot contact • http://www.regulations.gov: Follow you for clarification, EPA may not be 40 CFR Part 63 the on-line instructions for submitting able to consider your comment. comments. Electronic files should avoid the use of [EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0600; FRL–9203–7] • E-mail: [email protected]. special characters, any form of Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– encryption, and be free of any defects or RIN 2060–AO91 OAR–2010–0600. viruses. For additional information • Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention National Emission Standards for about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Docket Center homepage at http:// 0600. Hard and Decorative Chromium • www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send Docket. The EPA has established a Electroplating and Chromium comments to: EPA Docket Center, EPA Anodizing Tanks; Group I Polymers docket for this rulemaking under Docket West (Air Docket), Attention Docket ID ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0600. All and Resins; Marine Tank Vessel No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0600, U.S. Loading Operations; Pharmaceuticals documents in the docket are listed in Environmental Protection Agency, the http://www.regulations.gov index. Production; The Printing and Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Publishing Industry; and Steel Although listed in the index, some Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. information is not publicly available, Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and Please include a total of two copies. In e.g., CBI or other information whose Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants addition, please mail a copy of your disclosure is restricted by statute. comments on the information collection AGENCY: Environmental Protection Certain other material, such as provisions to the Office of Information Agency (EPA). copyrighted material, is not placed on and Regulatory Affairs, Office of ACTION: the Internet and will be publicly Proposed rule; and Management and Budget (OMB), Attn: available only in hard copy. Publicly supplemental notice of proposed Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, available docket materials are available rulemaking. NW., Washington, DC 20503. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental either electronically in http:// SUMMARY: This action proposes how www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA will address the residual risk and Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301 Constitution the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, technology reviews conducted for two Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., national emission standards for Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– NW., Washington, DC. The Public hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP), and OAR–2010–0600. Such deliveries are Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to this action is a supplemental notice of only accepted during the Docket’s 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, proposed rulemaking for an October normal hours of operation, and special excluding legal holidays. The telephone 2008 action that proposed how EPA arrangements should be made for number for the Public Reading Room is would address the residual risk and deliveries of boxed information. (202) 566–1744, and the telephone technology reviews for four NESHAP. Instructions. Direct your comments to number for the EPA Docket Center is The six NESHAP include 16 source Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– (202) 566–1742. categories, 12 of which are the subject 0600. EPA’s policy is that all comments Public Hearing. We will hold a public of residual risk and technology reviews received will be included in the public hearing concerning this proposed rule in this package. This action proposes to docket without change and may be on November 5, 2010, from 9 a.m. to modify the existing emissions standards made available online at http:// 7 p.m. Persons interested in presenting for eight source categories in three of the www.regulations.gov, including any oral testimony at the hearing should six NESHAP to address certain emission personal information provided, unless contact Ms. Mary Tom Kissell, Sector sources not currently regulated under the comment includes information Policies and Programs Division (E143– these standards. It also proposes for all claimed to be confidential business 01), Office of Air Quality Planning and six NESHAP to address provisions information (CBI) or other information Standards, U.S. Environmental related to emissions during periods of whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Protection Agency, Research Triangle startup, shutdown, and malfunction. Do not submit information that you Park, NC 27711, telephone number, Finally, this action proposes changes to consider to be CBI or otherwise (919) 541–4516, by November 1, 2010. two of the six NESHAP to correct protected through http:// The public hearing will be held at the editorial errors, make clarifications, or www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The U.S. Environmental Protection address issues with implementation or http://www.regulations.gov Web site is Agency—Research Triangle Park determining compliance. an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which Campus, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, DATES: Comments. Comments must be means EPA will not know your identity Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. If no received on or before December 6, 2010. or contact information unless you one requests to speak at the public Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, provide it in the body of your comment. hearing by November 1, 2010, then the comments on the information collection If you send an e-mail comment directly public hearing will be cancelled and a provisions are best assured of having to EPA without going through http:// notification of cancellation posted on full effect if the Office of Management www.regulations.gov, your e-mail the following Web site: http:// and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of address will be automatically captured www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t3main.html. your comments on or before November and included as part of the comment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 22, 2010. that is placed in the public docket and questions about this proposed action, Public Hearing. We will hold a public made available on the Internet. If you contact Ms. Mary Tom Kissell, Sector hearing on November 5, 2010. Persons submit an electronic comment, EPA Policies and Programs Division (E143– requesting to speak at the public hearing recommends that you include your 01), Office of Air Quality Planning and must contact EPA by November 1, 2010. name and other contact information in Standards, U.S. Environmental ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your the body of your comment and with any Protection Agency, Research Triangle comments, identified by Docket ID No. disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541–

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65069

4516; fax number: (919) 541–0246; and 02), Office of Air Quality Planning and [email protected]. For e-mail address: [email protected]. Standards, U.S. Environmental information about the applicability of For specific information regarding the Protection Agency, Research Triangle these six NESHAP to a particular entity, risk modeling methodology, contact Ms. Park, NC 27711; telephone number: contact the appropriate person listed in Elaine Manning, Health and (919) 541–5499; fax number: (919) 541– Table 1 to this preamble. Environmental Impacts Division (C539– 0840; and e-mail address: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

TABLE 1—LIST OF EPA CONTACTS FOR THE NESHAP ADDRESSED IN THIS PROPOSED ACTION

NESHAP for: OECA contact 1 OAQPS contact 2

Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium An- Scott Throwe, (202) 564–7013, Phil Mulrine, (919) 541–5289, odizing Tanks. [email protected]. [email protected]. Group I Polymers and Resins Production ...... Scott Throwe, (202) 564–7013, Randy McDonald, (919) 541–5402, [email protected]. [email protected]. Marine Vessel Loading Operations ...... Maria Malave, (202) 564–7027, Steve Shedd, (919) 541–5397, [email protected]. [email protected]. Pharmaceuticals Production...... Marcia Mia, (202) 564–7042, Randy McDonald, (919) 541–5402, [email protected]. [email protected]. Printing and Publishing Industry ...... Len Lazarus, (202) 564–6369, David Salman, (919) 541–0859, [email protected]. [email protected]. Steel Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid Re- Maria Malave, (202) 564–7027, Phil Mulrine, (919) 541–5289, generation Plants. [email protected]. [email protected]. 1 OECA stands for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. 2 OAQPS stands for EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

I. Preamble Acronyms and HEM–3—Human Exposure Model version 3 RBLC—RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse Abbreviations HEPA—High Efficiency Particulate Air REL—CalEPA Chronic Reference Exposure HON—Hazardous Organic National Level Several acronyms and terms used to Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act describe industrial processes, data Pollutants RfC—Reference Concentration inventories, and risk modeling are HQ—Hazard Quotient RfD—Reference Dose included in this preamble. While this ICR—Information Collection Request RTR—Residual Risk and Technology Review may not be an exhaustive list, to ease IRIS—Integrated Risk Information System SAB—Science Advisory Board the reading of this preamble and for Km—Kilometer SCC—Source Classification Codes LAER—Lowest Achievable Emission Rate SCS—Smooth Clean Surface reference purposes, the following terms MACT—Maximum Achievable Control and acronyms are defined here: SF3—2000 Census of Population and Technology Housing Summary File 3 AERMOD—The air dispersion model used by MACT Code—A code within the NEI used to SO2—Sulfur Dioxide the HEM–3 model identify processes included in a source SOP—Standard Operating Procedures AEGL—Acute Exposure Guideline Levels category SSM—Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction ANPRM—Advance Notice of Proposed mg/dscm—Milligrams per Dry Standard TOSHI—Target Organ-Specific Hazard Index Rulemaking Cubic Meter TPY—Tons Per Year ASTM—An international standards MIR—Maximum Individual Risk TRIM—Total Risk Integrated Modeling organization that develops and publishes MTVLO—Marine Tank Vessel Loading System voluntary consensus technical standards Operations TTN—Technology Transfer Network ATCM—Airborne Toxics Control Measure NAC/AEGL Committee—National Advisory UF—Uncertainty Factor ATSDR—Agency for Toxic Substances and Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Disease Registry Levels for Hazardous Substances URE—Unit Risk Estimate BACT—Best Available Control Technology NAICS—North American Industry VOC—Volatile Organic Compounds bbl/yr—Barrels per Year Classification System WAFS—Wetting Agent/Fume Suppressant BID—Background Information Document NAS—National Academy of Sciences WCSC—Waterborne Commerce Statistics CalEPA—California Environmental NATA—National Air Toxics Assessment Center Protection Agency NESHAP—National Emissions Standards for WWW—Worldwide Web CARB—California Air Resources Board Hazardous Air Pollutants CAA—Clean Air Act NEI—National Emissions Inventory II. General Information CBI—Confidential Business Information NOX—Nitrogen Oxide CEEL—Community Emergency Exposure NRC—National Research Council A. Does this action apply to me? Levels NSR—New Source Review The regulated industrial source CIIT—Chemical Industry Institute of NTTAA—National Technology Transfer and categories that are the subject of this Toxicology Advancement Act CFR—Code of Federal Regulations OECA—Office of Enforcement and proposal are listed in Table 2 to this CMP—Composite Mesh Pad Compliance Assurance preamble. Table 2 is not intended to be CO—Carbon Monoxide OLD—Organic Liquids Distribution exhaustive, but rather provides a guide CO2—Carbon Dioxide OMB—Office of Management and Budget for readers regarding entities likely to be D/F—Dioxin/Furan PB–HAP—Hazardous air pollutants known to affected by the proposed action for the EED—Emission Elimination Device be persistent and bio-accumulative in the source categories listed. These EPA—Environmental Protection Agency environment standards, and any changes considered EPS—Eco Pickled Surface PFC—Perfluorinated Chemical in this rulemaking, would be directly ERPG—Emergency Response Planning PFOS—Perfluorooctyl Sulfonate Guidelines PM—Particulate Matter applicable to sources as a Federal HAP—Hazardous Air Pollutants POM—Polycyclic Organic Matter program. Thus, Federal, State, local, and HCl—Hydrochloric Acid RACT—Reasonably Available Control tribal government entities are not HI—Hazard Index Technology affected by this proposed action. The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65070 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

regulated categories affected by this proposed action include:

TABLE 2—NESHAP AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CATEGORIES AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSED ACTION

NESHAP and source category NAICS code 1 MACT code 2

Chromium Electroplating ...... Chromium Anodizing Tanks ...... 332813 1607 Decorative Chromium Electroplating ...... 332813 1610 Hard Chromium Electroplating ...... 332813 1615

Group I Polymers and Resins ...... Butyl Rubber Production ...... 325212 1307 Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production ...... 325212 1311 Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production ...... 325212 1313 HypalonTM Production 3 ...... 325212 1315 Neoprene Production ...... 325212 1320 Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production ...... 325212 1321 Polybutadiene Rubber Production ...... 325212 1325 Polysulfide Rubber Production 3 ...... 325212 1332 Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production ...... 325212 1339

Marine Vessel Loading Operations ...... 4883 0603

Pharmaceuticals Production ...... 3254 1201

Printing and Publishing Industry ...... 32311 0714

Steel Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants ...... 3311, 3312 0310 1 North American Industry Classification System. 2 Maximum Achievable Control Technology. 3 There are no longer any operating facilities in either the HypalonTM or Polysulfide Rubber source categories. Therefore, this proposal does not address these source categories.

B. Where can I get a copy of this CBI and then identify electronically C. What should I consider as I prepare my document and other related within the disk or CD–ROM the specific comments for EPA? information? information that is claimed as CBI. In D. How is this document organized? addition to one complete version of the III. Background In addition to being available in the A. What is the statutory authority for this docket, an electronic copy of this comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment action? proposal will also be available on the B. How did we consider the risk results in World Wide Web (WWW) through the that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for making decisions for this proposal? Technology Transfer Network (TTN). C. What other actions are we addressing in Following signature by the EPA inclusion in the public docket. If you submit a CD–ROM or disk that does not this proposal? Administrator, a copy of this proposed D. What specific RTR actions have action will be posted on the TTN’s contain CBI, mark the outside of the disk or CD–ROM clearly that it does not previously been taken for these source policy and guidance page for newly categories? proposed or promulgated rules at the contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public IV. Analyses Performed following address: http://www.epa.gov/ A. How did we estimate risk posed by the ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. The TTN docket and EPA’s electronic public docket without prior notice. Information source categories? provides information and technology B. How did we perform the technology exchange in various areas of air marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures review? pollution control. C. How did we perform the analyses for the Additional information is available on set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI other actions being proposed? the residual risk and technology review V. Analyses Results and Proposed Decisions only to the following address: Roberto (RTR) Web page at http://www.epa.gov/ A. What are the results and proposed Morales, OAQPS Document Control ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. This decisions for the Chromium Officer (C404–02), Office of Air Quality information includes source category Electroplating source categories? Planning and Standards, U.S. descriptions and detailed emissions and B. What are the results and proposed Environmental Protection Agency, other data that were used as inputs to decisions for the Group I Polymers and the risk assessments. Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Resins Production source categories? Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– C. What are the results and proposed C. What should I consider as I prepare OAR–2010–0600. decisions for Marine Tank Vessel my comments for EPA? D. How is this document organized? Loading Operations source category? Submitting CBI. Do not submit D. What are the results and proposed information containing CBI to EPA The information in this preamble is decisions for the Pharmaceuticals through http://www.regulations.gov or organized as follows: Production source category? e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of I. Preamble Acronyms and Abbreviations E. What are the results and proposed the information that you claim to be II. General Information decisions for the Printing and Publishing CBI. For CBI information on a disk or A. Does this action apply to me? Industry source category? CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark B. Where can I get a copy of this document F. What are the results and proposed the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as and other related information? decisions for Steel Pickling-HCl Process

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65071

Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid released from a process, stack, storage, potentially posed) by sources after Regeneration Plants source category? or fugitive emissions point, (D) are implementation of the MACT standards, VI. Summary of Proposed Actions design, equipment, work practice, or the public health significance of those A. What actions are we proposing as a operational standards (including risks, the means and costs of controlling result of the technology reviews? B. What actions are we proposing as a requirements for operator training or them, the actual health effects to result of the residual risk reviews? certification), or (E) are a combination of persons in proximity of emitting C. What other actions are we proposing? the above. CAA section 112(d)(2)(A)– sources, and the recommendations VII. Request for Comments (E). The MACT standard may take the regarding legislation of such remaining VIII. Submitting Data Corrections form of a design, equipment, work risk. EPA prepared and submitted this IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews practice, or operational standard where report (Residual Risk Report to A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory EPA first determines either that (A) a Congress, EPA–453/R–99–001) in March Planning and Review pollutant cannot be emitted through a 1999. Congress did not act in response B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory Flexibility Act conveyance designed and constructed to to the report, thereby triggering EPA’s D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act emit or capture the pollutant, or that obligation under CAA section 112(f)(2) E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism any requirement for or use of such a to analyze and address residual risk. F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation conveyance would be inconsistent with CAA section 112(f)(2) requires us to and Coordination With Indian Tribal law, or (B) the application of determine for source categories subject Governments measurement methodology to a to certain MACT standards, whether the G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of particular class of sources is not emissions standards provide an ample Children From Environmental Health practicable due to technological and margin of safety to protect public health. Risks and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions economic limitations. CAA sections If the MACT standards for HAP Concerning Regulations That 112(h)(1)–(2). ‘‘classified as a known, probable, or Significantly Affect Energy Supply, The MACT ‘‘floor’’ is the minimum possible human carcinogen do not Distribution, or Use control level allowed for MACT reduce lifetime excess cancer risks to I. National Technology Transfer and standards promulgated under CAA the individual most exposed to Advancement Act section 112(d)(3), and may not be based emissions from a source in the category J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions on cost considerations. For new sources, or subcategory to less than 1-in-1 To Address Environmental Justice in the MACT floor cannot be less stringent million,’’ EPA must promulgate residual Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations than the emission control that is risk standards for the source category (or achieved in practice by the best- subcategory) as necessary to provide an III. Background controlled similar source. The MACT ample margin of safety to protect public A. What is the statutory authority for floors for existing sources can be less health. In doing so, EPA may adopt this action? stringent than floors for new sources, standards equal to existing MACT but they cannot be less stringent than standards if EPA determines that the Section 112 of the Clean Air Act the average emission limitation existing standards are sufficiently (CAA) establishes a two-stage regulatory achieved by the best-performing 12 protective. NRDC v. EPA, 529 F.3d process to address emissions of percent of existing sources in the 1077, 1083 (District of Columbia Circuit, hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from category or subcategory (or the best- 2008). (‘‘If EPA determines that the stationary sources. In the first stage, performing five sources for categories or existing technology-based standards after EPA has identified categories of subcategories with fewer than 30 provide an ‘ample margin of safety,’ sources emitting one or more of the HAP sources). In developing MACT then the Agency is free to readopt those listed in section 112(b) of the CAA, standards, we must also consider standards during the residual risk section 112(d) of the CAA calls for us control options that are more stringent rulemaking.’’) EPA must also adopt more to promulgate NESHAP for those than the floor. We may establish stringent standards, if necessary, to ‘‘ ’’ sources. Major sources are those that standards more stringent than the floor prevent an adverse environmental emit or have the potential to emit any based on the consideration of the cost of effect,1 but must consider cost, energy, single HAP at a rate of 10 tons per year achieving the emissions reductions, any safety, and other relevant factors in (TPY) or more of a single HAP or 25 non-air quality health and doing so. TPY or more of any combination of environmental impacts, and energy Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA expressly HAP. For major sources, these requirements. preserves our use of a two-step process technology-based standards must reflect The EPA is then required to review for developing standards to address any the maximum degree of emission these technology-based standards and to residual risk and our interpretation of reductions of HAP achievable (after revise them ‘‘as necessary (taking into ‘‘ample margin of safety’’ developed in considering cost, energy requirements, account developments in practices, the National Emission Standards for and non-air quality health and processes, and control technologies)’’ no Hazardous Air Pollutants: Benzene environmental impacts) and are less frequently than every 8 years, under Emissions from Maleic Anhydride commonly referred to as maximum CAA section 112(d)(6). In conducting Plants, Ethylbenzene/Styrene Plants, achievable control technology (MACT) this review, EPA is not obliged to Benzene Storage Vessels, Benzene standards. completely recalculate the prior MACT Equipment Leaks, and Coke By-Product MACT standards are to reflect determination. NRDC v. EPA, 529 F.3d Recovery Plants (Benzene NESHAP) (54 application of measures, processes, 1077, 1084 (District of Columbia Circuit, FR 38044, September 14, 1989). The methods, systems, or techniques, 2008). including, but not limited to, measures The second stage in standard-setting 1 ‘‘Adverse environmental effect’’ is defined in which, (A) reduce the volume of or focuses on reducing any remaining CAA section 112(a)(7) as any significant and eliminate pollutants through process ‘‘residual’’ risk according to CAA section widespread adverse effect, which may be changes, substitution of materials or 112(f). This provision requires, first, that reasonably anticipated to wildlife, aquatic life, or natural resources, including adverse impacts on other modifications, (B) enclose systems EPA prepare a Report to Congress populations of endangered or threatened species or or processes to eliminate emissions, (C) discussing (among other things) significant degradation of environmental qualities capture or treat pollutants when methods of calculating risk posed (or over broad areas.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65072 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

first step in this process is the acceptability.’’ As explained more fully science policy assumptions and determination of acceptable risk. The in our Residual Risk Report to Congress, estimation uncertainties associated with second step provides for an ample EPA does not define ‘‘rigid line[s] of the risk measures, weight of the margin of safety to protect public health, acceptability,’’ but considers rather scientific evidence for human health which is the level at which the broad objectives to be weighed with a effects, other quantified or unquantified standards are set (unless a more series of other health measures and health effects, effects due to co-location stringent standard is required to factors (EPA–453/R–99–001, p. ES–11). of facilities, and co-emission of prevent, taking into consideration costs, The determination of what represents an pollutants.’’ Id. ‘‘acceptable’’ risk is based on a judgment energy, safety, and other relevant In some cases, these health measures of ‘‘what risks are acceptable in the factors, an adverse environmental and factors taken together may provide world in which we live’’ (Residual Risk effect). a more realistic description of the The terms ‘‘individual most exposed,’’ Report to Congress, p. 178, quoting the magnitude of risk in the exposed ‘‘acceptable level,’’ and ‘‘ample margin of Vinyl Chloride decision at 824 F.2d population than that provided by safety’’ are not specifically defined in 1165) recognizing that our world is not maximum individual lifetime cancer the CAA. However, CAA section risk-free. risk alone. As explained in the Benzene 112(f)(2)(B) preserves the interpretation In the Benzene NESHAP, we stated NESHAP, ‘‘[e]ven though the risks set out in the Benzene NESHAP, and the that ‘‘EPA will generally presume that if judged ‘‘acceptable’’ by EPA in the first United States Court of Appeals for the the risk to [the maximum exposed] District of Columbia Circuit in NRDC v. individual is no higher than step of the Vinyl Chloride inquiry are EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, concluded that approximately 1-in-10 thousand, that already low, the second step of the ‘‘ EPA’s interpretation of section 112(f)(2) risk level is considered acceptable.’’ 54 inquiry, determining an ample margin ’’ is a reasonable one. See NRDC v. EPA, FR 38045. We discussed the maximum of safety, again includes consideration 529 F.3d at 1083 (District of Columbia individual lifetime cancer risk as being of all of the health factors, and whether Circuit, ‘‘[S]ubsection 112(f)(2)(B) ‘‘the estimated risk that a person living to reduce the risks even further.’’ In the expressly incorporates EPA’s near a plant would have if he or she ample margin of safety decision process, interpretation of the Clean Air Act from were exposed to the maximum pollutant the Agency again considers all of the the Benzene standard, complete with a concentrations for 70 years.’’ Id. We health risks and other health citation to the Federal Register’’). explained that this measure of risk ‘‘is information considered in the first step. (District of Columbia Circuit 2008). See an estimate of the upper bound of risk Beyond that information, additional also, A Legislative History of the Clean based on conservative assumptions, factors relating to the appropriate level Air Act Amendments of 1990, volume 1, such as continuous exposure for 24 of control will also be considered, p. 877 (Senate debate on Conference hours per day for 70 years.’’ Id. We including costs and economic impacts Report). We notified Congress in the acknowledge that maximum individual of controls, technological feasibility, Residual Risk Report to Congress that lifetime cancer risk ‘‘does not uncertainties, and any other relevant we intended to use the Benzene necessarily reflect the true risk, but factors. Considering all of these factors, NESHAP approach in making CAA displays a conservative risk level which the Agency will establish the standard section 112(f) residual risk is an upper-bound that is unlikely to be at a level that provides an ample margin determinations (EPA–453/R–99–001, p. exceeded.’’ Id. of safety to protect the public health, as ES–11). Understanding that there are both required by CAA section 112(f). 54 FR In the Benzene NESHAP, we stated as benefits and limitations to using 38046. an overall objective: maximum individual lifetime cancer risk as a metric for determining B. How did we consider the risk results * * * in protecting public health with an acceptability, we acknowledged in the in making decisions for this proposal? ample margin of safety, we strive to provide 1989 Benzene NESHAP that maximum feasible protection against risks to As discussed in section III.A. of this ‘‘consideration of maximum individual health from hazardous air pollutants by (1) preamble, we apply a two-step process risk * * * must take into account the protecting the greatest number of persons for developing standards to address strengths and weaknesses of this possible to an individual lifetime risk level residual risk. In the first step, EPA measure of risk.’’ Id. Consequently, the no higher than approximately 1-in-1 million; determines if risks are acceptable. This and (2) limiting to no higher than presumptive risk level of 100-in-1 determination ‘‘considers all health approximately 1-in-10 thousand [i.e., 100-in- million (1-in-10 thousand) provides a information, including risk estimation 1 million] the estimated risk that a person benchmark for judging the acceptability uncertainty, and includes a presumptive living near a facility would have if he or she of maximum individual lifetime cancer were exposed to the maximum pollutant limit on maximum individual lifetime risk, but does not constitute a rigid line 2 concentrations for 70 years. for making that determination. [cancer] risk (MIR) of approximately 1- The Agency also stated that, ‘‘The EPA The Agency also explained in the in-10 thousand [i.e., 100-in-1 million].’’ also considers incidence (the number of 1989 Benzene NESHAP the following: 54 FR 38045. In the second step of the persons estimated to suffer cancer or ‘‘In establishing a presumption for MIR process, EPA sets the standard at a level other serious health effects as a result of [maximum individual cancer risk], that provides an ample margin of safety exposure to a pollutant) to be an rather than a rigid line for acceptability, ‘‘in consideration of all health important measure of the health risk to the Agency intends to weigh it with a information, including the number of the exposed population. Incidence series of other health measures and persons at risk levels higher than measures the extent of health risk to the factors. These include the overall approximately 1-in-1 million, as well as exposed population as a whole, by incidence of cancer or other serious other relevant factors, including costs providing an estimate of the occurrence health effects within the exposed and economic impacts, technological of cancer or other serious health effects population, the numbers of persons in the exposed population.’’ The Agency exposed within each individual lifetime 2 Although defined as ‘‘maximum individual ‘‘ risk,’’ MIR refers only to cancer risk. MIR, one went on to conclude that estimated risk range and associated incidence metric for assessing cancer risk, is the estimated incidence would be weighed along with within, typically, a 50-kilometer (km) risk were an individual exposed to the maximum other health risk information in judging exposure radius around facilities, the level of a pollutant for a lifetime.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65073

feasibility, and other factors relevant to economic impacts of controls, EPA wishes to point out that certain each particular decision.’’ Id. technological feasibility, uncertainties, health information has not been In past residual risk determinations, and any other relevant factors.’’ Id. considered in these decisions. In EPA presented a number of human The Agency acknowledges that the assessing risks to populations in the health risk metrics associated with Benzene NESHAP provide flexibility vicinity of the facilities in each category, emissions from the category under regarding what factors the EPA might we present estimates of risk associated review, including: The MIR; the consider in making our determinations with HAP emissions from the source numbers of persons in various risk and how they might be weighed for each category alone (source category risk ranges; cancer incidence; the maximum source category. In responding to estimates) and HAP emissions from the non-cancer hazard index (HI); and the comment on our policy under the entire facilities at which the covered maximum acute non-cancer hazard. In Benzene NESHAP, EPA explained that: source categories are located (facility- estimating risks, EPA considered source ‘‘The policy chosen by the wide risk estimates). We have not categories under review that are located Administrator permits consideration of presented estimates of total HAP near each other and that affect the same multiple measures of health risk. Not inhalation risks from all sources in the population. EPA provided estimates of only can the MIR figure be considered, vicinity of the covered sources (i.e., the the expected difference in actual but also incidence, the presence of non- sum of risks from ambient levels, emissions from the source category cancer health effects, and the emissions from the source category, under review and emissions allowed uncertainties of the risk estimates. In facility-wide emissions, and emissions pursuant to the source category MACT this way, the effect on the most exposed from other facilities nearby). standard. EPA also discussed and individuals can be reviewed as well as The Agency understands the potential considered risk estimation the impact on the general public. These importance of considering an uncertainties. EPA is providing this factors can then be weighed in each individual’s total exposure to HAP in same type of information in support of individual case. This approach complies addition to considering exposure to these actions. with the Vinyl Chloride mandate that HAP emissions from the source category However, in contrast to past the Administrator ascertain an and facility. This is particularly determinations, this notice presents and acceptable level of risk to the public by important when assessing non-cancer considers additional measures of health employing [her] expertise to assess risks, where pollutant-specific exposure information to support our decision- available data. It also complies with the levels (e.g., Reference Concentration making. These are discussed in more Congressional intent behind the CAA, (RfC)) are based on the assumption that detail in later sections of this notice, which did not exclude the use of any thresholds exist for adverse health and include: particular measure of public health risk effects. For example, the Agency • Estimates of ‘‘total facility’’ cancer from the EPA’s consideration with recognizes that, although exposures and non-cancer risk (risk from all HAP respect to CAA section 112 regulations, attributable to emissions from a source emissions from the facility at which the and, thereby, implicitly permits category or facility alone may not source category is located). consideration of any and all measures of indicate the potential for increased risk • Demographic analyses (analyses of health risk which the Administrator, in of adverse non-cancer health effects in the distributions of HAP-related cancer [her] judgment, believes are appropriate a population, the exposures resulting risks and non-cancer risks, across to determining what will ‘protect the from emissions from the facility in different social, demographic, and public health.’ ’’ 54 FR 38057. combination with emissions from all of economic groups within the populations For example, the level of the MIR is the other sources (e.g., other facilities) to living near the facilities where these only one factor to be weighed in which an individual is exposed may be source categories are located). determining acceptability of risks. The sufficient to result in increased risk of • Additional estimates of the risks Benzene NESHAP explain ‘‘an MIR of adverse non-cancer health effects. In associated with emissions allowed by approximately 1-in-10 thousand should May 2010, the EPA Science Advisory the MACT standard. ordinarily be the upper end of the range Board (SAB) advised us ‘‘* * * that RTR The Agency is considering all of this of acceptability. As risks increase above assessments will be most useful to available health information to inform this benchmark, they become decision makers and communities if our determinations of risk acceptability presumptively less acceptable under results are presented in the broader and ample margin of safety under CAA CAA section 112, and would be context of aggregate and cumulative section 112(f). Specifically, as explained weighed with the other health risk risks, including background in the Benzene NESHAP, ‘‘the first step measures and information in making an concentrations and contributions from judgment on acceptability cannot be overall judgment on acceptability. Or, other sources in the area.’’ 3 reduced to any single factor,’’ and, thus, the Agency may find, in a particular While we are interested in placing ‘‘[t]he Administrator believes that the case, that a risk that includes MIR less source category and facility-wide HAP acceptability of risk under section 112 is than the presumptively acceptable level risks in the context of total HAP risks best judged on the basis of a broad set is unacceptable in the light of other from all sources combined in the of health risk measures and health risk factors.’’ Id. at 38045. vicinity of each source, we are information.’’ 54 FR 38044 and 38046, Similarly, with regard to the ample concerned about the uncertainties of September 14, 1989. Similarly, with margin of safety analysis, the Benzene doing so. At this point, we believe that regard to making the ample margin of NESHAP state that: ‘‘* * * EPA believes such estimates of total HAP risks will safety determination, the Benzene the relative weight of the many factors NESHAP state that ‘‘[I]n the ample that can be considered in selecting an 3 EPA’s responses to this and all other key margin decision, the Agency again ample margin of safety can only be recommendations of the SAB’s advisory on RTR risk assessment methodologies (which is available considers all of the health risk and other determined for each specific source at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ health information considered in the category. This occurs mainly because 4AB3966E263D943A8525771F00668381/$File/EPA- first step. Beyond that information, technological and economic factors SAB-10-007-unsigned.pdf) are outlined in a memo additional factors relating to the (along with the health-related factors) to this rulemaking docket from David Guinnup entitled, EPA’s Actions in Response to the Key appropriate level of control will also be vary from source category to source Recommendations of the SAB Review of RTR Risk considered, including cost and category.’’ Id. at 38061. Assessment Methodologies.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65074 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

have significantly greater associated section 112(d) standard for a specific anticipate all upset situations. After a uncertainties than for the source source category, these two provisions certain point, the transgression of category or facility-wide estimates, exempt sources within that source regulatory limits caused by hence, compounding the uncertainty in category from the requirement to ‘uncontrollable acts of third parties,’ any such comparison. This is because comply with the otherwise applicable such as strikes, sabotage, operator we have not conducted a detailed emission standard during periods of intoxication, or insanity, and a variety technical review of HAP emissions data SSM. We are proposing to eliminate the of other eventualities, must be a matter for source categories and facilities that SSM exemption in each of the six for the administrative exercise of case- have not previously undergone an RTR MACT standards addressed in this by-case enforcement discretion, not for review or are not currently undergoing proposal. Consistent with Sierra Club v. specification in advance by regulation.’’) such review. We are requesting EPA, we are proposing that the Further, it is reasonable to interpret comment on whether and how best to established standards in these rules CAA section 112(d) as not requiring estimate and evaluate total HAP apply at all times. We are also proposing EPA to account for malfunctions in exposure in our assessments, and, in to revise the General Provisions table in setting emissions standards. For particular, on whether and how it might each of the six MACT standards in example, we note that CAA section 112 be appropriate to use information from several respects. For example, we are uses the concept of ‘‘best performing’’ EPA’s National Air Toxics Assessment removing the General Provisions’ sources in defining MACT, the level of (NATA) to support such estimates. We requirement that the source develop an stringency that major source standards are also seeking comment on how best SSM plan. We are also removing certain must meet. Applying the concept of to consider various types and scales of recordkeeping and reporting ‘‘best performing’’ to a source that is risk estimates when making our requirements related to the SSM malfunctioning presents significant acceptability and ample margin of safety exemption, but we are retaining the difficulties. The goal of best performing determinations under CAA section recordkeeping and related requirements sources is to operate in such a way as 112(f). Additionally, we are seeking for malfunctions and request public to avoid malfunctions of their units. recommendations for any other comment on the requirements. EPA has Moreover, even if malfunctions were comparative measures that may be attempted to ensure that regulatory considered a distinct operating mode, useful in the assessment of the language relating to the SSM exemption we believe it would be impracticable to distribution of HAP risks across has been removed. We solicit comment take malfunctions into account in potentially affected demographic on whether we have overlooked any setting CAA section 112(d) standards. groups. regulatory provisions that might be As noted above, by definition, inappropriate, unnecessary, or malfunctions are sudden and C. What other actions are we addressing unexpected events, and it would be in this proposal? redundant based on our proposal to remove the exemption from compliance difficult to set a standard that takes into In this proposal, we are addressing with the emission limit during periods account the myriad different types of three additional types of action for some of SSM. malfunctions that can occur across all or all of these six MACT standards. For sources in each source category. eight source categories subject to three Periods of startup, normal operations, Malfunctions can also vary in of the MACT standards, we identified and shutdown are all predictable and frequency, degree, and duration, further significant emission sources within the routine aspects of a source’s operations. complicating standard setting. categories for which standards were not In contrast, malfunction is defined as a Under this proposal, in the event that previously developed. We are proposing ‘‘sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably a source fails to comply with the MACT standards for these emission preventable failure of air pollution applicable CAA section 112(d) sources pursuant to CAA section control and monitoring equipment, standards as a result of a malfunction 112(d)(2) and (3). For four source process equipment or a process to event, EPA would determine an categories subject to two of the MACT operate in a normal or usual manner appropriate response based on, among standards, we are also proposing ***’’ (40 CFR 63.2). EPA believes that other things, the good faith efforts of the changes to correct editorial errors, to a malfunction should not be viewed as source to minimize emissions during make clarifications, and to address a distinct operating mode, and, malfunction periods, including issues with implementation or therefore, any emissions that occur preventative and corrective actions, as determining compliance. We are also during malfunctions do not need to be well as root cause analyses to ascertain proposing to revise requirements in factored into development of CAA and rectify excess emissions. EPA each of the six MACT standards related section 112(d) standards, which, once would also consider whether the to emissions during periods of startup, promulgated, apply at all times. In source’s failure to comply with the CAA shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). Mossville Environmental Action Now v. section 112(d) standard was, in fact, The United States Court of Appeals EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1242 (District of ‘‘sudden, infrequent, not reasonably for the District of Columbia Circuit Columbia Circuit 2004), the Court preventable’’ and was not instead vacated portions of two provisions in upheld as reasonable standards that had ‘‘caused in part by poor maintenance or EPA’s CAA section 112 regulations factored in variability of emissions careless operation.’’ 40 CRF 63.2 governing the emissions of HAP during under all operating conditions. (definition of malfunction). periods of SSM. Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 However, nothing in CAA section Finally, EPA recognizes that, even F.3d 1019 (District of Columbia Circuit, 112(d) or in case law requires that EPA equipment that is properly designed and 2008), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 1735 (U.S. anticipate and account for the maintained can sometimes fail, and that 2010). Specifically, the Court vacated innumerable types of potential such failure can sometimes cause or the SSM exemption contained in 40 malfunction events in setting emission contribute to an exceedance of the CFR 63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1), that is part of standards. See, Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, relevant emission standard. (See, e.g., a regulation, commonly referred to as 590 F.2d 1011, 1058 (District of State Implementation Plans: Policy the General Provisions Rule, that EPA Columbia Circuit 1978) (‘‘In the nature Regarding Excessive Emissions During promulgated under section 112 of the of things, no general limit, individual Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown CAA. When incorporated into a CAA permit, or even any upset provision can (September 20, 1999); Policy on Excess

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65075

Emissions During Startup, Shutdown, Production, Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production).5 Comments were received Maintenance, and Malfunctions Production, Neoprene Production, and on that proposal, but no final action has (February 15, 1983)). Therefore, Polysulfide Rubber Production), we been taken. This proposal presents consistent with our recently previously proposed and promulgated a additional analyses we have performed promulgated final amendments to decision not to revise the standards for since the proposal, for each of these regulations addressing the Portland purposes of the RTR provisions in CAA source categories with regard to the Cement category (75 FR 54970, sections 112(d)(6) and (f)(2).4 See 72 FR RTR. In addition, we are proposing September 9, 2010), we are proposing to 70543, December 12, 2007 (proposed revisions to the SSM provisions in the add regulatory language providing an rule), and 73 FR 76220, December 16, existing standards for these source affirmative defense against civil 2008 (final rule). These four categories categories, and, for several of the source penalties for exceedances of emission were determined to be ‘‘low-risk,’’ as the categories, we are proposing MACT limits that are caused by malfunctions maximum lifetime individual cancer standards under CAA sections 112(d)(2) in each of the six MACT standards risks were less than 1-in-1-million, and and (3) for emission points that were not addressed in this proposal. We are there were no other health concerns of previously regulated. proposing to define ‘‘affirmative significance. Therefore, we determined 3. Categories for Which RTR Decisions defense’’ to mean, in the context of an that conducting additional risk analyses Have Not Been Proposed enforcement proceeding, a response or for these categories was not warranted. defense put forward by a defendant, We are not re-opening the RTR in this We have not previously proposed any regarding which the defendant has the notice for these four source categories, RTR actions for the four source burden of proof, and the merits of which and do not seek additional comments on categories (Hard and Decorative are independently and objectively that prior RTR. Chromium Electroplating, Chromium evaluated in a judicial or administrative However, for three of these four Anodizing Tanks, and Steel Pickling— proceeding. We are also proposing Group I Polymers and Resins source HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric regulatory provisions to specify the categories (Butyl Rubber Production, Acid Regeneration Plants) covered by elements that are necessary to establish Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production, the Chromium Electroplating and Steel this affirmative defense. (See 40 CFR and Neoprene Production), we have Pickling MACT standards. Therefore, 22.24). The proposed criteria would identified significant emission sources this is our initial proposed action for ensure that the affirmative defense is for which MACT standards were not these two MACT standards to address available only where the event that previously developed. In this proposal, the RTR requirement. In addition, we identified significant advances in the causes an exceedance of the emission we are proposing MACT standards for housekeeping requirements in the limit meets the narrow definition of these emission sources, and we are also chromium source categories for which malfunction in 40 CFR 63.2 (sudden, proposing that the residual risks after we are proposing MACT standards. We infrequent, not reasonably preventable, implementation of these new MACT are also proposing revisions to the and not caused by poor maintenance standards will not change our previous provisions addressing SSM to ensure and/or careless operation). The finding that these source categories they are consistent with the Court proposed criteria also are designed to present low risks and that our obligation decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d ensure that steps are taken to correct the to review the residual risk under CAA 1019, and we are proposing changes to malfunction, to minimize emissions, section 112(f) has also been satisfied. and to prevent future malfunctions. In correct editorial errors, make any judicial or administrative 2. Categories for Which RTR Decisions clarifications, or address issues with proceeding, the Administrator would be Have Been Proposed, but Not implementation or determining able to challenge the assertion of the Promulgated compliance. affirmative defense and, if the For eight source categories covered IV. Analyses Performed respondent has not met its burden of under four of the MACT standards proving all of the requirements in the As discussed above, in this notice, we addressed in this proposal, we are taking the following actions: (1) We affirmative defense, appropriate previously performed an RTR review penalties could be assessed in are newly proposing action or and proposed that no revisions of the supplementing our previous proposal to accordance with section 113 of the CAA MACT standards were necessary to (see also 40 CFR 22.77). address the RTR requirements of CAA address residual risk and that it was not sections 112(d)(6) and (f)(2) for 16 D. What specific RTR actions have necessary to revise the existing source categories covered by six previously been taken for these source standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). different MACT standards; (2) for eight categories? See 73 FR 60423, October 10, 2008. The of the source categories, we are MACT standards addressed in this For some of the 16 source categories proposing MACT standards for proposal included Marine Tank Vessel covered by these six MACT standards, significant emission sources that are not Loading Operations (MTVLO), Printing we have previously taken certain currently subject to emission standards and Publishing Industry, actions under the RTR program. under the MACT standards; (3) we are Pharmaceuticals Production, and five of Following is a summary of these proposing to revise the provisions in the source categories covered under previous actions and also a summary of each of these six MACT standards to Group I Polymers and Resins additional reviews we have address SSM to ensure that the SSM (Epichlorohydrin Elastomers, subsequently conducted for each source provisions are consistent with the Court HypalonTM Production, Nitrile category. Butadiene Rubber Production, 5 The Mineral Wool Production source category 1. Categories for Which RTR Decisions Polybutadiene Rubber Production, and was also addressed in that same October 2008 Have Been Finalized proposal. We are not proposing any additional Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex action for that source category in this proposal, but There are nine source categories will do so in a separate future action. We note that 4 regulated under the Group I Polymers There are no longer any operating facilities in there are no longer any operating facilities in the the United States that produce polysulfide rubber, United States that produce HypalonTM, and we do and Resins MACT standard. For four of and we do not anticipate any will begin to operate not anticipate that any will begin operation in the these source categories (Butyl Rubber in the future. future.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65076 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. Rubber and Latex Production), the necessary to the data set used for the 3d 1019; and (4) for two of the MACT preliminary data sets were based on proposal. For the Polymers and Resins standards, we are proposing information we collected directly from I MACT standard source categories amendments to correct editorial errors, industry on emissions data and included in the October 10, 2008, to make clarifications, and to address emissions release characteristics. For proposal, updates have been made issues with implementation or the MTVLO, Pharmaceuticals based on information received in determining compliance. Production, and the Printing and response to an industry information Publishing Industry source categories, collection survey. Documentation for A. How did we estimate risk posed by we created the preliminary data sets industry contacts, surveys, and other the source categories? using data in the 2002 National information gathered to support these To support the proposed decision Emissions Inventory (NEI) Final changes is available in the docket for under the RTR for each source category, Inventory, Version 1 (made publicly this action. EPA conducted risk assessments that available on February 26, 2006), For the four source categories not provided estimates of the MIR posed by supplemented by data collected directly included in the December 10, 2008, the HAP emissions from each source in from industry when available. The NEI proposal, we compiled preliminary data a category and by each source category, is a database that contains information sets using the best available the distribution of cancer risks within about sources that emit criteria air information, reviewed the data, and the exposed populations, cancer pollutants and their precursors, and made changes where necessary. For the incidence, HI for chronic exposures to HAP. The database includes estimates of three Chromium Electroplating MACT HAP with non-cancer health effects, annual air pollutant emissions from standard source categories (Chromium hazard quotients (HQ) for acute point, nonpoint, and mobile sources in Anodizing Tanks, Decorative Chromium exposures to HAP with non-cancer the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Electroplating, and Hard Chromium health effects, and an evaluation of the Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. The Electroplating) and the Steel Pickling potential for adverse environmental EPA collects this information and source category, we compiled the effects. The risk assessments consisted releases an updated version of the NEI preliminary data sets using data in the of seven primary steps, as discussed database every 3 years. 2005 NEI. Then, for the Steel Pickling below. In the March 29, 2007, ANPRM, we source category, seven facilities were The docket for this rulemaking specifically requested comment on, and contacted to verify their emissions and contains the following documents updates to, these preliminary data sets. emissions release characteristic data, which provide more information on the We received comments on emissions and we updated the data set based on risk assessment inputs and models, data and emissions release the information collected. This updated Draft Residual Risk Assessment for 9 characteristics data for facilities in these data set was used to conduct the risk Source Categories, Draft Residual Risk source categories. These comments were assessments and other analyses that Assessment for Steel Pickling, and Draft reviewed, considered, and the emissions form the bases for the proposed actions. Residual Risk Assessment for Chromium information was adjusted where we For the Chromium Electroplating Electroplating, as well as the concluded the comments supported source categories, a review of the 2005 memoranda for the Printing and such adjustment. After incorporation of NEI data indicated that not all Publishing Industry, MTVLO, changes to the data sets from this public chromium electroplating facilities were Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production, data review process, data sets were included in the data set. To develop an Polybutadiene Rubber Production, created that were used to conduct the emissions inventory for the entire Styrene Butadiene Rubber Production, risk assessments and other analyses that industry that could be used for Nitrile Butadiene Production, and formed the basis for the proposed modeling, an additional data set was Pharmaceuticals Production source actions included in the October 10, developed based on facilities with categories. 2008, proposal. known addresses—a total of 1,629 Since the proposal, we have 1. Establishing the Nature and facilities compared to 122 facilities in continued to scrutinize the data sets for Magnitude of Actual Emissions and the NEI. Emissions for each type of these source categories and to review Identifying the Emissions Release plant were estimated based on the additional data that has become Characteristics model plants developed for the original available since the October 10, 2008, Chromium Electroplating MACT For the source categories included in proposal. For the Printing and standard,6 with hard chromium model the October 10, 2008, proposal, we Publishing Industry source category, we plants having the highest emissions, compiled preliminary data sets using became aware that some facilities had followed by decorative chromium readily-available information, reviewed closed. We also reviewed the emissions electroplating, and then chromium the data, and made changes where data and had questions about the anodizing. If the type of electroplating necessary, and shared these data with emissions of certain HAP. After contact performed at a specific plant was the public via an Advanced Notice of with industry, it was determined that unknown, we assumed these facilities Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM). 72 FR those emissions did not occur from were hard chrome electroplating when 29287, March 29, 2007. The data sets those facilities. We updated the Printing we estimated emissions and risks for were then updated based on comments and Publishing Industry data set to those facilities. Although we knew that, received on the ANPRM and, in some reflect these changes in operating by doing so, we would be cases, with additional information facilities and emissions. For the MTVLO overestimating emissions of chromium, gathered by EPA. For the five Group I data set, we had concerns that several and, therefore, also of risk, we made this Polymers and Resins I Production emission points in our existing data set conservative assumption because we source categories included in the were mislabeled, and, thus, we did not have complete information, and October 2008 proposal (Epichlorohydrin extracted more recent data from the NEI. we chose to overestimate to preserve an Elastomers Production, HypalonTM For this source category, the data set is Production, Nitrile Butadiene Rubber based on the 2005 NEI. For the 6 See EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0600, Model Plant Production, Polybutadiene Rubber Pharmaceuticals Production source Data Used to Estimate Risk from Chromium Production, and Styrene Butadiene category data set, no changes are Electroplating Sources.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65077

ample margin of safety in the risk if there was information to suggest Bureau census block 8 internal point assessment upon which our risk several facilities in a source category locations and populations provides the modeling would be based. This analysis were controlling storage tank emissions basis of human exposure calculations and a supplemental assessment are fully by 98 percent while the MACT (Census, 2000). In addition, the census described in section V.A. standards required only 92-percent library includes the elevation and 2. Establishing the Relationship control, we would estimate that MACT- controlling hill height for each census Between Actual Emissions and MACT- allowable emissions from these block, which are also used in dispersion Allowable Emissions Levels emission points could be as much as calculations. A third library of pollutant four times higher (8-percent allowable unit risk factors and other health The available emissions data in the emissions compared with 2-percent benchmarks is used to estimate health NEI and from other sources typically actually emitted), and the ratio of represent the mass of emissions actually risks. These risk factors and health MACT-allowable to actual would be 4:1 benchmarks are the latest values emitted during the specified annual for this emission point type at the time period. These ‘‘actual’’ emission recommended by EPA for HAP and facilities in this source category. After other toxic air pollutants. These values levels are often lower than the level of developing these ratios for each emissions that a facility might be are available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ emission point type in each source allowed to emit and still comply with atw/toxsource/summary.html and are category, we next applied these ratios the MACT standard. The emissions discussed in more detail later in this on a facility-by-facility basis to the level allowed to be emitted by the section. maximum chronic risk values from the MACT standard is referred to as the inhalation risk assessment to obtain In developing the risk assessment for ‘‘MACT-allowable’’ emissions level. This chronic exposures, we used the represents the highest emission level facility-specific maximum risk values based on MACT-allowable emissions. estimated annual average ambient air that could be emitted by the facility concentration of each of the HAP without violating the MACT standard. 3. Conducting Dispersion Modeling, emitted by each source for which we We discussed the use of both MACT- Determining Inhalation Exposures, and have emissions data in the source allowable and actual emissions in the Estimating Individual and Population category. The air concentrations at each final Coke Oven Batteries residual risk Inhalation Risks nearby census block centroid were used rule (70 FR 19998–19999, April 15, as a surrogate for the chronic inhalation 2005) and in the proposed and final Both long-term and short-term exposure concentration for all the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) inhalation exposure concentrations and residual risk rules (71 FR 34428, June health risks from each of the source people who reside in that census block. 14, 2006, and 71 FR 76609, December categories addressed in this proposal We calculated the MIR for each facility 21, 2006, respectively). In those were estimated using the Human as the cancer risk associated with a previous actions, we noted that Exposure Model (Community and lifetime (70-year period) of exposure to assessing the risks at the MACT- Sector HEM–3 version 1.1.0). The HEM– the maximum concentration at the allowable level is inherently reasonable 3 performs three of the primary risk centroid of an inhabited census block. since these risks reflect the maximum assessment activities listed above: (1) Individual cancer risks were calculated level sources could emit and still Conducting dispersion modeling to as the lifetime exposure to the ambient comply with national emission estimate the concentrations of HAP in concentration of each of the HAP standards. But we also explained that it ambient air, (2) estimating long-term multiplied by its Unit Risk Estimate is reasonable to consider actual and short-term inhalation exposures to (URE), which is an upper bound emissions, where such data are individuals residing within 50 km of the estimate of an individual’s probability available, in both steps of the risk modeled sources, and (3) estimating of contracting cancer over a lifetime of analysis, in accordance with the individual and population-level exposure to a concentration of 1 Benzene NESHAP. (54 FR 38044, inhalation risks using the exposure microgram of the pollutant per cubic September 14, 1989.) It is reasonable to estimates and quantitative dose- meter of air. For residual risk consider actual emissions because response information. assessments, we generally use URE sources typically seek to perform better The dispersion model used by HEM– values from EPA’s Integrated Risk than required by emission standards to Information System (IRIS).9 For provide an operational cushion to 3 is AERMOD, which is one of EPA’s preferred models for assessing pollutant carcinogenic pollutants without EPA accommodate the variability in IRIS values, we look to other reputable manufacturing processes and control concentrations from industrial facilities.7 To perform the dispersion sources of cancer dose-response values, device performance. often using California Environmental As described above, the actual modeling and to develop the preliminary risk estimates, HEM–3 Protection Agency (CalEPA) URE emissions data were compiled based on values, where available. In cases where the NEI, information gathered from draws on three data libraries. The first new, scientifically credible dose facilities and States, and information is a library of meteorological data, response values have been developed in received in response to the ANPRM for which is used for dispersion a manner consistent with EPA several of the source categories. To calculations. This library includes 1 guidelines and have undergone a peer estimate emissions at the MACT- year of hourly surface and upper air review process similar to that used by allowable level, we developed a ratio of observations for 130 meteorological MACT-allowable to actual emissions for stations, selected to provide coverage of EPA, we may use such dose-response each emissions source type in each the United States and Puerto Rico. A values in place of, or in addition to, source category, based on the level of second library of United States Census other values. control required by the MACT standard compared to the level of reported actual 7 U.S. EPA. Revision to the Guideline on Air 8 A census block is generally the smallest Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General geographic area for which census statistics are emissions and available information on Purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) Dispersion tabulated. the level of control achieved by the Model and Other Revisions (70 FR 68218, 9 The IRIS information is available at http:// emissions controls in use. For example, November 9, 2005). www.epa.gov/IRIS.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65078 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

We note here that several carcinogens for the population within 50 km of any or below which no adverse health have a mutagenic mode of action.10 For source were also estimated for the effects are anticipated for a specified these compounds, the age-dependent source category as part of these exposure duration is termed the REL. adjustment factors described in EPA’s assessments by summing individual REL values are based on the most Supplemental Guidance for Assessing risks. A distance of 50 km is consistent sensitive, relevant, adverse health effect Susceptibility from Early-Life Exposure with both the analysis supporting the reported in the medical and to Carcinogens 11 were applied. This 1989 Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044) toxicological literature. REL values are adjustment has the effect of increasing and the limitations of Gaussian designed to protect the most sensitive the estimated lifetime risks for these dispersion modeling. individuals in the population by the pollutants by a factor of 1.6.12 In To assess risk of non-cancer health inclusion of margins of safety. Since addition, although only a small fraction effects from chronic exposures, we margins of safety are incorporated to of the total polycyclic organic matter summed the HQ for each of the HAP address data gaps and uncertainties, (POM) emissions were reported as that affects a common target organ exceeding the REL value does not individual compounds, EPA expresses system to obtain the HI for that target automatically indicate an adverse health carcinogenic potency for compounds in organ system (or target organ-specific impact.’’ this group in terms of benzo[a]pyrene HI, TOSHI). The HQ is the estimated equivalence, based on evidence that exposure divided by the chronic AEGL values were derived in carcinogenic POM have the same reference level, which is either the U.S. response to recommendations from the mutagenic mechanism of action as does EPA RfC, defined as ‘‘an estimate (with National Research Council (NRC). As benzo[a]pyrene. For this reason, EPA’s uncertainty spanning perhaps an order described in ‘‘Standing Operating Science Policy Council 13 recommends of magnitude) of a continuous Procedures (SOP) of the National applying the Supplemental Guidance to inhalation exposure to the human Advisory Committee on Acute Exposure all carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic population (including sensitive Guideline Levels for Hazardous hydrocarbons for which risk estimates subgroups) that is likely to be without Substances’’ (http://www.epa.gov/ are based on relative potency. an appreciable risk of deleterious effects opptintr/aegl/pubs/sop.pdf),15 ‘‘the Accordingly, we have applied the during a lifetime,’’ or, in cases where an NRC’s previous name for acute exposure Supplemental Guidance to all RfC is not available, the CalEPA Chronic levels—community emergency exposure unspeciated POM mixtures. Reference Exposure Level (REL), levels (CEEL)— was replaced by the Incremental individual lifetime defined as ‘‘the concentration level at or term AEGL to reflect the broad cancer risks associated with emissions below which no adverse health effects application of these values to planning, from the source category were estimated are anticipated for a specified exposure response, and prevention in the as the sum of the risks for each of the duration.’’ As noted above, in cases community, the workplace, carcinogenic HAP (including those where new, scientifically credible dose- transportation, the military, and the classified as carcinogenic to humans, response values have been developed in remediation of Superfund sites.’’ This likely to be carcinogenic to humans, and a manner consistent with EPA document also states that AEGL values suggestive evidence of carcinogenic guidelines and have undergone a peer ‘‘represent threshold exposure limits for potential 14) emitted by the modeled review process similar to that used by the general public and are applicable to source. Cancer incidence and the EPA, we may use those dose-response emergency exposures ranging from 10 distribution of individual cancer risks values in place of, or in addition to, minutes to 8 hours.’’ The document lays other values. out the purpose and objectives of AEGL 10 U.S. EPA, 2006. Performing risk assessments Screening estimates of acute by stating (page 21) that ‘‘the primary that include carcinogens described in the exposures and risks were also evaluated purpose of the AEGL program and the Supplemental Guidance as having a mutagenic for each of the HAP at the point of NAC/AEGL Committee is to develop mode of action. Science Policy Council Cancer Guidelines Implementation Workgroup highest off-site exposure for each facility guideline levels for once-in-a-lifetime, Communication II: Memo from W.H. Farland dated (i.e., not just the census block centroids) short-term exposures to airborne June 14, 2006. http://epa.gov/osa/spc/pdfs/ assuming that a person is located at this concentrations of acutely toxic, high- CGIWGCommunication_II.pdf. spot at a time when both the peak priority chemicals.’’ In detailing the 11 U.S. EPA, 2005. Supplemental Guidance for (hourly) emission rate and hourly Assessing Early-Life Exposure to Carcinogens. EPA/ intended application of AEGL values, 630/R–03/003F. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/ dispersion conditions (1991 calendar the document states (page 31) that ’’[i]t childrens_supplement_final.pdf. year data) occur. In each case, acute HQ is anticipated that the AEGL values will 12 Only one of these mutagenic compounds, values were calculated using best be used for regulatory and benzo[a]pyrene, is emitted by any of the sources available, short-term health threshold nonregulatory purposes by United covered by this proposal. values. These acute threshold values 13 U.S. EPA, 2005. Science Policy Council Cancer States Federal and State agencies, and Guidelines Implementation Workgroup include REL, Acute Exposure Guideline possibly the international community in Communication I: Memo from W.H. Farland dated Levels (AEGL), and Emergency conjunction with chemical emergency October 4, 2005, to Science Policy Council. Response Planning Guidelines (ERPG) response, planning, and prevention http://www.epa.gov/osa/spc/pdfs/canguid1.pdf. for 1-hour exposure durations. As programs. More specifically, the AEGL 14 These classifications also coincide with the discussed below, we used conservative terms ‘‘known carcinogen, probable carcinogen, and values will be used for conducting possible carcinogen,’’ respectively, which are the assumptions for emission rates, various risk assessments to aid in the terms advocated in the EPA’s previous Guidelines meteorology, and exposure location for development of emergency for Carcinogen Risk Assessment, published in 1986 our acute analysis. preparedness and prevention plans, as (51 FR 33992, September 24, 1986). Summing the As described in the CalEPA’s Air risks of these individual compounds to obtain the well as real-time emergency response cumulative cancer risks is an approach that was Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk actions, for accidental chemical releases recommended by the EPA’s SAB in their 2002 peer Assessment Guidelines, Part I, The at fixed facilities and from transport review of EPA’s NATA entitled, NATA—Evaluating Determination of Acute Reference carriers.’’ the National-scale Air Toxics Assessment 1996 Exposure Levels for Airborne Toxicants, Data—an SAB Advisory, available at: http:// yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ an acute REL value (http:// 15 NAS, 2001. Standing Operating Procedures for 214C6E915BB04E14852570CA007A682C/$File/ www.oehha.ca.gov/air/pdf/acuterel.pdf) Developing Acute Exposure Levels for Hazardous ecadv02001.pdf. is defined as ‘‘the concentration level at Chemicals, page 2.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65079

The AEGL–1 value is then specifically 2 values are compared to our modeled distinguish facility property from an defined as ‘‘the airborne concentration exposure levels to screen for potential area where the public could be exposed. of a substance above which it is acute concerns. Ideally, we would prefer to have predicted that the general population, Acute REL values for 1-hour exposure continuous measurements over time to including susceptible individuals, could durations are typically lower than their see how the emissions vary by each experience notable discomfort, corresponding AEGL–1 and ERPG–1 hour over an entire year. Having a irritation, or certain asymptomatic values. Even though their definitions are frequency distribution of hourly nonsensory effects. However, the effects slightly different, AEGL–1 values are emission rates over a year would allow are not disabling and are transient and often the same as the corresponding us to perform a probabilistic analysis to reversible upon cessation of exposure.’’ ERPG–1 values, and AEGL–2 values are estimate potential threshold The document also notes (page 3) that, often equal to ERPG–2 values. exceedances and their frequency of ‘‘Airborne concentrations below AEGL– Maximum HQ values from our acute occurrence. Such an evaluation could 1 represent exposure levels that can screening risk assessments typically include a more complete statistical produce mild and progressively result when basing them on the acute treatment of the key parameters and increasing but transient and REL value for a particular pollutant. In elements adopted in this screening nondisabling odor, taste, and sensory cases where our maximum acute HQ analysis. However, we recognize that irritation or certain asymptomatic, value exceeds 1, we also report the HQ having this level of data is rare, hence nonsensory effects.’’ Similarly, the value based on the next highest acute our use of the multiplier approach. document defines AEGL–2 values as threshold (usually the AEGL–1 and/or 4. Conducting Multipathway Exposure ‘‘the airborne concentration (expressed the ERPG–1 value). and Risk Modeling as ppm or mg/m3) of a substance above To develop screening estimates of which it is predicted that the general acute exposures, we developed The potential for significant human population, including susceptible estimates of maximum hourly emission health risks due to exposures via routes individuals, could experience rates by multiplying the average actual other than inhalation (i.e., irreversible or other serious, long-lasting annual hourly emission rates by a factor multipathway exposures) and the adverse health effects or an impaired to cover routinely variable emissions. potential for adverse environmental ability to escape.’’ We chose the factor to use based on impacts were evaluated in a three-step ERPG values are derived for use in process knowledge and engineering process. In the first step, we determined emergency response, as described in the judgment and with awareness of a Texas whether any facilities emitted any HAP American Industrial Hygiene study of short-term emissions known to be persistent and bio- Association’s document entitled, variability, which showed that most accumulative in the environment (PB– Emergency Response Planning peak emission events, in a heavily- HAP). There are 14 PB–HAP Guidelines (ERPG) Procedures and industrialized 4-county area (Harris, compounds or compound classes Responsibilities (http://www.aiha.org/ Galveston, Chambers, and Brazoria identified for this screening in EPA’s 1documents/committees/ Counties, Texas), were less than twice Air Toxics Risk Assessment Library ERPSOPs2006.pdf), which states that, the annual average hourly emission rate, (available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ _ _ ‘‘Emergency Response Planning and the highest peak emission event fera/risk atra vol1.html). They are Guidelines were developed for was 8.5 times the annual average hourly cadmium compounds, chlordane, emergency planning and are intended as emission rate.17 This analysis is chlorinated dibenzodioxins and furans, health-based guideline concentrations provided in Appendix 4 of the Draft dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene, for single exposures to chemicals.’’ 16 Residual Risk Assessment for Source heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene, The ERPG–1 value is defined as ‘‘the Categories Report and is available in the hexachlorocyclohexane, lead maximum airborne concentration below docket for this action. Considering this compounds, mercury compounds, which it is believed that nearly all analysis, unless specific process methoxychlor, polychlorinated individuals could be exposed for up to knowledge provided an alternate value, biphenyls, POM, toxaphene, and 1 hour without experiencing other than a conservative screening multiplication trifluralin. mild transient adverse health effects or factor of 10 was applied to the average In the second step of the screening without perceiving a clearly defined, annual hourly emission rate in these process, we determined whether the facility-specific emission rates of each of objectionable odor.’’ Similarly, the acute exposure screening assessments. the emitted PB–HAP were large enough ERPG–2 value is defined as ‘‘the In cases where all acute HQ values to create the potential for significant maximum airborne concentration below from the screening step were less than non-inhalation risks. To facilitate this which it is believed that nearly all or equal to 1, acute impacts were step, we have developed emission rate individuals could be exposed for up to deemed negligible and no further thresholds for each PB–HAP using a 1 hour without experiencing or analysis was performed. In the cases hypothetical screening exposure developing irreversible or other serious where an acute HQ from the screening scenario developed for use in health effects or symptoms which could step was greater than 1, additional site- conjunction with the TRIM.FaTE model. impair an individual’s ability to take specific data were considered to The hypothetical screening scenario was protective action.’’ develop a more refined estimate of the subjected to a sensitivity analysis to As can be seen from the definitions potential for acute impacts of concern. ensure that its key design parameters above, the AEGL and ERPG values The data refinements considered were established such that include the similarly-defined severity included using a peak-to-mean hourly environmental media concentrations levels 1 and 2. For many chemicals, a emissions ratio based on source were not underestimated (i.e., to severity level 1 value AEGL or ERPG has category-specific knowledge or data minimize the occurrence of false not been developed; in these instances, (rather than the default factor of 10) and negatives, or results that suggest that higher severity level AEGL–2 or ERPG– using the site-specific facility layout to risks might be acceptable when, in fact, 16 ERP Committee Procedures and 17 See http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/compliance/ actual risks are high), and to also Responsibilities. 1 November 2006. American field_ops/eer/index.html or docket to access the minimize the occurrence of false Industrial Hygiene Association. source of these data. positives for human health endpoints.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65080 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

We call this application of the from the entire ‘‘facility,’’ where the utility of such analyses for future TRIM.FaTE model TRIM–Screen. The facility includes all HAP-emitting rulemakings. facility-specific emission rates of each of operations within a contiguous area and For this analysis, we analyzed risks the PB–HAP in each source category under common control. In other words, due to the inhalation of HAP in two were compared to the emission for each facility that includes one or separate ways. In the first approach, we threshold values for each of the PB– more sources from one of the source focus the analysis on the total HAP identified in the source category categories under review, we examined populations residing within 5 km of data sets. the HAP emissions not only from the each facility (source category and For all of the facilities in the source source category of interest, but also facility-wide), regardless of their categories addressed in this proposal, all emissions of HAP from all other estimated risks, and examine the of the PB–HAP emission rates were less emission sources at the facility. The distributions of estimated risk across the than the emission threshold values. As emissions data for generating these various demographic groups within a result of this, multi-pathway ‘‘facility-wide’’ risks were obtained from those 5 km circles. The distance of 5 km exposures and environmental risks were the 2005 NEI (available at http:// was chosen for the first approach to be deemed negligible and no further www.epa.gov/chief/net/ consistent with previous demographic analysis was performed. If the emission 2005inventory.html). We analyzed risks analyses performed at EPA, such as the rates of the PB–HAP had been above the due to the inhalation of HAP that are one which was performed in support of emission threshold values, the source emitted ‘‘facility-wide’’ for the the recent proposal for the Boilers categories would have been further populations residing within 50 km of NESHAP. In the second approach, we evaluated for potential non-inhalation each facility, consistent with the focus the analysis only on the risks and adverse environmental effects methods used for the source category populations within 5 km 18 of any in a third step through site-specific analysis described above. For these facility estimated to have exposures to refined assessments using EPA’s facility-wide risk analyses, the modeled HAP which result in cancer risks of 1- TRIM.FaTE model. source category risks were compared to in-1 million or greater or non-cancer For further information on the multi- the facility-wide risks to determine the hazard indices of 1 or greater (based on pathway analysis approach, see the portion of facility-wide risks that could the emissions of the source category or residual risk documentation as be attributed to each of the six source the facility, respectively). Once again, referenced in section IV.A of this categories being addressed in this we examine the distributions of those preamble. proposal, we specifically examined the risks across various demographic facility that was associated with the groups. In each approach, we compare 5. Assessing Risks Considering highest estimate of risk and determined the percentages of particular Emissions Control Options the percentage of that risk attributable to demographic groups to the total number In addition to assessing baseline the source category of interest. The risk of people in those demographic groups inhalation risks and screening for documentation available through the nationwide. In this preamble, we only potential multi-pathway risks, for some docket for this action provides all the present the results of the second source categories, where appropriate, facility-wide risks and the percentage of approach since it focuses on the we also estimated risks considering the source category contribution for all significant risks from either the source potential emission reductions that source categories assessed. category or the facility-wide emissions. would be achieved by the particular The methodology and the results of The results of both approaches control options under consideration. the facility-wide analyses for each including other risk metrics such as The inhalation and multi-pathway risks source category are included in the average risks for the exposed estimated, as described above, at the residual risk documentation as populations are documented in source actual and MACT-allowable levels referenced in section IV.A of this category-specific technical reports in the represent the actual and maximum preamble, which is available in the docket for each of the source categories allowable operating conditions of the docket for this action. covered in this proposal.19 facilities in the source categories b. Demographic Analysis The basis for the risk values used in these analyses were the modeling analyzed. For source categories where To examine the potential for any emission reduction options were results obtained from the HEM–3 model environmental justice issues that might described above. The risk values for available, we estimated risk based on be associated with each source category, the expected emissions reductions that each census block were linked to a we evaluated the distributions of HAP- database of information from the 2000 would be realized with those additional related cancer and non-cancer risks emissions controls. In these cases, the Decennial census that includes data on across different social, demographic, race and ethnicity, age distributions, expected emissions reductions were and economic groups within the applied to the specific HAP and poverty status, household incomes, and populations living near the facilities education level. The Census Department emissions sources in the source category where these source categories are ® data set. The results of the risk analyses Landview database was the source of located. The development of the data on race and ethnicity, and the considering the application of emissions demographic analyses to inform the controls are included in the residual consideration of environmental justice 18 Generally, we have found that using a 5 km risk documentation as referenced in issues in EPA rulemakings is an radius in the analysis will capture more than 90 section IV.A of this preamble, which is evolving science. The EPA offers the percent of all the individuals with cancer risks available in the docket for this action. demographic analyses in this above 1-in-1 million. In the future, we plan to extend these analyses to cover the entire modeled 6. Conducting Other Risk-Related rulemaking as examples of how such domain for a facility (50 km radius) to capture all Analyses, Including Facility-Wide analyses might be developed to inform individuals with risks above 1-in-1 million from the Assessments and Demographic Analyses such consideration, and invites public affected facilities. comment on the approaches used and 19 For example, the report pertaining to the Hard a. Facility-Wide Risk Chromium Electroplating source category is entitled the interpretations made from the Risk and Technology Review—Analysis of Socio- To put the source category risks in results, with the hope that this will Economic Factors for Populations Living Near Hard context, we also examined the risks support the refinement and improve Chromium Electroplating Facilities.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65081

data on age distributions, poverty status, wide RTR modeling results and the our estimate of the number of facilities household incomes, and education level census data described above. may not represent the number of was obtained from the 2000 Census of The methodology and the results of facilities that we have in our notice of Population and Housing Summary File the demographic analyses for each proposed rulemaking data set. There is 3 (SF3) Long Form. While race and source category are included in the also significant uncertainty for some ethnicity census data are available at the residual risk documentation as source categories in the identification of block group level, the age and income referenced in section IV.A of this sources as major or area in the NEI. census data are only available at the preamble, which is available in the b. Uncertainties in Dispersion Modeling census block level (which includes an docket for this action. average of 26 blocks or an average of 7. Considering Uncertainties in Risk While the analysis employed EPA’s 1,350 people). Where census data are Assessment recommended regulatory dispersion available at the block group level but model, AERMOD, we recognize that not the block level, we assumed that all Uncertainty and the potential for bias there is uncertainty in ambient blocks within the block group have the are inherent in all risk assessments, concentration estimates associated with same distribution of ages and incomes including those performed for the any model, including AERMOD. Where as the block group. source categories addressed in this possible, model options (e.g., rural/ For each source category, the analysis proposal. Although uncertainty exists, urban, plume depletion, chemistry) results include the distribution of we believe the approach that we took, were selected to provide an estimated lifetime inhalation cancer and which used conservative tools and overestimate of ambient air chronic non-cancer risks for different assumptions, ensures that our decisions concentrations of the HAP. However, racial and ethnic groups, different age are health-protective. A brief discussion because of practicality and data groups, adults with and without a high of the uncertainties in the emissions limitation reasons, some factors (e.g., school diploma, people living in data sets, dispersion modeling, meteorology, building downwash) have households below the national median inhalation exposure estimates, and the potential in some situations to income, and for people living below the dose-response relationships follows overestimate or underestimate ambient poverty line among the population below. A more thorough discussion of impacts. For example, meteorological living near these facilities. The specific these uncertainties is included in the data were taken from a single year Draft Residual Risk Assessment for the census population categories studied (1991), and facility locations can be a Steel Pickling Source Category (July include: significant distance from the site where 2010), Draft Residual Risk Assessment • Total population. these data were taken. Despite these for the Chromium Electroplating Source • White. uncertainties, we believe that at off-site Category (July 2010), Draft Residual • African American (or Black). locations and census block centroids, • Risk Assessment for 9 Source Categories Native Americans. the approach considered in the • (August 2008), and the Risk and Other races and multiracial. dispersion modeling analysis should • Technology Review (RTR) Assessment Hispanic or Latino. generally yield overestimates of ambient • Plan (November 2006), each of which Children 18 years of age and under. HAP concentrations. • Adults 19 to 64 years of age. are available in the docket for this • Adults 65 years of age and over. action. c. Uncertainties in Inhalation Exposure • Adults without a high school a. Uncertainties in the Emissions Data The effects of human mobility on diploma. Sets exposures were not included in the • Households earning under the assessment. Specifically, short-term national median income. Although the development of the RTR • People living below the poverty data sets involved quality assurance/ mobility and long-term mobility quality control processes, the accuracy between census blocks in the modeling line. 20 It should be noted that these of emissions values will vary depending domain were not considered. As a categories overlap in some instances, on the source of the data, the degree to result, this simplification will likely resulting in some populations being which data is incomplete or missing, the bias the assessment toward counted in more than one category (e.g., degree to which assumptions made to overestimating the highest exposures. In other races and multiracial and complete the data sets are inaccurate, addition, the assessment predicted the Hispanic). In addition, while not a errors in estimating emissions values, chronic exposures at the centroid of specific census population category, we and other factors. The emission values each populated census block as also examined risks to the category considered in this analysis generally are surrogates for the exposure ‘‘Minorities,’’ which is defined as all race annual totals that do not reflect short- concentrations for all people living in population categories except white. term fluctuations during the course of a that block. Using the census block Since these demographic analysis year or variations from year to year. In centroid to predict chronic exposures methods are still evolving, EPA contrast, the estimates of peak hourly tends to over-predict exposures for specifically solicits comment on the emission rates for the acute effects people in the census block who live inclusion of other demographic screening assessment were based on further from the facility and under- categories (e.g., ‘‘Hispanic and Non- multiplication factors applied to the predict exposures for people in the white’’) in our future analyses. average annual hourly emission rates census block who live closer to the For further information about risks to (the default factor is 10), which are facility. Thus, using the census block the populations local to the facilities in intended to account for emission centroid to predict chronic exposures these source categories, we also fluctuations due to normal facility may lead to a potential understatement evaluated the estimated distribution of operations. In some cases, more refined or overstatement of the true maximum inhalation cancer and chronic non- estimates were used for source cancer risks associated with the HAP categories where the screening estimates 20 Short-term mobility is movement from one ‘‘ ’’ microenvironment to another over the course of emissions from all the emissions did not screen out all sources and hours or days. Long-term mobility is movement sources at the facility (i.e., facility- more specific information was available. from one residence to another over the course of a wide). This analysis used the facility- Additionally, for some source categories lifetime.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65082 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

impact, but is an unbiased estimate of d. Uncertainties in Dose-Response of magnitude) of daily oral exposure average risk and incidence. Relationships (RfD) or of a continuous inhalation The assessments evaluate the cancer There are uncertainties inherent in exposure (RfC) to the human population inhalation risks associated with the development of the reference values (including sensitive subgroups) that is pollutant exposures over a 70-year used in our risk assessments for cancer likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. period, which is the assumed lifetime of effects from chronic exposures and non- To derive values that are intended to be an individual. In reality, both the length cancer effects from both chronic and ‘‘without appreciable risk,’’ the of time that modeled emissions sources acute exposures. Some uncertainties methodology relies upon an uncertainty at facilities actually operate (i.e., more may be considered quantitatively, and factor (UF) approach (U.S. EPA, 1993, or less than 70 years), and the domestic others generally are expressed in 1994) which includes consideration of growth or decline of the modeled qualitative terms. We note as a preface both uncertainty and variability. When industry (i.e., the increase or decrease in to this discussion a point on dose- there are gaps in the available the number or size of United States response uncertainty that is brought out information, UF are applied to derive facilities), will influence the risks posed in EPA’s 2005 Cancer Guidelines; reference values that are intended to by a given source category. Depending namely, that ‘‘the primary goal of EPA protect against appreciable risk of on the characteristics of the industry, actions is protection of human health; deleterious effects. UF are commonly these factors will likely result in an accordingly, as an Agency policy, risk default values,24 e.g., factors of 10 or 3, overestimate (or possibly an assessment procedures, including used in the absence of compound- underestimate in the extreme case default options that are used in the specific data; where data are available, where a facility maintains or increases absence of scientific data to the UF may also be developed using its emission levels beyond 70 years and contrary, should be health protective.’’ compound-specific information. When residents live beyond 70 years at the (EPA 2005 Cancer Guidelines, pages data are limited, more assumptions are same location) both in individual risk 1–7.) This is the approach followed here needed and more UF are used. Thus, levels and in the total estimated number as summarized in the next several there may be a greater tendency to of cancer cases. Annual cancer paragraphs. A complete detailed overestimate risk in the sense that incidence estimates from exposures to discussion of uncertainties and further study might support emissions from these sources would not variabilities in dose-response development of reference values that are be affected by uncertainty in the length relationships is given in the residual higher (i.e., less potent) because fewer of time emissions sources operate. risk documentation as referenced in default assumptions are needed. The exposure estimates used in these section IV.A of this preamble, which is However, for some pollutants it is analyses assume chronic exposures to available in the docket for this action. possible that risks may be ambient levels of pollutants. Because Cancer URE values used in our risk underestimated. most people spend the majority of their assessments are those that have been While collectively termed ‘‘UF,’’ these time indoors, actual exposures may not developed to generally provide an upper factors account for a number of different be as high, depending on the bound estimate of risk. That is, they quantitative considerations when using characteristics of the pollutants represent a ‘‘plausible upper limit to the observed animal (usually rodent) or modeled. For many HAP, indoor levels true value of a quantity’’ (although this human toxicity data in the development are roughly equivalent to ambient is usually not a true statistical of the RfC. The UF are intended to levels, but for very reactive pollutants or confidence limit).22 In some account for: (1) Variation in larger particles, these levels are circumstances, the true risk could be as susceptibility among the members of the typically lower. This factor has the low as zero; however, in other human population (i.e., inter-individual potential to result in an overstatement of circumstances the risk could also be variability); (2) uncertainty in 25 to 30 percent of exposures.21 23 greater. When developing an upper extrapolating from experimental animal In addition to the uncertainties bound estimate of risk and to provide data to humans (i.e., interspecies highlighted above, there are several risk values that do not underestimate differences); (3) uncertainty in factors specific to the acute exposure risk, health-protective default extrapolating from data obtained in a assessment that should be highlighted. approaches are generally used. To err on study with less-than-lifetime exposure The accuracy of an acute inhalation the side of ensuring adequate health- exposure assessment depends on the protection, EPA typically uses the upper 24 According to the NRC report, Science and simultaneous occurrence of bound estimates rather than lower Judgment in Risk Assessment (NRC, 1994) ‘‘[Default] independent factors that may vary bound or central tendency estimates in options are generic approaches, based on general greatly, such as hourly emissions rates, our risk assessments, an approach that scientific knowledge and policy judgment, that are applied to various elements of the risk assessment meteorology, and human activity may have limitations for other uses (e.g., process when the correct scientific model is patterns. In this assessment, we assume priority-setting or expected benefits unknown or uncertain.’’ The 1983 NRC report, Risk that individuals remain for 1 hour at the analysis). Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing point of maximum ambient Chronic non-cancer reference (RfC the Process, defined default option as ‘‘the option chosen on the basis of risk assessment policy that concentration as determined by the co- and RfD) values represent chronic appears to be the best choice in the absence of data occurrence of peak emissions and worst- exposure levels that are intended to be to the contrary’’ (NRC, 1983a, p. 63). Therefore, case meteorological conditions. These health-protective levels. Specifically, default options are not rules that bind the Agency; assumptions would tend to overestimate these values provide an estimate (with rather, the Agency may depart from them in evaluating the risks posed by a specific substance actual exposures since it is unlikely that uncertainty spanning perhaps an order when it believes this to be appropriate. In keeping a person would be located at the point with EPA’s goal of protecting public health and the of maximum exposure during the time 22 IRIS glossary (http://www.epa.gov/NCEA/iris/ environment, default assumptions are used to _ of worst-case impact. help gloss.htm). ensure that risk to chemicals is not underestimated 23 An exception to this is the URE for benzene, (although defaults are not intended to overtly which is considered to cover a range of values, each overestimate risk). See EPA 2004, An examination 21 U.S. EPA. National-Scale Air Toxics end of which is considered to be equally plausible, of EPA Risk Assessment Principles and Practices, Assessment for 1996. (EPA 453/R–01–003; January and which is based on maximum likelihood EPA/100/B–04/001 available at: http:// 2001; page 85.) estimates. www.epa.gov/osa/pdfs/ratf-final.pdf.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65083

(i.e., extrapolating from sub-chronic to the current value. We may re-evaluate Based on specific knowledge of each chronic exposure); (4) uncertainty in residual risks for the final rulemaking if, source category, we began by identifying extrapolating the observed data to as a result of these reviews, a dose- known developments in practices, obtain an estimate of the exposure response metric changes enough to processes, and control technologies. For associated with no adverse effects; and indicate that the risk assessment the purpose of this exercise, we (5) uncertainty when the database is supporting this notice may significantly considered any of the following to be a incomplete or there are problems with understate human health risk. ‘‘development’’: the applicability of available studies. • Any add-on control technology or Many of the UF used to account for e. Uncertainties in the Multipathway other equipment that was not identified variability and uncertainty in the and Environmental Effects Assessment and considered during MACT development of acute reference values We generally assume that when development; • are quite similar to those developed for exposure levels are not anticipated to Any improvements in add-on chronic durations, but they more often adversely affect human health, they also control technology or other equipment use individual UF values that may be are not anticipated to adversely affect (that was identified and considered less than 10. UF are applied based on the environment. We generally rely on during MACT development) that could chemical-specific or health effect- the facility-specific levels of PB–HAP result in significant additional emission specific information (e.g., simple reduction; emissions to determine whether a full • irritation effects do not vary appreciably assessment of the multi-pathway and Any work practice or operational between human individuals, hence a environmental effects is necessary. procedure that was not identified and considered during MACT development; value of 3 is typically used), or based on Because facility-specific PB–HAP and the purpose for the reference value (see emission levels were so far below levels • Any process change or pollution the following paragraph). The UF which would trigger a refined applied in acute reference value prevention alternative that could be assessment of multi-pathway impacts, broadly applied that was not identified derivation include: (1) Heterogeneity we are confident that these types of among humans; (2) uncertainty in and considered during MACT impacts are insignificant for these development. extrapolating from animals to humans; source categories. (3) uncertainty in lowest observable In addition to looking back at adverse effect (exposure) level to no f. Uncertainties in the Facility-Wide practices, processes, or control observable effect (exposure) level Risk Assessment technologies reviewed at the time we developed the MACT standard, we adjustments; and (4) uncertainty in The same uncertainties discussed accounting for an incomplete database reviewed a variety of sources of data to above exist with regard to the facility- aid in our evaluation of whether there on toxic effects of potential concern. wide risk assessments. Additionally, the Additional adjustments are often were additional practices, processes, or degree of uncertainty associated with controls to consider. One of these applied to account for uncertainty in facility-wide emissions and risks is extrapolation from observations at one sources of data was subsequent air generally greater because we have not toxics rules. Since the promulgation of exposure duration (e.g., 4 hours) to completed our review of emissions data derive an acute reference value at the MACT standards for the source for source categories not currently another exposure duration (e.g., 1 hour). categories addressed in this proposal, undergoing an RTR review. Not all acute reference values are EPA has developed air toxics developed for the same purpose and g. Uncertainties in the Demographic regulations for a number of additional care must be taken when interpreting Analysis source categories. In these subsequent the results of an acute assessment of air toxic regulatory actions, we human health effects relative to the Our analysis of the distribution of consistently evaluated any new reference value or values being risks across various demographic groups practices, processes, and control exceeded. Where relevant to the is subject to the typical uncertainties technologies. We reviewed the estimated exposures, the lack of associated with census data (e.g., errors regulatory requirements and/or threshold values at different levels of in filling out and transcribing census technical analyses associated with these severity should be factored into the risk forms), as well as the additional subsequent regulatory actions to characterization as potential uncertainties associated with the identify any practices, processes, and uncertainties. extrapolation of census-block group data control technologies considered in these Although every effort is made to (e.g., income level and education level) efforts that could possibly be applied to identify peer-reviewed reference values down to the census block level. emission sources in the source for cancer and non-cancer effects for all B. How did we perform the technology categories under this current RTR pollutants emitted by the sources review? review. included in this assessment, some We also consulted EPA’s RACT/ pollutants have no peer-reviewed Our technology review is focused on BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC). The reference values for cancer or chronic the identification and evaluation of terms ‘‘RACT,’’ ‘‘BACT,’’ and ‘‘LAER’’ are non-cancer or acute effects. Since ‘‘developments in practices, processes, acronyms for different program exposures to these pollutants cannot be and control technologies.’’ If a review of requirements under the CAA provisions included in a quantitative risk estimate, available information identifies such addressing the national ambient air an understatement of risk for these developments, then we conduct an quality standards. Control technologies, pollutants at environmental exposure analysis of the technical feasibility of classified as RACT (Reasonably levels is possible. requiring the implementation of these Available Control Technology), BACT Additionally, chronic reference values developments, along with the impacts (Best Available Control Technology), or for several of the compounds included (costs, emission reductions, risk LAER (Lowest Achievable Emission in this assessment are currently under reductions, etc.). We then make a Rate) apply to stationary sources EPA IRIS review and revised decision on whether it is necessary to depending on whether the sources are assessments may determine that these amend the regulation to require these existing or new, and on the size, age, pollutants are more or less potent than developments. and location of the facility. BACT and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65084 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

LAER (and sometimes RACT) are compliance with the rule provisions. The Chromium Anodizing source determined on a case-by-case basis, EPA has also independently identified category consists of facilities that use usually by State or local permitting these types of issues. We are proposing chromic acid to form an oxide layer on agencies. EPA established the RBLC to rule changes where appropriate. aluminum to provide resistance to provide a central data base of air corrosion. The chromium anodizing V. Analyses Results and Proposed pollution technology information process is used to coat aircraft parts (including technologies required in Decisions (such as wings and landing gears), as source-specific permits) to promote the This section of the preamble provides well as architectural structures that are sharing of information among background information on the MACT subject to high stress and corrosive permitting agencies and to aid in standards and source categories, the conditions. identifying future possible control results of our RTR for each source The HAP emission sources subject to technology options that might apply category, our proposed actions to the Chromium Electroplating NESHAP broadly to numerous sources within a address significant unregulated are the tanks in which the chromium category or apply only on a source-by- emission points for a number of source deposition takes place. For hard source basis. The RBLC contains over categories, our proposed decisions chromium and decorative chromium 5,000 air pollution control permit concerning the SSM provisions in each electroplating facilities, the emission determinations that can help identify of the six MACT standards, and the sources are electroplating tanks. For the appropriate technologies to mitigate specific clarifications we are proposing Chromium Anodizing source category, many air pollutant emission streams. for selected MACT standards. the emission sources are anodizing We searched this database to determine tanks. whether any practices, processes, or A. What are the results and proposed The primary emission controls used control technologies are included for the decisions for the Chromium by the facilities in these source types of processes used for emission Electroplating source categories? categories include packed bed sources (e.g., tanks or vents) in the 1. Overview of the Source Categories scrubbers, mesh pad mist eliminators, source categories under consideration in and MACT Standard composite mesh pad (CMP) systems, this proposal. high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) We also requested information from National Emission Standards for filters, and wetting agent/fume industry regarding developments in Chromium Emissions from Hard and suppressants (WAFS). Most decorative practices, processes, or control Decorative Chromium Electroplating chromium electroplating plants comply technology. Finally, we reviewed other and Chromium Anodizing Tanks with the MACT standards by using information sources, such as State or (Chromium Electroplating MACT WAFS in the tank bath to control local permitting agency databases and standards) were promulgated on January surface tension, which in turn reduces industry-supported databases. 25, 1995 (60 FR 4963), and codified at emissions. Some plants use a 40 CFR part 63, subpart N. The combination of WAFS and add-on C. How did we perform the analyses for Chromium Electroplating MACT control to meet the MACT emission the other actions being proposed? standards regulate emissions of limits. If a facility controls emissions For several of the source categories chromium compounds from three using an add-on control device, the tank considered in this proposal, we related source categories: Hard is generally equipped with a hood and identified significant emission points Chromium Electroplating, Decorative duct work to exhaust emissions through that were not previously regulated Chromium Electroplating, and the control device and out the stack. under MACT. For these emission points, Chromium Anodizing. Within these However, when WAFS are used as the consistent with the requirements of source categories, the MACT standards only means of emission control, the CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3), we apply to all plants, both major and area tanks often are not equipped with identified the MACT floor for existing sources, regardless of size. exhaust hoods. In such cases, emissions and new sources and considered The Hard Chromium Electroplating from the tank are fugitive and are beyond-the-floor options. source category consists of facilities that exhausted to the outside using wall- We also reviewed the SSM provisions plate base metals with a relatively thick mounted exhaust fans. of each of the six MACT standards in layer of chromium using an electrolytic We estimate that there are light of Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d process. Hard chromium electroplating approximately 1,770 plants that are 1019. As part of this review, we provides a finish that is resistant to currently subject to the Chromium evaluated available information and wear, abrasion, heat, and corrosion. Electroplating MACT standards. Of engaged industry concerning the type of These facilities plate large cylinders and these, we estimate that there are 790 activities and emissions that occur industrial rolls used in construction hard chromium electroplating plants, during periods of startup or shutdown. equipment and printing presses, 740 decorative chromium electroplating Finally, we identified potential hydraulic cylinders and rods, zinc die plants, and 240 chromium anodizing revisions to these MACT standards to castings, plastic molds, engine plants. A detailed description of how correct or clarify regulatory components, and marine hardware. the number of each type of plant was requirements. In the years since The Decorative Chromium estimated can be found in the Estimated promulgation and compliance with the Electroplating source category consists Number of Chromium Electroplating MACT standards, EPA has received of facilities that plate base materials Plants document available in the docket comments and suggestions for such as brass, steel, aluminum, or for this action. Some facilities perform improving the clarity of the MACT plastic with layers of copper and nickel, more than one type of chromium standards in general, as well as rule- followed by a relatively thin layer of electroplating or anodizing. For specific comments for some individual chromium to provide a bright, tarnish- purposes of our estimates, we classified MACT standards. These comments and wear-resistant surface. Decorative facilities as hard chromium, decorative include such things as identification of chromium electroplating is used for chromium, or chromium anodizing editorial errors in the rule, clarification items such as automotive trim, metal based on the primary type of of existing rule text, regulatory obstacles furniture, bicycles, hand tools, and electroplating operation performed at to effective implementation of or plumbing fixtures. the facility. Some chromium

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65085

electroplating facilities electroplate fully representative of the source among the three source categories, we items that are used internally in the categories and their risks, we developed made these selections as a conservative manufacturing process at the same an additional data set. In the or health-protective assumption. facility or within the same company. development of this data set, we used To represent the decorative chromium For example, some large printing ‘‘model plants’’ developed for the electroplating facilities, we combined facilities electroplate their printing original MACT standard to represent the two of the six groups of facilities; rollers in house, and the chromium individual facilities. For hard and decorative chromium facilities and electroplating processes are located at decorative chromium electroplating, we facilities that perform both decorative the same site as the printing and used three model plants (large, medium, chromium and chromium anodizing. publishing processes. and small) that represent average This results in 319 decorative chromium characteristics for each of these groups. facilities in this data set, which, even 2. What data were used in our risk when combined with the 96 decorative analyses? For each of these plant sizes, there is an annual emissions rate (lbs/yr) that is chromium electroplating facilities in the For the Chromium Electroplating derived from the design and operating 2005 NEI data set, is less than the 740 source categories, we compiled a parameters, and is specific to the size facilities that we believe exist in the preliminary data set using data in the and type of model plant. For chromium industry. Because we modeled all of the 2005 NEI. A review of the NEI resulted anodizing, we have two model plants unknown electroplating type facilities in the identification of data for 122 (large and small). The model plants as the highest-emitting hard chromium chromium electroplating facilities. were based on data collected during electroplating facilities, we consider this These data were reviewed and the data development of the original MACT assessment to be conservative, even for eight hard chromium and six standards from 1988 to 1993 from more though it appears to under-represent decorative chromium electroplating than 100 facilities that responded to an decorative chromium facilities. plants were revised based on Information Collection Request (ICR) for Similarly, the last of the six groups information in the facilities’ permits or the chromium electroplating and are all known chromium anodizing permit applications. Additional data anodizing industry. Data from site visits facilities. This group includes 73 were available for 44 facilities through and other information also were used in facilities, and, when combined with the responses to a CAA section 114 developing the model plants. A 7 chromium anodizing facilities in the information request that was sent to complete description of the model 2005 NEI data set, still represents only facilities for the Plating and Polishing plants developed for the MACT about a third of the 240 facilities Area Source rule. The data for these standard is provided in the Background chromium anodizing facilities. Again, facilities were added to the NEI data set, Information Document (BID) for the we believe this is conservative because and, as with the original data, represent original MACT standard (Chromium those facilities not modeled as actual emission levels for these chromium anodizing plants were Electroplating BID). electroplating and anodizing facilities. The basis for this additional data set modeled as the higher emitting hard Most of these facilities have low is 1,629 chromium electroplating chromium facilities in the analysis. To estimate the risks for this emissions, which are generally less than facilities with known addresses.27 For assessment, we needed to establish 2 pounds per year (lbs/yr). These 166 about half of these facilities, the type of facilities now included in the 2005 NEI estimated emissions for each of the electroplating performed is known, but comprise approximately 9 percent of the electroplating and anodizing types. To the size of the facility is not known. For estimated 1,770 facilities covered by the ensure that we did not underestimate the remaining facilities, neither the type MACT standards, and include 63 hard cancer risk to the most exposed of chromium electroplating process or chromium electroplating, 96 decorative individual, we originally planned to use processes, nor the facility size is known. the large plant emission factors that we chromium electroplating, and 7 For use in the risk analysis, the 25 had developed for the original MACT chromium anodizing facilities. This limited available data were used to standard to represent all model plants data set of 166 facilities was modeled to divide these facilities into six groups. for each type of chromium determine the maximum individual Facilities in three of the six groups were electroplating processing. In reviewing cancer risk, the population cancer risk, assigned to be hard chromium available emissions data, we found that, the cancer incidence, and the maximum electroplating facilities. Those groups chronic non-cancer risk for the three while the large plant emission factors include: hard chromium facilities; adequately represent the average source categories based on actual facilities with combined hard chromium emissions. The maximum individual chromium emissions from known large operations and other electroplating or decorative chromium electroplating and cancer risk and the maximum chronic anodizing; and facilities with unknown non-cancer risk estimated from this data large chromium anodizing facilities, processes. Together, these three groups they are not representative of the set were also compared to the maximum yielded a total of 1,219 plants, all of individual cancer risk and the average chromium emissions from large which we modeled as hard chromium hard chromium electroplating facilities. maximum chronic non-cancer risk electroplating facilities. This total, in estimated from MACT-allowable The emission factor for large hard addition to the 63 hard chromium chromium electroplating developed for emissions for the three source electroplating facilities in the 2005 NEI 26 the original MACT standard was 35.3 categories. data set, yields a total of 1,282 facilities, To address the possibility that the lbs/yr. However, in comparing this which is substantially higher than the small number of facilities included in emission factor to available emissions 790 hard chromium facilities that we the 166-facility data set might not be data for individual facilities, we find estimate exist in the United States. that this emissions factor is However, because hard chromium 25 The National Association of Surface Finishers unrealistically high and does not provided OMB with data for 15 plants. We have facilities have the highest emissions represent the average level of emissions placed this information in the docket for this for large facilities as we would expect to rulemaking. 27 There is some overlap between the 1,629 26 The Occupational Safety and Health facilities with known addresses and the 166 see under the current MACT standard. Administration adopted a lower permissible facilities for which we have emissions data based As explained more fully in the Model exposure limit for hexavalent chromium in 2006. on the NEI and the data collection request. Plant Data Used to Estimate Risk from

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65086 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Chromium Electroplating Sources assessment for decorative chromium. medium, or small). For example, the document available in the docket for For the Decorative Chromium category, average emissions factor for hard this action, based on the large model we estimate that only 5 percent of the chromium electroplating (2.24 lbs/yr) is plant design flow rate and operating facilities are large, based upon the the weighted average of the model plant hours, a large hard chromium model distribution of decorative chromium emission factors for large plants (10 plant operating at the MACT emission plants nationwide when the original percent of plants at 9.26 lbs/yr per limit of 0.015 milligrams per dry NESHAP were developed. Finally, for plant), medium plants (20 percent of standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) would chromium anodizing, the emission plants at 4.63 lbs/yr per plant, and small emit a maximum of only 23.6 lbs/yr of factor for small facilities is 0.036 lb/yr, plants (70 percent of plants at 0.55 lb/ chromium compounds. Moreover, the and for large facilities, is 0.44 lb/yr. The yr per plant). This distribution of plant available data on actual emissions for large facility emissions factor (0.44 lb/ sizes is based on actual data collected hard chromium electroplating plants yr) was used in the conservative during development of the original indicate there are only 4 plants with analysis for all of the anodizing facilities MACT rule. We have no reason to annual emissions greater than 10 lbs/yr. even though we estimate that only 25 believe the distribution of facility sizes As a result, we determined that the large percent are large. has changed significantly since then. size model plant emissions factor, as Population risk indicators can be The uncertainties associated with defined for the original MACT standard, greatly overstated when highly both the conservative analysis and the is not representative of existing large conservative emission estimates are supplemental analysis include the hard chromium electroplating facilities applied to every facility in the source estimated distribution of plant types on a nationwide basis. On the other category. Recognizing this fact, we and sizes as well as the facility hand, the emission factor associated performed a supplemental analysis to emissions factors. Although the type of with a medium size hard chromium better address nationwide average plants used in the NEI analysis is based electroplating model plant (9.26 lbs/yr) emission levels and assess the on a variety of reliable sources, falls between the 90th percentile (8.04 sensitivity of our population risk including ICR responses for the Plating lbs/yr) and the 95th percentile (11.6 lbs/ estimates. Thus, as described further and Polishing NESHAP, trade yr) of the available emissions data for below, the supplemental analysis was association data, data from State hard chromium electroplating facilities. performed to understand the degree to agencies, and information from Web Because this emission factor, which was which the risk might be overstated, and, sites, we were unable to identify the originally developed for medium sized thus, how much weight to attach to the plant type for nearly half of the data set. facilities at the time the MACT standard conservative analysis. The conservatism For those plants of unknown type, we was developed, is representative of the of this risk assessment is one factor that used the highest emissions factor, which emissions from large facilities, the we consider in determining whether the corresponds to a large hard chromium emissions factor of 9.26 lbs/yr was used risk is acceptable within the meaning of plant, in the conservative analysis. For to represent current large hard the Benzene NESHAP. the supplemental analysis, we chromium electroplating facilities. For the supplemental analysis, we developed an emissions factor using a Thus, for purposes of this residual risk assigned unique emission factors to weighted average across all plant types review, we refer to 9.26 lbs/yr as the each of the 6 groups of facilities in our and sizes. For all plants that were emissions factor for a ‘‘large’’ hard 1,629 facility data set. These emission modeled, we are soliciting additional chromium electroplating facility. factors were developed to better information on actual and MACT- We believe the approach of using the estimate the average emissions for all of allowable emissions, plant type, and ‘‘large’’ facility emissions factor to the sources within each group. The new plant size. More information about the represent all facility sizes is reasonable emission factors are: development of the model plants can be to ensure that we did not underestimate • 2.24 lbs/yr for known hard found in the Model Plant Data Used to maximum individual cancer risk. chromium electroplating facilities, Estimate Risk from Chromium Although we believe that only a small • 0.225 lb/yr for known decorative Electroplating Sources document percentage of the facilities are large, we chromium electroplating facilities, available in the docket for this action. recognize that we do not have emissions • 0.137 lb/yr for known chromium In all the data sets, chromium data for approximately 90 percent of the anodizing facilities, compounds account for all the HAP sources. Thus, by assuming all sources • 1.23 lbs/yr for facilities with emissions from the Chromium are large, we have ensured that we will combinations of hard chromium Electroplating and Chromium not underestimate the maximum electroplating and either decorative Anodizing source categories. For the individual risk. electroplating or anodizing, Hard Chromium Electroplating source For hard chromium electroplating, the • 0.181 lb/yr for facilities with category, in the NEI-based data set, model plant emission factors for small, combinations of decorative chromium VI compounds account for 98 medium, and large facilities range from electroplating and anodizing, and percent of the emissions, with 0.55 to 9.26 lbs/yr. While we expect • 1.11 lbs/yr for facilities where the chromium III and chromium trioxide only 10 percent of the facilities to be type of process (electroplating or compounds comprising the remaining large, based on the distribution of model anodizing) is unknown. HAP. In both the NEI and model plant plant sizes developed for the MACT A detailed explanation for how these emission estimates, we made the standard, we used the emissions factor emission factors were derived can be conservative assumption that 100 for a large facility (9.26 lbs/yr) for all of found in the Model Plant Data Used to percent of the emissions are chromium the 1,219 facilities that we considered as Estimate Risk from Chromium VI compounds. For the Decorative hard chromium electroplating facilities. Electroplating Sources available in the Chromium Electroplating source Similarly, for decorative chromium docket for this action. These weighted category, in the NEI-based data set, electroplating, the emission factors for average emission factors account for the chromium VI compounds account for 94 small, medium, and large facilities are plant type (hard chromium percent of the emissions, with 0.065, 0.27, and 2.65 lbs/yr, electroplating, decorative chromium chromium III and chromium trioxide respectively, and the large facility electroplating, or chromium anodizing) compounds comprising the remaining emissions factor was used in the risk and the distribution of plant sizes (large, HAP. In both emission estimates, we

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65087

made the conservative assumption that 3. What are the results of the risk one based primarily on NEI data for 166 100 percent of the emissions are assessments and analyses? sources, and one based on model plant chromium VI compounds. For the We conducted an inhalation risk data for 1,629 sources. Chromium Anodizing source category, assessment for each of the three source The following tables present the in the NEI-based data set, chromium VI categories: Hard Chromium combined results from the data sets. compounds account for 99 percent of Electroplating, Decorative Chromium Table A.1 provides an overall summary the emissions with chromium III Electroplating, and Chromium of the maximum individual inhalation compounds comprising the remaining Anodizing. Also, for each source risk assessment results, and Table A.2 HAP. In both emission estimates, we category, we conducted an assessment provides population risk assessment made the conservative assumption that of facility-wide risk, and performed a results for the Hard Chromium 100 percent of the emissions are demographic analysis of population Electroplating, Decorative Chromium chromium VI compounds. risks. As noted above, we developed Electroplating, and Chromium two data sets for these source categories, Anodizing source categories.

TABLE A.1—CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING AND ANODIZING MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS*

Maximum individual Maximum cancer risk chronic non-cancer Number of (in 1 million) 2 TOSHI 3 Maximum off-site Source category facilities acute non-cancer (NEI/model 4 1 Actual Allowable Actual Allowable HQ plant) emissions emissions emissions emissions level level level level

Hard Chromium Electroplating ...... 63/1,219 70 90 0.06 0 .09 Not applicable 5. Decorative Chromium Electroplating ...... 96/337 70 70 0.06 0 .06 Not applicable 5. Chromium Anodizing ...... 7/73 5 5 0.004 0.004 Not applicable 5. * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from each source in the categories. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis: the first number refers to the NEI data set, and the second number applies to the conserv- ative emission estimate. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Hard Chromium Electroplating, Decorative Chromium Electroplating, and Chromium Anodizing source categories is the respiratory system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A. of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values. 5 NA = not applicable. There are no HAP with acute dose-response benchmark values, so no acute HQ were calculated for these source cat- egories. See section IV.A of this preamble for an explanation of acute threshold values.

TABLE A.2—CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING AND ANODIZING POPULATION RISK INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Conservative assessment Conservative Supplemental assessment Supplemental Number of population at risk annual population at risk annual Source category facilities cancer cancer (NEI/model ≥ incidence ≥ plant) ≥ 1-in-1 million 10-in-1 (cases per ≥ 1-in-1 million 10-in-1 incidence million year) million (case per year)

Hard Chromium Electroplating ...... 63/1,219 14,200,000 71,000 0.8 360,000 5,100 0 .1 Decorative Chro- mium Electro- plating ...... 96/337 390,000 4,000 0.08 30,000 1,300 0 .01 Chromium Anodizing 7/73 2,700 0 0 .003 540 0 0.001

As shown in Table A.1, the results of level accurately reflects the maximum people exposed to a cancer risk greater the inhalation risk assessment for the individual exposure. The maximum than 1-in-1 million and 71,000 people Hard Chromium Electroplating source chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could exposed to a cancer risk of at least category indicate the maximum lifetime be 0.06, based on the actual emissions 10-in-1 million. individual cancer risk could be as high level, and up to 0.09 based on As noted above, we conducted a as 70-in-1 million, based on actual allowables. This value is also based on supplemental analysis to determine the emissions, and as high as 90-in-1 known emission levels from the largest weight to give to the conservative risk million based on allowable emissions. facility in the nation. A non-cancer analysis. That supplemental analysis This maximum individual cancer risk is TOSHI of one or less is not of human estimates 0.1 excess cancer cases per based on the highest risk facility out of health concern. year, or one case in every 10 years. the 63 actual facilities and the 1,219 The total estimated national cancer Additionally, it estimates a population model plants. The highest risk facility is incidence from hard chromium exposure of 360,000 people at 1-in-1 one for which we have design and electroplating facilities based on actual million cancer risk. For a cancer risk of operating data, and we believe it is also emission levels is 0.8 excess cancer at least 10-in-1 million, the population both the largest and highest emitting cases per year, or one case in every 1.25 exposed decreases to 5,100. hard chromium electroplating facility in years for the conservative assessment. Based on the 2005 NEI data set for the the United States. Thus, we believe this Our risk assessment shows 14.2 million Decorative Chromium Electroplating

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65088 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

source category, the maximum lifetime in-1 million and 0.003 excess cancer Furthermore, the available data indicate individual cancer risk could be as high cases per year, or one case in every 333 that no other hard chromium as 70-in-1 million, and the maximum years.30 electroplating facility would have a chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could Also, as there were no reported cancer risk that high if operated at the be up to 0.06, based on the actual emissions of PB–HAP for these three allowable emissions limit. 28 source categories, we do not expect the emissions level. We do not believe the For the Decorative Chromium potential for human health maximum lifetime individual cancer Electroplating source category, we multipathway risks or adverse risk and the maximum chronic non- performed a similar analysis of the cancer TOSHI value would be any environmental impacts. available data and concluded that the higher than this based on allowable Our analyses of potential differences maximum individual lifetime cancer emissions. The total estimated between actual emission levels and risk would not exceed 70-in-1 million population risks from the conservative emissions allowable under the MACT for any facility that operated at the risk assessment of the decorative standards are based on emissions test allowable emissions limit. As stated chromium electroplating facilities based data from specific facilities. A earlier, because most chromium on actual emission levels is 390,000 comparison of these test results to anodizing facilities use WAFS, we people exposed to a cancer risk greater allowable emissions at these facilities believe actual emissions are essentially than 1-in-1 million and 0.08 excess indicates that the ratio of MACT- the same as allowable emissions. Thus, cancer cases per year, or one case in allowable to actual emissions varies every 12 years.29 considerably from facility to facility. As we believe that the MIR based on Based on the 2005 NEI data set for the a result, a uniform factor was not allowable emissions would be the same Chromium Anodizing source category, available to apply to all facilities. as that based on actual emissions, i.e., the maximum lifetime individual cancer However, for the Hard Chromium 5-in-1 million. risk could be as high as 5-in-1 million Electroplating source category, we did Table A.3 displays the results of the and the maximum chronic non-cancer evaluate the facility that was modeled as facility-wide risk assessment for actual TOSHI value could be up to 0.004, having the highest maximum individual emissions of all sources at the facility as based on the actual emissions level. The lifetime cancer risk (70-in-1 million) reported in the NEI. We did not perform total estimated population risks from based on actual emissions. Our analysis a facility-wide risk assessment based on the conservative assessment of the indicates that this facility, if operated at allowable emissions, as explained in the chromium anodizing facilities based on the allowable emissions limit, could documentation referenced in section actual emission levels is 2,700 people have a maximum individual lifetime IV.A of this preamble, which is exposed to a cancer risk greater than 1- cancer risk as high as 90-in-1 million. available in the docket for this action.

TABLE A.3—CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING AND ANODIZING FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Source Source category Maximum category contribution facility-wide contribution Maximum to this Source category individual to this facility-wide maximum cancer risk maximum chronic non- facility-wide (in 1 million) facility-wide cancer TOSHI chronic individual non-cancer cancer risk 1 TOSHI 1

Hard Chromium Electroplating ...... 90 < 1% 2 < 1% Decorative Chromium Electroplating ...... 90 7% 0.8 < 1% Chromium Anodizing ...... 20 75% 0.2 < 1% 1 Percentage shown reflects source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

As shown in Table A.3, the maximum values occur, the estimated proportion electroplating source is primarily driven individual cancer risks from all HAP of the cancer risk attributable to the by chemical production processes. We emissions at facilities that perform hard hard chromium electroplating, are currently developing a chemical chromium electroplating, decorative decorative chromium electroplating, manufacturing sector project 31 and plan chromium electroplating, and and chromium anodizing processes is to address risk from these chemical chromium anodizing are estimated to be less than 1 percent, 7 percent, and 75 production processes as part of that 90-in-1 million, 90-in-1 million, and percent, respectively. The highest action. The highest facility-wide cancer 20-in-1 million, respectively. For the facility-wide cancer risk for a facility risk for a facility that includes a facilities where these maximum risk that includes a hard chromium decorative chromium electroplating

28 There is uncertainty regarding the operating about the uncertainty of the risk assessment results, we note that the supplemental assessment shows status of the facility (reported to be closed) we note that the supplemental assessment shows 540 people exposed to a cancer risk greater than 1- associated with the maximum lifetime individual 30,000 people exposed to a cancer risk greater than in-1 million and 0.001 excess cancer case per year, cancer risk. Prior to any final rulemaking action, we 1-in-1 million and 0.01 excess cancer case per year, or one case in every 1,000 years. will investigate this situation and revise the risk or one case in every 100 years. 31 This is one of several projects EPA is analysis and results accordingly. 30 Based on our conservative risk assessment, we 29 Based on our conservative risk assessment, we believe the risks are low, and, as explained further undertaking to establish and implement national believe the risks are low, and, as explained further below, are proposing that the risks are acceptable emission-control measures for specific sectors of the below, are proposing that the risks are acceptable for the Chromium Anodizing source category. economy by taking an integrated multipollutant for the Decorative Chromium source category. Although we did not need to consider the approach to assessing and implementing additional Although we did not need to consider the supplemental analysis that we conducted for emission controls using our existing regulatory supplemental analysis that we conducted for Chromium Anodizing to help guide our conclusion frameworks. Decorative Chromium to help guide our conclusion about the uncertainty of the risk assessment results,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65089

source is primarily driven by aerospace category processes are estimated to be 2, levels for the population living within processes that will be addressed in a 0.8, and 0.2, respectively. At the 5 km of the facilities, among various future residual risk review for the facilities where these maximum risk demographic groups are provided in a Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework values occur, the estimated proportion report available in the docket for this Facilities source category. The highest of the non-cancer risk attributable to the action and summarized in Tables A.4, facility-wide cancer risk for a facility Hard Chromium Electroplating, A.5, and A.6 below. These estimates of that includes a chromium anodizing Decorative Chromium Electroplating, total population with risk exceeding source is primarily driven by the and Chromium Anodizing source 1-in-1 million differ from the risk chromium anodizing processes. The category processes is less than 1 percent estimates presented above because the facility-wide maximum chronic non- for each source category. demographic analysis uses a 5 km cancer TOSHI values for facilities that The results of the demographic radius and the risk assessment results include Hard Chromium Electroplating, analyses performed to investigate the provided above reflect use of a 50 km Decorative Chromium Electroplating, distribution of risks above 1-in-1 radius around all chromium and Chromium Anodizing source million, based on actual emissions electroplating facilities.

TABLE A.4—HARD CHROME ELECTROPLATING DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Emissions Maximum Below the Over 25 basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty w/o a (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level HS diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category 70 13.1 52 23 29 34 0.6 22 20 Facility- wide ...... 90 13.1 52 23 29 34 0.6 22 20

TABLE A.5—DECORATIVE CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Emissions Maximum Below the Over 25 basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty w/o a (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level HS diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category 70 0.35 50 18 32 47 0.8 24 23 Facility- wide ...... 90 0.43 54 21 32 48 0.7 24 25

TABLE A.6—CHROMIUM ANODIZING DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Emissions Maximum Below the Over 25 basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty w/o a (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level HS diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category 5 0.0027 36 16 0 0 0.4 25 19 Facility- wide ...... 20 0.0079 22 10 12 13 0.8 19 16

The results of the demographic included in the ‘‘Other and Multiracial’’ than 1-in-1 million is higher than the analysis show that, for the population demographic group, 23 percent are typical distribution of these located within 5 km of Hard Chromium included in the ‘‘African-American’’ demographic groups across the United Electroplating source category, there are demographic group, 22 percent are States. These demographic analyses are about 13.1 million people with cancer included in the ‘‘Below Poverty Level’’ based on the conservative assessment risks greater than 1-in-1 million for both demographic group, and 20 percent are results. the source category and facility-wide. Of included in the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High For the Decorative Chromium this population at risk, 52 percent could School Diploma’’ demographic group. Electroplating source category, there are be classified as a ‘‘Minority,’’ 34 percent The percentage of the population within about 350,000 people with cancer risks are included in the ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’ 5 km of a hard chromium electroplating greater than 1-in-1 million for the source demographic group, 29 percent are facility and with a cancer risk greater category and 430,000 people with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65090 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

cancer risks greater than 1-in-1 million individual most exposed is 70-in-1 disproportionate risks 32 from exposure facility-wide. Of this population at risk, million based on actual emissions and to emissions from this category (Tables 50 percent could be classified as a 90-in-1 million based on MACT- A.4–A.6). Although the demographic ‘‘Minority,’’ 47 percent are included in allowable emissions. The maximum analysis was based on our conservative the ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’ demographic non-cancer risk level, which is low, is risk assessment modeling, we have no group, 32 percent are included in the a TOSHI of 0.06 based on actual reason to believe that the results would ‘‘Other and Multiracial,’’ demographic emissions and 0.09 based on allowable be substantially different were we to re- group, 18 percent are included in the emissions. These risks are due to run that analysis using the assumptions ‘‘African-American’’ demographic group, estimated emissions of hexavalent underlying the supplemental 24 percent are included in the ‘‘Below chromium, which EPA describes as a assessment. This is because the Poverty Level’’ demographic group, and known human carcinogen by the disparate impacts identified through our 23 percent are included in the ‘‘Over 25 inhalation route of exposure. As demographic analysis are reflective of Without a High School Diploma’’ explained above, both the MIR and the the fact that many chrome facilities are demographic group. The percentage of maximum non-cancer risk levels are located in inner city urban areas, and in the population within 5 km of a based on emissions from what we or near residential neighborhoods more decorative chromium electroplating believe is the highest risk hard likely to be inhabited by minority and facility and with a cancer risks greater chromium facility operating in the low income persons. We are concerned than 1-in-1 million is higher than the United States. about the potential disproportionate typical distribution of these We further estimate that the excess health risks from these urban facilities demographic groups across the United cancer incidence could be as high as 0.8 on minorities and those below the States. The results of the demographic cases per year, and that over 14 million poverty level. We solicit comment on analysis for facility-wide emissions are people could be exposed to a cancer risk whether there may be pollution similar to the results for the source of 1-in-1 million or greater. These risk prevention efforts or other HAP category. levels are based on a highly emission reduction approaches that For the Chromium Anodizing source conservative risk assessment as could mitigate the impacts that these category, there are about 2,700 people described above. In summary, in this facilities have on their immediate with cancer risks greater than 1-in-1 assessment we used (1) actual emissions surroundings. We also recognize that, in million and 7,900 people with cancer data for 63 facilities and (2) emissions addition to whatever controls are risks greater than 1-in-1 million facility- estimates that are reflective of average required in the final rulemaking for the wide. Of the population with cancer emissions for the highest emitting Hard Chromium Electroplating source risks greater than 1-in-1 million, 36 facilities for each one of an additional category, there may be other percent could be classified as a 1,219 facilities not in the original approaches, such as facility-specific ‘‘Minority,’’ 16 percent are included in dataset. Because there are only 790 hard compliance assistance, that could the ‘‘African-American’’ demographic chromium facilities, and because only mitigate the impacts that these facilities group, 25 percent are included in the ten percent of the facilities would have have on their immediate surroundings. ‘‘Below Poverty Level’’ demographic this high an emissions rate, we believe We solicit comment and supporting group, and 19 percent are included in that these conservative risk assessment information to assist EPA in identifying the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High School results overstate cancer incidence and measures to mitigate these population exposure. Diploma’’ demographic group. The disproportionate risks. As noted above, we performed a percentage of the population within 5 In accordance with the approach supplemental analysis to assess the km of a chromium anodizing facility established in the Benzene NESHAP, degree to which the conservative risk and with a cancer risk greater than 1-in- EPA weighed all health risk measures assessment may overstate risks, and, 1 million is higher than the typical and information, including the thus, to determine how heavily to weigh distribution of these demographic maximum individual cancer risk, the those risks in determining whether to cancer incidence, the number of people groups across the United States. The find the risks acceptable. In this exposed to a risk greater than 1-in-1 results of the facility-wide demographic supplemental analysis we assessed million, the distribution of risks in the analysis are higher than the typical these risks based on (1) the emissions exposed population, and the uncertainty distribution of risks to the demographic data used in the conservative groups across the United States, for the assessment for the 63 facilities for of our risk calculations in determining ‘‘Below Poverty Level’’ and the ‘‘Over 25 which we have actual facility emission whether the risk posed by emissions Without a High School Diploma’’ information, and (2) revised emission from hard chromium facilities is demographic groups, but are lower than data that better represent nationwide acceptable. As an initial matter, we note that the these levels for the other demographic average emission levels for the 1,219 90-in-1 million risk based on allowable groups. facilities. The supplemental assessment emissions is approaching the Details of these assessments and indicates that the excess cancer risks ‘‘presumptive limit on maximum analyses can be found in the residual from hard chromium electroplating risk documentation as referenced in facilities is 0.1 cancer cases per year and individual lifetime risk of section IV.A of this preamble, which is 360,000 people exposed to a cancer risk approximately 1-in-10 thousand [100-in- ’’ available in the docket for this action. of 1-in-1 million or more, which is 1 million] recognized in the Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38045). We also note 4. What are our proposed decisions on substantially less than we found with the conservative assessment. These risk acceptability and ample margin of 32 Using census data on race and ethnicity, we safety? results indicate that the estimated risks estimated the percentage of people in the United are uncertain and are highly sensitive to a. Risk Acceptability States that are minority. We also estimated the input assumptions and that the percentage of people that live within 5 km of each The risk analysis we performed for conservative assessment may facility and have cancer risks greater than 1-in-1 million that are minority. Where the percentage of this proposal indicates that for the Hard substantially overstate risks. people at risk is higher than the percentage Chromium Electroplating source The results of our demographic nationwide, those minorities face disproportionate category, the cancer risks to the analysis indicate that minorities face risks.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65091

that, based on our conservative analysis, However, we are very concerned by population. To feel comfortable with a there is a high level of cancer incidence the results of our conservative risk final decision finding the risk of 0.8 excess cancer cases per year analysis, especially the large number of acceptable, we believe it is important to nationwide, and a very large number people (including disproportionately reduce the level of uncertainty (14.2 million) of people potentially affected populations) estimated to be associated with our current analyses. exposed to a cancer risk greater than 1- exposed at a cancer risk above 1-in-1 Thus, in light of the comments and any in-1 million.33 However, we also million. We are also concerned about additional data (or lack thereof) that we recognize that our supplemental the level of uncertainty with our receive during the comment period, we assessment based on alternative input analysis given that we have very limited may determine that it is appropriate to assumptions concerning emissions (that information as to the number (and size) issue a supplemental proposal in which better represent nationwide average of the facilities. While our current we propose to find the risk emissions) indicate that the results of proposal is supported by recognizing unacceptable. If we issue a the conservative assessments are the uncertainty associated with the high supplemental proposal in which we substantially overstated. Thus, there is risk levels from our conservative propose to find the risk unacceptable, great uncertainty about both the cancer assessment and, as explained above, we would be required to propose incidence and the number of people that uncertainty (as demonstrated by the emissions standards or work practices exposed. supplemental analysis) points in the that reduce risk to a level that is On the one hand, we acknowledge direction of an overstatement of risk, we acceptable and provides an ample that the cancer incidence and number of would prefer to base a final rule on margin of safety. people exposed to cancer risks of 1-in- more complete and reliable information. For the Decorative Chromium 1 million or greater are high based on The purpose of the residual risk Electroplating source category, the our conservative analysis. On the other standards under CAA section 112(f) is to cancer risks to the individual most hand, we recognize the significant ensure protection of public health and exposed is 70-in-1 million, based on uncertainty of these risk estimates and the environment. Thus, we believe it is both actual and MACT-allowable the likelihood that they are overstated, important to develop a conservative risk emissions. Based on this cancer risk based on the conservative nature of the analysis and err on the side of potential level and in consideration of other assessment. The supplemental analysis overestimation of risk analyses where health measures and factors, including highlights the sensitivity of our risk we are missing data. In this case, we the cancer incidence (one case in every analysis to highly uncertain input recognize that the assessment may be 12.5 years) and the low maximum non- assumptions and supports a overly conservative, and we are cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.06 based determination that the population considering additional methods for on both actual and MACT-allowable exposure and cancer incidence risk performing a conservative analysis. emissions), we propose that the risks numbers are overstated. It shows However, we believe additional from the Decorative Chromium substantially lower cancer incidence information and data regarding the Electroplating source category are (0.1 excess cases per year nationwide as location, type and size of facilities will acceptable. For the Chromium Anodizing source opposed to 0.8) and number of people be important to performing any category, the cancer risks to the potentially exposed to a cancer risk of additional analysis that would err on individual most exposed is 5-in-1 1-in-1 million or more (360 thousand as the side of protectiveness without being million, based on both actual and opposed to 14.2 million). In addition, overly conservative. At this time, we are allowable emissions. Based on this low the distribution of risks in the exposed not certain that we would take final cancer risk level and in consideration of population shows the number of people action finding the risk to be acceptable other health measures and factors, exposed to a cancer risk greater than 10- based on the limited information including the cancer incidence (one in-1 million is 71,000 for the currently available to the Agency. case in every 250 years) and the low conservative assessment and 5,100 for The comments and information that maximum non-cancer risk level (TOSHI the supplemental analysis. we receive on this proposal will be In determining whether risk is of 0.004 based on actual emissions), we critical in making a final decision on propose that the risks from the acceptable, we focus on the results of all acceptability. We are soliciting Chromium Anodizing source category aspects of the risk assessment. Because comment and data to help the Agency are acceptable. the MIR is less than 100-in-1 million, make an informed decision as it moves and because of the significant forward with this rulemaking. b. Ample Margin of Safety uncertainty of the cancer incidence and Specifically, with regard to each of the Although we are proposing that the number of people exposed, which we facilities listed in Appendix A to this risks from these source categories are believe are overstated based on the fact preamble, we are seeking to identify (1) acceptable, risk estimates for that our risk analysis was highly the actual annual emissions, if known; individuals in the exposed population conservative, at this time, we are (2) which of the three source categories are above 1-in-1 million. Consequently, proposing that the risks from the Hard it falls within; and (3) whether, for hard we considered whether the MACT Chromium Electroplating source chromium, it is a ‘‘large’’ or ‘‘small’’ standard provides an ample margin of category are acceptable. We are facility within the definitions in 40 CFR safety. As part of this analysis, we proposing that the risks are acceptable, 63.341(a). In particular, we are investigated available emissions control in large part, because we believe that the encouraging the States to provide EPA options that might reduce the risk assumptions underlying the with better inventory data for sources associated with chromium compound supplemental analysis may present a within their States. Moreover, we are emissions from the nationwide more realistic estimate of the emissions encouraging States to help identify estimated 1,770 hard chromium from hard chromium facilities. sources that may be located near electroplating, decorative chromium sensitive populations or other electroplating, and chromium anodizing 33 These comparisons refer to estimates of populations of concern, such as located operations. Once we identified the incidence and populations from risk assessments performed for other source categories previously near schools or that may be located in available emissions control options, we covered by RTR risk assessments. communities with a significant minority estimated the cost of these options and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65092 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

estimated the emission reduction and the control efficiencies achieved by of the industry. Table A.7 summarizes associated with each control option. To those technologies. The distribution of the nationwide costs and cost- determine controlled baseline emissions emission control methods among the effectiveness of these regulatory control nationwide, assumptions were made various types of chromium options. about the numbers and types of electroplating plants and plant sizes was emission control technologies in use, estimated based on general knowledge

TABLE A.7—COSTS OF CONTROL OPTIONS FOR CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING

Cost-effec- Number of Emission Capital Annualized tiveness MIR after Type of facility Control option affected reduction costs costs ($million/ control facilities (TPY) ($million) ($million/yr) ton) (in-1-million)

Large hard chromium electro- HEPA filter retrofit 132 1.0 35.1 18.4 36.3 6 plating. Small hard chromium electro- HEPA filter retrofit 658 0.4 66.0 33.9 59.3 6 plating. CMP retrofit ...... 392 0.2 36.6 11.1 33.1 10 Decorative chromium electro- HEPA filter retrofit 740 0.1 109.0 47.8 486 4 plating. CMP retrofit ...... 644 1 0.05 63.1 17.1 367 10 Chromium anodizing ...... HEPA filter retrofit 240 0.02 43.9 17.9 895 < 1 CMP retrofit ...... 198 1 0.009 22.9 5.6 649 2 1 Based on an estimated control efficiency of 99.9 percent.

For large hard chromium respectively. The cost-effectiveness chromium compounds by an estimated electroplating facilities, we evaluated would be $33,100,000 per ton of HAP 0.098 TPY from the estimated baseline the costs and emissions reductions emissions reduced. The Benzene level of 0.10 TPY. The estimated capital associated with retrofitting existing NESHAP emphasize the need to and annualized costs for this option tanks with HEPA filters. For small hard consider ‘‘costs and the economic would be $108,970,000 and chromium electroplating facilities, we impacts of control,’’ which implies some $47,800,000, respectively. The cost- evaluated the same HEPA filter retrofit knowledge of affordability (54 FR effectiveness would be $486,000,000 per option, and also the option of 38046). The cost of the control options ton of HAP emissions reduced. retrofitting CMP systems on all tanks for hard chromium electroplating would Retrofitting CMP systems on all currently controlled with packed bed impact over half of these facilities with decorative chromium electroplating scrubbers. Retrofitting HEPA filters on estimated cost to sales ratios ranging tanks that currently do not have add-on existing tanks at large hard chromium from 8 percent to 22 percent. A cost to controls would reduce nationwide electroplating plants would reduce sales ratio greater than 3 percent may emissions of chromium compounds by nationwide emissions of chromium have a significant impact, including an estimated 0.05 TPY from the compounds by an estimated 1.0 TPY plant closure for many of these estimated baseline level of 0.10 TPY. from the estimated baseline level of 1.10 facilities. The estimated capital and annualized TPY. The estimated capital and These additional control requirements costs for this option would be annualized costs for this option would would reduce the maximum lifetime $63,100,000 and $17,100,000, be $35,100,000 and $18,430,000, individual cancer risk from the Hard respectively. The cost-effectiveness for respectively. The cost-effectiveness Chromium Electroplating source this option would be $367 million per would be $36,300,000 per ton of HAP category to approximately 4-in-1 ton of HAP emissions reduced. The emissions reduced. Retrofitting HEPA million, based on actual emissions. We additional control requirements for filters on existing tanks at small hard estimate that, considering MACT- HEPA filters would reduce the chromium electroplating plants would allowable emissions levels, the maximum lifetime individual cancer reduce nationwide emissions of maximum lifetime individual cancer risk from the Decorative Chromium chromium compounds by an estimated risk from the Hard Chromium Electroplating source category to 0.40 TPY from the estimated baseline Electroplating source category would be approximately 4-in-1 million, based on level of 0.42 TPY. The estimated capital reduced to approximately 6-in-1 actual emissions. Because we believe and annualized costs for this option million. The cancer incidence would be the actual emissions are essentially the would be $65,980,000 and $33,860,000, reduced to approximately 0.05 and the same as the MACT-allowable emissions respectively. The cost-effectiveness estimated number of people exposed for the Decorative Chromium would be $59,300,000 per ton of HAP higher than 1-in-1 million would be Electroplating source category, we emissions reduced. Retrofitting CMP about 1 million. estimate no difference between the risks systems on all tanks currently For decorative chromium from the allowable emission level and controlled with packed bed scrubbers at electroplating, we evaluated the options the actual emission level. small hard chromium electroplating of retrofitting HEPA filters on all For chromium anodizing, we plants would reduce nationwide existing tanks and the option of evaluated the options of retrofitting emissions of chromium compounds by retrofitting CMP systems on the existing HEPA filters on all existing tanks and an estimated 0.19 TPY from the tanks that currently are not equipped the option of retrofitting CMP systems estimated baseline level of 0.37 TPY. with add-on control devices. Retrofitting on the existing tanks that currently are The estimated capital and annualized HEPA filters on all existing decorative not equipped with add-on control costs for this option would be chromium electroplating tanks would devices. Retrofitting HEPA filters on all $36,640,000 and $11,050,000, reduce nationwide emissions of existing chromium anodizing tanks

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65093

would reduce nationwide emissions of overstated. Our supplemental risk these risks. In particular, we are chromium compounds by an estimated analysis for this source category requesting States to identify any 0.020 TPY from the estimated baseline indicates a cancer incidence of 0.1 cases controls they have already required for level of 0.021 TPY. The estimated per year and 360,000 people exposed to these facilities, any controls they are capital and annualized costs for this cancer risks of greater than 1-in-1- currently considering, or any other option would be $43,860,000 and million. This analysis indicates that the controls of which they may be aware. $17,900,000, respectively. The cost- risk levels in the assessment are highly We are also soliciting comment on effectiveness would be $895,000,000 per uncertain and err on the side of being whether our cost estimates for these ton of HAP emissions reduced. conservative. options are accurate and whether these Retrofitting CMP systems on all Our analyses also show that, for these controls may be more cost-effective. chromium anodizing tanks that source categories, there is no potential In summary, we propose that the risks currently do not have add-on controls for an adverse environmental effect or posed by these source categories are would not significantly reduce human health multipathway effects, and acceptable. We are also proposing that emissions. The estimated capital and that acute and chronic non-cancer the current MACT standard provides an annualized costs for this option would health impacts are unlikely. Our ample margin of safety to protect public be $22,900,000 and $5,600,000, additional analysis of facility-wide risks health based on our conclusion that the respectively. The cost-effectiveness for showed that the maximum facility-wide controls available are not cost-effective this option would be $649 million per cancer risk is 90-in-1 million, and that in light of the additional health ton of HAP emissions reduced. The the maximum chronic non-cancer risks protection the controls would provide. additional control requirements for are unlikely to cause health impacts. Thus, we are proposing to re-adopt the HEPA filters would reduce the Our additional analysis of the existing MACT standard to satisfy maximum lifetime individual cancer demographics of the exposed section 112(f) of the CAA. risk from the Chromium Anodizing population shows that minorities face source category to less than 1-in-1 disproportionate risk from exposure to 5. What is our proposed decision on the million, based on actual emissions. emissions from this category technology review? We do not believe there is a Because we believe the actual emissions To evaluate developments in significant risk reduction from the are essentially the same as the MACT- practices, processes, and control housekeeping measures we are allowable emissions for the Chromium technologies for the chromium proposing under CAA section 112(d)(6). Anodizing source category, we estimate electroplating source categories, several However, we are requesting information the risk reduction based on allowable activities were performed. Public on any risk reductions from these emissions to be the same as that for the comments received on the proposed housekeeping practices and whether we actual emissions. 2002 amendments to the Chromium Our risk analysis results show cancer should consider adopting these Electroplating MACT standards (67 FR risks to the individual most exposed of practices under CAA section 112(f)(2). 38810, June 5, 2002) were reviewed to 70-in-1 million and 5-in-1 million based We considered all these factors in our determine whether they identified any on actual and MACT-allowable ample margin of safety decision, and developments in practices, processes, or emissions, respectively, for the concluded that the costs of the options control technologies that warrant further Decorative Chromium Electroplating analyzed are not reasonable considering consideration. A review was performed and Chromium Anodizing source the emissions reductions and cancer categories. For both of these categories, health benefits potentially achievable of the supporting documentation for the the cancer incidence is less than 0.01 with the controls. As a result, we 2007 amendments to California’s cases per year. For decorative chromium propose that the existing MACT Airborne Toxic Control Measure electroplating, the number of people standard provides an ample margin of (ATCM) for Chromium Plating and exposed to a cancer risk of 1-in-1 safety (considering cost, technical Chromium Anodizing Facilities. Finally, million or more is approximately feasibility, and other factors) to protect searches of the RBLC and the Internet 390,000. For chromium anodizing, the public health for all three of these were conducted to identify other number of people exposed to a cancer source categories. Thus, we are practices, processes, or control risk of 1-in-1 million or more is proposing to re-adopt the existing technologies that could be applied to approximately 2,700. MACT standard to satisfy section 112(f) chromium electroplating. For the Hard Chromium of the CAA. The 2004 amendments to the Electroplating source category, our risk While we propose that the existing Chromium Electroplating MACT analysis shows cancer risks to the MACT standard for the Hard Chromium standards addressed three specific individual most exposed are 70-in-1 Electroplating source category is technology developments that occurred million based on actual emissions levels acceptable and provides an ample following promulgation of the original and 90-in-1 million based on MACT- margin of safety, we are proposing MACT standard: The use of WAFS for allowable emissions. The cancer additional requirements under CAA hard chromium electroplating emission incidence for this source category could section 112(d)(6), as discussed below. control; instrumental differences in be as high as 0.8 cases per year, and Notwithstanding our proposal that the surface tension measurements for could be over 14 million people risks are acceptable, we remain demonstrating compliance with exposed to cancer risks of 1-in-1 million concerned that up to 14.2 million electroplating bath surface tension or greater due to emissions from hard people may be exposed to cancer risks limits; and enclosing hoods for chromium electroplating sources using of 1-in-1 million or greater, and that electroplating tanks. Because those highly conservative assumptions. As we there are disparities in risks for some technology developments have already stated previously, we believe we demographic groups. While we are been addressed and we are not aware of overestimated hard chromium rejecting the option of adding HEPA any improvements to them, they are not electroplating emissions, the number of filters or CMP as not cost-effective, we discussed further. The following plants that perform hard chromium are specifically requesting comment on paragraphs describe all developments in electroplating, and, therefore, that the whether there are any cost-effective practices, processes, and control risks from the resulting analyses are also controls that may be able to reduce technologies that we identified and that

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65094 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

were thus considered for the technology preamble. In light of the high cost of this addition of PFOS-based WAFS to tanks review, along with our conclusions. option as compared with the risk as a control method for these source reductions it would achieve, we are categories. We solicit comment on all a. Emission Elimination Device proposing that it is not necessary to aspects of this change, including the An emission elimination device revise the MACT standard under section non-air quality health and (EED), which is also referred to as a 112(d)(6) to require HEPA filters. environmental impacts associated with ‘‘Merlin cover,’’ consists of a tank cover However, we request comment on using PFOS based WAFS. that includes a porous membrane that whether we should require HEPA filters For new sources, we are proposing allows gases to escape, but captures for new source MACT. that no PFOS-based WAFS could be droplets and mist emanating from the used upon startup. For existing sources, electroplating tank. While these tank c. Wetting Agent Fume Suppressants we are proposing that no PFOS-based covers are available, we do not believe (WAFS) WAFS could be added to the any chromium electroplating or The MACT standard allows the use of electroplating or anodizing tanks anodizing facilities are currently using WAFS as a compliance alternative for beginning 3 years after promulgation of an EED due to the impracticality of meeting the applicable emission limit. the final amendments; however, the covering the electroplating tank while WAFS are used in most decorative tanks may continue operating with the plating is underway. Because these chromium electroplating and chromium remaining PFOS-based WAFS in them devices are not known to be used in this anodizing tanks and in many hard after that date until it is depleted. Under industry and because it is unclear that chromium electroplating tanks for these amendments, these requirements they are feasible for these operations, we emission control. Historically, the most would be specified in 40 CFR concluded that it is not necessary to effective types of WAFS have been 63.342(c)(1)(iv) and (2)(vi) for hard revise the MACT standard to require based on perfluorooctyl sulfonate chromium electroplating tanks, 40 CFR this control under section 112(d)(6). (PFOS). The PFOS-based WAFS used in 63.342(d)(3) for decorative chromium However, we request comment on tanks the chromium electroplating industry electroplating and chromium anodizing or processes in which an EED could are part of a family of chemical tanks, and 40 CFR 63.342(e)(2) for practicably be used by chromium compounds categorized as long-chain decorative chromium electroplating electroplating or anodizing facilities. perfluorinated chemicals (PFC). As tanks that use a trivalent chromium b. HEPA Filters noted in a 2010 California Office of bath. A definition of PFOS-based fume Health Hazard Assessment report, suppressants also would be added to 40 Although HEPA filters have been on Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and CFR 63.341. the market for decades, they were not Its Salts and Transformation and d. Housekeeping Procedures considered to be a practical control Degradation Precursors,34 these method for electroplating tank compounds have persistent, We are also proposing under CAA emissions when the MACT standards bioaccumulative, and toxic section 112 (d)(6) to incorporate several were developed due to potential characteristics and are a particular housekeeping requirements into 40 CFR problems with clogging and the concern for children’s health. 63.342(f). In our review of the 2007 availability of several other types of mist Over the last several years there have amendments to California’s ATCM for eliminator technologies that had been been developments associated with the Chromium Plating and Chromic Acid proven to be effective in reducing use of WAFS as a compliance Anodizing Facilities, we found this rule emissions from electroplating tanks. alternative. There are now several types required several housekeeping However, in the past decade, facilities of WAFS on the market that do not procedures that were not included in in California have increasingly used include PFOS chemicals and have been the housekeeping procedures required HEPA filters to meet the emission limits proven effective for use in hard by the Chromium Electroplating MACT of the State’s ATCM for Chromium chromium and decorative chromium standards. These measures would Plating and Chromic Acid Anodizing electroplating baths that we believe are potentially reduce fugitive chromium Facilities. In October 2007, the cost-effective. Furthermore, these non- emissions from chromium electroplating California Air Resources Board (CARB) PFOS WAFS are not associated with any and anodizing operations. In view of the amended the ATCM to further tighten known adverse health effects. Although implementation of these procedures in emission limits and to require HEPA the non-PFOS WAFS have not been California and the potential for fugitive filters on all new chromium used extensively in the chromium emissions reductions, we are proposing electroplating and anodizing tanks. In anodizing industry, we are not aware of to add these procedures to the those applications, HEPA filters act as a any technical reasons to preclude their Chromium Electroplating MACT second stage of control, with the first use and effectiveness for chromium standards. The proposed housekeeping stage generally consisting of a mesh pad anodizing baths. However, we seek procedures would include storage mist eliminator or other device that comment on this, as well as on our requirements for any substance that removes large particles from the exhaust assessment that their use is cost- contains hexavalent chromium as a primary ingredient; controls for the stream prior to the HEPA filter. effective. Because of the adverse non-air dripping of bath solution resulting from Discussions with State and local agency quality health and environmental dragout; splash guards to minimize staff in California indicate no impacts associated with using PFOS- overspray and return bath solution to technological problems with using based WAFS (i.e., the increasing the electroplating or anodizing tank; a HEPA filters for chromium concern over the presence of long-chain requirement to promptly clean up or electroplating emissions control. As part PFC in the environment), we are contain all spills of any substance of this technology review, HEPA filters proposing under CAA section 112(d)(6) containing hexavalent chromium; have been considered as a possible to revise the scope of the compliance requirements for the routine cleaning or control option for sources subject to the alternative to no longer allow the Chromium Electroplating MACT stabilizing of storage and work surfaces, standards. The costs of requiring HEPA 34 This report is available at http:// walkways, and other surfaces filters were estimated, and are discussed www.oehha.org/prop65/CRNR_notices/pdf_zip/ potentially contaminated with above in section V.A.4.b of this 070910_PFOS_CIC.pdf. hexavalent chromium; a requirement to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65095

install a barrier between all buffing, b. Rule Improvements proposed action would also revise the grinding, or polishing operations and In addition, we identified the need for trigger for semiannual compliance electroplating or anodizing operations; revisions of the standards to correct reports specified in 40 CFR and requirements for the storage, editorial errors, make clarifications, or 63.347(h)(2)(A) to be consistent with the disposal, recovery, or recycling of address issues with implementation or trigger specified in the General chromium-containing wastes. The determining compliance with the rule Provisions. Subpart N currently proposed housekeeping procedures provisions. provides that a semiannual report must would be listed in a new Table 2 to 40 Monitoring and Testing Requirements. be submitted if both the duration of CFR 63.342. In addition, this proposed We are proposing to revise 40 CFR excess emissions exceeds 1 percent of action would require owners and 63.344(e), which addresses compliance the source operating time and the operators to incorporate these provisions for multiple sources duration of air pollution control device housekeeping procedures in the facility controlled by a common add-on air malfunctions exceeds 5 percent of the Operation and Maintenance Plan pollution control device. This section of source operating time during the specified in section 40 CFR 63.342(f)(3) the MACT standard references testing reporting period; however, 40 CFR and implement them, and a new by Method 306, without any mention of 63.10(e)(3)(viii) of the General Provisions requires submitting a definition would be added to 40 CFR Method 306A. Since Method 306A is an semiannual report if either condition 63.341(a) to clarify what is meant by the alternative to Method 306, we are occurs. We are proposing to revise 40 term ‘‘contains hexavalent chromium as proposing to revise section 40 CFR CFR part 63, subpart N to require a primary ingredient.’’ The proposed 63.344(e) to clarify that testing can be semiannual reports to be submitted if compliance date for implementing the performed by either Method 306 or either condition occurs. housekeeping procedures would be 6 Method 306A. months after promulgation of the final To correct inconsistencies between B. What are the results and proposed amendments. the amendments made to 40 CFR part decisions for the Group I Polymers and 6. What are the other actions we are 63, subpart N in 2004 (69 FR 42885) and Resins Production source categories? proposing? Method 306B, we are proposing to The National Emission Standards for revise Method 306B, which specifies a. SSM Provisions Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: procedures for measuring the surface Group I Polymers and Resins were Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, tension of chromium electroplating and promulgated on September 5, 1996 (62 EPA is proposing that standards in this anodizing baths. In addition, the FR 46925), and codified at 40 CFR part rule would apply at all times. The proposed amendments would help to 63, subpart U. The Polymers and Resins existing MACT standards for these three ensure that surface tension I MACT standard applies to major source categories already specifies that measurements made using sources and regulates HAP emissions the emission limitations apply ‘‘during stalagmometers are accurate. Under the from nine source categories: Butyl periods of startup and shutdown’’ but proposed amendments, section 1.2 of Rubber Production, Epichlorohydrin not during malfunctions. We are Method 306B would be revised to Elastomers Production, Ethylene proposing to revise this paragraph to clarify that the method also applies to Propylene Rubber Production, remove the sentence indicating that the hard chromium electroplating tanks. HypalonTM Production, Neoprene emission limitations do not apply Section 11.1 would be revised to Production, Nitrile Butadiene Rubber during malfunctions. We are include procedures for checking the Production, Polybutadiene Rubber maintaining the malfunction-associated accuracy of, and cleaning, a Production, Polysulfide Rubber reporting and recordkeeping stalagmometer before using the Production, and Styrene Butadiene requirements in 40 CFR 63.346 and 40 stalagmometer to measure surface Rubber and Latex Production. CFR 63.347 with minor revisions. We tension. The proposed revisions to The Polymers and Resins I MACT are proposing to add language to 40 CFR section 11.1 are consistent with the standards regulate HAP emissions 63.344(a) to clarify the conditions CARB ATCM for Hexavalent Chromium resulting from the production of during which performance tests shall be for Decorative and Hard Chrome plating elastomers (i.e., synthetic rubber). An conducted and to specify in Table 1 that and Chromic Acid Anodizing Facilities. elastomer is a synthetic polymeric the performance test specifications in 40 Maintaining surface tension measuring material that can stretch to at least twice CFR 63.7(e)(1) of the General Provisions devices is critical for obtaining accurate its original length and then return do not apply. We are also proposing to measurements. Method 306B currently rapidly to approximately its original add a general duty provision to references standard procedures for the length when released. Elastomers are minimize emissions into 40 CFR use of tensiometers (ASTM Method D produced via a polymerization/ 63.342(a)(1). In addition, we are 1331–89), but not for the use of copolymerization process, in which proposing to promulgate an affirmative stalagmometers. The proposed monomers undergo intermolecular defense against civil penalties for amendment to section 11.1 would help chemical bond formation to form a very exceedances of emission standards to ensure that stalagmometers used to large polymer molecule. Generally, the caused by malfunctions, as well as demonstrate compliance with surface production of elastomers entails four criteria for establishing the affirmative tension limits are maintained and used processes: (1) Raw material (i.e., defense. EPA has attempted to ensure properly. Finally, section 11.2 would be solvent) storage and refining; (2) that we have not incorporated into the revised to account for the differences in polymer formation in a reactor (either proposed regulatory language any surface tension limits, depending on the via the solution process, where provisions that are inappropriate, type of instrument used (tensiometer or monomers are dissolved in an organic unnecessary, or redundant in the stalagmometer). solvent, or the emulsion process, where absence of the SSM exemption. We are Rule Corrections. To eliminate a monomers are dispersed in water using specifically seeking comment on discrepancy between the Chromium a soap solution); (3) stripping and whether there are any such provisions Electroplating MACT standards in material recovery; and (4) finishing (i.e., that we have inadvertently incorporated subpart N of part 63 and the General blending, aging, coagulation, washing, or overlooked. Provisions in subpart A of part 63, this and drying).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65096 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Sources of HAP emissions from categories for which we proposed RTR emissions release characteristics. We elastomers production include raw decisions on October 10, 2008. also reviewed the emissions and other material storage vessels, front-end data to identify data anomalies that a. Overview of the Source Category process vents, back-end process could affect risk estimates. On March operations, wastewater operations, and Epichlorohydrin elastomers are 29, 2007, we published an ANPRM (72 equipment leaks. The ‘‘front-end’’ prepared from the polymerization or FR 29287) for the express purpose of processes include pre-polymerization, copolymerization of epichlorohydrin or requesting comments on and updates to reaction, stripping, and material other monomers. Epichlorohydrin this data set, as well as to the data sets recovery operations; and the ‘‘back-end’’ elastomers are produced by a solution for the other source categories addressed process includes all operations after polymerization process, typically using in that ANPRM. Comments received in stripping (predominately drying and toluene as the solvent in the reaction. response to the ANPRM were reviewed finishing). Typical control devices used The main epichlorohydrin elastomers and considered, and we made to reduce organic HAP emissions from are polyepichlorohydrin, epi-ethylene adjustments to the data set where we front-end process vents include flares, oxide (EO) copolymer, epi-allyl glycidyl concluded the comments supported incinerators, absorbers, carbon ether (AGE) copolymer, and epi-EOAGE such adjustment. After making adsorbers, and condensers. In addition, terpolymer. Epichlorohydrin elastomers appropriate changes to the data set hydrochloric acid formed when are widely used in the automotive based on this public data review chlorinated organic compounds are industry. process, the data set on which we based combusted are controlled using We identified one currently operating the initial proposal was created. This scrubbers. Emissions from storage epichlorohydrin elastomers production data set was used to conduct the risk vessels are controlled by floating roofs facility subject to the Polymers and assessment and other analyses for the or by routing them to a control device. Resins I MACT standard. Toluene Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production While emissions from back-end accounts for the majority of the HAP source category that formed the basis for process operations can be controlled emissions from the epichlorohydrin the proposed RTR included in the with control devices such as elastomers production processes at this October 10, 2008, proposal. incinerators, the most common method facility (approximately 44 TPY and 99 We have continued to scrutinize the of reducing these emissions is the percent of the total HAP emissions by existing data set and have evaluated any pollution prevention method of mass). This facility also reported additional data that became available reducing the amount of residual HAP relatively small emissions of subsequent to the October 10, 2008, that is contained in the raw product epichlorohydrin and ethylene oxide. proposal. Specific questions we had going to the back-end operations. The majority of HAP emissions are from concerning current operations led us to Emissions from wastewater are back-end process vents (approximately develop a questionnaire and ask for controlled by a variety of methods, 82 percent of the total HAP by mass). updated emissions and emissions including equipment modifications We estimate that the MACT-allowable release characteristics information. This (e.g., fixed roofs on storage vessels and emissions (i.e., the maximum emission information was requested from the oil water separators; covers on surface levels allowed if in compliance with the facility in May 2010 using the authority impoundments, containers, and drain MACT standard) from this source of section 114 of the CAA. We updated systems), treatment to remove the HAP category are approximately equal to the our data set for this source category (steam stripping, biological treatment), reported, actual emissions. For more based on the information received control devices, and work practices. detail about this estimate of the ratio of through this request. Emissions from equipment leaks are actual to MACT-allowable emissions, c. What are the results of the risk typically reduced by leak detection and see the memo in the docket for this assessments and analyses? repair work practice programs, and in action describing the estimation of some cases, by equipment MACT-allowable emission levels and We have conducted a revised modifications. Each of the seven Group associated risks and impacts. inhalation risk assessment for the I Polymers and Resins Production Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production b. What data were used in our risk source categories addressed in this source category. We have also analyses? proposal are discussed further below. conducted an assessment of facility- We initially created a preliminary wide risk, and performed a demographic 1. Epichlorohydrin Elastomers data set for the Epichlorohydrin analysis of population risks. Table B.1.1 Production Elastomers Production source category provides an overall summary of the Epichlorohydrin Elastomers using information we collected directly results of the revised inhalation risk Production is one of the source from industry on emissions data and assessment.

TABLE B.1.1—EPICHLOROHYDRIN ELASTOMERS PRODUCTION REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum Maximum individual chronic non-cancer Annual 3 cancer risk Population cancer TOSHI (in 1 million) 2 Maximum off-site acute non- Number of facilities1 at risk ≥ 1- incidence cancer HQ 4 in-1 million (cases per Actual Allowable Actual Allowable year) emissions emissions emissions emissions level level level level

1 ...... 10 10 800 0.0001 0.1 0.1 HQREL = 0.2 epichlorohydrin * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65097

3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Epichlorohydrin Elastomer Production source category is the respiratory system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A. of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was national cancer incidence from these for this action describing the estimation performed using actual emissions level facilities based on actual emission levels of MACT-allowable emission levels and data. As shown in Table B.1.1, the is 0.0001 excess cancer cases per year, associated risks and impacts. results of the revised inhalation risk or one case in every 10,000 years. There were no reported emissions of assessment indicated the maximum Based on our analysis, we believe that PB–HAP; therefore, we do not expect lifetime individual cancer risk could be actual emissions approximate emissions potential for human health as high as 10-in-1 million, the maximum allowable under the MACT standard. chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could Therefore, the risk results for MACT- multipathway risks or adverse be as high as 0.1, and the maximum off- allowable emissions are approximately environmental impacts. facility-site acute HQ value could be as equal to those for actual emissions. For Table B.1.2 displays the results of the high as 0.2, based on the actual more detail about the estimate of the facility-wide risk assessment. This emissions level and the REL value for ratio of actual to MACT-allowable assessment was conducted based on epichlorohydrin. The total estimated emissions, see the memo in the docket actual emission levels.

TABLE B.1.2—EPICHLOROHYDRIN ELASTOMERS PRODUCTION FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 10 Epichlorohydrin Elastomer Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk 1 100% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 0.1 Epichlorohydrin Elastomer Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI 1 ... 100% 1 Percentage shown reflects Epichlorohydrin Elastomer Production source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

As shown in Table B.1.2, the be 0.1. The estimated proportion of the distribution of risks above 1-in-1 maximum individual cancer risk from risk attributable to Epichlorohydrin million, based on actual emissions all HAP emissions at the one facility Elastomers Production source category levels for the population living within 5 that contains epichlorohydrin processes at this facility is km of the facilities, among various elastomers production processes subject approximately 100 percent for cancer demographic groups are provided in a to the Group I Polymers and Resins risks and 100 percent for chronic non- report available in the docket for this MACT standard is estimated to be 10-in- cancer risk. action and summarized in Table B.1.3 1 million, and the maximum chronic The results of the demographic below. non-cancer TOSHI value is estimated to analyses performed to investigate the

TABLE B.1.3—EPICHLOROHYDRIN ELASTOMERS DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category ...... 10 0.0008 54 53 1 1 0.4 20 11 Facility-wide ...... 10 0.01 52 50 2 1 0.2 23 14

The results of the demographic categories based on the typical d. What are our proposed decisions on analysis show that, for the distribution of these demographic risk acceptability and ample margin of Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production groups across the United States. The safety? source category, of the population of table also shows that the results of the October 2008 Proposed Decision. In 800 people with cancer risk greater than demographic analysis for the facility- our October 10, 2008, proposal, we 1-in-1 million, 54 percent could be wide emissions are similar to the results proposed that the risks 0f 30-in-1 classified as a ‘‘Minority,’’ 53 percent are for the source category. million were acceptable because the included the ‘‘African-American’’ Details of these assessments and risks results indicated that cancer risks demographic group, and 20 percent are analyses can be found in the residual to the individual most exposed to included the ‘‘Below Poverty Level,’’ risk documentation as referenced in emissions from the category were demographic group. The percentage of section IV.A. of this preamble, which is greater than 1-in-1 million, but less than the population within 5 km of a available in the docket for this action. 100-in-1 million. We then analyzed epichlorohydrin elastomers production other risk factors in the ample margin of facility and with a cancer risk greater safety determination. In this analysis, than 1-in-1 million is higher than we proposed that emissions from the expected for these demographic source category posed no potential for

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65098 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

an adverse environmental effect, did not MACT standard to satisfy section 112(f) malfunctions in this section; clarify that pose potential for human health of the CAA. representative conditions do not include multipathway risks, and were unlikely periods of SSM throughout the rule; e. What are our proposed decisions on to cause acute or chronic non-cancer remove references to periods of SSM in the technology review? health impacts. We also identified one monitoring; and revise the SSM- emissions control option that would In the October 10, 2008 proposal, we associated recordkeeping and reporting reduce risks. We proposed that such identified no advancements in practices, requirements in 40 CFR 63.506 to control was not necessary to protect processes, and control technologies require reporting and recordkeeping for public health with an ample margin of applicable to the emission sources in periods of malfunction. We are also safety in light of the high cost and the Group I Polymers and Resins proposing to revise Table 1 to indicate limited addition health protection it Production source categories in our that SSM-related provisions in 40 CFR would provide. Therefore, we proposed technology review, and we proposed to 63.6(f)(1), 40 CFR 63.7(e)(1), and 40 CFR that the existing standard provided an re-adopt the existing MACT standard to 63.10(d)(5)(i) of the General Provisions ample margin of safety and proposed to satisfy section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. In do not apply. In addition, we are re-adopt the existing MACT standard to that review, we examined the regulatory proposing to promulgate an affirmative satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. requirements and/or technical analyses defense against civil penalties for Risk Acceptability. The revised risk for subsequently promulgated air toxics exceedances of emission standards analysis we performed for this proposal regulations with similar types of caused by malfunctions, as well as indicates that the cancer risks to the emissions sources as those in the Group criteria for establishing the affirmative individual most exposed is 10-in-1 I Polymers and Resins Production defense. million based on both actual and source categories, and we conducted a EPA has attempted to ensure that we MACT-allowable emissions. The cancer search of the RBLC for controls for VOC- have not incorporated into proposed incidence and the number of people and HAP-emitting processes in the regulatory language any provisions that exposed to cancer risks of 1-in-1 million Group I Polymers and Resins are inappropriate, unnecessary, or or greater are not significantly changed Production source categories. We have redundant in the absence of the SSM from the risk identified in the October not identified any additional exemption. We are specifically seeking 2008 proposal. Similarly, the risk developments in practices, processes, comment on whether there are any such analysis continued to show no potential and control technologies since the provisions that we have inadvertently for an adverse environmental effect or proposal date for the Epichlorohydrin incorporated or overlooked. human health multipathway effects, and Elastomers Production source category. Significant Emission Points Not that acute or chronic non-cancer health Thus, we are proposing that it is not Previously Regulated Review. We impacts are unlikely. Our additional necessary to revise the MACT standard identified the absence of a limit for a analysis of facility-wide risks showed pursuant to section 112(d)(6) of the significant emissions source within the that the maximum facility-wide cancer CAA. provisions of the Group I Polymers and risk is 10-in-1 million and that the f. What other actions are we proposing? Resins MACT standard that apply to the maximum chronic non-cancer risks are Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production unlikely to cause health impacts. Our SSM Provisions. We are proposing to source category. Specifically, there are additional analysis of the demographics eliminate the SSM exemption in the no back-end process operation emission of the exposed population shows Group 1 Polymers and Resins MACT limits for this source category.35 As disparities in risks between standard. Consistent with Sierra Club v. these processes are major sources of demographic groups for the 800 people EPA, EPA is proposing that standards in emissions for the one facility in the exposed at risks of 1-in-1 million. Based this rule would apply at all times. We source category, we are proposing to set on this low cancer risk level and in are proposing several revisions to 40 standards for back-end process consideration of other health measures CFR part 63, subpart U. Specifically, we operations under CAA section 112(d)(2) and factors, including the low cancer are proposing to revise Table 1 to and (d)(3) in this action. incidence (one case in every 10,000 indicate that the requirements of 40 CFR As there is only one facility in the years) and the low maximum non- 63.6(e) of the General Provisions do not source category, the emissions level cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.1), we apply. The 40 CFR 63.6(e) requires currently being achieved by this facility propose that the risks from the owner or operators to act according to represents the MACT floor. The annual Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production the general duty to ‘‘operate and HAP emissions from the back-end are acceptable. maintain any affected source, including process operations at this facility are Ample Margin of Safety. Because we associated air pollution control approximately 36 TPY of toluene. There are proposing that the risks are equipment and monitoring equipment, are two separate dryer vents, one acceptable, but still above 1-in-1 in a manner consistent with safety and emitting around 24 TPY of toluene, and million, we then reconsidered our 2008 good air pollution control practices for the other emitting around 12 TPY of ample margin of safety decision. We minimizing emissions.’’ We are toluene. Neither of these vents is have not identified any additional separately proposing to incorporate this controlled. Therefore, we have control options or any changes to the general duty to minimize into 40 CFR determined that the MACT floor for previously analyzed control option. Our 63.483(a). The 40 CFR 63.6(e) also these processes is 36 TPY based on the analysis does not indicate a change in requires the owner or operator of an current level of HAP stripping and the emissions reductions that could be affected source to develop a written recovery, given current production achieved or the cost of control for the SSM plan. We are proposing to remove levels, but which would fluctuate control option considered in the the SSM plan requirement. We are proportionally with an increase or October 2008 proposal. Therefore, we proposing to remove the explanation of decrease in production levels. continue to propose that the current applicability of emissions standards As part of our beyond-the-floor MACT standard provides an ample during periods SSM in 40 CFR 63.480(j); analysis, we considered alternatives margin of safety to protect public health remove the malfunction plan from 40 and the environment, and we are CFR 63.482 and revise the definition of 35 Note that these uncontrolled emissions were proposing to re-adopt the existing initial start-up to remove references to included in the baseline risk assessment.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65099

more stringent than the MACT floor averaged daily. The capital costs of this effectiveness of approximately $31,000/ option. We identified one option using option are estimated to be ton. Table B.2.4 summarizes the cost add-on emission controls that would approximately $600,000 and the total and emission reduction impacts of the require the ducting of emissions from annual costs are estimated to be proposed options. Because the the back-end process operations to a approximately $1,100,000. We estimate reduction in HAP would be due to control device, such as an incinerator. that an incinerator would achieve an toluene, no reduction of cancer risk This option would also require an initial emissions reduction of 98 percent, would result from this control option. performance test of the incinerator and resulting in a HAP decrease of continuous parameter monitoring approximately 35 TPY, with a cost-

TABLE B.1.4—EPICHLOROHYDRIN ELASTOMER PRODUCTION FACILITY BACK-END OPTIONS IMPACTS

Cost- effectiveness HAP emissions Capital cost Annual cost as compared to Regulatory alternatives (TPY HAP) ($million) ($million/yr) baseline $/Ton HAP Removed

Baseline ...... 36 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 36 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 1 0.6 1.1 31,000

In addition to the cost and emission a. Overview of the Source Category which represents 70 percent of the total reduction impacts shown in Table B.1.4, Polybutadiene rubber is a HAP emissions by mass, and 500 TPY we estimate that the beyond-the-floor homopolymer of 1,3-butadiene (i.e., 1,3- toluene, which represents 23 percent). option would result in increases in butadiene is the only monomer used in The facilities in this source category criteria pollutant and carbon dioxide the production of this polymer). While also reported emissions of styrene, 1,3- ¥ ¥ emissions (PM 0.2 TPY, SO2 0.03 both the solution and emulsion butadiene, ethylbenzene, and relatively ¥ ¥ TPY, NOX 12 TPY, CO 2 TPY, and polymerization processes can be used to minor quantities of other HAP. The ¥ CO2 7,000 TPY), and an increase in produce polybutadiene rubber, all majority of HAP emissions are from energy use of approximately 117,000 currently operating facilities in the back-end process operations million British thermal units (BTU)/year United States use a solution process. In (approximately 70 percent of the total at a cost of approximately $33,000/year. the solution process, the reaction is HAP by mass). For all emission sources We believe that the costs and other conducted in an organic solvent except the back-end process operations, impacts of this beyond-the-floor option (hexane, toluene, or a non-HAP organic the actual emissions level is are not reasonable, given the level of solvent), which helps to dissipate heat representative of the MACT-allowable emission reduction. Therefore, we are generated by the reaction and control level. For back-end process operations, proposing an emission standard that the reaction rate. While polybutadiene we estimate that MACT-allowable reflects the MACT floor option. We are rubber is the primary product at these emissions from this source category requesting comment on this analysis facilities, styrene-butadiene rubber can could be as high as seven times the and these options. also be produced as a minor product by actual emissions. Because these back- adding styrene as a monomer. Most of end limitations are production-based, As noted above, we are proposing that the polybutadiene rubber manufactured this estimate was made by comparing the MACT standard, prior to the in the United States is used in the the actual emissions levels to the implementation of the proposed production of tires in the construction emissions calculated using the emission limitation to the back-end of the tread and sidewalls. limitations and production levels. For process operations discussed in this Polybutadiene rubber is also used as a more detail about the estimate of the section, provides an ample margin of modifier in the production of other ratio of actual to MACT-allowable safety to protect public health. polymers and resins (e.g., polystyrene). emissions, see the memo in the docket Therefore, we maintain that after the We identified five currently operating for this action describing the estimation new standard’s implementation, the rule polybutadiene rubber production of MACT-allowable emission levels and will continue to provide an ample facilities subject to the Polymers and associated risks and impacts. margin of safety to protect public health. Resins I MACT standard. Some of these b. What data were used in our risk Consequently, we do not believe it will facilities are located at plant sites that be necessary to conduct another also have other HAP-emitting sources analyses? residual risk review under CAA section regulated under separate MACT We initially created a preliminary 112(f) for this source category 8 years standards, which have been or will be data set for the Polybutadiene Rubber following promulgation of new back- addressed in separate regulatory actions. Production source category using end process limitations, merely due to Three of the polybutadiene rubber information we collected directly from the addition of this new MACT production facilities use hexane as the industry on emissions data and requirement. solvent in their solution process, one emissions release characteristics. We 2. Polybutadiene Rubber Production facility uses toluene as its solvent, and also reviewed the emissions and other the fifth uses a non-HAP organic data to identify data anomalies that Polybutadiene Rubber Production is solvent. Overall, hexane and toluene could affect risk estimates. On March one of the source categories for which account for the majority of the HAP 29, 2007, we published an ANPRM (72 we proposed RTR decisions on October emissions from this source category FR 29287) for the express purpose of 10, 2008. (approximately 1,600 TPY hexane, requesting comments on, and updates

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65100 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

to, this data set, as well as to the data data set was used to conduct the risk c. What are the results of the risk sets for the other source categories assessment and other analyses for the assessments and analyses? addressed in that ANPRM. Comments Polybutadiene Rubber Production We have conducted a revised received in response to the ANPRM source category that formed the basis for inhalation risk assessment for the were reviewed and considered. We the proposed actions included in the Polybutadiene Rubber Production made adjustments to the data set where October 10, 2008, proposal. We have source category. We have also we concluded the comments supported continued to scrutinize the data set and conducted an assessment of facility- such adjustment. After making any additional data that have become wide risk and performed a demographic appropriate changes to the data set available since the October 10, 2008, analysis of population risks. Table B.2.1 based on this public data review proposal. provides an overall summary of the process, the data set on which we based results of the revised inhalation risk the initial proposal was created. This assessment.

TABLE B.2.1—POLYBUTADIENE RUBBER REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum individual cancer risk Maximum chronic non-cancer 2 3 (in 1 million) Population at Annual cancer TOSHI Maximum off-site Number of ≥ incidence 1 risk 1-in-1 acute facilities Actual Allowable (cases per Actual Allowable 4 emissions emissions million year) emissions emissions non-cancer HQ level level level level

5 ...... 30 30 24,000 0.003 0.3 0.3 HQREL = 1 toluene * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Polybutadiene Rubber Production source category is the reproductive system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A. of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was actual emission levels is 0.003 excess allowable emissions are applied to each performed using actual emissions level cancer cases per year, or one case in emission source type, the result is that data. As shown in Table B.2.1, the every 333 years. the cancer risks at the MACT-allowable results of the revised inhalation risk Our analysis of potential differences level are equal to those at the actual assessment indicated the maximum between actual emission levels and level shown in Table B.2.1. lifetime individual cancer risk could be emissions allowable under the MACT There were no reported emissions of as high as 30-in-1 million, the maximum standard indicated that MACT- PB–HAP; therefore, we do not expect chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could allowable emission levels are equal to potential for human health be up to 0.3, and the maximum off- actual emissions for all emissions multipathway risks or adverse facility-site acute HQ value could be as sources other than back-end process environmental impacts. high as 1, based on the actual emissions operations and may be up to seven Table B.2.2 displays the results of the level and the REL value for toluene. The times greater than actual emission levels facility-wide risk assessment. This total estimated national cancer for back-end process operations. When assessment was conducted based on incidence from these facilities based on these ratios of actual to MACT- actual emission levels.

TABLE B.2.2—POLYBUTADIENE RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 30 Polybutadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk) 1 ...... 100% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 0.3 Polybutadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI 1 ...... 100% 1 Percentage shown reflects Polybutadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

The maximum individual cancer risk 0.3. At the facilities where these distribution of risks above 1-in-1 from all HAP emissions at a facility that maximum risk values occur, the million, based on actual emissions contains polybutadiene rubber estimated proportion of the risk levels for the population living within production processes subject to the attributable to the Polybutadiene Rubber 5 km of the facilities, among various Group I Polymers and Resins MACT Production source category processes is demographic groups are provided in a standard is estimated to be 30-in-1 100 percent for both cancer and non- report available in the docket for this million, and the maximum chronic non- cancer risk. action and summarized in Table B.2.3 cancer TOSHI value is estimated to be The results of the demographic below. analyses performed to investigate the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65101

TABLE B.2.3—POLYBUTADIENE RUBBER DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic or Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category ...... 30 0.017 11 6 4 4 0.5 11 13 Facility-wide ...... 30 0.02 12 7 5 4 0.5 12 14

The results of the Polybutadiene Risk Acceptability. The revised risk MACT standard to satisfy section 112(f) Rubber Production source category analysis we performed for this proposal of the CAA. demographic analysis show that the indicates that the cancer risks to the percentage of the population within 5 individual most exposed is 30-in-1 e. What are our proposed decisions on km of a polybutadiene rubber million based on both actual and the technology review? production facility and with a cancer MACT-allowable emissions. The cancer In the October 10, 2008 proposal, we risk greater than 1-in-1 million is less incidence and the number of people identified no advancements in practices, than the distribution of these exposed to cancer risks of 1-in-1 million processes, and control technologies demographic groups across the United or greater are not significantly changed applicable to the emission sources in States as displayed in Table B.2.3, with from the risk identified in the October the Group I Polymers and Resins the exception of those ‘‘Over 25 Without 2008 proposal. Similarly, the risk Production source categories in our ’’ a High School Diploma , where the analysis continued to show no potential technology review, and we proposed to levels are equal to the distribution of for an adverse environmental effect or re-adopt the existing MACT standard to these demographic groups across the human health multipathway effects, and satisfy section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. In United States. The table also shows that that chronic non-cancer health impacts that review we examined the regulatory the facility-wide emissions demographic are unlikely. The revised assessment did requirements and/or technical analyses analysis shows similar results. indicate that an acute non-cancer HQ as for subsequently promulgated air toxics Details of these assessments and high as 1 could occur, based on the REL regulations with similar types of analyses can be found in the residual value at an area adjacent to the facility emissions sources as those in the Group risk documentation as referenced in fenceline. Our additional analysis of I Polymers and Resins Production section IV.A of this preamble, which is facility-wide risks showed that the source categories, and we conducted a maximum facility-wide cancer risk is available in the docket for this action. search of the RBLC for controls for VOC- 30-in-1 million and that the maximum and HAP-emitting processes in the d. What are our proposed decisions on chronic non-cancer risks are unlikely to Group I Polymers and Resins risk acceptability and ample margin of cause health impacts. Our additional Production source categories. We have safety? analysis of the demographics of the not identified any additional exposed population suggests there are October 2008 Proposed Decision. In developments in practices, processes, no disparities in risks for the various our October 10, 2008 proposal, we and control technologies since the demographic groups. Based on this low proposed that the risks were acceptable proposal date for the Polybutadiene cancer risk level and in consideration of because the risks results indicated that Rubber Production source category. In other health measures and factors, cancer risks to the individual most addition, we have not identified the exposed to emissions from the category including the low cancer incidence (one case in every 333 years) and the low need for revisions of the standards to were 10-in-1 million which is greater correct editorial errors, make than 1-in-1 million but less than 100-in- maximum non-cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.3), we propose that the risks from clarifications, or address issues with 1 million. We then analyzed other risk implementation or determining factors in the ample margin of safety the Polybutadiene Rubber Production source category are acceptable. compliance with the rule provisions. determination. In this analysis, we Thus, we are continuing to propose to proposed that emissions from the source Ample Margin of Safety. Because we re-adopt the existing MACT standard to category posed no potential for an are proposing that the risks are satisfy section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. adverse environmental effect, did not acceptable, but still above 1-in-1 pose potential for human health million, we then re-considered our 2008 f. What other actions are we proposing? multipathway risks, and were unlikely ample margin of safety decision. We to cause acute or chronic non-cancer have not identified any additional The proposed changes to the SSM health impacts. We also identified two control options or any changes to the provisions for the Group I Polymers and emissions control options that would previously analyzed control option. Our Resins MACT, which apply to the reduce risks. We proposed that these analysis does not indicate a change in Polybutadiene Rubber Production controls were not necessary to protect the emissions reductions that could be source category, are discussed above in public health with an ample margin of achieved or the cost of control for the section V.B.1.f. safety in light of the high cost and control option considered in the 3. Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex limited addition health protection they October 2008 proposal. Therefore, we Production would provide. Therefore, we proposed continue to propose that the current that the existing standard provided an MACT standard provides an ample Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex ample margin of safety and proposed to margin of safety to protect public health Production is one of the source re-adopt the existing MACT standard to and the environment, and we are categories for which we proposed RTR satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. proposing to re-adopt the existing decisions on October 10, 2008.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65102 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

a. Overview of the Source Category other HAP. The majority of HAP made adjustments to the data set where Styrene butadiene rubber and latex emissions are from back-end process we concluded the comments supported are elastomers prepared from styrene operations (approximately 78 percent of such adjustment. After making and butadiene monomer units. The the total HAP by mass). For all emission appropriate changes to the data set source category is divided into three sources except the back-end process based on this public data review subcategories due to technical process operations, the actual emissions level is process, the data set on which we based and HAP emission differences: (1) The representative of the MACT-allowable the initial proposal was created. This production of styrene butadiene rubber level. For back-end process operations, data set was used to conduct the risk by emulsion, (2) the production of we estimate that MACT-allowable assessment and other analyses for the styrene butadiene rubber by solution, emissions from this source category Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex and (3) the production of styrene could be as high as four times the actual Production source category, which butadiene latex. Styrene butadiene emissions. Since these back-end formed the basis for the proposed RTR rubber is coagulated and dried to limitations are production-based, this actions included in the October 10, 2008 produce a solid product, while latex is estimate was made by comparing the proposal. actual emissions levels to the emissions a liquid product. For both styrene We have continued to scrutinize the calculated using the limitations and butadiene rubber processes, the existing data set and have evaluated any production levels. For more detail about monomers used are styrene and additional data that became available the estimate of the ratio of actual to butadiene; either process can be subsequent to the October 2008 MACT-allowable emissions, see the conducted as a batch or a continuous proposal. Specific questions we had memo in the docket for this action process. These elastomers are concerning current operations led us to describing the estimation of MACT- commonly used in tires and tire-related develop a questionnaire and ask for allowable emission levels and products. We identified three currently updated emissions and emissions associated risks and impacts. operating styrene butadiene rubber release characteristics information. This production facilities using the emulsion b. What data were used in our risk information was requested from the process and three styrene butadiene analyses? facilities in May 2010 using the rubber latex production facilities subject authority of section 114 of the CAA. We to the Polymers and Resins I MACT We initially created a preliminary updated our data set for this source standard. Other than the polybutadiene data set for the Styrene Butadiene category based on the information plants that produce styrene butadiene Rubber and Latex Production source received through this request. rubber as a minor product, we did not category using information we collected identify any styrene butadiene rubber directly from industry on emissions data c. What are the results of the risk produced in a solution process. Some of and emissions release characteristics. assessments and analyses? these facilities are located at plant sites We also reviewed the emissions and that also have other HAP-emitting other data to identify data anomalies We have conducted a revised sources regulated under separate MACT that could affect risk estimates. On inhalation risk assessment for the standards, for which we have addressed March 29, 2007, we published an Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex or will address in future rulemaking ANPRM (72 FR 29287) for the express Production source category. We have actions. Overall, styrene accounts for purpose of requesting comments on and also conducted an assessment of the majority of the HAP emissions from updates to this data set, as well as to the facility-wide risk and performed a these facilities (approximately 276 TPY data sets for the other source categories demographic analysis of population and 90 percent of the total HAP addressed in that ANPRM. Comments risks. Table B.3.1 provides an overall emissions by mass). These facilities also received in response to the ANPRM summary of the results of the revised reported relatively small emissions of were reviewed and considered, and we inhalation risk assessment.

TABLE B.3.1—STYRENE BUTADIENE RUBBER AND LATEX PRODUCTION REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum individual cancer risk Maximum chronic non-cancer 2 3 (in 1 million) Population at Annual cancer TOSHI Maximum off-site Number of facili- risk ≥ 1-in-1 incidence acute non-cancer ties 1 Actual Allowable (cases per Actual Allowable HQ 4 emissions emissions million year) emissions emissions level level level level

6 ...... 10 10 25,000 0.004 0.2 0.2 HQREL = 0.4 styrene. * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production source category is the reproductive system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A. of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could based on actual emission levels is 0.004 performed using actual emissions level be up to 0.2, and the maximum off- excess cancer cases per year, or one case data. As shown in Table B.3.1, the facility-site acute HQ value could be as in every 250 years. results of the revised inhalation risk high as 0.4, based on the actual Our analysis of potential differences assessment indicated the maximum emissions level and the REL value for between actual emission levels and lifetime individual cancer risk could be styrene. The total estimated national emissions allowable under the MACT as high as 10-in-1 million, the maximum cancer incidence from these facilities standard indicated that MACT-

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65103

allowable emission levels are equal to potential increase in emissions does not potential for human health actual emissions for all emissions effect risk. When these ratios of actual multipathway risks or adverse sources other than back-end process to MACT-allowable emissions are environmental impacts. operations. While the emissions may be applied to each emission source type, Table B.3.2 displays the results of the the result is that the cancer risks at the up to four times greater than actual facility-wide risk assessment. This MACT-allowable level are equal to those emission levels for back-end process assessment was conducted based on at the actual level shown in Table B.3.1. operations, the compounds emitted do actual emission levels. not have cancer potency values so this There were no reported emissions of PB–HAP; therefore, we do not expect

TABLE B.3.2—STYRENE BUTADIENE RUBBER AND LATEX PRODUCTION FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 70 Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk 1 ...... 5% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 1 Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI 1 ...... 10% 1 Percentage shown reflects the Styrene Butadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

As shown in Table B.3.2, the estimated proportion of the risk The results of the demographic maximum individual cancer risk from attributable to Styrene Butadiene analyses performed to investigate the all HAP emissions at a facility that Rubber and Latex Production source distribution of risks above 1-in-1 contains styrene butadiene rubber and category processes is approximately 5 million, based on actual emissions latex production processes subject to the percent for cancer risks and 10 percent levels for the population living within 5 Group I Polymers and Resins MACT for chronic non-cancer risk. Both the km of the facilities, among various standard is estimated to be 70-in-1 cancer and non-cancer risks at this demographic groups are provided in a million, and the maximum chronic non- facility are primarily due to a nitrile report available in the docket for this cancer TOSHI value is estimated to be butadiene rubber process, which has action and summarized in Table B.3.3 1. At the facilities where these recently closed. below. maximum risk values occur, the

TABLE B.3.3—STYRENE BUTADIENE RUBBER AND LATEX PRODUCTION DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category...... 10 0.02 40 3 36 54 0.6 18 24 Facility-wide ...... 70 0.1 50 29 20 32 0.5 23 20

The results of the Styrene Butadiene States. The table also shows that the million indicated that cancer risks to the Rubber and Latex Production source results of the facility-wide demographic individual most exposed to emissions category demographic analysis show analysis are higher than the national from the category were greater than 1- that of the population with cancer risk percentages for the those that could be in-1 million but less than 100-in-1 greater than 1-in-1 million, 40 percent classified as a ‘‘Minority’’ and for those million. We then analyzed other risk could be classified as a ‘‘Minority,’’ 54 included in the ‘‘Hispanic or Latino,’’ factors in the ample margin of safety percent are included in the ‘‘Hispanic or ‘‘African American,’’ ‘‘Other and determination. In this analysis, we Latino’’ demographic group, 36 percent Multiracial,’’ ‘‘Below Poverty Level,’’ and proposed that emissions from the source are included in the ‘‘Other and the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High School category posed no potential for an Multiracial,’’ demographic group, 18 Diploma’’ demographic groups. adverse environmental effect, did not Details of these assessments and percent are included in the ‘‘Below pose potential for human health analyses can be found in the residual Poverty Level,’’ and 24 percent are multipathway risks, and were unlikely risk documentation as referenced in included in the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High to cause acute or chronic non-cancer section IV.A of this preamble, which is ’’ School Diploma demographic group. available in the docket for this action. health impacts. We also identified one These percentages of the population emissions control option that would within 5 km of a styrene butadiene d. What are our proposed decisions on reduce risks. We proposed that such rubber and latex production facility and risk acceptability and ample margin of control was not necessary to protect with a cancer risk greater than 1-in-1 safety? public health with an ample margin of million is higher than the percentages October 2008 Proposed Decision. In safety in light of the high cost and for these demographic categories based our October 10, 2008 proposal, we limited addition health protection it on the distribution of these proposed that the risks were acceptable would provide. Therefore, we proposed demographic groups across the United because the risks results of 7-in-1 that the existing standard provided an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65104 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

ample margin of safety and proposed to processes, and control technologies Acrylonitrile and 1,3-butadiene account re-adopt the existing MACT standard to applicable to the emission sources in for the HAP emissions from this source satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. the Group I Polymers and Resins category (approximately 2 TPY). The Risk Acceptability. The revised risk Production source categories in our majority of HAP emissions are from analysis we performed for this proposal technology review, and we proposed to back-end process operations indicates that the cancer risks to the re-adopt the existing MACT standard to (approximately 97 percent of the total individual most exposed is 10-in-1 satisfy section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. In HAP by mass) for this source category. million based on both actual and that review we examined the regulatory We estimate that MACT-allowable MACT-allowable emissions. The cancer requirements and/or technical analyses emissions from this source category are incidence and the number of people for subsequently promulgated air toxics approximately equal to reported, actual exposed to cancer risks of 1-in-1 million regulations with similar types of emissions. For more detail about this or greater are not significantly changed emissions sources as those in the Group from the risk identified in the October I Polymers and Resins I Production estimate of the ratio of actual to MACT- 2008 proposal. Similarly, the risk source categories, and we conducted a allowable emissions, see the memo in analysis continued to show no potential search of the RBLC for controls for VOC- the docket for this action describing the for an adverse environmental effect or and HAP-emitting processes in the estimation of MACT-allowable emission human health multipathway effects, and Group I Polymers and Resins levels and associated risks and impacts. that chronic non-cancer health impacts Production source categories. We have b. What data were used in our risk are unlikely. The revised assessment not identified any additional analyses? indicated that an acute non-cancer HQ developments in practices, processes, as high as 0.4 could occur, based on the and control technologies since the We initially created a preliminary REL value. Our additional analysis of proposal date for the Styrene Butadiene data set for the Nitrile Butadiene Rubber facility-wide risks showed that the Rubber and Latex Production source Production source category using maximum facility-wide cancer risk is category. Thus, we are continuing to information we collected directly from 70-in-1 million and the maximum propose to re-adopt the existing MACT industry on emissions data and facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI is 1. It standard to satisfy section 112(d)(6) of emissions release characteristics. We also showed that the styrene butadiene the CAA. also reviewed the emissions and other rubber production processes located at the facilities with these maximum risk f. What other actions are we proposing? data to identify data anomalies that values contribute approximately 5 and The proposed changes to the SSM could affect risk estimates. On March 10 percent to such risks, respectively. provisions for the Group I Polymers and 29, 2007, we published an ANPRM (72 Our additional analysis of the Resins MACT, which apply to the FR 29287) for the express purpose of demographics of the exposed Styrene Butadiene Rubber and Latex requesting comments and updates to population may show disparities in Production source category, are this data set, as well as to the data sets risks between demographic groups. discussed above in section V.B.1.f. for the other source categories addressed Based on this low cancer risk level and in that ANPRM. Comments received in in consideration of other health 4. Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production response to the ANPRM were reviewed measures and factors, including the low Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production and considered, and we made cancer incidence (one case in every 250 is one of the source categories for which adjustments to the data set where we years) and the low maximum non- we proposed RTR decisions on October concluded the comments supported cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.2), we 10, 2008. such adjustment. After making propose that the risks from the Styrene a. Overview of the Source Category appropriate changes to the data set Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production based on this public data review Nitrile butadiene rubber is a source category are acceptable. process, the data set on which we based Ample Margin of Safety. Because we copolymer of 1,3-butadiene and acrylonitrile, and the Nitrile Butadiene the initial proposal was created. This are proposing that the risks are data set was used to conduct the risk acceptable, but still above 1-in-1 Rubber Production source category assessment and other analyses for the million, we then re-considered our 2008 includes any facility that polymerizes Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production ample margin of safety decision. 1,3-butadiene and acrylonitrile. While We have not identified any additional nitrile butadiene rubber is the primary source category, which formed the basis control options or any changes to the product at these facilities, styrene- for the proposed RTR actions included previously analyzed control option to butadiene rubber can also be produced in the October 10, 2008 proposal. reduce risks. Our analysis does not as a minor product by substituting Since the proposal, we have indicate a change in the emissions styrene for acrylonitrile as a monomer. continued to scrutinize the existing data reductions that could be achieved or the Depending on its specific composition, set and have evaluated any additional cost of control for the control option nitrile butadiene rubber can be resistant data that became available subsequent considered in the October 2008 to oil and chemicals, a property that to the October 10, 2008 proposal. proposal. Therefore, we continue to facilitates its use in disposable gloves, Specific questions we had concerning propose that the current MACT standard hoses, seals, and a variety of automotive current operations led us to develop a provides an ample margin of safety to applications. questionnaire and ask for updated We identified one nitrile butadiene protect public health and the emissions and emissions release environment, and we are proposing to rubber production facility currently subject to the Polymers and Resins I characteristics information. This re-adopt the existing MACT standard to information was requested from the satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. MACT standard. This facility is at a plant site that also has other HAP- facility in May 2010 using the authority e. What are our proposed decisions on emitting sources that are regulated of section 114 of the CAA. We updated the technology review? under separate MACT standards, for our data set for this source category In the October 10, 2008 proposal, we which we have addressed or will based on the information received identified no advancements in practices, address in future rulemaking actions. through this request.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65105

c. What are the results of the risk Butadiene Rubber Production source population risks. Table B.4.1 provides assessments and analyses? category. We have also conducted an an overall summary of the results of the We have conducted a revised assessment of facility-wide risk and revised inhalation risk assessment. inhalation risk assessment for the Nitrile performed a demographic analysis of

TABLE B.4.1—NITRILE BUTADIENE RUBBER PRODUCTION REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum individual cancer risk Maximum chronic non-cancer 2 3 (in 1 million) Population at Annual cancer TOSHI Maximum off-site Number of facili- risk ≥ 1-in-1 incidence acute non-cancer ties 1 Actual Allowable (cases per Actual Allowable HQ 4 emissions emissions million year) emissions emissions level level level level

1 ...... 2 2 70 0.0004 0.009 0.009 HQAEGL–1 = 0.002 ac- rylonitrile * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production source category is the reproductive system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section III.A of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was for acrylonitrile. The total estimated MACT-allowable emissions are equal to performed using actual emissions level national cancer incidence from these those for actual emissions. data. As shown in Table B.4.1, the facilities based on actual emission levels There were no reported emissions of results of the revised inhalation risk is 0.0004 excess cancer cases per year, PB–HAP; therefore, we do not expect assessment indicated the maximum or one case in every 2,500 years. potential for human health lifetime individual cancer risk could be Our analysis of potential differences multipathway risks or adverse as high as 2-in-1 million, the maximum chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could between actual emission levels and environmental impacts. be up to 0.009, and the maximum off- emissions allowable under the MACT Table B.4.2 displays the results of the facility-site acute HQ value could be as standard indicate that actual and facility-wide risk assessment. This high as 0.002, based on the actual allowable emissions are approximately assessment was conducted based on emissions level and the AEGL–1 value the same. Therefore, the risk results for actual emission levels.

TABLE B.4.2—NITRILE BUTADIENE RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 5 Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk 1 .... 33% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 0.03 Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI 1 ...... 30% 1 Percentage shown reflects Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

The maximum individual cancer risk Rubber Production source category distribution of risks above 1-in-1 from all HAP emissions at a facility that processes at this facility is million, based on actual emissions contains nitrile butadiene rubber approximately 33 percent for cancer levels for the population living within production processes subject to the risks and 30 percent for chronic non- 5 km of the facilities, among various Group I Polymers and Resins MACT cancer risk. This facility also has demographic groups are provided in a standard is estimated to be 5-in-1 processes subject to the Group IV report available in the docket for this million, and the maximum chronic non- Polymers and Resins MACT standard, action and summarized in Table B.4.3 cancer TOSHI value is estimated to be 40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJ. below. 0.03. The estimated proportion of the The results of the demographic risk attributable to Nitrile Butadiene analyses performed to investigate the

TABLE B.4.3—NITRILE BUTADIENE RUBBER PRODUCTION DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Emissions Maximum Below the Over 25 basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic or Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category ...... 2 0.00007 94 94 0 0 0 33 14 Facility-wide ...... 5 0.006 95 93 2 0.4 0.1 23 17

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65106 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

The results of the demographic incidence and the number of people search of the RBLC for controls for VOC- analysis show that, for the Nitrile exposed to cancer risks of 1-in-1 million and HAP-emitting processes in the Butadiene Rubber Production source or greater are much less than the risk Group I Polymers and Resins category, of the population of 70 people identified in the October 2008 proposal. Production source categories. We have with cancer risk greater than 1-in-1 Similarly, the risk analysis continued to not identified any additional million, 94 percent could be classified show no potential for an adverse developments in practices, processes, as a ‘‘Minority,’’ 94 percent are included environmental effect or human health and control technologies since the in the ‘‘African-American’’ demographic multipathway effects, and that acute or proposal date for the Nitrile Butadiene group, 33 percent are included in the chronic non-cancer health impacts are Rubber Production source category. ‘‘Below Poverty Level’’ demographic unlikely. Our additional analysis of Thus, we are continuing to propose to group, and 14 percent are included in facility-wide risks showed that the re-adopt the existing MACT standard to the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High School maximum facility-wide cancer risk is satisfy section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. Diploma’’ demographic group. The 5-in-1 million and that the maximum f. What other actions are we proposing? percentage of the population for these chronic non-cancer risks are unlikely to demographic categories within 5 km of cause health impacts. Our additional SSM Provisions. The proposed a nitrile butadiene rubber production analysis of the demographics of the changes to the Group I Polymers and facility and with a cancer risk greater exposed population may show Resins MACT, which apply to the than 1-in-1 million is higher than disparities in risks between Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production distribution of these demographic demographic groups, but only for the 60 source category, are discussed above in groups across the United States. The people at cancer risk greater than 1-in- section V.B.1.f. table also shows that the results of the 1 million. Based on this low cancer risk Significant Emission Points Not demographic analysis for the 6,000 level and in consideration of other Previously Regulated. We identified the people at cancer risk greater than 1-in- health measures and factors, including absence of a standard for a significant 1 million from facility-wide emissions the low cancer incidence (one case in emissions source in the category in the are similar to the results for the source every 2,500 years) and the low provisions of the Group I Polymers and category. maximum non-cancer risk level (TOSHI Resins MACT standard that apply to the Details of these assessments and of 0.009), we propose that the risks from Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production analyses can be found in the residual the Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production source category. Specifically, there are risk documentation as referenced in source category are acceptable. no back-end process operation emission section IV.A of this preamble, which is Ample Margin of Safety. Because we limits for this source category.36 As available in the docket for this action. are proposing that the risks are these processes are major sources of acceptable, but still above 1-in-1 emissions for the one facility in the d. What are our proposed decisions on million, we then re-considered our source category, we are proposing to set risk acceptability and ample margin of October 2008 ample margin of safety standards for back-end process safety? decision. operations under CAA section 112(d)(2) October 2008 Proposed Decision. In We have not identified any additional and (d)(3) in this action. our October 2008 proposal, we proposed control options or any changes to the The emission limit we are proposing that the risks were acceptable because previously analyzed control option. Our today represents the MACT floor level the risks results indicated that cancer analysis does not indicate a change in of control. As there is only one facility risks to the individual most exposed to the emissions reductions that could be in the source category, the emissions emissions from the category of 60-in-1 achieved or the cost of control for the limitation achieved by this facility is the million were greater than 1-in-1 million control option considered in the MACT floor. The annual emissions from but less than 100-in-1 million. We then October 2008 proposal. Therefore, we the back-end process operations at this analyzed other risk factors in the ample continue to propose that the current facility are approximately 2 TPY. There margin of safety determination. In this MACT standard provides an ample are 11 separate dryer vents; one is analysis, we proposed that emissions margin of safety to protect public health controlled, while the others are from the source category posed no and the environment, and we are uncontrolled. The controlled vent emits potential for an adverse environmental proposing to re-adopt the existing around 0.003 TPY of 1,3-butadiene and effect, did not pose potential for human MACT standard to satisfy section 112(f) 0.002 TPY of acrylonitrile. The health multipathway risks, and were of the CAA. regenerative thermal oxidizer used on unlikely to cause acute or chronic non- this vent achieves approximately 96 cancer health impacts. We also e. What are our proposed decisions on the technology review? percent control of the acrylonitrile identified one emissions control option emissions, but no control of 1,3- that would reduce risks. We proposed In the October 10, 2008 proposal, we butadiene. The collection of 10 that such control was not necessary to identified no advancements in practices, uncontrolled vents emit around 0.8 TPY protect public health with an ample processes, and control technologies of 1,3-butadiene and 0.9 TPY of margin of safety in light of the high cost applicable to the emission sources in acrylonitrile. and limited addition health protection it the Group I Polymers and Resins As part of our beyond-the-floor would provide. Therefore, we proposed Production source categories in our analysis, we considered alternatives that the existing standard provided an technology review, and we proposed to more stringent than the MACT floor ample margin of safety and proposed to re-adopt the existing MACT standard to option. We identified one option using re-adopt the existing MACT standard to satisfy section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. In add-on emission controls that would satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. that review we examined the regulatory require the ducting of emissions from Risk Acceptability. The revised risk requirements and/or technical analyses the currently uncontrolled back-end analysis we performed for this proposal for subsequently promulgated air toxics process operations emission source to a indicates that the cancer risks to the regulations with similar types of control device, such as an incinerator. individual most exposed is 2-in-1 emissions sources as those in the Group million based on both actual and I Polymers and Resins Production 36 Note that these uncontrolled emissions were MACT-allowable emissions. The cancer source categories, and we conducted a included in the baseline risk assessment.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65107

This option would also require an initial annual costs are estimated to be effectiveness of approximately performance test of the incinerator and approximately $11,400,000/year. We $6,700,000/ton. Table B.4.4 summarizes continuous parameter monitoring estimate that an incinerator would the cost and emission reduction impacts averaged daily. The capital costs of this achieve an emissions reduction of 98 of the proposed options. option are estimated to be percent, resulting in a HAP decrease of approximately $1,600,000 and the total approximately 1.7 TPY, with a cost-

TABLE B.4.4—NITRILE BUTADIENE RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY BACK-END OPTION IMPACTS

Cost-effective- ness as com- Regulatory alternatives HAP emissions Capital cost Annual cost pared to baseline (TPY) (million $) (million $/yr) (million $/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 1.7 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 1.7 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 0.04 1.6 11.4 6.7

In addition to the cost and emission a. Overview of the Source Category As these processes are major sources of reduction impacts shown in Table B.4.4, Neoprene is a polymer of chloroprene. emissions for the one facility in the we estimate that the beyond-the-floor Neoprene was originally developed as source category, we are proposing to set option will result in increases in criteria an oil-resistant substitute for natural standards for back-end process pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions operations under CAA sections ¥ ¥ ¥ rubber, and its properties allow its use (PM 2 TPY, SO2 0.4 TPY, NOX 133 in a wide variety of applications, 112(d)(2) and (3) in this action. TPY, CO¥23 TPY, and CO ¥80,000 2 including wetsuits, gaskets and seals, As there is only one facility in the TPY) and an increase in energy use of hoses and tubing, plumbing fixtures, source category, the emissions level approximately 1,400,000 BTU/year at a adhesives, and other products. We have currently being achieved by this facility cost of approximately $385,000/year. We believe that the costs and other identified one neoprene rubber represents the MACT floor. The annual impacts of this beyond-the-floor option production facility currently subject to emissions from the back-end process are not reasonable, given the level of the Polymers and Resins I MACT operations at this facility are emission reduction. Therefore, we are standards. approximately 14 TPY. There are 11 proposing Option 1, the MACT floor For the Neoprene Rubber Production separate dryer vents collectively option. We are requesting comment on source category, we have proposed and emitting around 14 TPY of toluene. this analysis and these options. finalized a decision not to revise the None of the vents are controlled. As noted above, we are proposing that standards for those source categories Therefore, we have determined that the the MACT standard, prior to the based on our RTR. As noted above, this MACT floor for the back-end process is implementation of the proposed decision was proposed on December 12, 14 TPY based on stripping and HAP emission limitation to the back-end 2007 and finalized on December 16, recovery, given current production process operations discussed in this 2008. Since the Neoprene Production levels, but which would fluctuate section, provides an ample margin of source category was determined to be proportionally with an increase or safety to protect public health. Since the ‘‘low risk’’ (maximum lifetime cancer decrease in production levels. risk less than 1-in-1 million), we did not proposed emission limitation represents As part of our beyond-the-floor the existing level of control for the believe it was necessary to conduct a facility-wide or demographic risk analysis, we considered alternatives single plant in the source category, this more stringent than the MACT floor proposed emission limitation will not analysis. Therefore, we are not option. We identified one option using have an impact on risk. Therefore, we addressing the RTR in today’s notice for add-on emission controls that would maintain that after its implementation, this source category. require the ducting of emissions from the rule will continue to provide an b. What other actions are we proposing? the back-end process operations to a ample margin of safety to protect public health. Consequently, we do not believe SSM Provisions. The proposed control device, such as an incinerator. it will be necessary to conduct another changes to the Group I Polymers and This option would also require an initial residual risk review under CAA section Resins MACT, which apply to the performance test of the incinerator and 112(f) for this source category 8 years Neoprene Rubber Production source continuous parameter monitoring following promulgation of new back- category, are discussed above in section averaged daily. The capital costs of this end process limitations, merely due to V.B.1.f. option are estimated to be the addition of this new MACT Significant Emission Points Not approximately $1,300,000 and the total requirement. Previously Regulated. We identified in annual costs are estimated the provisions of the Group I Polymers approximately $4,800,000 per year. We 5. Neoprene Rubber Production and Resins MACT standard that apply estimate that an incinerator would Neoprene Rubber Production is one of to the Neoprene Rubber Production achieve an emissions reduction of 98 the source categories for which we source category the absence of a percent, resulting in a HAP decrease of proposed and finalized RTR decisions standard for a significant emissions approximately 22.6 TPY, with a cost- on December 12, 2007 (72 FR 70543) source in the category. Specifically, effectiveness of approximately $213,000 and December 16, 2008 (73 FR 76220), there are no back-end process operation per ton. Table B.5.1 summarizes the respectively. emission limits for this source category. impacts of the proposed options.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65108 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE B.5.1—NEOPRENE RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY BACK-END OPTION IMPACTS

Cost-effective- HAP ness as Regulatory alternatives emissions Capital cost Annual cost compared to (TPY) (million $) (million$/yr) baseline ($/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 23 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 23 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 0.5 1.3 4.8 213,000

In addition to the cost and emission plastics blending, wire and cable combustion by-products. These reduction impacts shown in Table B.5.1, insulation and jackets, and single-ply combustion by-products could include we estimate that the beyond-the-floor roofing membranes. trace chlorinated compounds such as option will result in increases in criteria For the Ethylene Propylene Rubber dioxins and furans. Due to the level of pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions Production source category, we have HCl emissions resulting from the (PM ¥ 0.8, SO2 ¥ 0.2 TPY, NOX ¥ 55 proposed and finalized a decision not to combustion of chlorinated organic TPY, CO ¥ 10 TPY, and CO2 ¥ 33,000 revise the standards for this source compounds in Group 1 streams, we are TPY) and an increase in energy use of category based on our RTR. As noted proposing to require control of these approximately 560,000 million BTU/ above, this decision was proposed on HCl emissions for the Ethylene year at a cost of approximately December 12, 2007 and finalized on Propylene Rubber Production source $159,000/year. December 16, 2008. Since the Ethylene category. We believe that the costs and other Propylene Rubber Production source As part of our beyond-the-floor impacts of this beyond-the-floor option category was determined to be ‘‘low analysis, we considered alternatives to are not reasonable, given the level of risk’’ (maximum lifetime cancer risk less reduce these HCl emissions, which are emission reduction. Therefore, we are than 1-in-1 million), we did not believe more stringent than the MACT floor proposing Option 1, the MACT floor it was necessary to conduct a facility- option. We identified the option of option. We are requesting comment on wide or demographic risk analysis. eliminating the exemption from the this analysis and these options. Therefore, we are not addressing the requirement to control hydrogen halides As noted above, we have proposed RTR in this notice for this source and halogens from the outlet of and finalized a decision that the MACT category. combustion devices. The one facility standard for neoprene rubber reports around 20 TPY of HCl emissions production, prior to the implementation b. What other actions are we proposing? resulting from the combustion of of the proposed emission limitation to SSM Provisions. The proposed chlorinated organic compounds in a the back-end process operations changes to the SSM provisions for the discussed in this section, provides an Group I Polymers and Resins MACT, flare. The other two facilities indicated ample margin of safety to protect public which apply to the Ethylene Propylene that they do not emit any HCl emissions health. Since this source category was Rubber Production source category, are resulting from the combustion of ‘‘low risk’’ prior to this proposed discussed above in section V.B.1.f. chlorinated organic compounds. We emission limitation, we maintain that Significant Emission Points Not estimated that the capital costs for the after their implementation, the rule will Previously Regulated. We identified in facility to replace the flare with an continue to provide an ample margin of the provisions of the Group I Polymers incinerator followed by a scrubber to safety to protect public health. and Resins MACT standard that apply reduce the HCl would be approximately Consequently, we do not believe it will to the Ethylene Propylene Rubber $985,000 and the total annual costs are be necessary to conduct another Production source category the absence estimated to be approximately $446,000 residual risk review under CAA section of a standard for a significant emissions per year. While there would be no 112(f) for this source category 8 years source in the category. Specifically, the additional reduction in organic HAP following promulgation of new back- rule requires that emissions from Group from this requirement, the HCl end process limitations, merely due to 1 front-end process vents be routed to a emissions would be reduced by 99 the addition of this new MACT control device that achieves 98 percent percent, or 19.6 TPY. The cost- requirement. reduction in organic HAP emissions but effectiveness of this option would be does not require the control of hydrogen approximately $21,000 per ton. 6. Ethylene Propylene Rubber halides and halogens from the outlet of However, this ethylene propylene Production combustion devices. All three currently- rubber process is co-located with the Ethylene Propylene Rubber operating facilities in this source halobutyl rubber process, which also Production is one of the source category control the organic HAP vents a vent stream containing categories for which we proposed and emissions in accordance with the chlorinated organic compounds to a finalized RTR decisions on December requirements in the rule (i.e., reduce flare, resulting in HCl emissions. We 12, 2007 (72 FR 70543) and December organic HAP emissions by 98 percent). estimated the costs of a single 16, 2008 (73 FR 76220), respectively. This represents the MACT floor for this incinerator and scrubber to control the source category. However, one facility streams containing chlorinated organics a. Overview of the Source Category routes a chlorinated organic compound from both the ethylene propylene rubber Ethylene propylene rubber is an to a flare, which results in emissions of and halobutyl rubber processes. The elastomer prepared from ethylene and HCl that are not regulated by the current estimated capital cost of this control propylene monomers. Common uses for MACT requirements. When chlorinate scenario is $1,100,000 and the annual these elastomers include radiator and organics are burned in a flare, there are cost is $640,000 per year. This would heater hoses, weather stripping, door variations in the combustion which still achieve the same HCl emission and window seals for cars, construction likely results in the formation of reduction from the ethylene propylene

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65109

rubber process (19.6 TPY), and the propylene rubber and halobutyl rubber B.6.1 summarizes the impacts of the overall cost-effectiveness considering would be around $6,700 per ton. Table proposed options. the reductions from the ethylene

TABLE B.6.1—ETHYLENE PROPYLENE RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY FRONT-END OPTIONS IMPACTS

Cost- effectiveness HAP Capital cost Annual cost as compared Regulatory alternatives emissions ($million) ($million/yr) to baseline (TPY HAP) ($/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 20 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 20 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 0.2 * 1.1 * 0.6 *6,700 * Assuming a shared control incinerator/scrubber combination is used for both the ethylene propylene rubber and halobutyl rubber processes.

In addition to the cost and emission a. Overview of the Source Category Resins MACT, which apply to the Butyl reduction impacts shown in Table B.6.1, The Butyl Rubber Production source Rubber Production source category, are we estimate that the beyond-the-floor category includes any facility that discussed above in section V.B.1.f. option will result in increases in criteria manufactures copolymers of isobutylene Significant Emission Points Not pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions and isoprene. A typical composition of Previously Regulated. We identified in ¥ ¥ (PM 0.03 TPY, SO2 0.006 TPY, butyl rubber is approximately 97 the provisions of the Group I Polymers ¥ ¥ NOX 2 TPY, CO 0.4 TPY, and CO2 percent isobutylene and 3 percent and Resins MACT standard that apply ¥ 1,200 TPY), the generation of isoprene. Modified, derivative, and to both Butyl Rubber Production approximately 29 million gallons/year halogenated copolymers and latexes are subcategories the absence of standards of wastewater, and an increase in energy also included in this source category. for two significant emissions sources in use of approximately 21,000 million Butyl rubber is typically made by a each of the Butyl Rubber Production BTU/year at a cost of approximately precipitation (slurry) polymerization subcategories. Specifically, these $7,000/year. process in which isobutylene and situations are HCl emissions from front- We believe that the costs and other isoprene are copolymerized in methyl end process vents and emissions from impacts of this beyond-the-floor option chloride solvent. Butyl rubber is very back-end process operations. The rule requires that emissions from are reasonable, given the level of impermeable to common gases and Group 1 front-end process vents be emission reduction. Therefore, we are resists oxidation. Uses for butyl rubber routed to a control device that achieves proposing Option 2, the beyond-the- include tires, tubes, and tire products; 98 percent reduction in organic HAP floor option. We are requesting automotive mechanical goods; emissions but does not require the comment on this analysis and these adhesives, caulks, and sealants; and control of hydrogen halides and options. pharmaceutical uses. A specialty group of butyl rubbers are halogenated butyl halogens from the outlet of combustion As noted above, we have proposed rubbers, which are produced devices. Both facilities in these and finalized a decision that the MACT commercially by dissolving butyl rubber subcategories control the organic HAP standard for ethylene propylene rubber in hydrocarbon solvent and contacting emissions in accordance with the production, prior to the implementation the solution with gaseous or liquid requirements in the rule (i.e., reduce of the proposed emission limitation elemental halogens such as chlorine or organic HAP emissions by 98 percent). discussed in this section, provides an bromine. For the purpose of the MACT This represents the MACT floor for ample margin of safety to protect public standards, this source category is these subcategories. However, these health. Since this source category was divided into two subcategories: butyl facilities route a chlorinated organic ‘‘low risk’’ prior to this proposed rubber and halobutyl rubber. compound to a flare, which results in emission limitation, we maintain that For the Butyl Rubber Production emissions of HCl that are exempted after its implementation, which will source category, we have proposed and from the current MACT requirements. only further reduce HAP emissions, the finalized a decision not to revise the Due to the level of HCl emissions rule will continue to provide an ample standards for this source category based resulting from the combustion of margin of safety to protect public health. on our RTR. As noted above, this chlorinated organic compounds in Consequently, we do not believe it will decision was proposed on December 12, Group 1 streams, we are proposing to be necessary to conduct another 2007 and finalized on December 16, require control of these HCl emissions residual risk review under CAA section 2008. Since the Butyl Rubber for both the Butyl Rubber Production 112(f) for this source category 8 years Production source category was and Halobutyl Rubber Production following promulgation of new determined to be ‘‘low risk’’ (maximum subcategories. limitations, merely due to the addition lifetime cancer risk less than 1-in-1 As there is only one facility in each of this new MACT requirement. million), we did not believe it was subcategory, the existing level of control 7. Butyl Rubber Production necessary to conduct a facility-wide or for organic HAP emissions represents demographic risk analysis. Therefore, the MACT floor. As part of our beyond- Butyl Rubber Production is one of the we are not addressing the RTR in this the-floor analysis, we considered source categories for which we notice for this source category. alternatives to reduce the HCl proposed and finalized RTR decisions emissions, which are more stringent on December 12, 2007 (72 FR 70543) b. What other actions are we proposing? than the MACT floor option. For front- and December 16, 2008 (73 FR 76220), SSM Provisions. The proposed SSM end process vents, we identified the respectively. changes to the Group I Polymers and option of eliminating the exemption

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65110 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

from the requirement to control rubber facility and $424,000 per year for these streams could be controlled using hydrogen halides and halogens from the the halobutyl rubber facility. Since there the same equipment at this facility, we outlet of combustion devices. The butyl would be no additional reduction in estimated the costs of a single rubber facility reported HCl emissions organic HAP emissions from what is incinerator and scrubber to control the of 30.1 TPY, while the halobutyl rubber being achieved by the current controls, streams containing chlorinated organics facility reported 76.8 TPY. Since the only emission reduction would a 99 from both the ethylene propylene rubber scrubbers could not be installed on the percent reduction in HCl emissions, or and halobutyl rubber processes. The outlet of these combustion devices to 29.8 TPY for the butyl rubber facility estimated capital cost of this control reduce the HCl emissions by 99 percent, and 76 TPY for the halobutyl rubber scenario is $1,100,000 and the annual the butyl rubber facility and the facility. Thus, the cost-effectiveness of cost is $640,000 per year. This would halobutyl rubber facility would need to these beyond-the-floor options would be still achieve the same HCl emission install new incinerators followed by approximately $7,900 per ton for butyl reduction from the halobutyl rubber scrubbers to comply with this beyond- rubber and $6,000 per ton for halobutyl process (76 TPY), and the overall cost- the-floor requirement. We estimate that rubber. However, this halobutyl rubber effectiveness considering the reductions the capital costs for this would be process is co-located with an ethylene from the ethylene propylene rubber and $669,000 for the butyl rubber facility propylene rubber process, which also halobutyl rubber would be around and $984,000 for the halobutyl rubber vents a vent stream containing $6,700 per ton. Tables B.7.1 and B.7.2 facility. The total annual costs would be chlorinated organic compounds to a summarize the impacts of the proposed around $235,000 per year for the butyl flare, resulting in HCl emissions. As options.

TABLE B.7.1—BUTYL RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY FRONT-END OPTIONS IMPACTS

Cost- effectiveness HAP Capital cost Annual cost as compared to Regulatory alternatives emissions ($million) ($million/yr) baseline (TPY HAP) ($/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 30.1 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 30.1 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 0.3 0.6 0.2 $7,900

TABLE B.7.2—HALOBUTYL RUBBER PRODUCTION FACILITY FRONT-END OPTIONS IMPACTS

Cost- effectiveness HAP Capital cost Annual cost as compared to Regulatory alternatives emissions ($million) ($million/yr) baseline (TPY HAP) ($/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 76.8 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 76.8 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 0.8 * 1.1 * 0.6 *$6,700 * Assuming a shared control incinerator/scrubber combination is used for both the ethylene propylene rubber and halobutyl rubber processes.

In addition to the cost and emission of wastewater, and an increase in energy uncontrolled back-end process reduction impacts shown in Table B.7.1 use of around 21,000 million BTU/year operations at the butyl rubber facility for butyl rubber production, we estimate at a cost of approximately $7,000/year. are approximately 26 TPY, and 35 TPY that the beyond-the-floor option will We believe that the costs and other at the halobutyl facility. There are two result in increases in criteria pollutant impacts of these beyond-the-floor separate dryer vent streams at the butyl ¥ and carbon dioxide emissions (PM options are reasonable, given the level rubber facility, with one stream ¥ ¥ 0.004 TPY, SO2 0.001 TPY, NOX of emission reduction. Therefore, we are controlled. The controlled stream emits ¥ ¥ 2 TPY, CO 0.05 TPY, and CO2 160 proposing Option 2, the beyond-the- around 28 TPY of hexane. The floor option, for both the Butyl Rubber TPY), the generation of approximately regenerative thermal oxidizer used to 31 million gallons/year of wastewater, Production and Halobutyl Rubber control emissions achieves and an increase in energy use of around Production subcategories. We are approximately 98-percent control. There 3,000 million BTU/year at a cost of requesting comment on this analysis approximately $3,000/year. and these options. are four separate dryer vents at the In addition to the cost and emission We also noted that there are no back- halobutyl facility and one vent is reduction impacts shown in Table B.6.2 end process operation emission limits controlled. The controlled vent emits for halobutyl rubber production, we for either the Butyl Rubber Production around 18 TPY of hexane. The estimate that the beyond-the-floor or Halobutyl Rubber Production regenerative thermal oxidizer used to option will result in increases in criteria subcategories. As there is only one control emissions achieves pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions facility in each subcategory, the back- approximately 97-percent control of the (PM ¥ 0.03 TPY, SO2 ¥ 0.006 TPY, end process operations emissions level hexane emissions. The four NOX ¥ 2 TPY, CO ¥ 0.4 TPY, and CO2 currently being achieved by these uncontrolled vents collectively emit ¥ 1,200 TPY), the generation of facilities represents the MACT floor. around 35 TPY of hexane. Therefore, we approximately 29 million gallons/year The annual emissions from the have determined that the MACT floors

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65111

for these processes are these emission require an initial performance test of the estimate that an incinerator would levels, given current production levels, incinerator and continuous parameter achieve an emissions reduction of 98 but which would fluctuate monitoring averaged daily. For the Butyl percent, resulting in a HAP decrease of proportionally with an increase or Rubber Production subcategory, the approximately 26 TPY for the Butyl decrease in production levels. capital costs of this option are estimated Rubber Production subcategory and 34 As part of our beyond-the-floor to be approximately $235,000 and the for Halobutyl Rubber Production analysis, we considered alternatives total annual costs are estimated to be subcategory. The associated cost- more stringent than the MACT floor approximately $181,000. For the effectiveness values would be option. We identified one option using Halobutyl Rubber Production approximately $7,000 per ton for Butyl add-on emission controls that would subcategory, the capital costs of this Rubber Production subcategory and require the ducting of emissions from option are estimated to be $47,000/ton for Halobutyl Rubber the uncontrolled back-end process approximately $950,000 and the total Production subcategory. Tables B.7.3 operations to a control device, such as annual costs are estimated to be and B.7.4 summarize the impacts of the an incinerator. This option would also approximately $1,600,000 per year. We proposed options.

TABLE B.7.3—BUTYL RUBBER PRODUCTION SUBCATEGORY FACILITY BACK-END OPTION IMPACTS

Cost- effectiveness HAP Capital cost Annual cost as compared to Regulatory alternatives emissions ($million) ($million/yr) baseline (TPY HAP) ($/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 54 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 54 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 28 0.2 0.2 $7,000

TABLE B.7.4—HALOBUTYL RUBBER PRODUCTION SUBCATEGORY FACILITY BACK-END OPTION IMPACTS

Cost- effectiveness HAP Capital cost Annual cost as compared to Regulatory alternatives Emissions ($million) ($million/yr) baseline (TPY HAP) ($/ton HAP removed)

Baseline ...... 53 ...... 1 (MACT floor) ...... 53 0 0 ...... 2 (Beyond-the-floor) ...... 19 1 1.6 $47,000

In addition to the cost and emission emission reduction. Therefore, we are after their implementation, which will reduction impacts shown in Table B.7.3 proposing Option 2 for the Butyl Rubber only further reduce HAP emissions, the for Butyl Rubber Production Production subcategory, the beyond-the- rule will continue to provide an ample subcategory, we estimate that the floor option. We are requesting margin of safety to protect public health. beyond-the-floor option will result in comment on this analysis and these Consequently, we do not believe it will increases in criteria pollutant and options. be necessary to conduct another ¥ carbon dioxide emissions (PM 0.01, We believe that the costs and other residual risk review under CAA section ¥ ¥ SO2 0.003 TPY, NOX 8 TPY, CO impacts of the beyond-the-floor option 112(f) for this source category 8 years ¥ ¥ for the Halobutyl Rubber Production 0.2 TPY, and CO2 600 TPY) and following promulgation of new front- an increase in energy use of subcategory back-end process end process vent and back-end process approximately 10,000 million BTU/year operations are not reasonable, given the limitations, merely due to the addition at a cost of approximately $6,000/year. level of emission reduction. Therefore, In addition to the cost and emission we are proposing Option 1, the MACT of these new MACT requirements. reduction impacts shown in Table B.7.4 floor option. We are requesting C. What are the results and proposed for Halobutyl Rubber Production comment on this analysis and these decisions for the Marine Tank Vessel subcategory, we estimate that the options. Loading Operations source category? beyond-the-floor option will result in As noted above, we have proposed increases in criteria pollutant and and finalized a decision that the MACT 1. Overview of the Source Category and carbon dioxide emissions (PM ¥0.25, standard for the Butyl Rubber MACT Standards SO2 ¥0.05 TPY, NOX ¥17 TPY, CO ¥3 Production source category, prior to the The NESHAP for MTVLO were TPY, and CO2 ¥10,500 TPY) and an implementation of the proposed increase in energy use of approximately emission limitations to the front-end promulgated on September 19, 1995 (60 170,000 million BTU/year at a cost of process vent and back-end process FR 48388), and codified at 40 CFR part approximately $49,000/year. operations discussed in this section, 63, subpart Y. The MTVLO MACT- We believe that the costs and other provides an ample margin of safety to based standards apply to major sources impacts of the beyond-the-floor option protect public health. Since both and regulate HAP emissions from: Land- for back-end process operations for the subcategories of this source category based terminals, off-shore terminals, Butyl Rubber Production subcategory were ‘‘low risk’’ prior to these proposed and the Alyeska Pipeline Service are reasonable, given the level of emission limitations, we maintain that Company’s Valdez Marine Terminal.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65112 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

MTVLO are conducted at terminals subject to the MACT standards and the and considered, and adjustments were that load liquid commodities in bulk, analyses discussed in this section are made to the data set where we such as crude oil, gasoline, and other based on these 152 facilities. We believe concluded the comments supported fuels, and some chemicals and solvent the 152 facilities emit HAP that are such adjustment. After making mixtures. The cargo is pumped from the representative of HAP emissions within appropriate changes to the data set terminal’s large, above-ground storage the source category because, based on based on this public data review tanks through a network of pipes into a available information, we expect that process, we created the data set on storage compartment (tank) on the the rest of the facilities in the source which we based the initial proposal. vessel. Emissions occur as vapors are category generally emit the same HAP as This data set was used to conduct the displaced from the tank as it is being do the 152 modeled facilities. In risk assessment and other analyses for filled. Most MTVLO facilities are either addition, we expect that these 152 the MTVLO source category that formed independent terminals or are associated terminals represent the larger-emitting the basis for the actions included in the with petroleum refineries or synthetic terminals, based on the specific October 2008, proposal. organic chemical manufacturers. terminals included in the 2005 NEI and For purposes of the MTVLO analysis, the average reported emissions from Since the initial October 2008 we considered only emissions from these terminals (2.8 TPY of HAP on proposal, we have continued to those sources that are part of the average). scrutinize the existing data set and have MTVLO source category. We recognize Marine terminals with MTVLO evaluated all additional data that that there are additional sources of located at petroleum refineries are not became available subsequent to the emissions at these facilities that are not part of the MTVLO source category, but proposal. Uncertainty about possible part of the MTVLO source category. are subject to the MTVLO MACT-based changes in the industry led us to extract Those emission sources include standards because the Refinery more recent data from the NEI and, emissions from hatch leaks or J tubes NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC, ultimately, to replace the entire 2002 during transit, lightering operations, incorporate those requirements by NEI–based MTVLO data set with a data ballasting wastewater from non- reference. However, marine terminals set based on the 2005 NEI. Additionally, segregated ballasting, cleaning of the that are part of the Petroleum Refineries we continue to work with industry cargo tank (especially when changing source category were not included in representatives to resolve data issues products), and ventilating the cargo tank this risk assessment because they are found with facilities modeled with a prior to loading. We are investigating not in the MTVLO source category. For MIR above 1-in-1 million (discussed in these sources to understand their these reasons, we are proposing to the next section) using the 2005 NEI emissions and any controls used to exclude refineries from the additional data. The industry’s review to date is reduce those emissions and request control requirements that are being provided in the docket for public review information about these sources that are proposed in this action. Loading and comment. currently not part of the MTVLO source operations at marine terminals that are The 2005 NEI-based data set shows category. part of the Petroleum Refineries source 420 TPY of total HAP emissions from The primary emission sources of category will be addressed in a separate the 152 modeled facilities in the data displaced vapors associated with RTR rulemaking action. set. Hexane, methyl tertiary butyl ether, MTVLO activities include open tank toluene, methanol, benzene, and hatches and overhead vent systems. 2. What data were used in our risk xylenes account for the majority of the Other possible emission points are analyses? HAP emissions from loading operations hatch covers or domes, pressure or We initially created a preliminary included in the MTVLO source category vacuum relief valves, seals, and vents. data set for the source category using at the 152 facilities in the data set The MACT standards require control of data in the 2002 NEI Final Inventory, (approximately 350 TPY, or 79 percent all displaced vapors that result from Version 1 (made publicly available on of the total HAP emissions by mass). product loading at affected sources February 26, 2006), which we reviewed These facilities also reported relatively irrespective of the point from which and changed where necessary to ensure those vapors are emitted. Typical that the proper facilities were included small emissions of 56 other HAP. control devices used to reduce HAP and that emissions from the proper 3. What are the results of the risk emissions at affected facilities include processes were allocated to the MTVLO assessments and analyses? vapor collection systems routed to source category. We also reviewed the either combustion or recovery devices, emissions and other data to identify We have conducted a revised such as flares, incinerators, absorbers, data anomalies that could affect risk inhalation risk assessment for the carbon adsorbers, and condensers. estimates. On March 29, 2007, we MTVLO source category. We have also When we developed the MTVLO published an ANPRM (72 FR 29287) conducted an assessment of facility- MACT, we estimated that approximately requesting comments on and updates to wide risks and performed a 300 major source facilities with MTVLO this data set, as well as the data sets for demographic analysis of population would be subject to the MACT the other source categories included in risks. Table C.1 provides an overall standards. However, data in the 2005 the notice. Comments received in summary of the results of the revised NEI were only available for 152 facilities response to the ANPRM were reviewed inhalation risk assessment.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65113

TABLE C.1—MARINE TANK VESSEL LOADING OPERATIONS REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum Maximum individual Annual chronic non-cancer 3 cancer risk Population cancer TOSHI Maximum off-site (in 1 million) 2 at risk 1 acute non-cancer Number of facilities ≥ 1-in-1 incidence Actual Allowable HQ 4 Actual Allowable million (cases per emissions emissions year) emissions emissions level level level level

152 Modeled Facilities ...... 20 60 71,000 0.01 0.3 0.9 HQREL = 1 benzene 300 Major Source Facilities 20 60 140,000 0.02 0.3 0.9 HQREL = 1 benzene Subject to the MTVLO MACT Standard. * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 There were 152 facilities in the data set that were modeled. We believe that these facilities are representative of the entire source category and that the maximum risks arising from any individual facility in the source category are properly characterized. The population risks were scaled up based on a linear relationship. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the MTVLO source category is the reproductive system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was 0.02, or one case in every 50 years, facilities to achieve 98-percent control performed using actual emissions level considering that there may be 300 of emissions where only 97-percent data. As shown in Table C.1, the results facilities in the source category. The emissions control is required by the of the revised inhalation risk assessment maximum off-facility-site acute HQ MACT standards for another facility, indicate the maximum lifetime value could be as high as 1, based on the they could, under MACT, increase individual cancer risk could be as high actual emissions level and the REL emissions by a factor of 3. Therefore, the as 20-in-1 million, the maximum value for benzene. maximum individual cancer risk based chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could In evaluating potential differences on MACT-allowable emissions is be up to 0.3. The total estimated between actual emission levels and estimated to be up to 60-in-1 million, national cancer incidence from these emissions allowable under the MACT- and the maximum chronic non-cancer facilities based on actual emission levels based standards, we investigated the TOSHI value is up to 0.9. at the 152 modeled facilities is 0.01 specific controls in use at facilities Table C.2 displays the results of the excess cancer cases per year or one case associated with cancer risks greater than facility-wide risk assessment. This in every 100 years. The total estimated 1-in-1 million and determined that the assessment was conducted based on cancer incidence for the MTVLO source highest factor for one of these facilities actual emission levels for the 152 category could, however, be as high as was 3.0, based on the ability of these modeled facilities.

TABLE C.2—MARINE TANK VESSEL LOADING OPERATIONS FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 200 MTVLO source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk 1 ...... 10% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 4 MTVLO source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI 1 ...... 20% 1 Percentage shown reflects MTVLO source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

The maximum individual cancer risk and the highest facility-wide non-cancer The results of the demographic from all HAP emissions at a facility that risk is primarily driven by chemical analyses performed to investigate the contains sources subject to the MTVLO manufacturing processes. The OLD and distribution of risks above 1-in-1 MACT standards is estimated to be 200- chemical manufacturing process million, based on actual emissions in-1 million, and the maximum chronic emissions will be addressed as part of levels for the population living within non-cancer TOSHI value is estimated to our effort to develop integrated 5 km of the facilities, among various be 4. The highest facility-wide cancer requirements for the chemical demographic groups are provided in a risk for a facility that includes a MTVLO manufacturing sector. We intend to report available in the docket for this source is primarily driven by emissions develop integrated rules for the action and summarized in Table C.3 associated with sources subject to the chemical manufacturing sector over the below. organic liquids distribution (OLD) next 2 years. NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65114 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE C.3—MARINE TANK VESSEL LOADING OPERATIONS DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic or Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multi-racial Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category...... 20 0.06 29 7 21 38 0.6 15 19 Facility-wide ...... 200 0.8 38 18 39 14 0.5 18 18

The results of the demographic environmental effects, did not pose 1 million, we then reconsidered our analysis show that, for the MTVLO potential for human health 2008 ample margin of safety decision. source category, of the 60,000 people multipathway risks, and were unlikely We have not identified any additional with cancer risk greater than 1-in-1 to cause acute or chronic non-cancer control options or any changes to the million, 29 percent could be classified health impacts. Therefore, we proposed previously-analyzed control option that as a ‘‘Minority,’’ 38 percent are included that the existing standards provided an would further reduce risks from MTVLO in the ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’ demographic ample margin of safety and proposed to that have cancer risks above 1-in-1 group, 21 percent are included in the re-adopt the existing MACT standards to million. Our analysis does not indicate ‘‘Other and Multiracial’’ demographic satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. a change in the emissions reductions that could be achieved or in the cost of group, 15 percent are included in the b. Risk Acceptability ‘‘Below Poverty Level’’ demographic control for the control option group, and 19 percent are included in The revised risk analysis we considered, but ultimately rejected, in the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High School performed for this proposal indicates the October 2008 proposal. Therefore, Diploma’’ demographic group. The that the cancer risks to the individual we continue to propose that the current percentage of the population within most exposed is 20-in-1 million based MACT-based standards provide an 5 km of the terminal and with a cancer on actual emissions and 30-in-1 million ample margin of safety to protect public risk greater than 1-in-1 million is higher based on MACT-allowable emissions. health and the environment, and we are than the typical distribution of these The cancer incidence and the number of proposing to re-adopt the existing demographic groups across the United people exposed to cancer risks of 1-in- MACT standards to satisfy section 112(f) States. The facility-wide demographic 1 million or greater are relatively low, of the CAA. analysis shows that many more people based on actual emissions. The analyses show no potential for adverse 5. What are our proposed decisions on (800,000) are at cancer risk greater than the technology review? 1-in-1 million. As with the MTVLO environmental effects or human health In the October 10, 2008 proposal, as analysis, many of the demographic multipathway effects, and that chronic, part of our technology review, we stated groups have disparate impacts non-cancer health impacts are unlikely. that we had not identified any compared to the distribution across the The revised assessment did indicate that advancements in practices, processes, United States. an acute non-cancer HQ as high as 1 could occur, based on the REL value. and control technologies applicable to Details of these assessments and Our additional analysis of facility-wide the emission sources in the MTVLO analyses can be found in the residual risks shows that the maximum facility- source category that would result in risk documentation referenced in wide cancer risk is 200-in-1 millions decreased emissions, and, on that basis, section IV.A of this preamble, which is and the maximum facility-wide non- proposed to re-adopt the existing MACT available in the docket for this action. cancer TOSHI is 4. It also shows that the standards to satisfy section 112(d)(6) of 4. What are our proposed decisions on MTVLO processes located at the the CAA. In that review, we examined risk acceptability and ample margin of facilities with these maximum risk the regulatory requirements and/or safety? values contribute approximately 10 and technical analyses for subsequently- promulgated air toxics regulations a. October 2008 Proposed Decision 20 percent to such risks, respectively. Our additional analyses of the applicable to source categories with In October 2008, we proposed that the demographics of the exposed emission sources similar to those in the risks were acceptable because the risk population show disparities in risks MTVLO source category, and we results indicated that cancer risks to the between demographic groups, but searched the RBLC for controls individual most exposed to emissions MTVLO represent a small portion of the applicable to VOC- and HAP-emitting from the category were greater than population at risk. Based on this low processes in the MTVLO source 1-in-1 million, but less than 100-in-1 cancer risk level and in consideration of category that might further reduce HAP million, and there were no other other health measures and factors, emissions. In addition to reviewing significant health impacts. We including the low cancer incidence (one subsequent regulatory actions identified one emissions control option case in every 100 years) and the low applicable to similar types of emissions, that would reduce risks in the ample maximum non-cancer risk level (TOSHI such as those from loading racks or margin of safety determination. We of 0.3 based on actual emissions and 0.5 transfer operations, we also conducted a proposed that such control was not based on MACT-allowable emissions), review for other VOC and organic HAP- necessary to protect public health with we propose that the risks from the emitting processes that would have an ample margin of safety in light of the MTVLO source category are acceptable. similar, technology-transferable high costs and limited additional health controls. protection it would provide. We also c. Ample Margin of Safety We conducted a further review in proposed that emissions from the source Because we are proposing that the conjunction with this proposed category posed no potential for adverse risks are acceptable, but still above 1-in- rulemaking. The existing MACT

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65115

standards require collection and control As part of our technology review, we reductions beyond those required under for MTVLO facilities that load at least evaluated gasoline loading thresholds of the current rule. For the 1 million bbl/ 10 million barrels per year (bbl/yr) of 0.5, 1.0, and 5 million bbl/yr gasoline yr threshold, we estimate an additional gasoline. As part of our technology loaded. Specifically, we found that 190 TPY of HAP emissions and 2,600 review, we identified vapor collection MTVLO facilities loading 5 million bbl/ TPY of VOC emission reduction can be and processors (recovery), as a possible yr have approximately 25 tons per year achieved. The cost-effectiveness of these control for additional gasoline loading of HAP emissions. Facilities with this controls is $74,000 per ton of HAP MTLVO facilities. Recovery technology level of HAP emissions are subject to emission reduction and $5,500 per ton is appropriate for controlling mixtures the control requirements under the of VOC emission reduction. While the of compounds and gasoline is the existing rule. Therefore, loading in HAP cost-effectiveness is higher than highest-quantity commodity loaded, excess of 5 million bbl/yr of gasoline is our historical values, the VOC cost- based on our review of the Waterborne already required to be controlled under effectiveness is within the range of Commerce Statistics Center (WCSC) the current standard. acceptability. For the 0.5 million bbl/yr database for the United States. The We estimated the cost-effectiveness option, the additional costs of controls WCSC database contains detailed and overall impacts of the vapor is disproportionate to the additional information on the types and quantities collection and recovery options as emission reduction. As such, we are of commodities loaded and unloaded at shown in Table C.4. As discussed proposing to reduce the threshold in the United States ports, harbors, waterways, earlier, the 5 million bbl/yr threshold current rule from 10 million bbl/yr to and canals. would not achieve any HAP or VOC 1 million bbl/yr.

TABLE C.4—COST-EFFECTIVENESS AND NATIONWIDE IMPACTS FOR VAPOR COLLECTION AND RECOVERY CONTROLS FOR SOURCES WITH GASOLINE LOADING

Total Net HAP VOC Gasoline loading Capital cost annualized Recovery annualized emission HAP cost- emission VOC cost- threshold (million $) cost credit cost reduction effectiveness reduction effectiveness (million bbl/yr) (million $) (million $) (million $) (TPY) ($/ton) (TPY) ($/ton)

5 ...... 0 0 0 0 0 ...... 0 ...... 1 ...... 22 16 1 14 190 74,000 2,600 5,500 0.5 ...... 36 22 2 20 240 85,000 3,200 6,300

The current rule requires a 97 percent 6. What other actions are we proposing? criteria for establishing the affirmative HAP reduction for those facilities with defense. a. SSM Provisions a loading of 10 million bbl/yr. To foster EPA has attempted to ensure that we the use of vapor recovery rather than We reviewed the SSM provisions of have removed any provisions in the combustion of the vapors, we the MTVLO NESHAP. The MTVLO regulatory text that are inappropriate, considered additional formats for the NESHAP do contain an SSM exemption unnecessary, or redundant in the standard. We looked to similar MACT because they specify in 40 CFR 63.560, absence of the SSM exemption. We are standards for gasoline loading of tank Table 1 that 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) applies. specifically seeking comment on trucks and rail cars. Based on our Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, EPA whether there are any such provisions review of these standards, we believe is proposing that standards in this rule that we have inadvertently overlooked. that vapor recovery is capable of would apply at all times. We b. Significant Emission Points Not achieving an emission limit of less than determined that there are currently Previously Regulated or equal to 10 milligrams of total organic several cross-references in the MTVLO We also conducted a review of the compound emissions per liter of NESHAP that could cause some MTVLO NESHAP to determine whether gasoline loaded (mg/l). The 10 mg/l confusion regarding periods of SSM. We there were significant emissions sources emission limit also approximates the 97- also determined that the NESHAP do for which standards were not previously percent control that is required for the not specifically address recordkeeping developed. In this review, we identified larger-emitting, existing MTVLO and reporting requirements during two subcategories, those facilities subcategories. Thus, we propose to periods of malfunction. We are, emitting less than 10/25 TPY of HAP, provide facilities the option of either therefore, proposing several revisions to and those facilities located more than meeting the 97-percent control 40 CFR part 63, subpart Y to address 0.5 miles from shore, for which the requirement or the equivalent emission these issues. We are also proposing to current NESHAP do not include limit of 10 mg/l. add language to 40 CFR 63.563(b)(1) to emission standards. As discussed In summary, as a result of the clarify the conditions during which below, we considered two levels of technology review under section performance tests shall be conducted. control (submerged fill and vapor 112(d)(6) of the CAA, we are proposing We are further proposing to revise 40 recovery) for these two subcategories. to lower the existing threshold for CFR 63.560, Table 1 to specify that the Submerged fill reduces the amount of control of emissions from gasoline SSM included provisions in 40 CFR emissions generated from the loading of loading from 10 million bbl/yr to 1 63.6(f)(1), 40 CFR 63.7(e)(1), and 40 CFR vessels by reducing turbulence and million bbl/yr and to provide facilities 63.10(c)(10)–(11) of the General misting. Use of this technique results in the option of either meeting the Provisions do not apply. Finally, we are a 60-percent reduction in emissions 97-percent control requirement or the proposing to promulgate an affirmative compared to splash loading. We have equivalent emission limit of 10 mg/l. defense against civil penalties for determined that submerged fill is exceedances of emission standards currently used by most, if not all, of the caused by malfunctions, as well as facilities. We reached this conclusion

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65116 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

based on information obtained through 112(f) for this source category 8 years Pharmaceuticals Production source contact with industry representatives following promulgation of these category. We also reviewed the and the Coast Guard about submerged limitations. emissions and other data to identify filling. Existing Coast Guard rules data anomalies that could affect risk D. What are the results and proposed (46 CFR 153.282) require that ‘‘the estimates. On March 29, 2007, we decisions for the Pharmaceuticals discharge point of a cargo tank filling published an ANPRM (72 FR 29287) for line must be not higher above the Production source category? the express purpose of requesting bottom of the cargo tank or sump than 1. Overview of the Source Category and comments and updates to this data set, 10 centimeters (approximately 4 inches) MACT Standard as well as to the data sets for the other or the radius of the filling line, source categories addressed in that The National Emission Standards for whichever is greater.’’ According to ANPRM. Comments received in Pharmaceuticals Production were Coast Guard representatives, the radius response to the ANPRM were reviewed promulgated on September 21, 1998 (63 of the fill lines can be up to 6 inches. and considered, and we made FR 50280) and codified at 40 CFR part We are proposing that the submerged adjustments to the data set where we 63, subpart GGG. The Pharmaceuticals fill technique is the MACT floor. concluded the comments supported Production MACT standards apply to We next undertook an evaluation of such adjustment. After making major sources of HAP. We identified 27 potential beyond-the-floor options for appropriate changes to the data set the two identified subcategories. The facilities currently subject to the based on this public data review only option beyond the floor is the Pharmaceuticals Production MACT process, the data set on which we based application of vapor collection and standards. the initial proposal was created. This processors, which were the basis for the The pharmaceutical manufacturing data set was used to conduct the risk emissions standards applicable to other process consists of chemical production assessment and other analyses for the MTVLO, at existing facilities in two operations that produce drugs and Pharmaceuticals Production source subcategories of the MTVLO NESHAP medication. These operations include category that formed the basis for the (60 FR 48388). We examined the use of chemical synthesis (deriving a drug’s proposed RTR review actions included these controls by sources in the two active ingredient) and chemical in the October 10, 2008 proposal. subcategories in the context of the formulation (producing a drug in its We have continued to scrutinize the original MACT standards, but rejected final form). existing data set and have evaluated any their use as a beyond the floor option Emission sources at pharmaceutical additional data that has become because they were not cost effective. As production facilities include breathing available since the October 10, 2008 described above under the technology and withdrawal losses from chemical proposal. Since the time of the proposal, review, we are proposing to lower the storage tanks, venting of process vessels, we identified an error in the latitude/ threshold for using vapor collection and leaks from piping and equipment used longitude coordinates of one emission processing at MTVLO facilities loading to transfer HAP compounds (equipment point at one facility. This error has been gasoline from 10 million bbl/yr to 1 leaks), and volatilization of HAP from corrected in the data set, and no other million bbl/yr. We are also proposing to wastewater streams. changes have been made to it since the provide facilities the option of either Typical control devices used to proposal. meeting the 97-percent control reduce HAP emissions from process Methylene chloride, methanol, requirement or the equivalent emission vents include flares, incinerators, acetonitrile, and toluene account for the limit of 10 mg/l. For the reasons set scrubbers, carbon adsorbers, and majority of the HAP emissions from forth above, we are proposing these condensers. Emissions from storage these facilities (approximately 890 TPY, same requirements as a beyond the floor vessels are controlled by floating roofs or 85 percent of the total HAP emissions measure for these two subcategories. As or by routing them to a control device. by mass). These facilities also reported for those facilities that do not load 1 Emissions from wastewater are relatively small emissions of 54 other million bbl/yr, we are proposing no controlled by a variety of methods, HAP. For more detail, see the memo in additional controls as part of our including equipment modifications the docket for this action describing the beyond the floor analysis. (e.g., fixed roofs on storage vessels and risk assessment inputs and models for In conclusion, we are proposing in oil water separators; covers on surface the Pharmaceuticals Production source this action to set submerged fill as the impoundments containers, and drain category. floor level of control for these two systems), treatment to remove the HAP We estimate that MACT-allowable MTVLO subcategories. Additionally, we (steam stripping, biological treatment), emissions from this source category are proposing vapor recovery as a control devices, and work practices. could be up to 25 percent greater than beyond-the-floor option for those two Emissions from equipment leaks the actual emissions, primarily from MTVLO subcategories if they load 1 typically are reduced by leak detection process vents, as it is possible that the million bbl/yr or more of gasoline. and repair work practice programs, and control devices used at some facilities As noted above, we are proposing that in some cases, by equipment achieve greater emission reductions the MACT standards, prior to the modifications. from these emission sources than what implementation of the proposed is required by the MACT standard. For emission limitations discussed in this 2. What data were used in our risk analyses? more detail about this estimate of the section, provide an ample margin of ratio of actual to MACT-allowable safety to protect public health. We initially created a preliminary emissions, see the memo in the docket Therefore, we maintain that after data set for the source category using for this action describing the estimation implementation, which will further data in the 2002 NEI Final Inventory, of MACT-allowable emission levels and reduce HAP emissions, the rule will Version 1 (made publicly available on associated risks and impacts. continue to provide an ample margin of February 26, 2006). We reviewed the safety to protect public health. NEI data set and made changes where 3. What are the results of the risk Consequently, we do not believe it will necessary to ensure the proper facilities assessments and analyses? be necessary to conduct another were included and to ensure the proper We have conducted a revised residual risk review under CAA section processes were allocated to the inhalation risk assessment for the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65117

Pharmaceuticals Production source performed a demographic analysis of overall summary of the results of the category. We have also conducted an population risks. Table D.1 provides an revised inhalation risk assessment. assessment of facility-wide risk and

TABLE D.1—PHARMACEUTICALS PRODUCTION REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum Maximum individual cancer risk Annual chronic non-cancer 2 3 (in 1 million) Population cancer TOSHI Maximum off-site acute non-cancer Number of at risk ≥ 1- incidence 1 HQ 4 facilities Actual Allowable in-1 million (cases per Actual Allowable emissions emissions year) emissions emissions level level level level

27 ...... 3 4 2,000 0.0008 0.2 0.4 HQREL = 2 glycol ethers, chloroform HQAEGL–1 = 0.001 chloroform * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Pharmaceutical Production source category is the nervous system. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was level and the REL value for chloroform. standards indicated that MACT- performed using actual emissions level The HQ value at this level occurs at a allowable emission levels may be up to data. As shown in Table D.1, the results location adjacent to one facility 25 percent greater than actual emission of the revised inhalation risk assessment fenceline for only a few (13) hours per levels. Considering this difference, the indicate the maximum lifetime year. This maximum exceedance of the risk results from the revised inhalation individual cancer risk could be as high REL value corresponds to an HQAEGL–2 risk assessment indicate the maximum as 3-in-1 million, the maximum chronic equal to 0.001. We also note a possible lifetime individual cancer risk could be non-cancer TOSHI value could be up to exceedance of the short-term REL value as high as 4-in-1 million, and the 0.2. The total estimated national cancer for glycol ethers at one other facility maximum chronic non-cancer TOSHI (HQ = 2). There are no other incidence from these facilities based on REL value could be up to 0.4 at the MACT- appropriate acute threshold values actual emission levels is 0.0008 excess allowable emissions level. available for glycol ethers on which to cancer cases per year, or one case in base a comparison of potential risk. Table D.2 displays the results of the every 1,250 years. The maximum off- Our analysis of potential differences facility-wide risk assessment. This facility-site acute HQ value could be as between actual emission levels and assessment was conducted based on high as 2, based on the actual emissions emissions allowable under the MACT actual emission levels.

TABLE D.2—PHARMACEUTICALS PRODUCTION FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 40 Pharmaceuticals Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk 1 ...... <1% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 0.8 Pharmaceuticals Production source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI 1 ...... <1% 1 Percentage shown reflects Pharmaceuticals Production source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

The maximum individual cancer risk less than one percent for both cancer processes will be addressed in future from all HAP emissions at a facility that and non-cancer risk. The highest residual risk and technology reviews. contains sources subject to the facility-wide cancer risk for a facility The results of the demographic Pharmaceuticals Production MACT that includes a pharmaceuticals analyses performed to investigate the standards is estimated to be 40-in-1 production source is primarily driven distribution of risks above 1-in-1 million, and the maximum chronic non- by acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) million, based on actual emissions cancer TOSHI value is estimated to be resin production processes, and the levels for the population living within 0.8. At the facility where these highest facility-wide non-cancer risk is 5 km of the facilities, among various maximum risk values occur, the primarily driven by pesticide demographic groups are provided in a estimated proportion of the risk manufacturing processes. These ABS report available in the docket for this attributable to the Pharmaceuticals resin and pesticide manufacturing action and summarized in Table D.3 Production source category processes is below.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65118 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE D.3—PHARMACEUTICALS PRODUCTION DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source category ...... 3 0.002 12 4 8 34 0.5 32 25 Facility-wide ...... 40 0.03 18 14 4 12 0.3 21 15

The results of the demographic health impacts. We also identified one 1,250 years) and the low maximum non- analysis show that, for the emissions control option that would cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.2 based on Pharmaceuticals Production source reduce risks. We proposed that such actual emissions and 0.4 based on category, of the population of 2,000 control was not necessary to protect MACT-allowable emissions), we people with cancer risk greater than 1- public health with an ample margin of propose that the risks from the in-1 million, 34 percent are included in safety in light of the high cost and Pharmaceuticals Production source the ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’ demographic limited additional health protection it category are acceptable. would provide. Therefore, we proposed group, 32 percent are included in the c. Ample Margin of Safety ‘‘Below Poverty Level’’ demographic that the existing standard provided an group, and 25 percent are included in ample margin of safety, and we Because we are proposing that the the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High School proposed to re-adopt the existing MACT risks are acceptable, but still above 1-in- Diploma’’ demographic group. The standard to satisfy section 112(f) of the 1 million, we then re-considered our percentage of the population within 5 CAA. 2008 ample margin of safety decision. We have not identified any additional km of a pharmaceuticals production b. Risk Acceptability facility and with a cancer risk greater control options or any changes to the than 1-in-1 million is higher than seen The revised inhalation risk analysis previously-analyzed control option that for these demographic categories based we performed for this proposal indicates would affect emissions reductions or the on the distribution of these that the cancer risks to the individual costs of control. Therefore, we continue demographic groups across the United most exposed is 3-in-1 million based on to propose that the current MACT States. The table also shows that the actual emissions and up to 4-in-1 standards provide an ample margin of results of the facility-wide demographic million based on MACT-allowable safety to protect public health and the environment, and we are proposing to analysis are higher than seen across the emissions. The cancer incidence and the re-adopt the existing MACT standards to U.S, for the those included in the number of people exposed to cancer satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. ‘‘African American,’’ ‘‘Below Poverty risks of 1-in-1 million or greater are not Level,’’ and the ‘‘Over 25 Without a High significantly changed from the risk 5. What are our proposed decisions on School Diploma’’ demographic groups, identified in the October 2008 proposal. the technology review? Similarly, the risk analysis continued to but the risks are lower than these levels In the October 10, 2008 proposal, we for the other demographic groups. show no potential for an adverse environmental effect or human health identified no developments in practices, Details of these assessments and multi-pathway effects, and that chronic processes, and control technologies analyses can be found in the residual non-cancer health impacts are unlikely. applicable to the emission sources and risk documentation referenced in The revised assessment did indicate that thus we did not propose any additional section IV.A of this preamble, which is an acute non-cancer HQ as high as 2 controls as necessary under CAA available in the docket for this action. could occur, based on the REL value at section 112(d)(6). In that review, we 4. What are our proposed decisions on a location adjacent to the facility examined the regulatory requirements risk acceptability and ample margin of fenceline for only a few (13) hours per and/or technical analyses for safety? year. However, we do not believe this subsequently promulgated air toxics situation warrants additional control regulations with similar types of a. October 2008 Proposed Decision considering the overall health effects. emissions sources as those in the In our October 10, 2008 proposal, we While our additional analysis of facility- Pharmaceuticals Production source stated that the risks were acceptable wide risks showed that the maximum category, and we conducted a search of because the risk results indicated that facility-wide cancer risk is 40-in-1 the RBLC for controls for VOC- and cancer risks to the individual most million, it also showed that HAP-emitting processes in the exposed to emissions from the category pharmaceutical sources located at such Pharmaceuticals Production source of 10-in-1 million were greater than 1- facilities contributed less than 1 percent category. We have not identified any in-1 million but less than 100-in-1 to such risk. The facility-wide analysis additional developments in practices, million. We then analyzed other risk indicates that the maximum chronic processes, and control technologies factors and emissions control options in non-cancer risks are unlikely to cause since the proposal date. Thus, we are the ample margin of safety health impacts. Our additional analysis again proposing that it is not necessary determination. In this analysis, we of the demographics of the exposed to revise the existing MACT standards found emissions from the source population may show disparities in pursuant to section 112(d)(6). category posed no potential for an risks between demographic groups. 6. What other actions are we proposing? adverse environmental effect, did not Based on this low cancer risk level and pose potential for human health multi- in consideration of other health a. SSM Provisions pathway risks, and were unlikely to measures and factors, including the low We propose to eliminate the SSM cause acute or chronic non-cancer cancer incidence (one case in every exemption in the Pharmaceuticals

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65119

Production MACT standards. Consistent with the standards in 40 CFR data anomalies that could affect risk with Sierra Club v. EPA, EPA proposes 63.1256(a)(2)(i). This section incorrectly estimates. On March 29, 2007, we that standards in this rule would apply provides that only one of the listed published an ANPRM (72 FR 29287) for at all times. We are proposing several criteria must be met for the inlet to the the express purpose of requesting revisions to 40 CFR part 63, subpart equalization tank to be considered the comments on and updates to this data GGG. Specifically, we are proposing to inlet to the biological treatment process. set, as well as to the data sets for the revise Table 1 to indicate that the Instead, it should specify that all of the other source categories addressed in that requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e) of the criteria must be met. Thus, we are ANPRM. Comments received in General Provisions do not apply. The 40 proposing to revise this section by response to the ANPRM were reviewed CFR 63.6(e) requires owner or operators changing the ‘‘or’’ before each clause to and considered, and we made to act according to the general duty to ‘‘and,’’ to clarify that all the criteria of 40 adjustments to the data set where we ‘‘operate and maintain any affected CFR 63.1256(e)(2)(iii)(A)(6)(ii) must be concluded the comments supported source, including associated air met for the inlet to the equalization tank such adjustment. After making pollution control equipment and to be considered as the inlet to the appropriate changes to the data set monitoring equipment, in a manner biological treatment process. based on this public data review consistent with safety and good air process, the data set on which we based pollution control practices for E. What are the results and proposed the initial proposal was created. This minimizing emissions.’’ We are decisions for the Printing and data set was used to conduct the risk separately proposing to incorporate this Publishing Industry source category? assessment and other analyses for the general duty to minimize into 40 CFR 1. Overview of the Source Category and Printing and Publishing Industry source 63.1250(g)(3). The 40 CFR 63.6(e) also MACT Standard category that formed the basis for the requires the owner or operator of an proposed RTR actions included in the affected source to develop a written The National Emission Standards for October 2008 proposal. SSM plan. We are proposing to remove the Printing and Publishing Industry We have continued to scrutinize the the SSM plan requirement. We are were promulgated on May 30, 1996 (61 existing data set and have evaluated any proposing to remove the exemption FR 27132) and codified at 40 CFR part additional data that became available provisions for periods of SSM in 40 CFR 63, subpart KK. The Printing and since the October 2008 proposal. Since 63.1250(g), require that delay of Publishing Industry MACT standards the time of the proposal, we identified equipment leak repair plans be apply to major sources of HAP. We errors in some HAP that were reported contained in a separate document in 40 identified 172 facilities currently subject to be emitted and several facilities that CFR 63.1255(g)(4), revise 40 CFR to the Printing and Publishing Industry were included have permanently closed. 63.1257(a) to specify the conditions for MACT standards. The data set was updated to correct the performance tests, and revise the SSM Printing and publishing facilities are errors and remove the facilities that associated monitoring, recordkeeping, those facilities that use rotogravure, have closed. and reporting requirements in 40 CFR flexography, and other methods, such as Toluene accounts for the majority of 63.1258(b)(8), 40 CFR 63.1259(a), and 40 lithography, letterpress, and screen the HAP emissions from these facilities CFR 63.1260(i) to require reporting and printing, to print on a variety of (approximately 7,105 TPY, or 83 percent recordkeeping for periods of substrates, including paper, plastic film, of the total HAP emissions by mass). malfunction. We are also proposing to metal foil, and vinyl. The Printing and These facilities also reported relatively revise Table 1 to specify that 40 CFR Publishing Industry MACT standards small emissions of 58 other HAP. These 63.6(f)(1), 40 CFR 63.7(e)(1), the last include two subcategories: (1) emissions are primarily from the sentence of 40 CFR 63.8(d)(3), 40 CFR Publication rotogravure printing and (2) evaporation of HAP present in the inks 63.10(c)(10), (11), and (15), and 40 CFR product and packaging rotogravure and and other materials applied with 63.10(d)(5) of the General Provisions do wide-web flexographic printing. rotogravure and flexographic processes. not apply. In addition, we are proposing Emissions at printing and publishing We estimate that MACT-allowable to promulgate an affirmative defense facilities result from the evaporation of emissions from emission points within against civil penalties for exceedances solvents in the inks and from cleaning this source category could be up to five of emission standards caused by solvents. The emission points include times greater than the actual emissions malfunctions, as well as criteria for printing presses and associated dryers because some capture systems and establishing the affirmative defense. and ink and solvent storage. Control control devices used on printers at some EPA has attempted to ensure that we techniques include recovery devices, facilities could achieve greater emission have not incorporated into proposed combustion devices, and the use of non- reductions (in the range of 98 to regulatory language any provisions that HAP/low-HAP inks and cleaning possibly 100 percent) than what is are inappropriate, unnecessary, or solvents. required by the MACT standard (92 redundant in the absence of the SSM 2. What data were used in our risk percent). For more detail about this exemption. We are specifically seeking analyses? estimate of the ratio of actual to MACT- comment on whether there are any such allowable emissions, see the memo in provisions that we have inadvertently We initially created a preliminary the docket for this action describing the incorporated or overlooked. data set for the source category using estimation of MACT-allowable emission data in the 2002 NEI Final Inventory, levels and associated risks and impacts. b. Rule Improvements Review Version 1 (made publicly available on We are proposing to correct an February 26, 2006). We reviewed the 3. What are the results of the risk editorial error in 40 CFR NEI data and made changes where assessments and analyses? 63.1257(e)(2)(iii)(A)(6)(ii). That section necessary to ensure the proper facilities We have conducted a revised specifies several criteria under which were included and to ensure the proper inhalation risk assessment for the the inlet to the equalization tank may be processes were allocated to the Printing Printing and Publishing Industry source considered as the inlet to the biological and Publishing Industry source category. We have also conducted an treatment process for the purposes of category. We also reviewed the assessment of facility-wide risk, and performance tests to show compliance emissions and other data to identify performed a demographic analysis of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65120 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

population risks. Table E.1 provides an overall summary of the results of the revised inhalation risk assessment.

TABLE E.1—PRINTING AND PUBLISHING INDUSTRY REVISED INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum individual cancer risk Maximum chronic (in 1 million) 2 non-cancer Number Annual cancer 3 Population at TOSHI Maximum off-site acute of risk ≥ 1-in-1 incidence facili- Actual Allowable (cases per non-cancer HQ 4 1 million Actual ties emissions emissions year) emissions Allowable level level level emissions level

172 ...... 4 20 300 0.0006 0.08 0.4 HQREL = 10 toluene HQAEGL¥1 = 0.6 toluene * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 Number of facilities evaluated in the risk analysis. 2 Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk. 3 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Printing and Publishing Industry source category is the reproductive sys- tem. 4 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which in most cases is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A. of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The inhalation risk modeling was high as 10, based on the actual five times greater than actual emission performed using actual emissions level emissions level and the REL value for levels. Assuming this worst case data. As shown in Table E.1, the risks toluene. The HQ value at this level difference occurred at the highest risk based on these actual emission levels occurs at a location adjacent to one facility, the scaled risk results from the indicate the maximum lifetime facility fenceline for only a few (90) revised inhalation risk assessment individual cancer risk could be as high hours per year. This maximum would indicate the maximum lifetime as 4-in-1 million, the maximum chronic exceedance of the REL value individual cancer risk could be as high non-cancer TOSHI value could be up to corresponds to an HQAEGL¥1 equal to as 20-in-1 million, and the maximum 0.08. The total estimated national cancer 0.6. chronic non-cancer TOSHI value could incidence from these facilities based on Our analysis of potential differences be up to 0.4. the actual emission levels is 0.0006 between actual emission levels and Table E.2 displays the results of the excess cancer cases per year, or one case emissions allowable under the MACT facility-wide risk assessment. This in every 1,666 years. The maximum off- standard indicated that MACT- assessment was conducted based on facility-site acute HQ value could be as allowable emission levels may be up to actual emission levels.

TABLE E.2—PRINTING AND PUBLISHING INDUSTRY FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk (in 1 million) ...... 20 Printing and Publishing Industry source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk 1 ...... < 1% Maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI ...... 1 20 Printing and Publishing Industry source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI 2 ...... 3 < 1% 1 After risk modeling was complete, EPA received data that identified an error in emissions that caused this highest TOSHI value. After revising the emissions value, the highest facility-wide TOSHI is 2 from a different facility. 2 Percentage shown reflects Printing and Publishing Industry source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown. 3 This percentage reflects the Printing and Publishing Industry source category contribution to the highest facility-wide TOSHI of 2, as noted in footnote 1 to this table.

The maximum individual cancer risk maximum risk values occur, the distribution of risks above 1-in-1 from all HAP emissions at a facility that estimated proportion of the risk million, based on actual emissions contains sources subject to the Printing attributable to the Printing and levels for the population living within 5 and Publishing Industry MACT Publishing Industry source category km of the facilities, among various standards is estimated to be 20-in-1 processes is less than one percent for demographic groups are provided in a million, and the maximum chronic non- both cancer and non-cancer risk. report available in the docket for this cancer TOSHI value is estimated to be The results of the demographic action and summarized in Table E.3 20. At the facilities where these analyses performed to investigate the below.

TABLE E.3—PRINTING AND PUBLISHING INDUSTRY DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 285 25 12 12 14 0.9 13 13 Source Category ...... 4 0.00005 0 0 0 0 0 11 5

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65121

TABLE E.3—PRINTING AND PUBLISHING INDUSTRY DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS—Continued

Population with risk greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Below the Over 25 Emissions basis risk Total Minority African Other and Hispanic Native poverty W/O a HS (in 1 million) (millions) % American multiracial or Latino American level diploma % % % % % %

Facility-wide ...... 20 0.05 14 8 5 5 0.3 9 11

The results of the Printing and are relatively low, based on actual re-adopt the existing MACT standards to Publishing Industry source category emissions. The analyses show no satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. demographic analysis show that for the potential for an adverse environmental 5. What are our proposed decisions on 50 people living within 5 km of a effect or human health multi-pathway the technology review? printing and publishing industry facility effects, and that chronic non-cancer and with a cancer risk greater than 1-in- health impacts are unlikely. The revised In the October 2008 proposal, we 1 million is less than the national assessment did indicate that an acute identified no advancements in practices, averages for the demographic categories non-cancer HQ as high as 10 could processes, and control technologies displayed in Table E.3, based on the occur, based on the REL value for applicable to the emission sources in typical distribution of these toluene at a location adjacent to the the Printing and Publishing Industry demographic groups across the United facility fenceline for up to 90 hours per source category in our technology States. The table also shows that the year. However, given the fact that this review, and thus we proposed that it results of the demographic analysis for potential impact does not exceed the was not necessary to revise the existing MACT standards pursuant to section the facility-wide emissions are similarly AEGL–1 value for toluene (HQAEGL–1 = less than the national averages for these 0.6) we do not believe this situation 112(d)(6) of the CAA. In that review we demographic groups. This means the warrants additional control considering examined the regulatory requirements emissions from these sources do not the overall health effects. Our additional and/or technical analyses for create any significant disparate risk analysis of facility-wide risks showed subsequently promulgated air toxics impacts. that the maximum facility-wide cancer regulations with similar types of Details of these assessments and risk is 20-in-1 million and the maximum emissions sources as those in the analyses can be found in the residual facility-wide non-cancer TOSHI is 20. It Printing and Publishing Industry source risk documentation as referenced in also showed that the printing and category, and we conducted a search of section IV.A of this preamble, which is publishing processes located at the the RBLC for controls for VOC- and available in the docket for this action. facilities with these maximum risk HAP-emitting processes in the Printing values contribute less than 1 percent to and Publishing Industry source 4. What are our proposed decisions on such risks. As previously mentioned, category. We re-examined these same risk acceptability and ample margin of our additional analysis of the sources of information to identify any safety? demographics of the exposed new developments since the time of the October 2008 proposal. For the purposes a. October 2008 Proposed Decision population suggests there are not large of this proposal, we examined the disparities in risks between In our October 10, 2008 proposal, the option of retrofitting permanent total demographic groups. risk results indicated that cancer risk to enclosures onto those controlled presses the individual most exposed to Based on this low cancer risk level that do not already have permanent total emissions from the category was 0.05- and in consideration of other health enclosures. A permanent total enclosure in-1 million, which is less than 1-in-1 measures and factors, including the low improves the capture of solvent HAP million (i.e., were ‘‘low risk’’). Therefore, cancer incidence (one case in every from inks and delivers the additional we did not conduct an additional ample 1,666 years), the low maximum non- captured solvent HAP to a control margin of safety analysis for the cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.08 based device. We estimate the cost- proposed rule. on actual emissions and 0.4 based on effectiveness of this retrofit to be over MACT-allowable emissions), relatively b. Risk Acceptability $50,000 per additional ton of HAP low facility-wide risks which are not controlled. We find the cost of this While at the time of the October 10, attributable to the printing and retrofit to be disproportionate to the 2008 proposal this source category publishing category, and the lack of emission reduction that would be showed low risks (cancer risks to the disparate impacts in the demographic achieved. Thus, we are proposing that it individual most exposed to emissions analysis, we propose that the risks from is not necessary to revise the existing from the category were less than 1-in-1 the Printing and Publishing Industry MACT standards pursuant to section million), in our revised analysis we source category are acceptable. 112(d)(6) of the CAA. found that cancer risks to the individual c. Ample Margin of Safety most exposed to emissions from the 6. What other actions are we proposing? category were 4-in-1 million based on Because we are proposing that the We propose to eliminate the SSM actual emissions and as high as 20-in- risks are acceptable, but still above 1-in- exemption in the Printing and 1 million based on MACT-allowable 1 million, we then re-considered our Publishing Industry MACT standard. emissions. This change in risk is 2008 ample margin of safety decision. Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, EPA primarily the result of a cancer health Based on these analyses, we continue to proposes that standards in this rule benchmark value becoming available for propose that the current MACT would apply at all times. We are ethyl benzene. The cancer incidence standards provide an ample margin of proposing several revisions to 40 CFR and the number of people exposed to safety to protect public health and the part 63, subpart KK regarding the cancer risks of 1-in-1 million or greater environment, and we are proposing to standards that apply during periods of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65122 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

SSM. Specifically, we are proposing to and Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration used before the emissions are scrubbed revise Table 1 to indicate that the Plants were promulgated on June 22, in one or two counter-current packed requirements of 40 CFR 63.6(e) of the 1999 (64 FR 33202) and codified at 40 tower absorbers. General Provisions do not apply. CFR part 63, subpart CCC. The Steel Section 63.6(e) requires owners or Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and 2. What data were used in our risk operators to act according to the general Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants analyses? duty to ‘‘operate and maintain any MACT standards (i.e., Steel Pickling For the Steel Pickling source category, affected source, including associated air MACT standard) apply to major sources we compiled preliminary data sets using pollution control equipment and of HAP. We estimate that there are data in the 2005 NEI. We reviewed these monitoring equipment, in a manner approximately 80 facilities subject to the data and made changes where consistent with safety and good air MACT standards that are currently pollution control practices for performing steel pickling and/or acid necessary. We also contacted several minimizing emissions.’’ We are regeneration. Many of these facilities are facilities to verify the emissions and separately proposing to incorporate this located adjacent to integrated iron and emissions release characteristic data, general duty to minimize emissions into steel manufacturing plants or electric and we made updates to the data set 40 CFR 63.823. The 40 CFR 63.6(e) also arc furnace steelmaking facilities (mini- based on the information received from requires the owner or operator of an mills) that produce steel from scrap. these communications. This updated affected source to develop a written Facilities that regenerate HCl may or data set comprises the data set that was SSM plan. We are proposing to remove may not be located at steel pickling used to conduct the risk assessments the SSM plan requirement. We are also operations. and other analyses that form the basis proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.827 to The Steel Pickling source category for this proposed action. Hydrochloric specify the conditions for performance consists of facilities that pickle steel, acid and chlorine account for all of the tests and to revise 40 CFR 63.829 and using HCl as the pickling acid, and HAP emissions from the Steel Pickling 40 CFR 63.830 to require reporting and facilities that regenerate the HCl after source category (approximately 248 and recordkeeping for periods of use, but does not include facilities 164 TPY, respectively). malfunction. We are proposing to revise which pickle steel using acids other Our analysis of potential differences Table 1 to specify that 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1), than HCl. 40 CFR 63.7(e)(1), the last sentence of 40 Steel pickling is a treatment process between actual emission levels and CFR 63.8(d)(3), 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(i), in which the heavy oxide crust or mill emissions allowable under the MACT (ii), (iv), and (v), 40 CFR 63.10(c)(10), scale that develops on the steel surface standards indicate that actual emissions (11), and (15), and 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5) of during hot forming or heat treating is and allowable emissions are the General Provisions do not apply. In removed chemically in a bath of approximately the same as allowable addition, we are proposing to aqueous acid solution. Pickling is a emissions. The available data indicate promulgate an affirmative defense process applied to metallic substances that pickling processes throughout the against civil penalties for exceedances that removes surface impurities, stains, industry are equipped with controls that of emission standards caused by or crusts to prepare the metal for achieve the HCl and chlorine emission malfunctions, as well as criteria for subsequent plating (e.g., with limits required by the MACT standards. establishing the affirmative defense. chromium) or other treatment, such as For more detail about this estimate of EPA has attempted to ensure that we galvanization or painting. the ratio of actual to MACT-allowable have not incorporated into proposed The HAP emission points from the emissions, see the memo in the docket regulatory language any provisions that steel pickling and acid regeneration for this action describing the estimation are inappropriate, unnecessary, or processes include spray roasters, steel of MACT-allowable emission levels and redundant in the absence of the SSM pickling baths, steel pickling sprays, associated risks and impacts. exemption. We are specifically seeking and tank vents. comment on whether there are any such Typical control devices used to 3. What are the results of the risk provisions that we have inadvertently reduce HAP emissions from steel assessments and analyses? incorporated or overlooked. pickling facilities include a packed tower scrubber, sieve tray scrubber, or We have conducted an inhalation risk F. What are the results and proposed assessment for the Steel Pickling source decisions for Steel Pickling—HCl horizontal packed bed scrubber. Each category. We have also conducted an Process Facilities and Hydrochloric type of scrubber is coupled with a assessment of facility-wide risk and Acid Regeneration Plants source demister. The general trend in scrubber category? installations at steel pickling facilities is performed a demographic analysis of to replace older scrubbers with sieve population risks. Table F.1 provides an 1. Overview of the Source Category and tray scrubbers, which generate less overall summary of the inhalation risk MACT Standard scrubber effluent (blowdown). For acid assessment results. The National Emission Standards for regeneration roasters, a cyclone or a Steel Pickling—HCl Process Facilities Venturi pre-concentrator is generally

TABLE F.1—STEEL PICKLING INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *

Maximum chronic non-cancer TOSHI 2 Population at Maximum off-site Number of facilities 1 risk from HI acute non-cancer Actual Allowable > 1 HQ 3 emissions emissions level level

51 Modeled Facilities ...... 2 2 30 HQREL = 0.4 chlorine

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65123

TABLE F.1—STEEL PICKLING INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS *—Continued

Maximum chronic non-cancer 2 TOSHI Population at Maximum off-site Number of facilities 1 risk from HI acute non-cancer Actual Allowable 3 emissions emissions > 1 HQ level level

80 Major Source Facilities Subject to the MACT Standard ...... 2 2 50 HQREL = 0.4 chlorine * All results are for impacts out to 50 km from every source in the category. 1 There are 51 facilities in the data set that were modeled. It is believed that these facilities are representative of the entire source category and that the maximum risks are characterized. The population risks were scaled up based on a linear relationship. 2 Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Steel Pickling source category is the neurological system. 3 The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of HQ val- ues. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which, in most cases, is the REL. When HQ values exceed 1, we also show HQ values using the next lowest available acute threshold. See section IV.A of this preamble for explanation of acute threshold values.

The results of the inhalation risk value could be as high as 2. The and the risk results for actual emissions assessment indicated there are no maximum off-facility-site acute HQ are approximately the same as those for cancer risks or incidences attributable to value could be as high as 0.4, based on MACT-allowable emissions. emissions from the Steel Pickling source the actual emissions level and the REL Table F.2 displays the results of the category because there were no value for chlorine. As our analysis of facility-wide risk assessment. This emissions of any HAP with cancer dose- potential differences between actual assessment was conducted based on response values (i.e., no known emission levels and emissions allowable actual emission levels for the 51 carcinogens are emitted from these under the MACT standards indicate, sources). As shown in Table F.1, the actual emissions are approximately the modeled facilities. maximum chronic non-cancer TOSHI same as MACT-allowable emissions,

TABLE F.2—STEEL PICKLING FACILITY-WIDE RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Maximum Facility-Wide Individual Cancer Risk (in 1 million) ...... 100 Steel Pickling source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide individual cancer risk ...... 1 NA Maximum Facility-Wide Chronic Non-cancer TOSHI ...... 10 Steel Pickling source category contribution to this maximum facility-wide chronic non-cancer TOSHI 2 ...... < 1% 1 The Steel Pickling source category does not contribute to the facility-wide cancer risks, as the facilities in this source category do not report emissions of any HAP with cancer dose-response values. 2 Percentage shown reflects Steel Pickling source category contribution to the maximum facility-wide risks at the facility with the maximum risk value shown.

The maximum individual cancer risk the maximum TOSHI risk value occurs, other coke oven processes (pushing, from all HAP emissions at a facility that the estimated proportion of the risk quenching, and battery stacks) will be contains sources subject to the Steel attributable to the Steel Pickling source addressed in a future residual risk Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and category processes is less than one review. Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants percent. The highest facility-wide The results of the demographic MACT standards is estimated to be 100- cancer risk for a facility that includes a analyses performed to investigate the in-1 million, and the maximum chronic steel pickling or HCL regeneration non-cancer TOSHI value is estimated to source is primarily driven by iron and distribution of TOSHI greater than 1, be 10. As noted previously, there were steel processes and coke oven based on actual emissions levels for the no emissions of any HAP with cancer emissions. The iron and steel processes population living within 5 km of the dose-response values from the Steel will be addressed in a future residual facilities, among various demographic Pickling source category; therefore, this risk review, some coke oven processes groups are provided in a report available source category does not contribute to (charging, top side, and door leaks) have in the docket for this action and the maximum facility-wide cancer risk been addressed in a previous summarized in Table F.3 below. of 100-in-1 million. At the facility where rulemaking action (70 FR 19992), and

TABLE F.3—STEEL PICKLING DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with TOSHI greater than 1-in-1 million Maximum Over 25 Emissions basis respiratory African Other and Hispanic Native Below the W/O hazard Total Minority American multiracial or Latino American poverty a HS index (millions) % % % % % level diploma % %

Nationwide ...... n/a 175 32 16 15 16 0.6 13 13 Source Category ...... 2 0.000045 0 0 0 9 0 6 9 Facility-wide ...... 10 0.0017 41 34 6 1 0.2 11 13

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65124 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

The results of the Steel Pickling values did not contribute to the cancer premature to consider it as a source category demographic analysis risk and contributed less than 1 percent replacement for steel pickling show that there are 45 people exposed to these non-cancer risks. Our operations. to an HI of one or greater from the additional analysis of the demographics Because we determined that the only source category and 1,700 people of the exposed population may show identified development is not exposed to an HI of one or greater for disparities in risks between technologically feasible at this time, we the facility-wide emissions. Of this demographic groups. Based on this are proposing that it is not necessary to relatively small number of people for cancer risk level and in consideration of revise the MACT standards pursuant to the source category, none of the groups other health measures and factors, section 112(d)(6). shows a disparate impact compared to including the cancer incidence (no the national distribution of non-cancer cases) and the low maximum non- 6. What other actions are we proposing? risk. The facility-wide analysis shows a cancer risk level (TOSHI of 0.2), the lack We propose to eliminate the SSM higher percentage population with an HI of disparate impacts in the demographic exemption in the Steel Pickling MACT of one or more only for those that could analysis, and the small contribution to standards. Consistent with Sierra Club be classified as a ‘‘Minority’’ and for the facility-wide risks, we propose that v. EPA, EPA proposes that standards in those included in the ‘‘African the risks from the Steel Pickling source this rule would apply at all times. We American’’ demographic group. category are acceptable. are proposing several revisions to 40 Details of these assessments and b. Ample Margin of Safety CFR part 63, subpart CCC regarding the analyses can be found in the residual standards that apply during periods of risk documentation as referenced in We are proposing that the risks are acceptable, and while cancer risks were SSM. Specifically, we are proposing to section IV.A of this preamble, which is revise Table 1 to indicate that the available in the docket for this action. not above 1-in-1 million (the level at which we generally perform an ample requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e) of the 4. What are our proposed decisions on margin of safety analysis), we decided to General Provisions do not apply. The 40 risk acceptability and ample margin of consider other factors before making a CFR 63.6(e) requires owner or operators safety? decision regarding the need for to act according to the general duty to ‘‘operate and maintain any affected a. Risk Acceptability standards to reduce risks. Based on these analyses, we continue source, including associated air The Steel Pickling source category to propose that the current MACT pollution control equipment and does not emit HAP that are known, standards provide an ample margin of monitoring equipment, in a manner probable, or possible carcinogens; safety to protect public health and the consistent with safety and good air therefore, based on actual and MACT- environment, and we are proposing to pollution control practices for allowable emission levels, cancer risks re-adopt the existing MACT standards to minimizing emissions.’’ We are are less than 1-in-1 million to the satisfy section 112(f) of the CAA. separately proposing to incorporate this individual most exposed. The analyses general duty to minimize emissions into we performed for this proposal show no 5. What are our proposed decisions on 40 CFR 63.1159(c). The 40 CFR 63.6(e) potential for an adverse environmental the technology review? also requires the owner or operator of an effect or human health multi-pathway We evaluated developments in affected source to develop a written effects, and that acute non-cancer health practices, processes, and control SSM plan. We are proposing to remove impacts are unlikely. We determined technologies applicable to the Steel the SSM plan requirement. We are also that emissions from the Steel Pickling Pickling source category. This included proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.1161 to source category would result in chronic a search of the RBLC and the internet. specify the conditions for performance non-cancer TOSHI approximately equal The only advancement that we tests, to revise the SSM-associated to 2 for the individual most exposed identified was one technology that is reporting and recordkeeping based on either actual emissions or being used instead of steel pickling for requirements in 40 CFR 63.1164 and 40 MACT-allowable emissions. This HI some applications which is called the CFR 63.1165 to require reporting and value is for one facility, which has had smooth clean surface (SCS) process. The recordkeeping for periods of compliance issues with the MACT SCS process uses patented roller malfunction, and to revise Table 1 to standards. The emissions data used in brushes to remove scale from steel specify that 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1), 40 CFR our analysis include emissions that are sheets and coils. However, this 63.7(e)(1), the last sentence of 40 CFR in excess of what is allowed by the technology leaves the last layer of scale, 63.8(d)(3), 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(i),(ii), (vi), MACT standards. Work is underway resulting in a product that is rust- and (v), 40 CFR 63.10(c)(10), (11), and between this facility, OECA at EPA, and resistant, but is not conducive to in-line (15), and 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5) of the the State to improve compliance. The galvanizing, painting, enameling or General Provisions do not apply. In next highest HI from any facility in the electrolytic plating. Additionally, some addition, we are proposing to source category is 0.1. Based on this, we types of forming, including promulgate an affirmative defense do not anticipate that MACT-allowable hydroforming, cold reduction and deep against civil penalties for exceedances emissions for the sources in this draw cannot be used with SCS treated of emission standards caused by category, or actual emissions when a steel. It is therefore not a viable malfunctions, as well as criteria for source is in compliance with the MACT replacement for steel pickling establishing the affirmative defense. standards, would result in adverse operations. Another technology, eco EPA has attempted to ensure that we chronic non-cancer health effects. Our pickled surface (EPS), could potentially have not incorporated into proposed additional analysis of facility-wide risks become a low-emission alternative for regulatory language any provisions that showed that the maximum facility-wide steel pickling. EPS blasts steel with an are inappropriate, unnecessary, or cancer risk is 100-in-1 million and the acid-free slurry which, like steel redundant in the absence of the SSM maximum facility-wide non-cancer pickling, removes all layers of scale. exemption. We are specifically seeking TOSHI is 10. It also showed that the However, EPS only became comment on whether there are any such steel pickling processes located at the commercially available in 2009 and it is provisions that we have inadvertently facilities with these maximum risk not yet a proven technology. Thus, it is incorporated or overlooked.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65125

VI. Summary of Proposed Actions For the Hard Chromium HCl emissions resulting from the Electroplating, Decorative Chromium combustion of chlorinated organic A. What actions are we proposing as a Electroplating, Chromium Anodizing, compounds. result of the technology reviews? and Steel Pickling—HCl Process In addition, we are proposing minor For the technology review for the Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid changes to two MACT standards to chromium electroplating and anodizing Regeneration Plants MACT standards improve compliance and correct errors. source categories, we are proposing to source categories, we propose that the For the Chromium Electroplating MACT amend the rules to prohibit the addition MACT standards provide an ample standard source categories, we are of PFOS-based WAFS to the margin of safety to protect public health proposing to clarify that testing can be electroplating or anodizing tanks. For and prevent adverse environmental performed by either Method 306 or these source categories, we are also effects. Thus, we are proposing to re- Method 306A, and we are proposing to proposing to require several adopt these standards for the purpose of revise Method 306B to correct housekeeping requirements to minimize meeting the requirements of CAA inconsistencies between the emissions of chromium-laden fugitive section 112(f)(2). amendments made to subpart N in 2004 (69 FR 42885) and Method 306B. In dust from chromium electroplating C. What other actions are we proposing? operations and for owners and operators addition, to eliminate a discrepancy to incorporate these housekeeping We propose to amend the Hard and between the Chromium Electroplating procedures in the facility operation and Decorative Chromium Electroplating MACT standard and the General maintenance plan. For MTVLO, we are and Chromium Anodizing Tanks, Group Provisions to part 63, we are also proposing to lower the existing I Polymers and Resins, MTVLO, proposing to revise the trigger for threshold for control of emissions from Pharmaceuticals Production, Printing semiannual compliance reports to be gasoline loading from 10 million bbl/yr and Publishing Industry, and Steel consistent with General Provisions to to 1 million bbl/yr. Pickling—HCl Process Facilities and part 63. For the Pharmaceuticals Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants For the Group I Polymers and Resins, Production MACT standards, we are MACT standards to remove the language Pharmaceuticals Production, and proposing to correct one typographical that exempts facilities from the Printing and Publishing Industry MACT error. emissions standards that would standards, which were addressed in the otherwise be applicable during periods VII. Request for Comments October 10, 2008 proposal, we have of SSM, and to add an affirmative We are soliciting comments on all reaffirmed our previous determinations defense against civil penalties for aspects of this proposed action. All that there have been no developments in exceedances of emission standards comments received during the comment practices, processes, or control caused by malfunctions. These changes period will be considered. In addition to technologies. Thus, we are continuing to are being made to ensure these rules are general comments on the proposed propose that it is not necessary to revise consistent with the court’s ruling in actions, we are also interested in any the existing MACT requirements based Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019, additional data that may help to reduce on our CAA section 112(d)(6) review. which addressed similar provisions in the uncertainties inherent in the risk For the Steel Pickling—HCl Process the General Provisions that apply to assessments. Such data should include Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid many MACT standards. supporting documentation in sufficient Regeneration Plants source category, we We are also proposing requirements detail to allow characterization of the have determined that there have been for two MACT standards under the quality and representativeness of the no developments in practices, authority of section 112(d)(2) and (3) of data or information. Please see the processes, or control technologies since the CAA to address emission points for following section for more information the promulgation of the MACT which emission standards were on submitting data. standards, and we are proposing that it previously not developed. For the is not necessary to revise the existing MTVLO MACT standard, we are VIII. Submitting Data Corrections MACT requirements based on our CAA proposing to add the requirement to The facility-specific data used in the section 112(d)(6) review. perform submerged fill for existing source category risk analyses, facility- B. What actions are we proposing as a facilities for two subcategories, those wide analyses, and demographic result of the residual risk reviews? emitting less than 10/25 tons of HAP, analyses for each source category and those located more than 0.5 miles subject to this action are available for For the Epichlorohydrin Elastomers from shore. For the Group I Polymers download on the RTR Web page at Production, HypalonTM Production, and Resins MACT standard source http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/ Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production, categories, we propose to add MACT rtrpg.html. These data files include Polybutadiene Rubber Production, standards limiting emissions from the detailed information for each HAP Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex back-end process operations from the emissions release point at each facility Production, MTVLO, Pharmaceuticals Butyl Rubber Production subcategory, included in the source category and all Production, and Printing and Publishing the Halobutyl Rubber Production other HAP emissions sources at these Industry MACT standards source subcategory, the Epichlorohydrin facilities (facility-wide emissions categories, which were addressed in the Rubber Production source category, the sources). However, it is important to October 10, 2008 proposal, we have Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production note that the source category risk reaffirmed our proposed determinations source category, and the Neoprene analysis included only those emissions that the MACT standards for these Rubber Production source category. We tagged with the MACT code associated source categories provide an ample also propose to revise the MACT with the source category subject to the margin of safety to protect public health standards for front-end process vents risk analysis. and prevent adverse environmental from the Butyl Rubber Production If you believe the data are not effects. Thus, we are continuing to subcategory, the Halobutyl Rubber representative or are inaccurate, please propose to re-adopt each of these Production subcategory, and the identify the data in question, provide standards for purposes of meeting the Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production your reason for concern, and provide requirements of CAA sections 112(f)(2). source category by requiring control of any ‘‘improved’’ data that you have, if

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65126 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

available. When you submit data, we downloaded from the RTR Web page, data fields that may be revised include request that you provide documentation complete the following steps: the following: of the basis for the revised values to 1. Within this downloaded file, enter support your suggested changes. To suggested revisions to the data fields submit comments on the data appropriate for that information. The

Data element Definition

Control Measure ...... Are control measures in place? (yes or no). Control Measure Comment ...... Select control measure from list provided, and briefly describe the control measure. Delete ...... Indicate here if the facility or record should be deleted. Delete Comment ...... Describes the reason for deletion. Emission Calculation Method Code For Revised Code description of the method used to derive emissions. For example, CEM, material bal- Emissions. ance, stack test, etc. Emission Process Group ...... Enter the general type of emission process associated with the specified emission point. Fugitive Angle ...... Enter release angle (clockwise from true North); orientation of the y-dimension relative to true North, measured positive for clockwise starting at 0 degrees (maximum 89 degrees). Fugitive Length ...... Enter dimension of the source in the east-west (x-) direction, commonly referred to as length (ft). Fugitive Width ...... Enter dimension of the source in the north-south (y-) direction, commonly referred to as width (ft). Malfunction Emissions ...... Enter total annual emissions due to malfunctions (TPY). Malfunction Emissions Max Hourly ...... Enter maximum hourly malfunction emissions here (lb/hr). North American Datum ...... Enter datum for latitude/longitude coordinates (NAD27 or NAD83); if left blank, NAD83 is as- sumed. Process Comment ...... Enter general comments about process sources of emissions. REVISED Address ...... Enter revised physical street address for MACT facility here. REVISED City ...... Enter revised city name here. REVISED County Name ...... Enter revised county name here. REVISED Emission Release Point Type ...... Enter revised Emission Release Point Type here. REVISED End Date ...... Enter revised End Date here. REVISED Exit Gas Flow Rate ...... Enter revised Exit Gas Flowrate here (ft3/sec). REVISED Exit Gas Temperature ...... Enter revised Exit Gas Temperature here (F). REVISED Exit Gas Velocity ...... Enter revised Exit Gas Velocity here (ft/sec). REVISED Facility Category Code ...... Enter revised Facility Category Code here, which indicates whether facility is a major or area source. REVISED Facility Name ...... Enter revised Facility Name here. REVISED Facility Registry Identifier ...... Enter revised Facility Registry Identifier here, which is an ID assigned by the EPA Facility Registry System. REVISED HAP Emissions Performance Level Enter revised HAP Emissions Performance Level here. Code. REVISED Latitude ...... Enter revised Latitude here (decimal degrees). REVISED Longitude ...... Enter revised Longitude here (decimal degrees). REVISED MACT Code ...... Enter revised MACT Code here. REVISED Pollutant Code ...... Enter revised Pollutant Code here. REVISED Routine Emissions ...... Enter revised routine emissions value here (TPY). REVISED SCC Code ...... Enter revised SCC Code here. REVISED Stack Diameter ...... Enter revised Stack Diameter here (ft). REVISED Stack Height ...... Enter revised Stack Height here (ft). REVISED Start Date ...... Enter revised Start Date here. REVISED State ...... Enter revised State here. REVISED Tribal Code ...... Enter revised Tribal Code here. REVISED Zip Code ...... Enter revised Zip Code here. Shutdown Emissions ...... Enter total annual emissions due to shutdown events (TPY). Shutdown Emissions Max Hourly ...... Enter maximum hourly shutdown emissions here (lb/hr). Stack Comment ...... Enter general comments about emission release points. Startup Emissions ...... Enter total annual emissions due to startup events (TPY). Startup Emissions Max Hourly ...... Enter maximum hourly startup emissions here (lb/hr). Year Closed ...... Enter date facility stopped operations.

2. Fill in the commenter information Access format and all accompanying categories, you need only submit one fields for each suggested revision (i.e., documentation to Docket ID No. EPA– file for that facility, which should commenter name, commenter HQ–OAR–2010–0600 (through one of contain all suggested changes for all organization, commenter e-mail address, the methods described in the ADDRESSES source categories at that facility. We commenter phone number, and revision section of this preamble). To expedite request that all data revision comments comments). review of the revisions, it would also be be submitted in the form of updated 3. Gather documentation for any helpful if you submitted a copy of your Microsoft® Access files, which are suggested emissions revisions (e.g., revisions to the EPA directly at provided on the http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ performance test reports, material [email protected] in addition to submitting atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html Web page. balance calculations, etc.). them to the docket. 4. Send the entire downloaded file 5. If you are providing comments on with suggested revisions in Microsoft® a facility with multiple source

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65127

IX. Statutory and Executive Order frequency of response is annual for all a total operation and maintenance Reviews respondents that must comply with the component (averaging $108 per year), rule’s reporting requirements and the and a labor cost component (averaging A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory estimated average number of likely $165,000 per year). Planning and Review respondents per year is 590. The cost An agency may not conduct or Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR burden to respondents resulting from sponsor, and a person is not required to 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a the collection of information includes respond to a collection of information significant regulatory action because it the total capital cost annualized over the unless it displays a currently valid OMB raises novel legal and policy issues. equipment’s expected useful life (about control number. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action $171,000), a total operation and To comment on the Agency’s need for to OMB for review under Executive maintenance component (about this information, the accuracy of the Order 12866 and any changes made in $534,000 per year), and a labor cost provided burden estimates, and any response to OMB recommendations component (about $500,000 per year). suggested methods for minimizing have been documented in the docket for respondent burden, EPA has established this action. 2. Group I Polymers and Resins MACT a public docket for this rule, which Standard includes these ICR, under Docket ID B. Paperwork Reduction Act The ICR document prepared by EPA number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0600. The information collection for the amendments to the Group I Submit any comments related to the ICR requirements in this rule have been Polymers and Resins MACT standards to EPA and OMB. See ADDRESSES submitted for approval to OMB under has been assigned EPA ICR number section at the beginning of this notice the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 2410.01. Burden changes associated for where to submit comments to EPA. 3501, et seq. with these amendments would result Send comments to OMB at the Office of The proposed revisions to the SSM from new recordkeeping and reporting Information and Regulatory Affairs, provisions for all of the standards being requirements associated with the new Office of Management and Budget, 725 amended with this proposed rule will back-end process operation emission 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC reduce the reporting burden associated limits for epichlorohydrin, neoprene, 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. with having to prepare and submit an nitrile butadiene rubber, and butyl Since OMB is required to make a SSM report. We are not proposing any rubber and the HCl emission limits from decision concerning the ICR between 30 new paperwork requirements to the the front-end process vents for ethylene and 60 days after October 21, 2010, a Pharmaceuticals Production, Printing propylene rubber and butyl rubber being comment to OMB is best assured of and Publishing Industry, and Steel proposed with this action. The having its full effect if OMB receives it Pickling-–HCl Process Facilities and estimated average burden per response by November 22, 2010. The final rule Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants is 237 hours; the frequency of response will respond to any OMB or public MACT standards. Revisions and burden is annual for all respondents that must comments on the information collection associated with amendments to the comply with the rule’s reporting requirements contained in this proposal. Hard and Decorative Chromium requirements and the estimated average C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Electroplating and Chromium number of likely respondents per year is Anodizing Tanks; Group I Polymers and 19. The cost burden to respondents The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Resins; and MTVLO MACT standards resulting from the collection of generally requires an agency to prepare are discussed in the following information includes the total capital a regulatory flexibility analysis of any paragraphs. The OMB has previously cost annualized over the equipment’s rule subject to notice and comment approved the information collection expected useful life (averaging $2,800), rulemaking requirements under the requirements contained in the existing a total operation and maintenance Administrative Procedure Act or any regulations being amended with this component (averaging $1,000 per year), other statute unless the agency certifies proposed rule (i.e., 40 CFR part 63, and a labor cost component (averaging that the rule will not have a significant subparts N, U, Y, KK, CCC, and GGG) $1.1 million per year). economic impact on a substantial under the provisions of the Paperwork number of small entities. Small entities 3. Marine Tank Vessel Loading Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. include small businesses, small Operations MACT Standard The OMB control numbers for EPA’s organizations, and small governmental regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 The ICR document prepared by EPA jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing CFR part 9. Burden is defined at 5 CFR for the amendments to the MTVLO the impacts of this proposed rule on 1320.3(b). MACT standards has been assigned EPA small entities, small entity is defined as: ICR number 1679.08. Burden changes (1) A small business that is a small 1. Hard and Decorative Chromium associated with these amendments industrial entity as defined by the Small Electroplating and Chromium would result from new recordkeeping Business Administration’s regulations at Anodizing Tanks MACT Standard and reporting requirements associated 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small The ICR document prepared by EPA with the vapor recovery requirements governmental jurisdiction that is a for the amendments to the Hard and being proposed with today’s action. The government of a city, county, town, Decorative Chromium Electroplating estimated average burden per response school district or special district with a and Chromium Anodizing Tanks MACT is 46 hours; the frequency of response population of less than 50,000; and (3) standards has been assigned EPA ICR is annual for all respondents that must a small organization that is any not-for- number 1611.08. Burden changes comply with the rule’s reporting profit enterprise which is independently associated with these amendments requirements and the estimated average owned and operated and is not would result from new recordkeeping number of likely respondents per year is dominant in its field. and reporting requirements associated 18. The cost burden to respondents This proposed rule will not impose with the new housekeeping resulting from the collection of emission measurements or reporting requirements being proposed with information includes the total capital requirements on small entities beyond today’s action. The estimated average cost annualized over the equipment’s those specified in existing regulations, burden per response is 11 hours; the expected useful life (averaging $3,780), nor does it change the level of any

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65128 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

emission standard for amendments to In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, significant adverse effect on the supply, all of the MACT standards proposed and consistent with EPA policy to distribution, or use of energy. This today, with the exception of the promote communications between EPA action will not create any new proposed amendments to the hard and and State and local governments, EPA requirements for sources in the energy decorative chromium electroplating and specifically solicits comment on this supply, distribution, or use sectors. chromium anodizing tanks MACT proposed rule from State and local I. National Technology Transfer and standard. The new housekeeping officials. Advancement Act requirements and PFOS use restrictions F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation proposed by these amendments to the Section 12(d) of the National and Coordination With Indian Tribal hard and decorative chromium Technology Transfer and Advancement Governments electroplating and chromium anodizing Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– tanks MACT standard may impact small Subject to the Executive Order 13175 113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs entities, but those impacts have been (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), EPA EPA to use voluntary consensus estimated to be nominal. may not issue a regulation that has tribal standards (VCS) in its regulatory After considering the economic implications, that imposes substantial activities unless to do so would be impacts of this proposed rule on small direct compliance costs, and that is not inconsistent with applicable law or entities, I certify that this action will not required by statute, unless the Federal otherwise impractical. VCS are have a significant economic impact on government provides the funds technical standards (e.g., materials a substantial number of small entities. necessary to pay the direct compliance specifications, test methods, sampling We continue to be interested in the costs incurred by tribal governments, or procedures, and business practices) that potential impacts of the proposed rule EPA consults with tribal officials early are developed or adopted by VCS on small entities and welcome in the process of developing the bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to comments on issues related to such proposed regulation and develops a provide Congress, through OMB, impacts. tribal summary impact statement. EPA explanations when the Agency decides has concluded that this proposed rule not to use available and applicable VCS. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act will not have tribal implications, as This proposed rulemaking does not This proposed rule does not contain specified in Executive Order 13175. It involve technical standards. Therefore, a Federal mandate under the provisions will not have substantial direct effect on EPA is not considering the use of any of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates tribal governments, on the relationship VCS. Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. between the Federal government and J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 1531–1538 for State, local, or tribal Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Actions To Address Environmental governments or the private sector. The power and responsibilities between the Justice in Minority Populations and proposed rule would not result in Federal government and Indian tribes, Low-Income Populations expenditures of $100 million or more as specified in Executive Order 13175. for State, local, and tribal governments, Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, in aggregate, or the private sector in any apply to this action. February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 1 year. The proposed rule imposes no EPA specifically solicits additional executive policy on environmental enforceable duties on any State, local, or comment on this proposed action from justice. Its main provision directs tribal governments or the private sector. tribal officials. Federal agencies, to the greatest extent Thus, this proposed rule is not subject practicable and permitted by law, to to the requirements of sections 202 or G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of make environmental justice part of their 205 of the UMRA. Children From Environmental Health mission by identifying and addressing, This proposed rule is also not subject Risks and Safety Risks as appropriate, disproportionately high to the requirements of section 203 of This proposed rule is not subject to and adverse human health or UMRA because it contains no regulatory Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, environmental effects of their programs, requirements that might significantly or April 23, 1997) because it is not policies, and activities on minority uniquely affect small governments economically significant as defined in populations and low-income because it contains no requirements that Executive Order 12866, and because the populations in the United States. apply to such governments nor does it Agency does not believe the To examine the potential for any impose obligations upon them. environmental health or safety risks environmental justice issues that might addressed by this action present a be associated with each source category, E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism disproportionate risk to children. This we evaluated the distributions of HAP- This proposed rule does not have action would not relax the control related cancer and non-cancer risks federalism implications. It will not have measures on existing regulated sources, across different social, demographic, substantial direct effects on the States, and EPA’s risk assessments (included in and economic groups within the on the relationship between the national the docket for this proposed rule) populations living near the facilities government and the States, or on the demonstrate that the existing where these source categories are distribution of power and regulations are health protective. located. The methods used to conduct responsibilities among the various demographic analyses for this rule are levels of government, as specified in H. Executive Order 13211: Actions described in section IV.A of the Executive Order 13132. None of the Concerning Regulations That preamble for this rule. The development facilities subject to this action are Significantly Affect Energy Supply, of demographic analyses to inform the owned or operated by State Distribution, or Use consideration of environmental justice governments, and, because no new This action is not a ‘‘significant energy issues in EPA rulemakings is an requirements are being promulgated, action’’ as defined under EO 13211, evolving science. The EPA offers the nothing in this proposal will supersede ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That demographic analyses in this State regulations. Thus, Executive Order Significantly Affect Energy Supply, rulemaking as examples of how such 13132 does not apply to this proposed Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May analyses might be developed to inform rule. 22, 2001), because it is not likely to have such consideration, and invites public

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65129

comment on the approaches used and environmental effect or human health contains 0.1 percent or greater by the interpretations made from the multipathway effects, and that acute weight, chromium trioxide, chromium results, with the hope that this will and chronic non-cancer health impacts (VI) oxide, chromic acid, or chromic support the refinement and improve are unlikely. Our additional analysis of anhydride. utility of such analyses for future facility-wide risks showed that the * * * * * rulemakings. maximum facility-wide cancer risks for Perfluorooctyl sulfonate (PFOS)-based For this analysis, we analyzed risks all source categories are within the fume suppressant means a fume due to the inhalation of HAP in two range of acceptable risks, and that the suppressant that contains 1 percent or separate ways. In the first approach, we maximum chronic non-cancer risks are greater PFOS by weight. focus the analysis on the total unlikely to cause health impacts. Our * * * * * populations residing within 5 km of additional analysis of the demographics (b) * * * each facility (source category and of the exposed population may show (10) VRtot = the average total facility-wide), regardless of their disparities in risks between estimated risks, and examine the ventilation rate for the three test runs as demographic groups for all three determined at the outlet by means of the distributions of estimated risk across the categories; EPA has determined that, various demographic groups within Method 306 or 306A testing specified in although there may be a disparity in appendix A of this part in dscm/min. those 5 km circles. In the other, we risks between demographic groups, no focus the analysis only on the 3. Section 63.342 is amended by: group is exposed to unacceptable level a. Revising paragraph (a); populations within 5 km of any facility of risk. The proposed rule would not who are estimated to have HAP b. Revising paragraph (b)(1); relax the control measures on sources c. Adding paragraph (c)(1)(iv); exposures which result in cancer risks regulated by the rule, and, therefore, of 1-in-1 million or greater or non- d. Adding paragraph (c)(2)(vi); would not increase risks to any e. Adding paragraph (d)(3); cancer HI of 1 or greater (based on the populations exposed to these sources. emissions of the source category or the f. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(2) and facility, respectively), once again List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 (e)(3) as paragraphs (e)(3) and (e)(4); examining the distributions of those g. Adding new paragraph (e)(2); Environmental protection, Air h. Revising newly designated risks across various demographic pollution control, Reporting and groups. In each approach, we compare paragraph (e)(4); recordkeeping requirements, Volatile i. Adding paragraph (f)(3)(i)(F); and the percentages of particular organic compounds. demographic groups to the total number j. Adding Table 2 to read as follows: Dated: September 14, 2010. of people in those demographic groups. § 63.342 Standards. In this preamble, we only present the Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator. (a)(1) At all times, each owner or results of the second approach since it operator must operate and maintain any focuses on the significant risks from For the reasons stated in the affected source subject to the either the source category or the facility- preamble, the Environmental Protection requirements of this subpart, including wide emissions. The results of both Agency proposes to amend title 40, associated air pollution control approaches are documented in memos chapter I of the Code of Federal equipment and monitoring equipment, to the docket for each of the source Regulations as follows: in a manner consistent with safety and categories covered in this proposal. As described in the preamble, for the PART 63—[AMENDED] good air pollution control practices for Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production, minimizing emissions. The general duty 1. The authority citation for part 63 Hypalon TM Production, Nitrile to minimize emissions does not require continues to read as follows: Butadiene Rubber Production, the owner or operator to make any Polybutadiene Rubber Production, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. further efforts to reduce emissions if Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex levels required by this standard have Production, MTVLO, Pharmaceuticals Subpart N—[Amended] been achieved. Determination of Production, and Printing and Publishing whether such operation and 2. Section 63.341 is amended by: maintenance procedures are being used Industry MACT standard source a. Adding, in alphabetical order in will be based on information available categories, which were addressed in the paragraph (a), definitions for to the Administrator which may October 10, 2008, proposal, we have ‘‘affirmative defense,’’ ‘‘contains include, but is not limited to, reaffirmed our proposed determinations hexavalent chromium,’’ and monitoring results, review of operation that the MACT standards for these ‘‘perfluorooctyl sulfonate (PFOS)-based and maintenance procedures, review of source categories provide an ample fume suppressant’’; and margin of safety to protect public health b. Revising paragraph (b)(10) to read operation and maintenance records, and and prevent adverse environmental as follows: inspection of the source. effects. For the Hard Chromium (2) Each owner or operator of an Electroplating, Decorative Chromium § 63.341 Definitions and nomenclature. affected source subject to the provisions Electroplating, Chromium Anodizing, (a) * * * of this subpart shall comply with these and Steel Pickling—HCl Process Affirmative defense means, in the requirements in this section on and after Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid context of an enforcement proceeding, a the compliance dates specified in Regeneration Plants MACT standard response or a defense put forward by a § 63.343(a). All affected sources are source categories, we propose the defendant, regarding which the regulated by applying maximum MACT standards provide an ample defendant has the burden of proof, and achievable control technology. margin of safety to protect public health the merits of which are independently * * * * * and prevent adverse environmental and objectively evaluated in a judicial (b) * * * effects. or administrative proceeding. (1) The emission limitations in this Our analyses also show that, for all * * * * * section apply during tank operation as the source categories evaluated, there is Contains hexavalent chromium defined in § 63.341, and during periods no potential for an adverse means, the substance consists of, or of startup and shutdown as these are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65130 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

routine occurrences for affected sources emissions on ambient air quality, the open surface hard chromium subject to this subpart. In response to an environment, and human health; and electroplating tank. action to enforce the standards set forth (F) All emissions monitoring and * * * * * in this subpart, you may assert a civil control systems were kept in operation (2) * * * defense to a claim for civil penalties for if at all possible; and (vi) After 3 years from date of exceedances of such standards that are (G) Your actions in response to the publication of the final rule caused by a malfunction, as defined in excess emissions were documented by amendments in the Federal Register, 40 CFR 63.2. Appropriate penalties may properly signed, contemporaneous the owner or operator of an affected be assessed, however, if the respondent operating logs; and enclosed hard chromium electroplating fails to meet its burden of proving all (H) At all times, the facility was tank shall not add PFOS-based fume the requirements in the affirmative operated in a manner consistent with suppressants to any affected enclosed defense. The affirmative defense shall good practices for minimizing hard chromium electroplating tank. not be available for claims for injunctive emissions; and relief. * * * * * (i) To establish the affirmative defense (I) The owner or operator has (d) * * * in any action to enforce such a limit, the prepared a written root cause analysis to (3) After 3 years from date of owners or operators of facilities must determine, correct and eliminate the publication of the final rule timely meet the notification primary causes of the malfunction and amendments in the Federal Register, requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of the excess emissions resulting from the the owner or operator of an affected this section, and must prove by a malfunction event at issue. The analysis decorative chromium electroplating preponderance of evidence that: shall also specify, using the best tank or an affected chromium anodizing (A) The excess emissions were caused monitoring methods and engineering tank shall not add PFOS-based fume by a sudden, short, infrequent, and judgment, the amount of excess suppressants to any affected decorative unavoidable failure of air pollution emissions that were the result of the chromium electroplating tank or control and monitoring equipment, or of malfunction. chromium anodizing tank. a process to operate in a normal an (ii) Notification. The owner or (e) * * * usual manner; and could not have been operator of the facility experiencing an (2) After 3 years from date of prevented through careful planning, exceedance of its emission limit(s) publication of the final rule proper design or better operation and during a malfunction shall notify the amendments in the Federal Register, maintenance practices; and did not stem Administrator by telephone or facsimile the owner or operator of an affected from any activity or event that could (FAX) transmission as soon as possible, decorative chromium electroplating have been foreseen and avoided, or but no later than two business days after tank using a trivalent chromium bath planned for; and were not part of a the initial occurrence of the shall not add PFOS-based fume recurring pattern indicative of malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself suppressants to any affected decorative inadequate design, operation, or of an affirmative defense to civil chromium electroplating tank. maintenance; and penalties for that malfunction. The * * * * * (B) Repairs were made as owner or operator seeking to assert an (4) Each owner or operator of an expeditiously as possible when the affirmative defense shall also submit a existing, new, or reconstructed applicable emission limitations were written report to the Administrator decorative chromium electroplating being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime within 30 days of the initial occurrence tank that had been using a trivalent labor were used, to the extent of the exceedance of the standard in this chromium bath that incorporated a practicable to make these repairs; and subpart to demonstrate, with all wetting agent and ceases using this type (C) The frequency, amount and necessary supporting documentation, of bath must fulfill the reporting duration of the excess emissions that it has met the requirements set forth requirements of § 63.347(i)(3) and (including any bypass) were minimized in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section. comply with the applicable emission to the maximum extent practicable limitation within the timeframe during periods of such emissions; and * * * * * (D) If the excess emissions resulted (c)(1) * * * specified in § 63.343(a)(7). from a bypass of control equipment or (iv) After 3 years from date of (f) * * * a process, then the bypass was publication of the final rule (3) * * * unavoidable to prevent loss of life, amendments in the Federal Register, (i) * * * severe personal injury, or severe the owner or operator of an affected (F) The plan shall include property damage; and open surface hard chromium housekeeping procedures, as specified (E) All possible steps were taken to electroplating tank shall not add PFOS- in Table 2 of this section. minimize the impact of the excess based fume suppressants to any affected * * * * *

TABLE 2 TO § 63.342—HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES

For You must: At this minimum frequency

1. Any substance that contains hexavalent (a) Store the substance in a closed container At all times. chromium. in an enclosed storage area; AND (b) Use a closed container when transporting Whenever transporting substance. the substance from the enclosed storage area. 2. Each affected tank, to minimize spills of bath (a) Install drip trays that collect and return to Prior to operating the tank. solution that result from dragout. the tank any bath solution that drips or drains from parts as the parts are removed from the tank; OR

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65131

TABLE 2 TO § 63.342—HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES—Continued

For You must: At this minimum frequency

(b) Contain and return to the tank all solution Whenever removing parts from an affected that drains or drips from parts as the parts tank. are removed from the tank. 3. Each spraying operation for removing excess Install a splash guard to minimize overspray Prior to any such spraying operation. chromic acid from parts removed from an af- and to ensure that any hexavalent chro- fected tank. mium laden liquid is returned to the electro- plating or anodizing tank. 4. Each operation that involves the handling or Clean up, or otherwise contain, all spills of the Within 1 hour of the spill. use of any substance that contains substance. hexavalent chromium. 5. All surfaces within the enclosed storage (a) Clean the surfaces using one or more of At least once every 7 days. area, open floor area, walkways around af- the following methods: fected tanks, or any surface potentially con- (i) HEPA vacuuming; taminated with hexavalent chromium that ac- (ii) Hand-wiping with a damp cloth; cumulates or potentially accumulates dust. (iii) Wet mopping; (iv) Other cleaning method approved by the permitting agency; OR (b) Apply a non-toxic chemical dust suppres- According to manufacturer’s recommenda- sant to the surfaces. tions. 6. All buffing, grinding, or polishing operations. Separate the operation from any affected Prior to beginning the buffing, grinding, or electroplating or anodizing operation by in- polishing operation. stalling a physical barrier; the barrier may take the form of plastic strip curtains. 7. All chromium or chromium-containing wastes Store, dispose, recover, or recycle the wastes At all times. generated from housekeeping activities. using practices that do not lead to fugitive dust and in accordance with hazardous waste requirements.

4. Section 63.343 is amended by b. Revising paragraphs (e)(3)(iii), determine the conditions of adding paragraph (a)(8) to read as (e)(3)(iv), and (e)(3)(v); and performance tests. Performance test follows: c. Revising paragraphs (e)(4)(ii) and results shall be documented in complete (e)(4)(iv) to read as follows: test reports that contain the information § 63.343 Compliance provisions. required by paragraphs (a)(1) through (9) § 63.344 Performance test requirements (a) * * * and test methods. of this section. The test plan to be followed shall be made available to the (8) No later than 6 months from date (a) Performance test requirements. Administrator prior to the testing, if of publication of the final amendments Performance tests shall be conducted requested. in the Federal Register, the owner or using the test methods and procedures operator of an affected source that is in this section. Performance tests shall * * * * * subject to the standards in paragraphs be conducted under such conditions as (e) * * * § 63.342(c) or (d) shall implement the the Administrator specifies to the owner (3) * * * housekeeping procedures specified in or operator based on representative (iii) Perform Method 306 or 306A Table 2 of § 63.342. performance of the affected source for testing and calculate an outlet mass * * * * * the period being tested. Upon request, emission rate. the owner or operator shall make (iv) Determine the total ventilation 5. Section 63.344 is amended by: available to the Administrator such rate from the affected sources (VRinlet) by a. Revising paragraph (a); records as may be necessary to using equation 1:

×=IDAi VRtot VRinlet ()1 ∑ IAtotal

where VRtot is the average total ventilation is the sum of all inlet duct areas from (v) Establish the allowable mass rate in dscm/min for the three test runs both affected and nonaffected sources; emission rate of the system (AMRsys) in as determined at the outlet by means of and VRinlet is the total ventilation rate milligrams of total chromium per hour the Method 306 or 306A testing; IDA is i from all inlet ducts associated with (mg/hr) using equation 2: the total inlet area for all ducts affected sources. associated with affected sources; èIAtotal

×× = ∑ VRinlet EL 60 minutes/hour AMRsys ()2

where è VRinlet is the total ventilation rate in EL is the applicable emission limitation mass emission rate (AMRsys) calculated dscm/min from the affected sources, and from § 63.342 in mg/dscm. The allowable from equation 2 should be equal to or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP21OC10.000 EP21OC10.001 65132 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

more than the outlet three-run average where VRtot is the average total ventilation performing the same operation, or each mass emission rate determined from rate in dscm/min for the three test runs type of affected source subject to the Method 306 or 306A testing in order for as determined at the outlet by means of same emission limitation. the source to be in compliance with the the Method 306 or 306A testing; IDAi,a is standard. the total inlet duct area for all ducts * * * * * (4) * * * conveying chromic acid from each type (iv) Establish the allowable mass of affected source performing the same (ii) Determine the total ventilation emission rate of the system (AMRsys) in rate for each type of affected source operation, or each type of affected source subject to the same emission limitation; milligrams of total chromium per hour (VRinlet,a) using equation 3: èIAtotal is the sum of all duct areas from (mg/hr) using equation 8, including both affected and nonaffected sources; each type of affected source as IDA VR ×=ia, VR ()3 and VRinlet,a is the total ventilation rate appropriate: tot ∑ IA inlet, a from all inlet ducts conveying chromic total acid from each type of affected source

+++= AMRhcl AMR hc2 AMR dc AMR ca AMR sys ()8

The allowable mass emission rate standards, records of the date and time during a malfunction of an affected calculated from equation 8 should be that fume suppressants are added to the source to minimize emissions in equal to or more than the outlet three- electroplating or anodizing bath and accordance with § 63.342(a)(1), run average mass emission rate records of the fume suppressant including actions taken to correct a determined from Method 306 or 306A manufacturer and product name; malfunction. testing in order for the source to be in * * * * * * * * * * compliance with the standards. 7. Section 63.347 is amended by: (h) * * * a. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(3)(xii) * * * * * (2) * * * 6. Section 63.346 is amended by and (g)(3)(xiii) as (g)(3)(xiii) and (g)(3)(xiv), respectively, and adding a (i) If either of the following conditions revising paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(13) to is met, semiannual reports shall be read as follows: new paragraph (g)(3)(xii); c. Revising paragraphs (h)(2)(i) prepared and submitted to the § 63.346 Recordkeeping requirements. introductory text and (h)(2)(i)(A) to read Administrator: * * * * * as follows: (A) The total duration of excess emissions (as indicated by the (b) * * * § 63.347 Reporting requirements. (4) Records of actions taken during monitoring data collected by the owner * * * * * periods of malfunction to minimize or operator of the affected source in (g) * * * accordance with § 63.343(c)) is 1 emissions in accordance with (3) * * * § 63.342(a)(1), including corrective percent or greater of the total operating (xii) The number, duration, and a time for the reporting period; or actions to restore malfunctioning brief description for each type of process and air pollution control and malfunction which occurred during the * * * * * monitoring equipment to its normal or reporting period and which caused or 8. Table 1 to Subpart N is amended usual manner of operation; may have caused any applicable by: * * * * * emission limitation to be exceeded. The a. Removing entry 63.7(e); (13) For sources using fume report must also include a description of b. Adding entries 63.7(e)(1) and suppressants to comply with the actions taken by an owner or operator 63.7(e)(2)–(4) to read as follows:

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART N OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART N

General provisions reference Applies to Subpart N Comment

******* 63.7(e)(1) ...... No ...... See § 63.344(a). Any cross reference to § 63.7(e)(1) in any other gen- eral provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross- reference to § 63.344(a). 63.7(e)(2)–(4) ...... Yes ...... Subpart N also contains test methods specific to affected sources covered by that subpart. *******

Subpart U—[Amended] (j) Applicability of this subpart. periods of non-operation of the affected Paragraphs (j)(1) through (4) of this source (or specific portion thereof) 9. Section 63.480 is amended by section shall be followed during periods resulting in cessation of the emissions to revising paragraph (j) to read as follows: of non-operation of the affected source which this subpart applies. However, if or any part thereof. a period of non-operation of one portion § 63.480 Applicability and designation of (1) The emission limitations set forth of an affected source does not affect the affected sources. in this subpart and the emission ability of a particular emission point to * * * * * limitations referred to in this subpart comply with the emission limitations to shall apply at all times except during which it is subject, then that emission

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP21OC10.002 EP21OC10.003 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65133

point shall still be required to comply (D) If the excess emissions resulted halobutyl rubber, neoprene rubber, and with the applicable emission limitations from a bypass of control equipment or nitrile butadiene rubber shall be in of this subpart during period of non- a process, then the bypass was compliance with the applicable operation. unavoidable to prevent loss of life, emission limitation in § 63.494(a)(4) no (2) The emission limitations set forth severe personal injury, or severe later than 1 year from date of in subpart H of this part, as referred to property damage; and publication of the final rule in § 63.502, shall apply at all times (E) All possible steps were taken to amendments in the Federal Register. except during periods of non-operation minimize the impact of the excess (2) Existing affected sources of the affected source (or specific emissions on ambient air quality, the producing butyl rubber shall be in portion thereof) in which the lines are environment, and human health; and compliance with § 63.494(a)(4)(i) no drained and depressurized resulting in (F) All emissions monitoring and later than 3 years from date of cessation of the emissions to which control systems were kept in operation publication of the final rule § 63.502 applies. if at all possible; and amendments in the Federal Register. (3) The owner or operator shall not (G) Your actions in response to the (3) Existing affected sources shut down items of equipment that are excess emissions were documented by producing butyl rubber, halobutyl required or utilized for compliance with properly signed, contemporaneous rubber, and ethylene propylene rubber this subpart during times when operating logs; and shall be in compliance with emissions (or, where applicable, (H) At all times, the facility was § 63.485(q)(1) no later than 3 years from wastewater streams or residuals) are operated in a manner consistent with date of publication of the final rule being routed to such items of equipment good practices for minimizing amendments in the Federal Register. if the shutdown would contravene emissions; and (4) Compliance with § 63.502 is requirements of this subpart applicable (I) The owner or operator has covered by paragraph (d) of this section. to such items of equipment. prepared a written root cause analysis to * * * * * (4) In response to an action to enforce determine, correct, and eliminate the 11. Section 63.482 is amended by the standards set forth in this subpart, primary causes of the malfunction and adding in alphabetical order a definition you may assert a civil defense to a claim the excess emissions resulting from the for ‘‘affirmative defense,’’ and revising for civil penalties for exceedances of malfunction event at issue. The analysis the definition of ‘‘initial start-up’’ in such standards that are caused by a shall also specify, using the best paragraph (b) to read as follows: malfunction, as defined in 40 CFR 63.2. monitoring methods and engineering Appropriate penalties may be assessed, judgment, the amount of excess § 63.482 Definitions. however, if the respondent fails to meet emissions that were the result of the * * * * * its burden of proving all the malfunction. (b) * * * requirements in the affirmative defense. (ii) Notification. The owner or Affirmative defense means, in the The affirmative defense shall not be operator of the facility experiencing an context of an enforcement proceeding, a available for claims for injunctive relief. exceedance of its emission limit(s) response or a defense put forward by a (i) To establish the affirmative defense during a malfunction shall notify the defendant, regarding which the in any action to enforce such a limit, the Administrator by telephone or facsimile defendant has the burden of proof, and owners or operators of facilities must (FAX) transmission as soon as possible, the merits of which are independently timely meet the notification but no later than 2 business days after and objectively evaluated in a judicial requirements of paragraph (j)(4)(ii) of the initial occurrence of the or administrative proceeding. malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself this section, and must prove by a * * * * * of an affirmative defense to civil preponderance of evidence that: Initial start-up means the first time a penalties for that malfunction. The (A) The excess emissions were caused new or reconstructed affected source owner or operator seeking to assert an by a sudden, short, infrequent, and begins production of an elastomer affirmative defense shall also submit a unavoidable failure of air pollution product, or, for equipment added or written report to the Administrator control and monitoring equipment, or a changed as described in § 63.480(i), the within 30 days of the initial occurrence process to operate in a normal and usual first time the equipment is put into of the exceedance of the standard in this manner; and could not have been operation to produce an elastomer subpart to demonstrate, with all prevented through careful planning, product. Initial start-up does not necessary supporting documentation, proper design, or better operation and include operation solely for testing that it has met the requirements set forth maintenance practices; and did not stem equipment. Initial start-up does not in paragraph (j)(4)(i) of this section. from any activity or event that could include subsequent start-ups of an 10. Section 63.481 is amended by have been foreseen and avoided, or affected source or portion thereof revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: planned for; and were not part of a following shutdowns or following recurring pattern indicative of § 63.481 Compliance dates and changes in product for flexible inadequate design, operation, or relationship of this subpart to existing operation units or following recharging maintenance; and applicable rules. of equipment in batch operation. (B) Repairs were made as * * * * * * * * * * expeditiously as possible when the (c) With the exceptions provided in 12. Section 63.483 is amended by applicable emission limitations were paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime section, existing affected sources shall labor were used, to the extent be in compliance with this subpart no § 63.483 Emission standards. practicable to make these repairs; and later than June 19, 2001, as provided in (a) At all times, each owner or (C) The frequency, amount, and § 63.6(c), unless an extension has been operator must operate and maintain any duration of the excess emissions granted as specified in paragraph (e) of affected source subject to the (including any bypass) were minimized this section. requirements of this subpart, including to the maximum extent practicable (1) Existing affected sources associated air pollution control during periods of such emissions; and producing epichlorohydrin elastomer, equipment and monitoring equipment,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65134 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

in a manner consistent with safety and (1) All Group 1 and Group 2 § 63.493 Back-end process provisions. good air pollution control practices for halogenated continuous front-end Owners and operators of new and minimizing emissions. The general duty process vents at existing affected existing affected sources shall comply to minimize emissions does not require sources producing butyl rubber, with the requirements in §§ 63.494 the owner or operator to make any halobutyl rubber, or ethylene propylene through 63.500. Owners and operators further efforts to reduce emissions if rubber using a solution process, must of affected sources whose only levels required by this standard have comply with § 63.113(a)(1)(ii) and elastomer products are latex products, been achieved. Determination of § 63.113(c). liquid rubber products, or products whether such operation and * * * * * produced in a gas-phased reaction maintenance procedures are being used 15. Section 63.489 is amended by process are not subject to the provisions will be based on information available revising paragraph (b)(4)(ii)(C) to read as of §§ 63.494 through 63.500. If latex or to the Administrator which may follows: liquid rubber products are produced in include, but is not limited to, an affected source that also produces monitoring results, review of operation § 63.489 Batch front-end process vents— another elastomer product, the and maintenance procedures, review of monitoring equipment. provisions of §§ 63.494 through 63.500 operation and maintenance records, and * * * * * do not apply to the back-end operations inspection of the source. Except as (b) * * * dedicated to the production of one or allowed under paragraphs (b) through more latex products or to the back-end (4) * * * (d) of this section, the owner or operator operations during the production of a of an existing or new affected source (ii) * * * latex product. shall comply with the provisions in: (C) The owner or operator may 18. Section 63.494 is amended by: (1) Section 63.484 for storage vessels; prepare and implement a gas stream a. Revising the section heading; (2) Section 63.485 for continuous flow determination plan that documents b. Revising paragraph (a) introductory front-end process vents; an appropriate method which will be text; (3) Sections 63.486 through 63.492 for used to determine the gas stream flow. c. Revising paragraph (a)(4) and the batch front-end process vents; The plan shall require determination of introductory text of paragraph (a)(5); (4) Sections 63.493 through 63.500 for gas stream flow by a method which will d. Adding paragraph (a)(6); back-end process operations; at least provide a value for either a e. Revising paragraph (b); (5) Section 63.501 for wastewater; representative or the highest gas stream f. Revising paragraph (c); and g. Revising paragraph (d) to read as (6) Section 63.502 for equipment flow anticipated in the scrubber during follows: leaks; representative operating conditions. The (7) Section 63.504 for additional test plan shall include a description of the § 63.494 Back-end process provisions— methods and procedures; methodology to be followed and an residual organic HAP and emission (8) Section 63.505 for monitoring explanation of how the selected limitations. levels and excursions; and methodology will reliably determine the (a) The monthly weighted average (9) Section 63.506 for general gas stream flow, and a description of the residual organic HAP content of all reporting and recordkeeping records that will be maintained to grades of styrene butadiene rubber requirements. document the determination of gas produced by the emulsion process, * * * * * stream flow. The owner or operator polybutadiene rubber and styrene 13. Section 63.484 is amended by shall maintain the plan as specified in butadiene rubber produced by the revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as § 63.506(a). solution process, and ethylene- follows: * * * * * propylene rubber produced by the § 63.484 Storage vessel provisions. 16. Section 63.491 is amended by solution process that is processed, shall * * * * * revising paragraph (e)(2)(ii) to read as be measured after the stripping (b) * * * follows: operation [or the reactor(s), if the plant (4) Storage vessels located has no stripper(s)] as specified in downstream of the stripping operations § 63.491 Batch front-end process vents— § 63.495(d), and shall not exceed the recordkeeping requirements. at affected sources subject to the back- limits provided in paragraphs (a)(1) end residual organic HAP limitation * * * * * through (3) of this section, as applicable. located in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3), (e) * * * Owners or operators of these affected sources shall comply with the that are complying through the use of (2) * * * requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) stripping technology, as specified in (ii) Monitoring data recorded during § 63.495; through (3) of this section using either periods of monitoring system stripping technology or control or * * * * * breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, recovery devices. The organic HAP 14. Section 63.485 is amended by and zero (low-level) and high-level emissions from all back-end process revising paragraphs (q) introductory text adjustments shall not be included in operations at affected sources producing and (q)(1) introductory text to read as computing the batch cycle daily butyl rubber, epichlorohydrin follows: averages. In addition, monitoring data elastomer, halobutyl rubber, neoprene, § 63.485 Continuous front-end process recorded during periods of non- and nitrile butadiene rubber shall not vent provisions. operation of the EPPU (or specific exceed the limits determined in portion thereof) resulting in cessation of * * * * * accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of this (q) Group 1 halogenated continuous organic HAP emissions shall not be section, as applicable. included in computing the batch cycle front-end process vents must comply * * * * * with the provisions of § 63.113(a)(1)(ii) daily averages. (4) The organic HAP emissions from and § 63.113(c), with the exceptions * * * * * back-end processes at affected sources noted in paragraphs (q)(1) and (2) of this 17. Section 63.493 is revised to read producing butyl rubber, section. as follows: epichlorohydrin elastomer, halobutyl

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65135

rubber, neoprene, and nitrile butadiene reaction process, styrene butadiene in paragraph (f) of this section. All rubber shall not exceed the limits rubber produced by any process other representative samples taken and determined in accordance with than a solution or emulsion process, analyzed during the month shall be paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (v) of this polybutadiene rubber produced by any used in the determination of the section for any consecutive 12-month process other than a solution process, or monthly weighted average. period. The specific limitation for each ethylene-propylene rubber produced by * * * * * elastomer type shall be determined any process other than a solution (g) Compliance with the organic HAP based on the emissions level provided process. emission limitations determined in in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (v) of this (b) If an owner or operator complies accordance with § 63.494(a)(4) shall be section divided by the base year with the residual organic HAP demonstrated in accordance with production level. The limitation shall be limitations in paragraph (a)(1) through paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this calculated and submitted in accordance (3) of this section using stripping section. with § 63.499(f)(1). technology, compliance shall be (1) Calculate your organic HAP (i) For butyl rubber, the organic HAP demonstrated in accordance with emission limitation in accordance with emission limitation, in units of Mg § 63.495. The owner or operator shall § 63.494(a)(4)(i) through (v), as organic HAP emissions per Mg of butyl also comply with the recordkeeping applicable, record it, and submit it in rubber produced, shall be calculated by provisions in § 63.498, and the reporting accordance with § 63.499(f)(1). dividing 28 Mg/yr by the mass of butyl provisions in § 63.499. (2) Each month, calculate and record rubber produced in 2009, in Mg. (c) If an owner or operator complies the organic HAP emissions from all back (ii) For epichlorohydrin elastomer, the with the residual organic HAP end process operations using organic HAP emission limitation, in limitations in paragraph (a)(1) through engineering assessment. Engineering units of Mg organic HAP emissions per (3) of this section using control or assessment includes, but is not limited Mg of epichlorohydrin elastomer recovery devices, compliance shall be to, the following: demonstrated using the procedures in produced, shall be calculated by (i) Previous test results, provided the § 63.496. The owner or operator shall dividing 36 Mg/yr by the mass of test was representative of current also comply with the monitoring epichlorohydrin elastomer produced in operating practices. 2009, in Mg. provisions in § 63.497, the (ii) Bench-scale or pilot-scale test data (iii) For halobutyl rubber, the organic recordkeeping provisions in § 63.498, obtained under conditions HAP emission limitation, in units of Mg and the reporting provisions in § 63.499. representative of current process organic HAP emissions per Mg of (d) If the owner or operator complies operating conditions. halobutyl rubber produced, shall be with the residual organic HAP calculated by dividing 53 Mg/yr by the limitations in paragraph (a)(1) through (iii) Design analysis based on mass of halobutyl rubber produced in (3) of this section using a flare, the accepted chemical engineering 2006, in Mg. owner or operator of an affected source principles, measurable process (iv) For neoprene, the organic HAP shall comply with the requirements in parameters, or physical or chemical emission limitation, in units of Mg § 63.504(c). laws or properties. Examples of organic HAP emissions per Mg of 19. Section 63.495 is amended by: analytical methods include, but are not neoprene produced, shall be calculated a. Revising the section heading; limited to: by dividing 23 Mg/yr by the mass of b. Revising paragraph (a); (A) Use of material balances; neoprene produced in 2009, in Mg. c. Revising paragraph (b)(5); and (B) Estimation of flow rate based on (v) For nitrile butadiene rubber, the d. Adding paragraph (g) to read as physical equipment design, such as organic HAP emission limitation, in follows: pump or blower capacities; (C) Estimation of organic HAP units of Mg organic HAP emissions per § 63.495 Back-end process provisions— Mg of nitrile butadiene rubber concentrations based on saturation procedures to determine compliance with conditions; and produced, shall be calculated by residual organic HAP limitations using dividing 1.7 Mg/yr by the mass of nitrile stripping technology and organic HAP (D) Estimation of organic HAP butadiene rubber produced in 2009, in emissions limitations. concentrations based on grab samples of Mg. (a) If an owner or operator complies the liquid or vapor. (5) For EPPU that produce both an with the residual organic HAP (3) Each month, record the mass of elastomer product with a residual limitations in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3) elastomer product produced. organic HAP limitation listed in using stripping technology, compliance (4) Each month, calculate and record paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this shall be demonstrated using the the sums of the organic HAP emissions section, and a product listed in periodic sampling procedures in and the mass of elastomer produced for paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (iv) of this paragraph (b) of this section, or using the month and the previous 11 months. section, only the residual HAP content the stripper parameter monitoring (5) Each month, divide the total mass of the elastomer product with a residual procedures in paragraph (c) of this of organic HAP emitted for the 12- organic HAP limitation shall be used in section. The owner or operator shall month period by the total mass of determining the monthly average determine the monthly weighted elastomer produced during the 12- residual organic HAP content. average residual organic HAP content month period. This value must be * * * * * for each month in which any portion of recorded in accordance with § 63.498(e) (6) There are no back-end process the back-end of an elastomer production and reported in accordance with operation residual organic HAP or process is in operation. A single § 63.499(f)(2). emission limitations for HypalonTM and monthly weighted average shall be 20. Section 63.496 is amended by: polysulfide rubber production. There determined for all back-end process a. Revising the section heading; are also no back-end process operation operations at the affected source. b. Revising paragraph (a); residual organic HAP limitations for (b) * * * c. Revising paragraph (c)(2); and latex products, liquid rubber products, (5) The monthly weighted average d. Revising paragraph (d) to read as products produced in a gas-phased shall be determined using the equation follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65136 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

§ 63.496 Back-end process provisions— limitations in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3) paragraph (b)(1), and in paragraph (b)(2) procedures to determine compliance with using control or recovery devices, or a or paragraph (b)(3) of this section, as residual organic HAP limitations using combination of stripping and control or appropriate. control or recovery devices. recovery devices, shall install the * * * * * (a) If an owner or operator complies monitoring equipment specified in (3) If the organic HAP contents for all with the residual organic HAP paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this samples analyzed during a month are limitations in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3) section, as appropriate. below the appropriate level in using control or recovery devices, * * * * * § 63.494(a), the owner or operator may compliance shall be demonstrated using (d) The owner or operator of an record that all samples were in the procedures in paragraphs (b) and (c) affected source with a controlled back- accordance with the residual organic of this section. Previous test results HAP limitations in § 63.494(a)(1) conducted in accordance with end process vent using a vent system that contains bypass lines that could through (3), rather than calculating and paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this recording a monthly weighted average. section may be used to determine divert a vent stream away from the control or recovery device used to (c) Each owner or operator of a back- compliance in accordance with end process operation using stripping paragraph (c) of this section. comply with § 63.494(a)(1) through (3) shall comply with paragraph (d)(1) or technology to comply with a residual * * * * * (2) of this section. Equipment such as organic HAP limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) (c) * * * low leg drains, high point bleeds, through (3), and demonstrating (2) A facility is in compliance if the compliance using the stripper parameter average of the organic HAP contents analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines, and pressure relief valves needed monitoring procedures in § 63.495(c), calculated for all three test runs is below shall maintain the records specified in the residual organic HAP limitations in for safety purposes are not subject to this paragraph. paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this § 63.494(a)(1) through (3). section. (d) An owner or operator complying * * * * * with the residual organic HAP 22. Section 63.498 is amended by: * * * * * limitations in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3) a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory (d) Each owner or operator of a back- using a control or recovery device, shall text; end process operation using control or redetermine the compliance status b. Revising paragraph (a)(3); recovery devices to comply with a through the requirements described in c. Adding paragraph (a)(4); residual organic HAP limitation in paragraph (b) of this section whenever d. Revising paragraph (b) introductory § 63.494(a)(1) through (3) shall maintain process changes are made. The owner or text; the records specified in paragraphs operator shall report the results of the e. Revising paragraph (b)(3); (d)(1) through (5) of this section. The redetermination in accordance with f. Revising paragraph (c) introductory recordkeeping requirements contained § 63.499(d). For the purposes of this text; in paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) pertain section, a process change is any action g. Revising paragraph (d) introductory to the results of the testing required by that would reasonably be expected to text; § 63.496(b), for each of the three impair the performance of the control or h. Revising paragraph (d)(5)(ii)(B); required test runs. recovery device. For the purposes of this i. Revising paragraph (d)(5)(ii)(E); and * * * * * section, the production of an elastomer j. Adding paragraph (e) to read as (5) * * * with a residual organic HAP content follows: (ii) * * * greater than the residual organic HAP (B) Monitoring data recorded during content of the elastomer used in the § 63.498 Back-end process provisions— periods of monitoring system recordkeeping. compliance demonstration constitutes a breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, process change, unless the overall effect (a) Each owner or operator shall and zero (low-level) and high-level of the change is to reduce organic HAP maintain the records specified in adjustments shall not be included in emissions from the source as a whole. paragraphs (a)(1) through (3), and computing the hourly or daily averages. Other examples of process changes may paragraphs (b) through (d) of this In addition, monitoring data recorded include changes in production capacity section, as appropriate. during periods of non-operation of the or production rate, or removal or * * * * * EPPU (or specific portion thereof) addition of equipment. For the purposes (3) If the back-end process operation resulting in cessation of organic HAP of this paragraph, process changes do is subject to a residual organic HAP emissions shall not be included in not include: Process upsets; limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3), computing the hourly or daily averages. unintentional, temporary process whether compliance will be achieved by Records shall be kept of the times and changes; or changes that reduce the stripping technology, or by control or durations of all such periods and any residual organic HAP content of the recovery devices. other periods of process or control elastomer. (4) If the back-end process operation device operation when monitors are not 21. Section 63.497 is amended by: is subject to an emission limitation in operating. a. Revising the section heading to § 63.494(a)(4), the organic HAP emission * * * * * § 63.497; limitation calculated in accordance with (E) For flares, records of the times and b. Revising paragraph (a) introductory § 63.494(a)(4)(i) through (v), as duration of all periods during which the text; and applicable. pilot flame is absent shall be kept rather c. Revising paragraph (d) introductory (b) Each owner or operator of a back- than daily averages. The records text to read as follows: end process operation using stripping specified in this paragraph are not § 63.497 Back-end process provisions— technology to comply with a residual required during periods when emissions monitoring provisions for control and organic HAP limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) are not routed to the flare. recovery devices used to comply with through (3), and demonstrating * * * * * residual organic HAP limitations. compliance using the periodic sampling (e) If the back-end process operation (a) An owner or operator complying procedures in § 63.495(b), shall is subject to an organic HAP emission with the residual organic HAP maintain the records specified in limitation in § 63.494(a)(4), the records

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65137

specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through § 63.506(e)(7)(iii). The report shall one of the time periods described in (4) of this section. include: paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, (1) The applicable organic HAP * * * * * without causing any of the situations emission limitation determined in (f) If the back-end process operation is described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this accordance with § 63.494(a)(4)(i) subject to an organic HAP emission section to occur. Upon request, the through (v). limitation in § 63.494(a)(4), the owner owner or operator shall make available (2) The organic HAP emissions from and operator must submit the to the Administrator such records as all back-end process operations for each information specified in paragraphs may be necessary to determine the month, along with documentation of all (f)(1) and (2) of this section. conditions of performance tests. calculations and other information used (1) The applicable organic HAP * * * * * in the engineering assessment to emission limitation determined in 28. Section 63.505 is amended by: estimate these emissions. accordance with § 63.494(a)(4)(i) a. Revising paragraph (e)(4); (3) The mass of elastomer product through (v) shall be submitted no later b. Revising paragraph (g)(1)(v)(A); produced each month. than 180 days from the date of c. Revising paragraph (g)(1)(v)(B); (4) The total mass of organic HAP publication of the final rule d. Removing paragraphs (g)(1)(v)(C) emitted for each 12-month period amendments in the Federal Register. through (g)(1)(v)(E); divided by the total mass of elastomer (2) In the periodic report required to e. Revising paragraph (g)(2)(ii)(B); and produced during the 12-month period, be submitted by § 63.506(e)(6), the total f. Adding paragraph (j) to read as determined in accordance with mass of organic HAP emitted for each of follows: § 63.495(g)(5). the rolling 12-month periods in the 23. Section 63.499 is amended by: reporting period divided by the total § 63.505 Parameter monitoring levels and a. Revising paragraph (a)(3); excursions. b. Revising paragraph (b) introductory mass of elastomer produced during the corresponding 12-month period, * * * * * text; (e) * * * c. Revising paragraph (c) introductory determined in accordance with (4) An owner or operator complying text; § 63.495(g)(5). with the residual organic HAP d. Revising paragraph (d) introductory 24. Section 63.501 is amended by limitations in paragraphs (a)(1) through text; and revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as e. Adding paragraph (f) to read as follows: (3) of § 63.494 using stripping, and follows: demonstrating compliance by stripper § 63.501 Wastewater provisions. parameter monitoring, shall redetermine § 63.499 Back-end process provisions— * * * * * the residual organic HAP content for all reporting. (c) * * * affected grades whenever process (a) * * * (2) Back-end streams at affected changes are made. For the purposes of (3) If the back-end process operation sources that are subject to a residual this section, a process change is any is subject to a residual organic HAP organic HAP limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) action that would reasonably be limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3), through (3) and that are complying with expected to impair the performance of whether compliance will be achieved by these limitations through the use of the stripping operation. For the stripping technology, or by control or stripping technology. purposes of this section, examples of recovery devices. 25. Section 63.502 is amended by process changes may include changes in (b) Each owner or operator of a back- revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as production capacity or production rate, end process operation using stripping to follows: or removal or addition of equipment. comply with a residual organic HAP For purposes of this paragraph, process § 63.502 Equipment leak and heat limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) through (3), exchange system provisions. changes do not include: Process upsets; and demonstrating compliance by unintentional, temporary process stripper parameter monitoring, shall * * * * * changes; or changes that reduce the submit reports as specified in (b) * * * residual organic HAP content of the paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section. (4) Surge control vessels and bottoms elastomer. receivers located downstream of the * * * * * stripping operations at affected sources * * * * * (c) Each owner or operator of an subject to the back-end residual organic (g) * * * affected source with a back-end process HAP limitation located in § 63.494(a)(1) (1) * * * operation control or recovery device through (3), that are complying through (v) * * * that shall comply with a residual the use of stripping technology, as (A) Monitoring system breakdowns, organic HAP limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) specified in § 63.495; repairs, calibration checks, and zero through (3) shall submit the information (low-level) and high-level adjustments; * * * * * specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through or (3) of this section as part of the § 63.503 [Amended] (B) Periods of non-operation of the Notification of Compliance Status 26. Section 63.503 is amended by affected source (or portion thereof), specified in § 63.506(e)(5). removing and reserving paragraph (f)(1). resulting in cessation of the emissions to * * * * * 27. Section 63.504 is amended by which the monitoring applies. (d) Whenever a process change, as revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory (2) * * * defined in § 63.496(d), is made that text to read as follows: (ii) * * * causes the redetermination of the (B) Subtract the time during the compliance status for the back-end § 63.504 Additional requirements for periods of monitoring system process operations subject to a residual performance testing. breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, organic HAP limitation in § 63.494(a)(1) (a) * * * and zero (low-level) and high-level through (3), the owner or operator shall (1) Performance tests shall be adjustments from the total amount of submit a report within 180 days after conducted at maximum representative time determined in paragraph the process change, as specified in operating conditions achievable during (g)(2)(ii)(A) of this section, to obtain the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65138 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

operating time used to determine if (i) Monitoring system breakdowns, accordance with § 63.483(a)(1), monitoring data are insufficient. repairs, calibration checks, and zero including actions taken to correct a * * * * * (low-level) and high-level adjustments; malfunction. (j) Excursion definition for back-end or * * * * * operations subject to § 63.494(a)(4). An (ii) Periods of non-operation of the (h) * * * affected source (or portion thereof), excursion means when the total mass of (1) * * * resulting in cessation of the emissions to organic HAP emitted for any (i) The monitoring system is capable which the monitoring applies. consecutive 12-month period divided by of detecting unrealistic or impossible the total mass of elastomer produced * * * * * data during periods of normal operation during the 12-month period, determined (e) * * * (e.g., a temperature reading of ¥200 °C (3) Precompliance Report. Owners or in accordance with § 63.495(g), is on a boiler), and will alert the operator operators of affected sources requesting greater than the applicable emission by alarm or other means. The owner or an extension for compliance; requesting limitation, determined in accordance operator shall record the occurrence. All approval to use alternative monitoring with § 63.494(a)(4)(i) through (v) and instances of the alarm or other alert in parameters, alternative continuous submitted in accordance with an operating day constitute a single monitoring and recordkeeping, or § 63.499(f)(1). occurrence. alternative controls; requesting approval 29. Section 63.506 is amended by: (ii) * * * a. Revising paragraph (b)(1); to use engineering assessment to estimate emissions from a batch (C) The running average reflects a b. Revising paragraph (d)(7); period of normal operation. c. Revising paragraph (e)(3) emissions episode, as described in (iii) The monitoring system is capable introductory text; § 63.488(b)(6)(i); wishing to establish of detecting unchanging data during d. Removing and reserving paragraph parameter monitoring levels according periods of normal operation, except in (e)(3)(viii); to the procedures contained in e. Revising paragraph (e)(3)(ix)(B); § 63.505(c) or (d); shall submit a circumstances where the presence of f. Revising paragraph (e)(6)(iii)(E); Precompliance Report according to the unchanging data is the expected g. Revising paragraph (h)(1)(i); schedule described in paragraph (e)(3)(i) operating condition based on past h. Revising paragraph (h)(1)(ii)(C); of this section. The Precompliance experience (e.g., pH in some scrubbers), i. Revising paragraph (h)(1)(iii); Report shall contain the information and will alert the operator by alarm or j. Revising paragraph (h)(2)(iii); and specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) through other means. The owner or operator k. Removing and reserving paragraph (vii) of this section, as appropriate. shall record the occurrence. All (h)(2)(iv)(A) to read as follows: * * * * * instances of the alarm or other alert in (viii) [Reserved] an operating day constitute a single § 63.506 General recordkeeping and (ix) * * * occurrence. reporting provisions. (B) Supplements to the Precompliance * * * * * * * * * * Report may be submitted to request (2) * * * (b) * * * approval to use alternative monitoring (iii) The owner or operator shall retain (1) Malfunction records. Each owner parameters, as specified in paragraph the records specified in paragraphs or operator of an affected source subject (e)(3)(iii) of this section; to use (h)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, for to this subpart shall maintain records of alternative continuous monitoring and the duration specified in paragraph (h) the occurrence and duration of each recordkeeping, as specified in paragraph of this section. For any calendar week, malfunction of operation (i.e., process (e)(3)(iv) of this section; to use if compliance with paragraphs (h)(1)(i) equipment), air pollution control alternative controls, as specified in through (iii) of this section does not equipment, or monitoring equipment. paragraph (e)(3)(v) of this section; to use result in retention of a record of at least Each owner or operator shall maintain engineering assessment to estimate one occurrence or measured parameter records of actions taken during periods emissions from a batch emissions value, the owner or operator shall of malfunction to minimize emissions in episode, as specified in paragraph record and retain at least one parameter accordance with § 63.483(a)(1), (e)(3)(vi) of this section; or to establish value during a period of normal including corrective actions to restore parameter monitoring levels according operation. malfunctioning process and air to the procedures contained in (iv) * * * pollution control and monitoring § 63.505(c) or (d), as specified in (A) [Reserved] equipment to its normal or usual paragraph (e)(3)(vii) of this section. manner of operation. * * * * * * * * * * 30. Table 1 to Subpart U of part 63 is * * * * * (6) * * * amended by: (d) * * * (iii) * * * (7) Monitoring data recorded during (E) The number, duration, and a brief a. Removing entry 63.6(e); periods identified in paragraphs (d)(7)(i) description for each type of malfunction b. Revising entries 63.6(e)(1)(i) and and (ii) of this section shall not be which occurred during the reporting 63.6(e)(1)(ii); included in any average computed period and which caused or may have c. Revising entry 63.6(e)(2); under this subpart. Records shall be caused any applicable emission d. Adding entry 63.6(e)(3); kept of the times and durations of all limitation to be exceeded. The report e. Removing entries 63.6(e)(3)(i) such periods and any other periods must also include a description of through 63.6(e)(3)(ix); during process or control device or actions taken by an owner or operator f. Revising entry 63.6(f)(1); and recovery device operation when during a malfunction of an affected e. Revising entries 63.7(e)(1) and monitors are not operating. source to minimize emissions in 63.10(d)(5)(i) to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65139

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART U OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART U AFFECTED SOURCES

Reference Applies to Subpart U Explanation

******* § 63.6(e)(1)(i) ...... No ...... See § 63.483(a)(1) for general duty requirement. Any cross reference to § 63.6(e)(1)(i) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross reference to § 63.483(a)(1). § 63.6(e)(1)(ii) ...... No.

******* § 63.6(e)(2) ...... No ...... [Reserved.] § 63.6(e)(3) ...... No. § 63.6(f)(1) ...... No.

******* § 63.7(e)(1) ...... No ...... See § 63.504(a)(1). Any cross-reference to § 63.7(e)(1) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to § 63.504(a)(1).

******* 63.10(d)(5)(i) ...... No.

*******

Subpart Y—[Amended] § 63.562(b) and (d) of this subpart are operations at existing offshore loading applicable to existing and new sources terminals, as that term is defined in 31–32. Section 63.560 is amended by: with emissions of 10 or 25 tons, as that § 63.561, except existing offshore a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), term is defined in § 63.561, except as loading terminals must meet paragraphs and (a)(3); specified in paragraph (d) of this b. Revising paragraph (d)(6); (d)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section. c. Adding paragraph (e)(1)(iv); section, and are applicable to new (i) The submerged fill standards of 46 d. Amending Table 1 to § 63.560 as sources with emissions less than 10 and CFR 153.282, and 25 tons, as that term is defined in follows: (ii) The provisions of § 63.562(f)(1) or i. Revising entry 63.6(f)(1); § 63.561, except as specified in ii. Removing entry 63.7(e); paragraphs (d) and (f) of this section. § 63.562(f)(2), if the terminal loads more iii. Adding entries 63.7(e)(1) and (2) Existing sources with emissions than 1 million barrels (M barrels) of 63.7(e)(2)–(4); less than 10 and 25 tons are not subject gasoline. iv. Removing entries 63.10(b)(2)(i) and to the emissions standards in § 63.562(b) * * * * * (b)(2)(ii)–(iii); and (d), except as specified in paragraph (e) * * * v. Adding entries 63.10(b)(2)(i)–(ii) (f) of this section. and (b)(2)(iii); (3) The recordkeeping requirements of (1) * * * vi. Removing entry 63.10(c)(10)–(13); § 63.567(j)(4) and the emission (iv) New and existing sources with and estimation requirements of § 63.565(l) emissions less than 10 or 25 tons, that vii. Adding entries 63.10(c)(10)–(11) apply to existing sources with emissions load more than 1 M barrels of gasoline and 63.10(c)(12)–(13) to read as follows: less than 10 and 25 tons, except as shall comply with the provisions of § 63.560 Applicability and designation of specified in paragraph (f) of this section. § 63.562(f) by [DATE 3 YEARS FROM affected source. * * * * * DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE (a) * * * (d) * * * FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL (1) The provisions of this subpart (6) The provisions of this subpart do REGISTER]. pertaining to the MACT standards in not apply to marine tank vessel loading * * * * *

TABLE 1 OF § 63.560—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART Y

Applies to affected sources in Reference subpart Y Comment

******* 63.6(f)(1) ...... No.

******* 63.7(e)(1) ...... No. See 63.563(b)(1). Any cross reference to 63.7(e)(1) in any other general provi- sion incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.563(b)(1). 63.7(e)(2)–(4) ...... Yes.

******* 63.10 (b)(2)(i)–(ii) ...... No.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65140 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1 OF § 63.560—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART Y—Continued

Applies to affected sources in Reference subpart Y Comment

******* 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ...... Yes.

******* 63.10(c)(10)–(11) ...... No. See 63.567(m)(1) for reporting malfunctions. Any cross-reference to 63.10(c)(10) or 63.10(c)(11) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.567(m)(1). 63.10(c)(12)–(13) ...... Yes.

*******

33. Section 63.561 is amended by of 10 or 25 tons, and an existing source Appropriate penalties may be assessed, adding in alphabetical order a definition with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons however, if the respondent fails to meet for ‘‘affirmative defense’’ to read as that loads more than 1 million bbl/yr of its burden of proving all the follows: gasoline shall limit marine tank vessel requirements in the affirmative defense. loading operations to those vessels that The affirmative defense shall not be § 63.561 Definitions. are equipped with vapor collection available for claims for injunctive relief. * * * * * equipment that is compatible with the (i) To establish the affirmative defense Affirmative defense means, in the terminal’s vapor collection system, in any action to enforce such a limit, the context of an enforcement proceeding, a except for those commodities exempted owners or operators of facilities must response or a defense put forward by a under § 63.560(d). timely meet the notification defendant, regarding which the (iii) Vapor tightness of marine vessels. requirements of paragraph (e)(7)(ii) of defendant has the burden of proof, and The owner or operator of a new source this section, and must prove by a the merits of which are independently with emissions less than 10 and 25 tons, preponderance of evidence that: and objectively evaluated in a judicial an existing or new source with (A) The excess emissions were caused or administrative proceeding. emissions of 10 or 25 tons, and an by a sudden, short, infrequent, and * * * * * existing source with emissions less than unavoidable failure of air pollution 34. Section 63.562 is amended by: 10 and 25 tons that loads more than 1 control and monitoring equipment, or a a. Revising paragraph (a); million bbl/yr of gasoline shall limit process to operate in a normal and usual b. Revising paragraph (b)(1); marine tank vessel loading operations to manner; and could not have been c. Revising paragraph (e) introductory those vessels that are vapor tight and to prevented through careful planning, text; those vessels that are connected to the proper design or better operation and d. Adding paragraph (e)(7); and vapor collection system, except for maintenance practices; and did not stem e. Adding paragraph (f) to read as those commodities exempted under from any activity or event that could follows: § 63.560(d). have been foreseen and avoided, or § 63.562 Standards. * * * * * planned for; and were not part of a (a) The emissions limitations in (e) Operation and maintenance recurring pattern indicative of paragraphs (b), (c), (d) and (f) of this requirements for air pollution control inadequate design, operation, or section apply during marine tank vessel equipment and monitoring equipment maintenance; and loading operations. for affected sources. At all times, owners (B) Repairs were made as (b) MACT standards, except for the or operators of affected sources shall expeditiously as possible when the VMT source—(1)(i) Vapor collection operate and maintain a source, applicable emission limitations were system of the terminal. The owner or including associated air pollution being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime operator of a new source with emissions control equipment, in a manner labor were used, to the extent less than 10 and 25 tons, an existing or consistent with safety and good air practicable to make these repairs; and new source with emissions of 10 or 25 pollution control practices for (C) The frequency, amount and tons, and an existing source with minimizing emissions. Determination of duration of the excess emissions emissions less than 10 and 25 tons that whether acceptable operation and (including any bypass) were minimized loads more than 1 M barrels of gasoline maintenance procedures are being used to the maximum extent practicable shall equip each terminal with a vapor will be based on information available during periods of such emissions; and collection system that is designed to to the Administrator which may (D) If the excess emissions resulted collect HAP vapors displaced from include, but is not limited to, from a bypass of control equipment or marine tank vessels during marine tank monitoring results, review of operation a process, then the bypass was vessel loading operations and to prevent and maintenance procedures, review of unavoidable to prevent loss of life, HAP vapors collected at one loading operation and maintenance records, and severe personal injury, or severe berth from passing through another inspection of the source. property damage; and loading berth to the atmosphere, except * * * * * (E) All possible steps were taken to for those commodities exempted under (7) In response to an action to enforce minimize the impact of the excess § 63.560(d). the standards set forth in this subpart, emissions on ambient air quality, the (ii) Ship-to-shore compatibility. The you may assert a civil defense to a claim environment, and human health; and owner or operator of a new source with for civil penalties for exceedances of (F) All emissions monitoring and emissions less than 10 and 25 tons, an such standards that are caused by a control systems were kept in operation existing or new source with emissions malfunction, as defined in § 63.2. if at all possible; and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65141

(G) Your actions in response to the conducted within 180 days after the applicable emission limitations were excess emissions were documented by compliance date for the specific affected being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime properly signed, contemporaneous source. During this performance test, labor were used, to the extent operating logs; and sources subject to MACT standards practicable to make these repairs; and (H) At all times, the facility was under § 63.562(b)(2), (3), (4), and (5), (iii) The frequency, amount, and operated in a manner consistent with and (d)(2) shall determine the reduction duration of the excess emissions good practices for minimizing of HAP emissions, as VOC, for all (including any bypass) were minimized emissions; and combustion or recovery devices other to the maximum extent practicable (I) The owner or operator has than flares. Performance tests shall be during periods of such emissions; and prepared a written root cause analysis to conducted under such conditions as the (iv) If the excess emissions resulted determine, correct and eliminate the Administrator specifies to the owner or from a bypass of control equipment or primary causes of the malfunction and operator based on representative a process, then the bypass was the excess emissions resulting from the performance of the affected source for unavoidable to prevent loss of life, malfunction event at issue. The analysis the period being tested. Upon request, severe personal injury, or severe shall also specify, using the best the owner or operator shall make property damage; and monitoring methods and engineering available to the Administrator such (v) All possible steps were taken to judgment, the amount of excess records as may be necessary to minimize the impact of the excess emissions that were the result of the determine the conditions of emissions on ambient air quality, the malfunction. performance tests. Sources subject to environment, and human health; and (ii) Notification. The owner or RACT standards under § 63.562(c)(3), (vi) All emissions monitoring and operator of the facility experiencing an (4), and (5), and (d)(2) shall determine control systems were kept in operation exceedance of its emission limit(s) the reduction of VOC emissions for all if at all possible; and during a malfunction shall notify the combustion or recovery devices other (vii) Your actions in response to the Administrator by telephone or facsimile than flares. excess emissions were documented by (FAX) transmission as soon as possible, * * * * * properly signed, contemporaneous but no later 2 business days after the operating logs; and initial occurrence of the malfunction, if Subpart KK—[Amended] (viii) At all times, the facility was it wishes to avail itself of an affirmative operated in a manner consistent with defense to civil penalties for that 36. Section 63.820 is amended by good practices for minimizing malfunction. The owner or operator adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: emissions; and seeking to assert an affirmative defense § 63.820 Applicability. (ix) The owner or operator has shall also submit a written report to the prepared a written root cause analysis to Administrator within 30 days of the * * * * * (c) In response to an action to enforce determine, correct and eliminate the initial occurrence of the exceedance of the standards set forth in this subpart, primary causes of the malfunction and the standard in this subpart to you may assert a civil defense to a claim the excess emissions resulting from the demonstrate, with all necessary for civil penalties for exceedances of malfunction event at issue. The analysis supporting documentation, that it has such standards that are caused by a shall also specify, using the best met the requirements set forth in malfunction, as defined in § 63.2. monitoring methods and engineering paragraph (e)(7)(i) of this section. (f) The owner or operator of an Appropriate penalties may be assessed, judgment, the amount of excess existing source, that is not located at a however, if the respondent fails to meet emissions that were the result of the petroleum refinery, with emissions less its burden of proving all the malfunction. than 10 and 25 tons that loads more requirements in the affirmative defense. (2) Notification. The owner or than 1 million bbl/yr of gasoline shall: The affirmative defense shall not be operator of the facility experiencing an (1) Limit emissions to not more than available for claims for injunctive relief. exceedance of its emission limit(s) 10 mg of total organic compounds per (1) To establish the affirmative during a malfunction shall notify the liter of gasoline loaded; or defense in any action to enforce such a Administrator by telephone or facsimile (2) Reduce captured emissions by at limit, the owners or operators of (FAX) transmission as soon as possible, least 97 percent by weight. facilities must timely meet the but no later 2 business days after the 35. Section 63.563 is amended by notification requirements of paragraph initial occurrence of the malfunction, if revising paragraphs (a) introductory text (c)(2) of this section, and must prove by it wishes to avail itself of an affirmative and (b)(1) to read as follows: a preponderance of evidence that: defense to civil penalties for that (i) The excess emissions were caused malfunction. The owner or operator § 63.563 Compliance and performance by a sudden, short, infrequent, and seeking to assert an affirmative defense testing. unavoidable failure of air pollution shall also submit a written report to the (a) The following procedures shall be control and monitoring equipment, or a Administrator within 30 days of the used to determine compliance with the process to operate in a normal an usual initial occurrence of the exceedance of emissions limits under § 63.562(b)(1), manner; and could not have been the standard in this subpart to (c)(2), (d)(1), and (f): prevented through careful planning, demonstrate, with all necessary * * * * * proper design or better operation and supporting documentation, that it has (b) * * * maintenance practices; and did not stem met the requirements set forth in (1) Initial performance test. An initial from any activity or event that could paragraph (c)(1) of this section. performance test shall be conducted have been foreseen and avoided, or 37. Section 63.822 is amended by using the procedures listed in § 63.7 of planned for; and were not part of a adding in alphabetical order a definition subpart A of this part according to the recurring pattern indicative of for ‘‘affirmative defense’’ to paragraph (a) applicability in Table 1 of § 63.560, the inadequate design, operation, or to read as follows: procedures listed in this section, and maintenance; and the test methods listed in § 63.565. The (ii) Repairs were made as § 63.822 Definitions. initial performance test shall be expeditiously as possible when the (a) * * *

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65142 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Affirmative defense means, in the § 63.827 Performance test methods. § 63.830 Reporting requirements. context of an enforcement proceeding, a Performance tests shall be conducted * * * * * response or a defense put forward by a under such conditions as the (b) * * * defendant, regarding which the Administrator specifies to the owner or (5) [Reserved] defendant has the burden of proof, and operator based on representative (6) * * * the merits of which are independently performance of the affected source for (v) The number, duration, and a brief and objectively evaluated in a judicial the period being tested. Upon request, description for each type of malfunction or administrative proceeding. the owner or operator shall make which occurred during the reporting * * * * * available to the Administrator such period and which caused or may have records as may be necessary to caused any applicable emission 38. Section 63.823 is revised to read determine the conditions of limitation to be exceeded. The report as follows: performance tests. must also include a description of § 63.823 Standards: General. * * * * * actions taken by an owner or operator during a malfunction of an affected 40. Section 63.829 is amended by (a) Table 1 to this subpart provides source to minimize emissions in adding paragraphs (g) and (h) to read as cross references to the 40 CFR part 63, accordance with § 63.823(b), including follows: subpart A, general provisions, actions taken to correct a malfunction. indicating the applicability of the § 63.829 Recordkeeping requirements. 42. Table 1 to Subpart KK of part 63 general provisions requirements to this * * * * * is amended by: subpart KK. (g) Each owner or operator of an a. Removing entry 63.6(e); (b) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this subpart b. Adding entries 63.6(e)(1)(i), affected source subject to this subpart shall maintain records of the occurrence 63.6(e)(1)(ii); 63.6(e)(1)(iii), 63.6(e)(2), must at all times operate and maintain and duration of each malfunction of and 63.6(e)(3); that affected source, including operation (i.e., process equipment), air c. Removing entry 63.6(f); associated air pollution control pollution control equipment, or d. Adding entries 63.6(f)(1) and equipment and monitoring equipment, monitoring equipment. 63.6(f)(2)–(f)(3); e. Removing entry 63.7; in a manner consistent with safety and (h) Each owner or operator of an good air pollution control practices for f. Adding entries 63.7(a)–(d), affected source subject to this subpart 63.7(e)(1), and 63.7(e)(2)–(e)(4); minimizing emissions. Determination of shall maintain records of actions taken g. Removing entry 63.8(d)–(f); whether such operation and during periods of malfunction to h. Adding entries 63.8(d)(1)–(2), maintenance procedures are being used minimize emissions in accordance with 63.8(d)(3), and 63.8(e)–(f); will be based on information available § 63.823(b), including corrective actions i. Removing entries 63.10(b)(1)–(b)(3), to the Administrator, which may to restore malfunctioning process and 63.10(c)(10)–(c)(15), and 63.10(d)(4)– include, but is not limited to, air pollution control and monitoring (d)(5); monitoring results, review of operation equipment to its normal or usual j. Adding entries 63.10(b)(1), and maintenance procedures, review of manner of operation. 63.10(b)(2)(i), 63.10(b)(2)(ii), operation and maintenance records, and 41. Section 63.830 is amended by: 63.10(b)(2)(iii), 63.10(b)(2)(iv)–(b)(2)(v), inspection of the source. a. Removing and reserving paragraph 63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(b)(2)(xiv), 63.10(b)(3), 39. Section 63.827 is amended by (b)(5); and 63.10(c)(10), 63.10(c)(11), 63.10(c)(12)– adding introductory text to read as b. Adding paragraph (b)(6)(v) to read (c)(14), 63.10(c)(15), 63.10(d)(4), and follows: as follows: 63.10(d)(5) to read as follows:

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART KK OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART KK

General provisions reference Applicable to Subpart KK Comment

******* § 63.6(e)(1)(i) ...... No ...... See 63.823(b) for general duty requirement. Any cross-reference to 63.6(e)(1)(i) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.823(b). § 63.6(e)(1)(ii) ...... No. § 63.6(e)(1)(iii) ...... Yes. § 63.6(e)(2) ...... No ...... Section reserved. § 63.6(e)(3) ...... No. § 63.6(f)(1) ...... No. § 63.6(f)(2)–(f)(3) ...... Yes.

******* § 63.7(a)–(d) ...... Yes. § 63.7(e)(1) ...... No ...... See 63.827 introductory text. Any cross-reference to 63.7(e)(1) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-ref- erence to 63.827 introductory text. § 63.7(e)(2)–(e)(4) ...... Yes.

******* § 63.8(d)(1)–(2) ...... Yes. § 63.8(d)(3) ...... Yes, except for last sentence. § 63.8(e)–(f) ...... Yes.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65143

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART KK OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART KK—Continued

General provisions reference Applicable to Subpart KK Comment

******* § 63.10(b)(1) ...... Yes. § 63.10(b)(2)(i) ...... No. § 63.10(b)(2)(ii) ...... No ...... See 63.829(g) for recordkeeping of occurrence and duration of malfunctions. See 63.829(h) for recordkeeping of actions taken during malfunction. Any cross-reference to 63.10(b)(2)(ii) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.829(g). § 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ...... Yes. § 63.10(b)(2)(iv)–(b)(2)(v) ... No. § 63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(b)(2)(xiv) Yes. § 63.10(b)(3) ...... Yes.

******* § 63.10(c)(10) ...... No ...... See 63.830(b)(6)(v) for reporting malfunctions. Any cross-reference to 63.10(c)(10) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.830(b)(6)(v). § 63.10(c)(11) ...... No ...... See 63.830(b)(6)(v) for reporting malfunctions. Any cross-reference to 63.10(c)(11) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.830(b)(6)(v). § 63.10(c)(12)–(c)(14) ...... Yes. § 63.10(c)(15) ...... No.

******* § 63.10(d)(4) ...... Yes. § 63.10(d)(5) ...... No.

*******

Subpart CCC—[Amended] planned for; and were not part of a (ix) The owner or operator has recurring pattern indicative of prepared a written root cause analysis to 43. Section 63.1155 is amended by inadequate design, operation, or determine, correct, and eliminate the adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: maintenance; and primary causes of the malfunction and § 63.1155 Applicability. (ii) Repairs were made as the excess emissions resulting from the * * * * * expeditiously as possible when the malfunction event at issue. The analysis (d) In response to an action to enforce applicable emission limitations were shall also specify, using the best the standards set forth in this subpart, being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime monitoring methods and engineering you may assert a civil defense to a claim labor were used, to the extent judgment, the amount of excess for civil penalties for exceedances of practicable to make these repairs; and emissions that were the result of the such standards that are caused by a (iii) The frequency, amount, and malfunction. duration of the excess emissions malfunction, as defined in § 63.2. (2) Notification. The owner or (including any bypass) were minimized Appropriate penalties may be assessed, operator of the facility experiencing an to the maximum extent practicable however, if the respondent fails to meet exceedance of its emission limit(s) during periods of such emissions; and its burden of proving all the during a malfunction shall notify the (iv) If the excess emissions resulted requirements in the affirmative defense. Administrator by telephone or facsimile from a bypass of control equipment or The affirmative defense shall not be (FAX) transmission as soon as possible, a process, then the bypass was available for claims for injunctive relief. but no later 2 business days after the (1) To establish the affirmative unavoidable to prevent loss of life, severe personal injury, or severe initial occurrence of the malfunction, if defense in any action to enforce such a it wishes to avail itself of an affirmative limit, the owners or operators of property damage; and defense to civil penalties for that facilities must timely meet the (v) All possible steps were taken to malfunction. The owner or operator notification requirements of paragraph minimize the impact of the excess seeking to assert an affirmative defense (d)(2) of this section, and must prove by emissions on ambient air quality, the shall also submit a written report to the a preponderance of evidence that: environment, and human health; and (i) The excess emissions were caused (vi) All emissions monitoring and Administrator within 30 days of the by a sudden, short, infrequent, and control systems were kept in operation initial occurrence of the exceedance of unavoidable failure of air pollution if at all possible; and the standard in this subpart to control and monitoring equipment, or a (vii) Your actions in response to the demonstrate, with all necessary process to operate in a normal an usual excess emissions were documented by supporting documentation, that it has manner; and could not have been properly signed, contemporaneous met the requirements set forth in prevented through careful planning, operating logs; and paragraph (d)(1) of this section. proper design, or better operation and (viii) At all times, the facility was 44. Section 63.1156 is amended by maintenance practices; and did not stem operated in a manner consistent with adding in alphabetical order a definition from any activity or event that could good practices for minimizing for ‘‘affirmative defense’’ to read as have been foreseen and avoided, or emissions; and follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65144 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

§ 63.1156 Definitions. pumps, and other liquid pumps, in official, showing the date of each * * * * * addition to exhaust system and scrubber inspection for each requirement, the Affirmative defense means, in the fans and motors associated with those problems found, a description of the context of an enforcement proceeding, a pumps and fans; repair, replacement, or other action response or a defense put forward by a (iii) Require cleaning of the scrubber taken, and the date of repair or defendant, regarding which the internals and mist eliminators at replacement. defendant has the burden of proof, and intervals sufficient to prevent buildup of 47. Section 63.1161 is amended by the merits of which are independently solids or other fouling; revising paragraph (a) introductory text and objectively evaluated in a judicial (iv) Require an inspection of each to read as follows: or administrative proceeding. scrubber at intervals of no less than 3 § 63.1161 Performance testing and test * * * * * months with: (A) Cleaning or replacement of any methods. 45. Section 63.1159 is amended by (a) Demonstration of compliance. The adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: plugged spray nozzles or other liquid delivery devices; owner or operator shall conduct an § 63.1159 Operational and equipment (B) Repair or replacement of missing, initial performance test for each process standards for existing, new, or misaligned, or damaged baffles, trays, or or emission control device to determine reconstructed sources. other internal components; and demonstrate compliance with the * * * * * (C) Repair or replacement of droplet applicable emission limitation (c) At all times, each owner or eliminator elements as needed; according to the requirements in § 63.7 operator must operate and maintain any (D) Repair or replacement of heat of subpart A of this part and in this affected source subject to the exchanger elements used to control the section. Performance tests shall be requirements of this subpart, including temperature of fluids entering or leaving conducted under such conditions as the associated air pollution control the scrubber; and Administrator specifies to the owner or equipment and monitoring equipment, (E) Adjustment of damper settings for operator based on representative in a manner consistent with safety and consistency with the required air flow. performance of the affected source for good air pollution control practices for (v) If the scrubber is not equipped the period being tested. Upon request, minimizing emissions. The general duty with a viewport or access hatch the owner or operator shall make to minimize emissions does not require allowing visual inspection, alternate available to the Administrator such the owner or operator to make any means of inspection approved by the records as may be necessary to further efforts to reduce emissions if Administrator may be used. determine the conditions of levels required by this standard have (vi) The owner or operator shall performance tests. been achieved. Determination of initiate procedures for corrective action * * * * * whether such operation and within 1 working day of detection of an 48. Section 63.1164 is amended by maintenance procedures are being used operating problem and complete all revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: will be based on information available corrective actions as soon as practicable. to the Administrator which may Procedures to be initiated are the § 63.1164 Reporting requirements. include, but is not limited to, applicable actions that are specified in * * * * * monitoring results, review of operation the maintenance plan. Failure to initiate (c) The number, duration, and a brief and maintenance procedures, review of or provide appropriate repair, description for each type of malfunction operation and maintenance records, and replacement, or other corrective action which occurred during the reporting inspection of the source. is a violation of the maintenance period and which caused or may have 46. Section 63.1160 is amended by requirement of this subpart. caused any applicable emission revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: (vii) The owner or operator shall limitation to be exceeded shall be stated maintain a record of each inspection, in a semiannual report. The report must § 63.1160 Compliance dates and including each item identified in also include a description of actions maintenance requirements. paragraph (b)(2)(iv) of this section, that taken by an owner or operator during a * * * * * is signed by the responsible malfunction of an affected source to (b) Maintenance requirements. (1) The maintenance official and that shows the minimize emissions in accordance with owner or operator shall prepare an date of each inspection, the problem § 63.1159(c), including actions taken to operation and maintenance plan for identified, a description of the repair, correct a malfunction. The report, to be each emission control device to be replacement, or other corrective action certified by the owner or operator or implemented no later than the taken, and the date of the repair, other responsible official, shall be compliance date. The plan shall be replacement, or other corrective action submitted semiannually and delivered incorporated by reference into the taken. or postmarked by the 30th day following source’s title V permit. All such plans (2) The owner or operator of each the end of each calendar half. must be consistent with good hydrochloric acid regeneration plant 49. Section 63.1165 is amended by: maintenance practices, and, for a shall develop and implement a written a. Revising paragraph (a)(1); scrubber emission control device, must maintenance program. The program b. Revising paragraph (a)(4); at a minimum: shall require: c. Removing paragraph (a)(5) and (i) Require monitoring and recording (i) Performance of the manufacturer’s redesignating paragraphs (a)(6) through the pressure drop across the scrubber recommended maintenance at the (a)(11) as paragraphs (a)(5) through once per shift while the scrubber is recommended intervals on all required (a)(10) to read as follows: operating in order to identify changes systems and components; that may indicate a need for (ii) Initiation of procedures for § 63.1165 Recordkeeping requirements. maintenance; appropriate and timely repair, (a) * * * (ii) Require the manufacturer’s replacement, or other corrective action (1) The occurrence and duration of recommended maintenance at the within 1 working day of detection; and each malfunction of operation (i.e., recommended intervals on fresh solvent (iii) Maintenance of a daily record, process equipment); pumps, recirculating pumps, discharge signed by a responsible maintenance * * * * *

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65145

(4) Actions taken during periods of a. Removing entry 63.6(a)–(g); f. Adding entries 63.10(a), 63.10(b)(1), malfunction to minimize emissions in b. Adding entries 63.6(a)–(d), 63.10(b)(2)(i), 63.10(b)(2)(ii), accordance with § 63.1259(c) and the 63.6(e)(1)(i), 63.6(e)(1)(ii), 63.6(e)(1)(iii), 63.10(b)(2)(iii), 63.10(b)(2)(iv)–(v), dates of such actions (including 63.6(e)(2), 63.6(e)(3), 63.6(f)(1), 63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(xvi), 63.10(b)(3), corrective actions to restore 63.6(f)(2)–(3), 63.6(g); 63.10(c)(1)–(9), 63.10(c)(10), malfunctioning process and air c. Removing entry 63.7–63.9; 63.10(c)(11), 63.10(c)(12)–(14), and pollution control equipment to its 63.10(c)(15); normal or usual manner of operation); d. Adding entries 63.7, 63.8(a)–(c), g. Removing entry 63.10(d)(4)–(5); * * * * * 63.8(d)(1)–(2), 63.8(d)(3), and 63.8(e)– 50. Table 1 to Subpart CCC is (f); h. Adding entries 63.10(d)(4) and amended by: e. Removing entry 63.10(a)–(c); 63.10(d)(5) to read as follows:

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART CCC OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART A) TO SUBPART CCC

Reference Applies to Subpart CCC Explanation

******* 63.6 (a)–(d) ...... Yes. 63.6(e)(1)(i) ...... No ...... See § 63.1259(c) for general duty requirement. Any cross-reference to § 63.6(e)(1)(i) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to § 63.1259(c). 63.6(e)(1)(ii) ...... No. 63.6(e)(1)(iii) ...... Yes. 63.6(e)(2) ...... No ...... Section reserved. 63.6(e)(3) ...... No. 63.6(f)(1) ...... No. 63.6(f)(2)–(3) ...... Yes. 63.6(g) ...... Yes.

******* 63.7 ...... Yes. 63.8(a)–(c) ...... Yes. 63.8(d)(1)–(2) ...... Yes. 63.8(d)(3) ...... Yes, except for last sentence. 63.8(e)–(f) ...... Yes.

******* 63.10(a) ...... Yes. 63.10(b)(1) ...... Yes. 63.10(b)(2)(i) ...... No. 63.10(b)(2)(ii) ...... No ...... See § 63.1265(a)(1) for recordkeeping of occurrence and duration of malfunc- tions. See § 63.1265(a)(4) for recordkeeping of actions taken during malfunc- tion. Any cross-reference to § 63.10(b)(2)(ii) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to § 63.1265(a)(1). 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ...... Yes. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)–(v) ...... No. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(xiv) ...... Yes. 63.10(b)(3) ...... Yes.

******* 63.10(c)(1)–(9) ...... Yes. 63.10(c)(10) ...... No ...... See § 63.1164(c) for reporting malfunctions. Any cross-reference to § 63.10(c)(10) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to § 63.1164(c). 63.10(c)(11) ...... No ...... See § 63.1164(c) for reporting malfunctions. Any cross-reference to § 63.10(c)(11) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to § 63.1164(c). 63.10(c)(12)–(c)(14) ...... Yes. 63.10(c)(15) ...... No. 63.10(d)(4) ...... Yes. 63.10(d)(5) ...... No.

*******

Subpart GGG—[Amended] § 63.1250 Applicability. provisions set forth in § 63.1255 of this * * * * * subpart shall not apply during periods 51. Section 63.1250 is amended by (g) Applicability of this subpart. (1) of nonoperation of the PMPU (or revising paragraph (g) to read as follows: Each provision set forth in this subpart specific portion thereof) in which the shall apply at all times, except that the lines are drained and depressurized

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65146 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

resulting in the cessation of the have been foreseen and avoided, or 52. Section 63.1251 is amended by emissions to which § 63.1255 of this planned for; and were not part of a adding in alphabetical order a definition subpart applies. recurring pattern indicative of for ‘‘affirmative defense’’ to read as (2) The owner or operator shall not inadequate design, operation, or follow: shut down items of equipment that are maintenance; and required or utilized for compliance with (B) Repairs were made as § 63.1251 Definitions. the emissions limitations of this subpart expeditiously as possible when the * * * * * during times when emissions (or, where applicable emission limitations were Affirmative defense means, in the applicable, wastewater streams or being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime context of an enforcement proceeding, a residuals) are being routed to such items labor were used, to the extent response or a defense put forward by a of equipment, if the shutdown would practicable to make these repairs; and defendant, regarding which the contravene emissions limitations of this (C) The frequency, amount, and defendant has the burden of proof, and subpart applicable to such items of duration of the excess emissions the merits of which are independently equipment. This paragraph does not (including any bypass) were minimized and objectively evaluated in a judicial apply if the owner or operator must shut to the maximum extent practicable or administrative proceeding. down the equipment to avoid damage to during periods of such emissions; and * * * * * a PMPU or portion thereof. (D) If the excess emissions resulted 53. Section 63.1255 is amended by (3) At all times, each owner or from a bypass of control equipment or revising paragraph (g)(4)(v)(A) to read as operator must operate and maintain any a process, then the bypass was follow: affected source subject to the unavoidable to prevent loss of life, requirements of this subpart, including severe personal injury, or severe § 63.1255 Standards: Equipment leaks. associated air pollution control property damage; and * * * * * equipment and monitoring equipment, (E) All possible steps were taken to (g) * * * in a manner consistent with safety and minimize the impact of the excess (4) * * * good air pollution control practices for emissions on ambient air quality, the (v) * * * minimizing emissions. The general duty environment, and human health; and (A) The owner or operator may to minimize emissions does not require (F) All emissions monitoring and develop a written procedure that the owner or operator to make any control systems were kept in operation identifies the conditions that justify a further efforts to reduce emissions if if at all possible; and delay of repair. The written procedures levels required by this standard have (G) Your actions in response to the shall be included in a document that is been achieved. Determination of excess emissions were documented by maintained at the plant site. Reasons for whether such operation and properly signed, contemporaneous delay of repair may be documented by maintenance procedures are being used operating logs; and citing the relevant sections of the will be based on information available (H) At all times, the facility was written procedure. to the Administrator which may operated in a manner consistent with good practices for minimizing * * * * * include, but is not limited to, 54. Section 63.1256 is amended by emissions; and monitoring results, review of operation revising paragraph (a)(4)(i) introductory and maintenance procedures, review of (I) The owner or operator has prepared a written root cause analysis to text, and removing paragraphs (a)(4)(iii) operation and maintenance records, and and (iv) to read as follows: inspection of the source. determine, correct, and eliminate the (4) In response to an action to enforce primary causes of the malfunction and § 63.1256 Standards: Wastewater. the standards set forth in this subpart, the excess emissions resulting from the * * * * * you may assert a civil defense to a claim malfunction event at issue. The analysis (a) * * * for civil penalties for exceedances of shall also specify, using the best (4) * * * such standards that are caused by a monitoring methods and engineering (i) The owner or operator shall malfunction, as defined in § 63.2. judgment, the amount of excess prepare a description of maintenance Appropriate penalties may be assessed, emissions that were the result of the procedures for management of however, if the respondent fails to meet malfunction. wastewater generated from the emptying its burden of proving all the (ii) Notification. The owner or and purging of equipment in the process requirements in the affirmative defense. operator of the facility experiencing an during temporary shutdowns for The affirmative defense shall not be exceedance of its emission limit(s) inspections, maintenance, and repair available for claims for injunctive relief. during a malfunction shall notify the (i.e., a maintenance turnaround) and (i) To establish the affirmative defense Administrator by telephone or facsimile during periods which are not in any action to enforce such a limit, the (FAX) transmission as soon as possible, shutdowns (i.e., routine maintenance). owners or operators of facilities must but no later 2 business days after the The descriptions shall be included in a timely meet the notification initial occurrence of the malfunction, if document that is maintained at the requirements of paragraph (g)(4)(ii) of it wishes to avail itself of an affirmative plant site and shall: this section, and must prove by a defense to civil penalties for that malfunction. The owner or operator * * * * * preponderance of evidence that: 55. Section 63.1257 is amended by seeking to assert an affirmative defense (A) The excess emissions were caused revising paragraph (a) introductory text shall also submit a written report to the by a sudden, short, infrequent, and and the first sentence of paragraph Administrator within 30 days of the unavoidable failure of air pollution (e)(2)(iii)(A)(6)(ii) to read as follows: control and monitoring equipment, or a initial occurrence of the exceedance of process to operate in a normal and usual the standard in this subpart to § 63.1257 Test methods and compliance manner; and could not have been demonstrate, with all necessary procedures. prevented through careful planning, supporting documentation, that it has (a) General. Except as specified in proper design, or better operation and met the requirements set forth in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, the maintenance practices; and did not stem paragraph (g)(4)(i) of this section. procedures specified in paragraphs (c), from any activity or event that could * * * * * (d), (e), and (f) of this section are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65147

required to demonstrate initial conveyed from the equalization tank 58. Section 63.1260 is amended by compliance with §§ 63.1253, 63.1254, exclusively by hard-piping to the revising paragraph (i) to read as follows: 63.1256, and 63.1252(e), respectively. biological treatment process and no The provisions in paragraphs (a)(2) treatment processes or other waste § 63.1260 Reporting requirements. through (3) apply to performance tests management units are used to store, * * * * * that are specified in paragraphs (c), (d), handle, or convey the wastewater (i) The number, duration, and a brief and (e) of this section. The provisions in between the equalization tank and the description for each type of malfunction paragraph (a)(5) of this section are used biological treatment process; and the which occurred during the reporting to demonstrate initial compliance with equalization tank is equipped with a period and which caused or may have the alternative standards specified in fixed roof and a closed-vent system that caused any applicable emission §§ 63.1253(d) and 63.1254(c). The routes emissions to a control device that limitation to be exceeded. The report provisions in paragraph (a)(6) of this meets the requirements of must also include a description of section are used to comply with the § 63.1256(b)(1)(i) through (iv) and actions taken by an owner or operator outlet concentration requirements § 63.1256(b)(2)(i). * * * during a malfunction of an affected specified in §§ 63.1253(c), * * * * * source to minimize emissions in 63.1254(a)(2)(i), and (a)(3)(ii)(B), accordance with § 63.1250(g)(3), 63.1254(b)(i), and 63.1256(h)(2). § 63.1258 [Amended] including actions taken to correct a Performance tests shall be conducted 56. Section 63.1258 is amended by malfunction. under such conditions as the removing paragraph (b)(8)(iv). * * * * * 57. Section 63.1259 is amended by Administrator specifies to the owner or 59. Table 1 to Subpart GGG is operator based on representative revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: amended by: performance of the affected source for a. Removing entry 63.6(e); the period being tested. Upon request, § 63.1259 Recordkeeping requirements. b. Adding entries 63.6(e)(1)(i), the owner or operator shall make * * * * * 63.6(e)(1)(ii), 63.6(e)(1)(iii), 63.6(e)(2), available to the Administrator such (a) * * * and 63.6(e)(3); records as may be necessary to (3) Malfunction records. Each owner c. Removing entry 63.6(f)–(g); determine the conditions of or operator of an affected source subject performance tests. d. Adding entries 63.6(f)(1), to this subpart shall maintain records of 63.6(f)(2)–(3), 63.6(g); * * * * * the occurrence and duration of each e. Removing entry 63.7(e); (e) * * * malfunction of operation (i.e., process f. Adding entries 63.7(e)(1) and (2) * * * equipment), air pollution control 63.7(e)(2)–(4); (iii) * * * equipment, or monitoring equipment. (A) * * * Each owner or operator shall maintain g. Removing entry 63.8(d); (6) *** records of actions taken during periods h. Adding entries 63.8(d)(1)–(2) and (ii) The owner or operator may of malfunction to minimize emissions in 63.8(d)(3). consider the inlet to the equalization accordance with § 63.1250(g)(3), i. Removing entry 63.10(c)–(d)(2); tank as the inlet to the biological including corrective actions to restore j. Adding entries 63.10(c)(1)–(9), treatment process if the wastewater is malfunctioning process and air 63.10(c)(10), 63.10(c)(11), 63.10(c)(12)– conveyed by hard-piping from either the pollution control and monitoring (14), 63.10(c)(15), and 63.10(d)(1)–(2); last previous treatment process or the equipment to its normal or usual k. Removing entry 63.10(d)(4–5); and point of determination to the manner of operation. l. Adding entries 63.10(d)(4) and equalization tank; and the wastewater is * * * * * 63.10(d)(5) to read as follows:

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART GGG OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART GGG

General provisions Applies to Subpart reference Summary of requirements GGG Comments

******* § 63.6(e)(1)(i) ...... Requirements during periods of startup, shut- No ...... See 63.1250(g)(3) for general duty require- down, and malfunction. ment. Any cross-reference to 63.6(e)(1)(i) in any other general provision incorporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-ref- erence to 63.1250(g)(3). § 63.6(e)(1)(ii) ...... Malfunction correction requirements ...... No. § 63.6(e)(1)(iii) ...... Enforceability of operation and maintenance Yes. requirements. § 63.6(e)(2) ...... Reserved ...... No ...... Section reserved. § 63.6(e)(3) ...... Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan re- No. quirements.

******* 63.6(f)(1) ...... Applicability of nonopacity emission standards No. 63.6(f)(2)–(3) ...... Methods of determining compliance and find- Yes. ings compliance. 63.6(g) ...... Use of an alternative nonopacity emission Yes. standard.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 65148 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART GGG OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART GGG—Continued

General provisions Applies to Subpart reference Summary of requirements GGG Comments

******* 63.7(e)(1) ...... Conduct of performance tests ...... No ...... See 63.1257(a) text. Any cross-reference to 63.7(e)(1) in any other general provision in- corporated by reference shall be treated as a cross-reference to 63.1257(a). 63.7 (e)(2)–(4) ...... Performance tests requirements ...... Yes.

******* 63.8(d)(1)–(2) ...... CMS quality control program requirements ...... Yes. 63.8(d)(3) ...... CMS quality control program recordkeeping Yes, except for last requirements. sentence.

******* 63.10(c)(1)–(9) ...... Additional recordkeeping requirements for Yes. sources with continuous monitoring systems. 63.10(c)(10) ...... Malfunction recordkeeping requirement ...... No ...... Subpart GGG specifies recordkeeping require- ments. 63.10(c)(11) ...... Malfunction corrective action recordkeeping re- No ...... Subpart GGG specifies recordkeeping require- quirement. ments. 63.10(c)(12)–(14) ...... Additional recordkeeping requirements for Yes. sources with continuous monitoring systems. 63.10(c)(15) ...... Additional SSM recordkeeping requirements ... No.

******* 63.10(d)(1)–(2) ...... General reporting requirements ...... Yes.

******* 63.10(d)(4) ...... Progress report requirements ...... Yes. 63.10(d)(5) ...... Startup, shutdown, and malfunction report re- No ...... Subpart GGG specifies reporting require- quirements. ments.

*******

60. Appendix A to part 63, Method 11.1 Procedure. The surface tension of 11.1.2.2.2 If, after cleaning and 306–B is amended by: the tank bath may be measured using a performing the procedure in Section 11.1.2.2, a. Revising paragraph 1.2; tensiometer, stalagmometer, or any other the number of drops indicated for the equivalent surface tension measuring device distilled/deionized water is not within ±1 b. Revising paragraph 6.1; for measuring surface tension in dynes per drop of the number indicated on the c. Revising paragraph 11.1; centimeter. instrument, either use the number of drops d. Adding paragraphs 11.1.1 through 11.1.1 If a tensiometer is used, the corresponding to the distilled/deionized 11.1.4.10; and procedures specified in ASTM Method D water volume as the reference number of drops, or replace the instrument. e. Revising paragraph 11.2.2 to read as 1331–89 must be followed. 11.1.2 If a stalagmometer is used, the 11.1.3 Determine the surface tension of follows: procedures specified in Sections 11.1.2.1 the tank liquid using the procedures Appendix A to Part 63—Test Methods through 11.1.2.3 must be followed. specified by the manufacturer of the 11.1.2.1 Check the stalagmometer for stalagmometer. Method 306B—Surface Tension visual signs of damage. If the stalagmometer 11.1.4 Stalagmometer cleaning Measurement for Tanks Used at Decorative appears to be chipped, cracked, or otherwise procedures. The procedures specified in Chromium Electroplating and Chromium in disrepair, the instrument shall not be used. Sections 11.1.4.1 through 11.1.4.10 shall be Anodizing Facilities 11.1.2.2 Using distilled or deionized used for cleaning a stalagmometer, as required by Section 11.1.2.2. * * * * * water and following the procedures provided 11.1.4.1 Set up the stalagmometer on its 1.2 Applicability. This method is by the manufacturer, count the number of stand in a fume hood. applicable to all chromium electroplating drops corresponding to the distilled/ and chromium anodizing operations, and 11.1.4.2 Place a clean 150 (mL) beaker deionized water liquid volume between the underneath the stalagmometer and fill the continuous chromium plating at iron and upper and lower etched marks on the steel facilities where a wetting agent is used beaker with reagent grade concentrated nitric stalagmometer. If the number of drops for the acid. in the tank as the primary mechanism for ± distilled/deionized water is not within 1 11.1.4.3 Immerse the bottom tip of the reducing emissions from the surface of the drop of the number indicated on the plating solution. stalagmometer (approximately 1 centimeter instrument, the stalagmometer must be (0.5 inches)) into the beaker. * * * * * cleaned, using the procedures specified in 11.1.4.4 Squeeze the rubber bulb and 6.1 Stalagmometer. Any commercially Sections 11.1.4.1 through 11.1.4.10 of this pinch at the arrow up (1) position to collapse. available stalagmometer or equivalent surface method, before using the instrument to 11.1.4.5 Place the bulb end securely on tension measuring device may be used to measure the surface tension of the tank top end of stalagmometer and carefully draw measure the surface tension of the plating or liquid. the nitric acid by pinching the arrow up (1) anodizing tank liquid provided the 11.1.2.2.1 If the stalagmometer must be position until the level is above the top procedures specified in Section 11.1.2 are cleaned, as indicated in Section 11.1.2.2, etched line. followed. repeat the procedure specified in Section 11.1.4.6 Allow the nitric acid to remain * * * * * 11.1.2.2 before proceeding. in stalagmometer for 5 minutes, then

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65149

carefully remove the bulb, allowing the acid 11.1.4.10 Again using the rubber bulb per tensiometer, or above an alternate surface to completely drain. the instructions in Sections 11.1.4.4 and tension limit established during the 11.1.4.7 Fill a clean 150 mL beaker with 11.1.4.5, rinse and drain stalagmometer twice performance test, the time interval shall distilled or deionized water. with isopropyl alcohol and allow the revert back to the original monitoring 11.1.4.8 Using the rubber bulb per the stalagmometer to dry completely. schedule of once every 4 hours. A subsequent instructions in Sections 11.1.4.4 and 11.1.4.5, * * * * * decrease in frequency would then be allowed rinse and drain stalagmometer with 11.2.2 If a measurement of the surface according to Section 11.2.1. tension of the solution is above the 45 dynes deionized or distilled water. per centimeter limit when measured using a * * * * * 11.1.4.9 Fill a clean 150 mL beaker with stalagmometer, above 35 dynes per [FR Doc. 2010–23839 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] isopropyl alcohol. centimeter when measured using a BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:13 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCP2.SGM 21OCP2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Thursday, October 21, 2010

Part III

Department of Homeland Security Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 154, 155, and 156 46 CFR Parts 35 and 39 Marine Vapor Control Systems; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65152 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Collection of Information Comments: I. Public Participation and Request for SECURITY If you have comments on the collection Comments of information discussed in section We encourage you to participate in Coast Guard VI.D. of this notice of proposed this rulemaking by submitting rulemaking (NPRM), you must also send comments and related materials. All 33 CFR Parts 154, 155, and 156 comments to the Office of Information comments received will be posted and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of without change to http:// 46 CFR Parts 35 and 39 Management and Budget. To ensure that www.regulations.gov and will include your comments to OIRA are received on any personal information you have [USCG–1999–5150] time, the preferred methods are by e- _ provided. RIN 1625–AB37 mail to oira [email protected] (include the docket number and A. Submitting Comments Marine Vapor Control Systems ‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for Coast If you submit a comment, please Guard, DHS’’ in the subject line of the AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. include the docket number for this e-mail) or fax at 202–395–6566. An rulemaking (USCG–1999–5150), ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. alternate, though slower, method is by indicate the specific section of this U.S. mail to the Office of Information SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to document to which each comment and Regulatory Affairs, Office of applies, and provide a reason for each increase maritime domain safety by Management and Budget, 725 17th revising existing safety regulations for suggestion or recommendation. You Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, may submit your comments and facility and vessel vapor control systems ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard. (VCSs). The proposed changes would material online or by fax, mail, or hand make VCS requirements more Viewing Incorporation by Reference delivery, but please use only one of compatible with new Federal and State Material: You may inspect the material these means. We recommend that you environmental requirements, reflect proposed for incorporation by reference include your name and a mailing industry advancements in VCS at room 1214, U.S. Coast Guard address, an e-mail address, or a phone technology, and codify the standards for Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW., number in the body of your document the design and operation of a VCS at Washington, DC 20593–0001 between so that we can contact you if we have tank barge cleaning facilities. These 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through questions regarding your submission. changes would increase the safety of Friday, except Federal holidays. The To submit your comment online, go to operations by regulating the design, telephone number is 202–372–1422. http://www.regulations.gov, click on the installation, and use of VCSs, but would Copies of the material are available as ‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will not require anyone to install or use indicated in the ‘‘Incorporation by then become highlighted in blue. In the VCSs. Reference’’ section of this preamble. ‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If DATES: Comments and related material ‘‘USCG–1999–5150’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ you have questions on this proposed must either be submitted to our online box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the rule, call or e-mail Ms. Sara Ju, Office docket via http://www.regulations.gov balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. of Operating and Environmental on or before April 21, 2011 or reach the If you submit your comments by mail or Standards, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone Docket Management Facility by that hand delivery, submit them in an 202–372–1422, e-mail date. Comments sent to the Office of unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2; by [email protected]. If you have Management and Budget (OMB) on 11 inches, suitable for copying and questions on viewing or submitting collection of information must reach electronic filing. If you submit material to the docket, call Renee V. OMB on or before April 21, 2011. comments by mail and would like to Wright, Program Manager, Docket ADDRESSES: You may submit comments know that they have reached the Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. identified by docket number USCG– Facility, please enclose a stamped, self- 1999–5150 using any one of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: addressed postcard or envelope. following methods: We will consider all comments and (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: Table of Contents for Preamble material received during the comment http://www.regulations.gov. I. Public Participation and Request for period and may change this proposed (2) Fax: 202–493–2251. Comments rule based on your comments. (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility A. Submitting Comments B. Viewing Comments and Documents (M–30), U.S. Department of B. Viewing Comments and Documents Transportation, West Building Ground C. Privacy Act To view comments, as well as Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey D. Public Meeting documents mentioned in this preamble Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– II. Abbreviations as being available in the docket, go to 0001. III. Basis and Purpose http://www.regulations.gov, click on the (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail IV. Discussion of Proposed Rule ‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then address above, between 9 a.m. and V. Incorporation by Reference become highlighted in blue. In the 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except VI. Regulatory Analyses ‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–1999– Federal holidays. The telephone number A. Regulatory Planning and Review 5150’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the is 202–366–9329. B. Small Entities ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ To avoid duplication, please use only C. Assistance for Small Entities column. If you do not have access to the D. Collection of Information one of these four methods. See the E. Federalism Internet, you may view the docket ‘‘Public Participation and Request for H. Civil Justice Reform online by visiting the Docket Comments’’ portion of the I. Protection of Children Management Facility in Room W12–140 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section J. Indian Tribal Governments on the ground floor of the Department below for instructions on submitting L. Technical Standards of Transportation West Building, 1200 comments. M. Environment New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65153

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., PPM Parts per million authorizes Federal and State regulations Monday through Friday, except Federal psi Pounds per square inch to set vapor emission standards and to holidays. We have an agreement with psia Pounds per square inch absolute require that marine terminals and tank the Department of Transportation to use psig Pounds per square inch gauge vessels be equipped with VCSs. These QDC Quick disconnect couplings systems are used to collect and process the Docket Management Facility. SIC Standard Industrial Classification vocs and other air pollutants emitted C. Privacy Act UFL Upper flammable limit USCG U.S. Coast Guard during loading and other operations of Anyone can search the electronic VCS Vapor control system marine tank vessels. form of comments received into any of VOC Volatile organic compound Two trends have emerged since we our dockets by the name of the implemented our current VCS individual submitting the comment (or III. Basis and Purpose regulations. Together, these trends make signing the comment, if submitted on This NPRM proposes amendments to it advisable for us to amend our behalf of an association, business, labor 1990 Coast Guard regulations (final rule, regulations. union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Improved design and technology: 55 FR 25396; June 21, 1990) relating to Act notice regarding our public dockets First, VCS design and technology has facility and vessel vapor control systems in the January 17, 2008 issue of the improved since 1990, and our current (VCSs), and generally appearing in 33 Federal Register (73 FR 3316). regulations do not reflect those CFR part 154, subpart E and in 46 CFR improvements. Currently, we D. Public Meeting part 39. These regulations do not require accommodate these design and We do not now plan to hold a public any facility or vessel to control vapor or technology improvements by using the meeting. But you may submit a request be equipped with a VCS, nor do they exemption and equivalency for one to the docket using one of the require a vessel to take away vapor from determination provisions of 33 CFR methods specified under ADDRESSES. In facilities. Instead, these regulations 154.108 and 46 CFR 30.15–1 to approve your request, explain why you believe a would apply to facilities and vessels individual applications by VCS owners public meeting would be beneficial. If that voluntarily engage in vapor control or designers who can show that their we determine that one would aid this activities or that do so in compliance improvements provide a level of safety rulemaking, we will hold one at a time with other regulatory requirements at least equivalent to that provided by and place announced by a later notice imposed by the Federal Government or our regulations. Reliance on individual in the Federal Register. by the States. Our regulatory authority exemptions or equivalency is delegated to the Coast Guard by the determinations involves extra risk for II. Abbreviations Secretary of Homeland Security, and VCS owners and designers, and extra derives from 42 U.S.C. 7511b(f)(2), 33 review time for the Coast Guard. We ANSI American National Standards U.S.C. 1231, and 46 U.S.C. 3703. Institute would prefer to reduce the need for API American Petroleum Institute Section 7511b(f)(2) of Title 42 U.S.C. individual exemptions and equivalency ASTM American Society for Testing and was enacted by the Clean Air Act determinations, and therefore reduce Materials Amendments of 1990 (CAA 90), and Coast Guard administrative work, by CAA 90 U.S. Clean Air Act Amendments of directs the Secretary to issue regulations updating our regulations to reflect more 1990 ensuring the safety of equipment and recent VCS design and technology. CTAC Chemical Transportation Advisory operations used to control vapor Expanded capabilities and Committee emissions. Section 1231 of Title 33 DHS Department of Homeland Security requirements: Second, VCSs may now DOT Department of Transportation U.S.C. gives the Secretary authority to control more cargoes than they could in EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issue regulations to implement port and 1990, and are subject to additional HAP Hazardous air pollutant waterways safety statutes. One of those Federal and State regulatory IEC International Electrotechnical statutes is 33 U.S.C. 1225, which requirements. In 1990, Federal and State Commission requires the Secretary to act as requirements limited VCSs to the IMO International Maritime Organization necessary to prevent damage to land and control of vapor emissions from crude ISA International Standards Association structures on or along U.S. navigable oil, gasoline blend, or benzene cargoes. ISGOTT International Safety Guide for Oil waters and to protect these navigable Tankers and Terminals The EPA and States now permit or MAWP Maximum allowable working waters and their resources. Section 3703 require the control of vapor emissions pressure of Title 46 U.S.C. requires the Secretary from many other cargoes. See current MESG Maximum experimental safe gap to regulate vessels and their liquid bulk EPA regulations in 40 CFR subpart Y, 40 MISL Marine Information for Safety and dangerous cargo operations to protect CFR 63.560–63.568. In addition, EPA Law Enforcement life, property, and the marine regulations now require marine tank MOCC Minimum oxygen concentration for environment. vessels operating at major terminals that combustion During marine tank vessel loading control VOC vapors to be vapor-tight MSC Coast Guard Marine Safety Center and other operations, the liquid loaded and equipped with vapor collection NAICS North American Industry into a cargo tank displaces vapors Classification System systems. 40 CFR 63.562. Because NEPA National Environmental Policy Act within the tank. Vapors are also current Coast Guard regulations have of 1969 generated because of vapor growth. The not been significantly amended since NFPA National Fire Protection Association emitted vapors of certain cargoes 1990, they do not reflect the expanded NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking contain volatile organic compounds range of cargoes controlled by VCSs, nor NTTAA The National Technology Transfer (VOCs) and other air pollutants. CAA 90 do they reflect EPA’s current 40 CFR and Advancement Act requires that these vapors be controlled 63.562 requirements. NVIC Navigation and Vessel Inspection in air quality non-attainment areas. Facilities and vessels that control Circular Under CAA 90, the U.S. Environmental vapors from cargoes other than crude OCIMF Oil Companies International Marine Forum Protection Agency (EPA) issues national oil, gasoline blend, or benzene, or that OMB Office of Management and Budget standards for control of VOCs and other are subject to 40 CFR 63.562, may P&IDs Piping and instrumentation diagrams air pollutants emitted during marine voluntarily comply with guidance that PIC Person-in-charge tank vessel operations. CAA 90 also we provided in a policy letter sent to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65154 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

VCS-certifying entities on May 5, 1992, • Reflect advances in VCS technology because of apparent lack of public or in Navigation and Vessel Inspection and operational practices since 1990, demand for these devices; Circular (NVIC) No. 1–96 (April 1996), particularly in vapor-balancing • Attempt to achieve greater clarity which provides safety standards for the operations, cargo line clearing through the use of tabular presentation; design and operation of marine VCSs at operations, and multi-breasted tandem • Update industry standards that are tank barge cleaning facilities. This barge-loading operations; incorporated by reference into our guidance was developed in close • Incorporate the policy guidance regulatory requirements; consultation with the Chemical (1992 policy letter and 1996 NVIC; both • Transportation Advisory Committee available in the docket) and reflect Phase in requirements for existing (CTAC), a Coast Guard advisory regulatory exemptions and equivalency VCSs in order to moderate the economic committee that operates under the determinations that we have provided impact of new requirements for those Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 or granted since 1990; VCSs; U.S.C. Appendix 2, but it is not legally • Provide new regulations for cargoes • Make conforming changes in binding on these facilities and vessels. and operations, such as tank barge regulations other than 33 CFR part 154, These guidance documents are available cleaning, that have become subject to subpart E and 46 CFR part 39; and in the public docket. We wish to update Federal or State regulatory expansion • Make nonsubstantive changes in the our VCS regulations to incorporate this since 1990; wording or style of existing regulations, • Provide for periodic operational guidance in our regulatory either to improve their clarity or to align reviews to ensure that VCSs are requirements. them with current Federal regulatory properly maintained and operated after Our proposed changes would bring style guidance. our regulations into line with the they are certified; guidance we have developed to deal • Provide an alternate test program Table 1 shows the sections affected by with post-1990 improvements in VCS for analyzers and pressure sensors, in our proposed rule and, with reference to design and technology, with the addition to existing 24-hour pre- the foregoing discussion, briefly expanded capabilities that VCSs now transfer/cleaning instrument testing indicates how and why we propose to provide, and with the expansion of the requirements, to provide greater change, add, or remove regulatory text. Federal and State regulatory regulatory flexibility; The proposed regulatory text itself is, in • environments in which VCSs function. Require certifying entities to be many places, complex and technical. The proposed changes would also adopt operated by currently licensed Therefore, we invite you to use Table 1 or modify many CTAC professional engineers, to ensure that as a guide, but we urge you to read and recommendations, all of which appear certification is conducted by properly analyze the proposed regulatory text in the docket for this rulemaking. qualified professionals, and clarify the following this preamble with care, to role of the certifying entity in VCS determine exactly how these proposed IV. Discussion of Proposed Rule design, installation, and hazard reviews; changes could affect you. We are The proposed new regulations: • Remove 33 CFR part 154, appendix providing an extended public comment • Reflect the expanded number and B, which provides specifications for period—6 months instead of the Coast scope of Federal and State regulations flame arresters, and requires flame Guard’s normal 3-month period—to for VCSs since 1990; arresters to meet third-party standards, facilitate your in-depth review.

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES IN MARINE VCS REGULATIONS

Section Proposed change and justification

33 CFR: 154.106 ...... Update or add standards that are incorporated by reference, to reflect changes proposed else- where in Part 154 and, generally, to reflect technology improvements since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.310(b) ...... Amend operations manual requirements relating to VCSs to reflect other proposed changes and to ensure the operations manual provides adequate information.

154.500 ...... Update or add industry flange and coupling standards that are incorporated by reference, and make nonsubstantive wording or style changes.

154.735 ...... Update or add incorporated-by-reference industry standards for electrical wiring, electrical equipment, and tank cleaning or gas freeing operations involving oil residue or mixtures, and make nonsubstantive wording or style changes.

154.740 ...... Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.800–154.850 (33 CFR Part 154, Sub- Remove these sections and transfer substance to new Subpart P, beginning with 33 CFR part E). 154.2000, to facilitate the substantive changes we propose while preserving related material in a sequential arrangement. Existing sections and their proposed new locations are listed here:

Existing § Proposed §

154.800 ...... 154.2000 154.802 ...... 154.2001 154.804 ...... 154.2020–154.2023 154.806 ...... 154.2010, 154.2011

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65155

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES IN MARINE VCS REGULATIONS—Continued

Section Proposed change and justification

154.808 ...... 154.2100 154.810 ...... 154.2101 154.812 ...... 154.2102 154.814 ...... 154.2103 154.820, 154.822 ...... 154.2105, 154.2106 154.824 ...... 154.2107 154.826 ...... 154.2108 154.828 ...... 154.2109 154.840 ...... 154.2030 154.850 ...... 154.2150

154.2000 (present 154.800) ...... Extend the applicability of this part to cover the range of cargoes that can be controlled by a VCS, and the range of facilities and operations using VCSs. Both have expanded since 1990. Grandfather existing facilities and provide for 3-year phase-in to moderate the economic impact of new requirements. Add language explaining the difference between regulatory measurements and parenthetical measurements that are included only for convenience, to eliminate possible confusion as to which measurement is the focus of the regulation. Clarify, without substantive change, that Coast Guard regulations do not require any vessel or facility to control vapor, but that the regulations apply to vessels or facilities that choose to or that, due to other laws, must control vapor. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2001 (present 154.802) ...... Add definitions to reflect substantive changes proposed elsewhere in the NPRM. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes.

154.2010, 154.2011 (present 154.806) ..... Reorganize provisions discussing qualifications and acceptance of certifying entities, for im- proved clarity. Codify current USCG guidance for those applying for acceptance as certifying entities, to elimi- nate possible confusion. Require certifying entities to use licensed professional engineers for VCS certification, to ensure that certification is conducted by persons with appropriate professional qualifications, as rec- ommended by CTAC. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2020–154.2023 (present 154.804) ..... Reorganize provisions discussing VCS certification and recertification for improved clarity, and add new requirements for operational reviews, to help reduce post-certification maintenance and operational problems. Clarify, without substantive change, that recertification is needed before an approved VCS can operate beyond the terms of its existing certification. Codify current USCG guidance for certifying entities conducting certification or recertification re- views, to standardize certification or recertification requirements and processes. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2030 (present 154.840) ...... Add new training requirements to reflect other proposed changes. Add new training requirements for persons overseeing VCS maintenance, to help ensure a good-quality maintenance program between recertifications. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2031 ...... Add new section to address training requirements for tank barge cleaning facility personnel, be- cause Federal and State regulations have expanded to include these facilities since 1990.

154.2100 (present 154.808) ...... Revise temperature limits to reflect additional cargoes. Modify or clarify (without substantive change) VCS piping, working pressure, remote indicator, alarm and shutdown activation, condensate control, VCS components/vapor suitability, and vapor processing unit provisions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determinations based on that guidance. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes, and update or add standards that are incor- porated by reference.

154.2101 (present 154.810) ...... Remove requirement for manual isolation valve between facility vapor connection and remotely operated cargo vapor shutoff valve to eliminate potential for overpressure if isolation valve is ac- cidentally left closed, to reflect post-1990 equipment and operational practice improvements. Modify or clarify (without substantive change) remotely operated cargo vapor shutoff valve, vapor line marking, vapor hose, and electrical insulation provisions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equiva- lency or exemption determinations based on that guidance.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65156 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES IN MARINE VCS REGULATIONS—Continued

Section Proposed change and justification

Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes, update or add standards that are incorporated by reference, and conform cross references to reflect proposed redesignations.

154.2102 (present 154.812) ...... Exclude facilities that collect vapors emitted during inerting of vessel cargo tanks because dur- ing cargo tank inerting, an inert gas instead of a liquid is added into the cargo tank and there- fore there is no liquid overfill hazard, in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determina- tions based on that guidance. Eliminate requirement for separate overfill control panels, to reflect post-1990 equipment and operational practice improvements; the change would allow the overfill control system to be in- corporated into other control panels to save cost. Clarify, without substantive change, what type of facilities need to have explosion-proof overfill receptacles. Align labeling requirements with current equipment vendor practice, which is suitable for these requirements. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2103 (present 154.814) ...... Revise to reflect additional cargoes that have been added since 1990. Require low-pressure sensors only if vapor-moving device is used to draw vapor; the change would allow cost savings because a vapor-moving device is the source of vacuum in a VCS. Require pressure sensors in facilities that collect vapors while inerting vessel cargo tanks, to prevent overpressurization hazard caused by inert gas added into the cargo tanks. Modify or clarify (without substantive change) cargo vapor shutoff valve closing, shutdown set- point, pressure sensor location, and pressure relief valve provisions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equiva- lency or exemption determinations based on that guidance. Limit requirements for flame arresters or flame screens to the flammable, combustible, or non- high flash point liquid cargoes for which flame is a serious threat. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2104 ...... Add new section to provide for cargo line clearance systems, to reflect post-1990 equipment and operational practice improvements, in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determina- tions based on that guidance.

154.2105, 154.2106 (present 154.820, Reorganize provisions for improved clarity. 154.822).

Revise to reflect additional cargoes that have been added since 1990. Limit applicability to the flammable, combustible, or non-high flash point liquid cargoes for which fire, explosion, or detonation are serious threats. Remove flame arrester provisions (and Appendix B) due to apparent lack of public demand for these devices. To maintain the equivalent level of safety, flame arresters are required to meet industry standards and the VCS is required to have additional safety monitoring instruments which will activate emergency VCS shutdown. Modify or clarify VCS controlling inerted cargo vapors, oxygen analyzer, dock detonation ar- rester location, discharge vent, and detonation arrester installation provisions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determinations based on that guidance. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2107 (present 154.824) ...... Revise to reflect additional cargoes (added since 1990) that share the flammable, combustible, or non-high flash point characteristics of cargoes covered by the existing regulation. Modify, add, or clarify (without substantive change) vapor line purging, gas injection location, analyzer controlling scheme, analyzer response time, analyzer alarm and shutdown setpoint, inert gas producing combustion device separation, and base loading method provisions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determinations based on that guidance. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2108 (present 154.826) ...... Revise to reflect additional cargoes added since 1990; limit paragraphs (b) and (e) to flam- mable, combustible, or non-high flash point cargoes that are subject to fire, detonation, or ex- plosion. Remove references to flame arresters, explosion suppressors, and other systems for which there is an apparent lack of public demand or which USCG generally has not accepted. Allow only Coast Guard-accepted detonation arresters, to improve safety.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65157

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES IN MARINE VCS REGULATIONS—Continued

Section Proposed change and justification

Modify or clarify (without substantive change) detonation arrester, alarm, and construction provi- sions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determinations based on that guidance. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2109 (present 154.828) ...... Revise to reflect additional cargoes added since 1990; limit paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) to flam- mable, combustible, or non-high flash point cargoes that are subject to fire, detonation, or ex- plosion. Remove references to flame arresters, explosion suppressors, and other systems USCG generally has not accepted. Allow only Coast Guard-accepted detonation arresters, to improve safety. Modify, add, or clarify (without substantive change) quick-closing stop valve, anti-flashback burner, liquid seal, and vapor-moving device shutdown provisions in line with current USCG guidance; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equiva- lency or exemption determinations based on that guidance. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2110 ...... Add new section to provide for facilities that control vapors to or from vessel cargo tanks through vapor balancing, to reflect post-1990 equipment and operational practice improvements. Limit the applicability of paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(4), (b), and (c) to flammable, combustible, or non-high flash point cargoes that are subject to fire, detonation, or explosion, as those para- graphs require measures that are only intended to address the risks posed by such cargoes.

154.2111 ...... Add new section to provide for connection of a marine VCS to a facility’s main VCS, to reflect technology advances since 1990.

154.2112 ...... Add new section to provide for additional cargoes that have potential to polymerize or freeze, which have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990.

154.2113 ...... Add new section to provide for additional cargoes that are alkylene oxides, which have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990.

154.2150 (present 154.850) ...... Revise to reflect substantive changes proposed elsewhere in the NPRM. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

154.2180, 154.2181 ...... Provide additional regulatory flexibility by adding new sections to provide testing program for analyzers and pressure sensors as an alternative to compliance with 154.2150 and 154.2250.

154.2200–154.2250 ...... Add new sections to provide for tank barge cleaning facilities, which have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990, in line with NVIC No. 1–96 as modified by CTAC recommendations.

154, Appendix B ...... Remove appendix dealing with tank vent flame arresters due to apparent lack of public demand for these devices; see entry above for 154.2105, 154.2106.

155.750 ...... Update cross references.

156.120 ...... Revise to reflect substantive changes proposed elsewhere in the NPRM.

156.170 ...... Update cross references. Allow alternative methods of compliance with testing and inspection requirements, in line with public comment received on periodic renewal of OMB approval for collection of information; see Docket USCG–2005–22983 in Regulations.gov.

46 CFR: 35.35–5 ...... Prohibit use of ship-to-shore bonding cables, to align with International Maritime Organization and International Safety Guide for Oil Tankers and Terminals policy, and make nonsubstantive wording or style changes.

35.35–20, 35.35–30 ...... Revise to reflect substantive changes proposed elsewhere in the NPRM.

Part 39 ...... Revise and transfer substance from existing sections to proposed new locations as listed here, to facilitate the substantive changes we propose while preserving related material in a sequen- tial arrangement.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65158 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES IN MARINE VCS REGULATIONS—Continued

Section Proposed change and justification

Existing § Proposed §

39.10–1 ...... 39.1001 39.10–3 ...... 39.1003 39.10–5 ...... 39.1005 39.10–9 ...... 39.1009 39.10–11 ...... 39.1011 39.10–13 ...... 39.1013, 39.1015 39.20–1 ...... 39.2001 39.20–3 ...... 39.2003 39.20–7 ...... 39.2007 39.20–9 ...... 39.2009 39.20–11 ...... 39.2011 39.20–13 ...... 39.2013 39.30–1 ...... 39.3001 39.40–1 ...... 39.4001 39.40–3 ...... 39.4003 39.40–5 ...... 39.4005

39.1001 (present 39.10–1) ...... Revise applicability to reflect additional cargoes and VCS operations that have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990. Grandfather existing tank barges and provide for 5-year phase-in to moderate the economic im- pact of new requirements, and codify current USCG guidance. Add language explaining the difference between regulatory measurements and parenthetical measurements that are included only for convenience, to eliminate possible confusion as to which measurement is the focus of the regulation. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.1003 (present 39.10–3) ...... Add definitions to reflect substantive changes proposed elsewhere in the NPRM. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.1005 (present 39.10–5) ...... Update, without substantive change, the general incorporation-by-reference section in line with current Office of the federal register requirements for the language of such sections. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.1009 (present 39.10–9) ...... Clarify, without substantive change, that vapor processing units can be either permanent or portable. Clarify, without substantive change, that vapor processing unit piping and components need to meet 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter F and electrical equipment need to meet 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter J. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.1011 (present 39.10–11) ...... Add new pre-cleaning procedures, which have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990, to personnel training requirements.

Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations. 39.1013, 39.1015 (present 39.10–13) ...... Clarify, without substantive change, by placing alternative for foreign-flagged vessels in a sepa- rate section (39.1015). For the regulated public’s benefit, provide additional information about the process for Marine Safety Center review and approval of proposed modification of existing USCG-approved vapor collection system. Clarify, without substantive change, that vapor processing unit is reviewed with tank vessel as a system. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.1017 ...... Add new section for tank barge multi-breasted loading, to reflect post-1990 operational practice improvements, and cargo tank gas-freeing or cleaning operations, which have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990.

39.2001 (present 39.20–1) ...... Allow flexible hoses and quick disconnect couplings, to reflect technology advances since 1990. Require overfill alarm and shutdown systems as primary overfill protection for toxic cargoes, to reflect technology advances since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes, conform cross references to reflect proposed redesignations, and update or add standards that are incorporated by reference.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65159

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES IN MARINE VCS REGULATIONS—Continued

Section Proposed change and justification

39.2003 (present 39.20–3) ...... Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.2007 (present 39.20–7) ...... Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.2009 (present 39.20–9) ...... Clarify, without substantive change, tank overfill sensor switch requirements. Add provisions for tank barges with toxic cargoes that have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes, conform cross references to reflect proposed redesignations, and update or add standards that are incorporated by reference.

39.2011 (present 39.20–11) ...... Revise cargo tank venting system capacity requirement to reflect additional cargoes that have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990, in line with current USCG guidance. Clarify, without substantive change, the range of vacuum pressure at which cargo tank venting system cannot relieve. Allow liquid-filled pressure-vacuum breakers, to reflect new technology since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.2013 (present 39.20–13) ...... Clarify, without substantive change, the location requirement for pressure sensors. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.2014 ...... Add new section for polymerizing cargoes that have become subject to Federal or State regu- latory coverage since 1990.

39.2015 ...... Add new section for tank barge pressure sensors, to improve safety and to reflect new tech- nology since 1990.

39.3001 (present 39.30–1) ...... Replace obsolete ‘‘letter of adequacy’’ requirement with certification and operations manual en- dorsement requirements. Clarify, without substantive change, the venting capacities of pressure-vacuum relief valves used in determining cargo loading rates. Clarify, without substantive change, the metallic sampling equipment bonded requirement for static accumulating cargoes. Revise oxygen concentration requirements to reflect additional cargoes that have become sub- ject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations. Update or add, generally to reflect technology advances since 1990, industry standards that are incorporated by reference.

39.4001 (present 39.40–1) ...... Revise to reflect additional operations and cargoes that have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.4003 (present 39.40–3) ...... Revise to reflect additional operations and cargoes that have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990. Clarify, without substantive change, that the detonation arrester requirement applies only to non-inerted flammable or combustible cargoes that are subject to serious flame or combustion risks. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.4005 (present 39.40–5) ...... Revise to reflect additional operations and cargoes that have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990. Make nonsubstantive wording or style changes and conform cross references to reflect pro- posed redesignations.

39.5001–39.5005 ...... Add new sections on tank barge multi-breasted loading, to reflect post-1990 operational practice improvements in line with current USCG policy; thereby eliminating the current need, explained in Part III of this preamble, for equivalency or exemption determinations based on design infor- mation and calculations.

39.6001–39.6009 ...... Add new sections on tank barge cleaning operations, which have become subject to Federal or State regulatory coverage since 1990, in line with existing USCG guidance provided by NVIC No. 1–96, as modified by CTAC recommendations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65160 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

V. Incorporation by Reference • Require new training or amend some provisions which would offer Material proposed for incorporation training requirements to improve safety. facilities the opportunity to reduce by reference appears in 33 CFR 154.106 These proposed training requirements maintenance costs. See the preliminary Regulatory and 46 CFR 39.1005. You may inspect affect facilities with VCSs (including Analysis available in the docket for a this material at U.S. Coast Guard tank barge cleaning facilities) and tank detailed analysis of the costs and Headquarters where indicated under barge owners and operators. • Permit cargo line clearing; however, benefits of this rulemaking. ADDRESSES. Copies of the material are there would be some requirements to available from the sources listed in 33 B. Small Entities receive Coast Guard permission to do CFR 154.106 and 46 CFR 39.1005. so. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Before publishing a binding rule, we • Provide foreign-flagged tank barges (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered will submit this material to the Director some flexibility for certification the impact of this rule on small entities. of the Federal Register for approval of procedures. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises the incorporation by reference. • Add new requirements for certain small businesses, not-for-profit VI. Regulatory Analyses equipment on U.S.-flagged tank barges organizations that are independently and at tank barge cleaning facilities and owned and operated and are not We developed this proposed rule after other facilities with VCSs to improve dominant in their fields, and considering numerous statutes and safety and environmental protection. governmental jurisdictions with executive orders related to rulemaking. • Removes certain requirements in populations of fewer than 50,000. Below we summarize our analyses order to offer cost savings. This change A combined preliminary Regulatory based on 13 of these statutes or mainly impacts facilities with VCSs. Analysis and Initial Regulatory executive orders. The proposed rule is necessary to Flexibility Analysis discussing the A. Regulatory Planning and Review reflect the expansion of Federal and impact of this proposed rule on small State regulations for VCSs since the entities is available in the docket where This proposed rule is not a significant current regulations were adopted in indicated under the ‘‘Public regulatory action under section 3(f) of 1990, and to reflect technological Participation and Request for Executive Order 12866, Regulatory advances over that period. Without Comments’’ section of this preamble. Planning and Review, and does not revisions to the regulation by the Coast Based on our analysis, we estimate require an assessment of potential costs Guard, market failures would persist in that small entities affected by this and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that creating situations of uncompensated rulemaking are primarily small Order. OMB has not reviewed it under risk. In the case of this proposed rule, businesses consisting of certifying that Order. the uncompensated risks accrue to the entities, owners and operators of tank A combined preliminary Regulatory public, maritime commerce, and barge cleaning facilities, tank barges, Analysis and an Initial Regulatory mariners in the form of safety hazards. and facilities with VCSs. We did not Flexibility Analysis is available in the find data to suggest small not-for-profit docket where indicated under the Affected Population organizations or small government ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Based on Coast Guard data, we entities would be directly affected by Comments’’ section of this preamble. A estimate this proposed rule would affect this rulemaking. In addition, certifying summary of the analysis follows: 234 facilities with VCSs, 25 certifying entities would incur no additional costs The proposed rule would revise the entities, 15 tank barge cleaning due to the proposed rule and are not existing regulations (33 CFR Parts 154 facilities, 216 U.S.-flagged tank barge analyzed further. We evaluated the and 156, 46 CFR Parts 35 and 39) owners, and owners of 338 foreign- impact on small entities for each regarding the safety of facility and flagged tank barges. segment of industry that incur vessel VCSs. This rulemaking would additional costs, since this rulemaking amend the regulations to make VCS Costs would require different provisions for requirements more compatible with Over a 10-year period of analysis, we owners and operators of tank barge other Federal and State environmental estimate the total present value cost of cleaning facilities, tank barges, and requirements, regulate industry the rulemaking to be approximately $8.8 facilities with VCSs. advancements in VCS technology, and million at a 7 percent discount rate and Based on our assessment, 54 percent codify the standards for VCSs at tank approximately $10.3 million at a of tank barge owners affected by this barge cleaning facilities. The proposed 3 percent discount rate. Over the same rulemaking would be considered small rule would increase the safety of 10-year period of analysis, we estimate by Small Business Administration operations by regulating the design, the annualized cost of this proposed (SBA) size standards. We estimate 97 installation, and use of VCSs, but would rule to be $1.3 million at 7 percent and percent of these small entities would not require anyone to install or use $1.2 million at 3 percent. incur cost impacts that are VCSs. 1 percent or less than their annual The proposed rule would provide Benefits revenues during the highest cost year additional requirements for VCS The proposed rule would amend (implementation year). The remainder equipment, compliance documentation, existing regulations regarding VCSs in would incur annual cost impacts training, and operations. In general, this marine activities. The Coast Guard is between 1 and 3 percent of their annual rulemaking would: pursuing this amendment to existing revenues. • Add new requirements for standards to reflect technological We estimate 8 percent of facilities certifications, recertifications, periodic improvements and to expand with VCSs would be small by SBA size operational reviews, and approval environmental protection. The proposed standards. We estimate that almost 93 processes for certain operations rule would promote maritime safety and percent of these small entities would concerning VCSs to improve safety. environmental stewardship. It offers incur annual cost impacts that are 1 These various requirements mainly provisions for more practicable and percent or less than their annual affect facilities with VCSs, including efficient management of hazardous revenues during the highest cost year tank barge cleaning facilities. materials. The proposed rule contains (implementation year) as well as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65161

annually. Another 7 percent would have the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 certifying entities. We estimate the total cost impacts between 1 to 3 percent of (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). As defined in number of respondents is 490. their revenue. 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ‘‘collection of Frequency of Responses: This We estimate all of the tank barge information’’ comprises reporting, proposed rule will vary the number of cleaning facilities are considered small recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, responses each year by requirement. by SBA size standards. We estimate 64 labeling, and other similar actions. The Some actions are one time only and percent of these tank barge cleaning title and description of the information others are required more frequently. facilities would incur cost impacts that collections, a description of those who Burden of Response: This collection are potentially greater than 3 percent of must collect the information, and an of information applies to certifying their annual revenues during the highest estimate of the total annual burden entities, tank barge owners/operators cost year (implementation year). follow. The estimate covers the time for and owners/operators of facilities with However, the proposed rule would reviewing instructions, searching VCS. The Coast Guard estimates the codify existing voluntary standards for existing sources of data, gathering and total number of respondents is 490. The tank barge cleaning facilities. We maintaining the data needed, and burden of response varies by collection anticipate the cost impacts to tank barge completing and reviewing the of information requirement. cleaning facilities may be overestimates. collection. Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The We are interested in the potential Title: Vapor Control Systems for total annual burden is estimated to impacts from this proposed rule on Facilities and Tank Vessels. increase by 7,197 hours (as a result of small businesses and we request public OMB Control Number: 1625–0060. the proposed rule. comment on these potential impacts. If Summary of the Collection of As required by the Paperwork you think that your business, Information: This collection of Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. organization, or governmental information ensures industry 3507(d)), we will submit a copy of this jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity compliance with safety standards for proposed rule to OMB for its review of and that this rulemaking would have a VCSs. The proposed rule would require the collection of information. significant economic impact on it, recordkeeping and reporting on the We ask for public comment on the please submit a comment to the Docket design and use of VCSs. The proposed proposed collection of information to Management Facility at the address rule contains collection of information help us determine how useful the under ADDRESSES. In your comment, requirements which include: information is; whether it can help us explain why, how, and to what degree Certifications, recertifications, approval perform our functions better; whether it you think this rule would have an requests, review of operating manuals, is readily available elsewhere; how economic impact on you. failure analyses, operational review accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is; how valid our methods for C. Assistance for Small Entities letters, and relabeling. The collection of information would aid the Coast Guard determining burden are; how we can Under section 213(a) of the Small improve the quality, usefulness, and Business Regulatory Enforcement and industry in assuring safe practices associated with VCSs. clarity of the information; and, how we Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), can minimize the burden of collection. Need for Information: The Coast we want to assist small entities in If you submit comments on the Guard needs this information to ensure understanding this proposed rule so that collection of information, submit them industry use of VCS requirements are they can better evaluate its effects on both to OMB and to the Docket compatible with new Federal and State them and participate in the rulemaking. Management Facility where indicated environmental requirements, to regulate If the proposed rule would affect your under ADDRESSES, by the date under industry advancements in VCS small business, organization, or DATES. governmental jurisdiction and you have technology, and to ensure the safe You need not respond to a collection questions concerning its provisions or design and operation of a VCS at a tank of information unless it displays a options for compliance, please consult barge cleaning facility. currently valid control number from Ms. Sara Ju at the address listed under Proposed Use of Information: The OMB. Before the Coast Guard could ADDRESSES. The Coast Guard will not Coast Guard would use this information enforce the collection of information retaliate against small entities that to determine whether an entity meets requirements in this proposed rule, question or complain about this rule or the statutory requirements. OMB would need to approve the any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Description of the Respondents: The Small businesses may send comments respondents are owners/operators of E. Federalism on the actions of Federal employees tank barge cleaning facilities, facilities A rule has implications for federalism who enforce, or otherwise determine and tank vessels. Reporting and under Executive Order 13132, compliance with, Federal regulations to recordkeeping requirements will be Federalism, if it has a substantial direct the Small Business and Agriculture completed by facility and vessel effect on State or local governments and Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman owners/operators, persons in charge, would either preempt State law or and the Regional Small Business engineers, maintenance workers, and impose a substantial direct cost of Regulatory Fairness Boards. The operations managers of affected tank compliance on them. We have analyzed Ombudsman evaluates these actions barges, tank barge cleaning facilities, this proposed rule under that Order and annually and rates each agency’s facilities, and certifying entities. have determined that it does not have responsiveness to small business. If you Number of Respondents: The burden implications for federalism. wish to comment on actions by change of this collection of information F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act employees of the Coast Guard, call includes certifications, re-certifications, 1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). approval requests, reviewing operating The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act manuals, preparing operational review of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires D. Collection of Information letters, and relabeling. This collection of Federal agencies to assess the effects of This proposed rule would require an information applies to various owners their discretionary regulatory actions. In amendment to an existing collection of and operators of tank barges, facilities, particular, the Act addresses actions information (1625–0060) as defined by tank barge cleaning facilities, and that may result in the expenditure by a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65162 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

State, local, or Tribal government, in the L. Technical Standards preamble. This rule involves regulations aggregate, or by the private sector of The National Technology Transfer concerning vessel operation safety $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 standards and regulations concerning more in any one year. Though this U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use manning, documentation, proposed rule would not result in such voluntary consensus standards in their admeasurement, inspection, and an expenditure, we do discuss the regulatory activities unless the agency equipping of vessels. We seek any effects of this rule elsewhere in this provides Congress, through the Office of comments or information that may lead preamble. Management and Budget, with an to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this G. Taking of Private Property explanation why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable proposed rule. This proposed rule would not cause a law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary List of Subjects taking of private property or otherwise consensus standards are technical have taking implications under standards (e.g., specifications of 33 CFR Part 154 Executive Order 12630, Governmental materials, performance, design, or Alaska, Fire prevention, Hazardous Actions and Interference with operation; test methods; sampling substances, Incorporation by reference, Constitutionally Protected Property procedures; and related management Oil pollution, Reporting and Rights. systems practices) that are developed or recordkeeping requirements. adopted by voluntary consensus H. Civil Justice Reform 33 CFR Part 155 standards bodies. This proposed rule meets applicable This proposed rule uses voluntary Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of consensus standards from the following pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice organizations: American Petroleum requirements. Reform, to minimize litigation, Institute (API), American National 33 CFR Part 156 eliminate ambiguity, and reduce Standards Institute (ANSI), American burden. Society for Testing and Materials Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping I. Protection of Children (ASTM), International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), International requirements, Water pollution control. We have analyzed this proposed rule Maritime Organization (IMO), National 46 CFR Part 35 under Executive Order 13045, Electrical Manufacturers Association Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Protection of Children from (NEMA), National Fire Protection Navigation (water), Occupational safety Environmental Health Risks and Safety Association (NFPA), Oil Companies and health, Reporting and Risks. This rule is not an economically International Marine Forum (OCIMF), recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. significant rule and would not create an and Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. environmental risk to health or risk to (UL). The proposed sections that 46 CFR Part 39 safety that might disproportionately reference these standards and the affect children. Cargo vessels, Fire prevention, locations of these standards are listed in Hazardous materials transportation, J. Indian Tribal Governments 33 CFR 154.106 and 46 CFR 39.1005. Incorporation by reference, Marine If you disagree with our analysis of safety, Occupational safety and health, This proposed rule does not have the voluntary consensus standards Reporting and recordkeeping Tribal implications under Executive listed above or are aware of voluntary requirements. Order 13175, Consultation and consensus standards that might apply For the reasons discussed in the Coordination with Indian Tribal but are not listed, please send a preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to Governments, because it would not have comment to the docket using one of the amend 33 CFR chapter I, and 46 CFR a substantial direct effect on one or methods under ADDRESSES. In your chapter I as follows: more Indian Tribes, on the relationship comment, please explain why you between the Federal Government and disagree with our analysis and/or 33 CFR—Navigation and Navigable Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of identify voluntary consensus standards Waters power and responsibilities between the we have not listed that might apply. Federal Government and Indian Tribes. PART 154—FACILITIES M. Environment TRANSFERRING OIL OR HAZARDOUS K. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule MATERIAL IN BULK We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 1. The authority citation for part 154 under Executive Order 13211, Actions Security Management Directive 023–01 is revised to read as follows: Concerning Regulations That and Commandant Instruction Significantly Affect Energy Supply, M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231, Distribution, or Use. We have Guard in complying with the National 1321(j)(1)(C), (j)(5), (j)(6), and (m)(2); sec. 2, determined that it is not a ‘‘significant Environmental Policy Act of 1969 E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757; Department of ’’ Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. energy action under that order because (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and Subpart F is also issued under 33 U.S.C. it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ have made a preliminary determination 2735. Vapor control recovery provisions of under Executive Order 12866 and is not that this action is one of a category of Subpart P are also issued under 42 U.S.C. likely to have a significant adverse effect actions which do not individually or 7511b(f)(2). on the supply, distribution, or use of cumulatively have a significant effect on 2. Revise § 154.106 to read as follows: energy. The Administrator of the Office the human environment. A preliminary of Information and Regulatory Affairs environmental analysis checklist § 154.106 Incorporation by reference. has not designated it as a significant supporting this determination is (a) Certain material is incorporated by energy action. Therefore, it does not available in the docket where indicated reference into this part with the require a Statement of Energy Effects under the ‘‘Public Participation and approval of the Director of the Federal under Executive Order 13211. Request for Comments’’ section of this Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65163

CFR part 51. To enforce any edition (2) ASTM F 715–95, Standard Test (i) Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. other than that specified in this section, Methods for Coated Fabrics Used for Oil (UL), 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, the Coast Guard must publish a notice Spill Control and Storage (‘‘ASTM F IL 60062. of change in the Federal Register and 715’’), IBR approved for 33 CFR part (1) UL 525 Standard for Flame the material must be available to the 154, Appendix C. Arresters, 8th Edition, May 9, 2008, IBR public. All approved material is (3) ASTM F 722–82 (1993), Standard approved for 33 CFR 154.2001. available for inspection at the National Specification for Welded Joints for (2) [Reserved] Archives and Records Administration Shipboard Piping Systems (‘‘ASTM F 3. In § 154.310, revise paragraph (b) to (NARA). For information on the 722’’), IBR approved for 33 CFR part read as follows: availability of this material at NARA, 154, Appendix A. § 154.310 Operations manual: Contents. call 202–741–6030 or go to http:// (4) ASTM F 1122–87 (1992), Standard www.archives.gov/federal_register/ Specification for Quick Disconnect * * * * * code_of_federal_regulations/ Couplings (‘‘ASTM F 1122’’), IBR (b)(1) The operations manual must ibr_locations.html. Also, it is available approved for 33 CFR 154.500. contain a description of the facility’s for inspection at the Coast Guard, Office (5) ASTM F 1155–98, Standard vapor control system (VCS), if the of Operating and Environmental Practice for Selection and Application facility— Standards (CG–522), 2100 2nd Street, of Piping System Materials (‘‘ASTM F (i) Collects vapor emitted from vessel SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC 20593– 1155’’), IBR approved for 33 CFR part cargo tanks for recovery, destruction, or 7126, and is available from the sources 154, Appendix A. dispersion; or indicated in this section. (6) ASTM F 1273–91 (Reapproved (ii) Balances vapor to or from vessel (b) American Petroleum Institute 1996) Standard Specification for Tank cargo tanks. (API), 1220 L Street, NW., Washington, Vent Flame Arresters (‘‘ASTM F 1273’’), (2) The VCS description required by DC 20005. IBR approved for 33 CFR 154.2001. paragraph (b)(1) of this section must (1) API Standard 2000, Venting (e) International Electrotechnical include a line diagram or simplified Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Storage Commission (IEC), Bureau Central de la piping and instrumentation diagram Tanks (Non-refrigerated and Commission Electrotechnique (P&ID) of the facility’s VCS piping, Refrigerated), Third Edition, January Internationale, 3, rue de Varembe´, P.O. including the location of each valve, 1982 (reaffirmed December 1987) (‘‘API Box 131, CH—1211 Geneva 20, control device, pressure-vacuum relief 2000’’), incorporation by reference (IBR) Switzerland. valve, pressure indicator, flame arrester, approved for 33 CFR 154.2103 and (1) IEC 60309–1 Plugs, Socket-Outlets and detonation arrester; (3) The VCS description required by 154.2203. and Couplers for Industrial Purposes— paragraph (b)(1) of this section must (2) API Recommended Practice 550, Part 1: General Requirements, Edition describe the design and operation of Manual on Installation of Refinery 4.1 2005–12, IBR approved for 33 CFR its— Instruments and Control Systems, Part 154.2102. (i) Vapor line connection; II—Process Stream Analyzers, Section (2) IEC 60309–2 Plugs, Socket-Outlets and Couplers for Industrial Purposes— (ii) Startup and shutdown procedures; 1—Oxygen Analyzers, Fourth Edition, (iii) Steady-state operating ‘‘ ’’ Part 2: Dimensional Interchangeability February 1985 ( API 550 ), IBR procedures; approved for 33 CFR 154.2107. Requirements for Pin and Contact-tube Accessories, Edition 4.1 2005–12, IBR (iv) Provisions for dealing with (c) American National Standards pyrophoric sulfide (for facilities which Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street, approved for 33 CFR 154.2102. (f) National Electrical Manufacturers handle inerted vapors of cargoes 4th floor, New York, NY 10036. Association (NEMA), 1300 North 17th containing sulfur); (1) ANSI B16.5, Steel Pipe Flanges Street, Suite 1752, Rosslyn, VA 22209. (v) Alarms and shutdown devices; and Flanged Fittings, 1988, IBR (1) ANSI NEMA WD–6—Wiring and approved for 33 CFR 154.500, 154.2100, Devices, Dimensional Requirements, (vi) Pre-transfer equipment inspection 154.2101, 154.2202, and 33 CFR part 1988 (‘‘NEMA WD–6’’), IBR approved for requirements. 154, Appendix A. 33 CFR 154.2102. (4) The VCS description required by (2) ANSI B16.24, Bronze Pipe Flanges (2) [Reserved] paragraph (b)(1) of this section must and Flange Fittings Class 150 and 300, (g) National Fire Protection include all test procedures and a 1979, IBR approved for 33 CFR 154.500 Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch checklist for use during the testing of and 154.2100. Park, Quincy, MA 02169–7471. the VCS required by 33 CFR 156.170(g). (3) ANSI B16.34, Valves—Flanged, (1) NFPA 51B, Standard for Fire The test procedures must specify— Threaded, and Welding End, 2004, IBR Prevention in Use of Cutting and (i) All tests required for initial approved for 33 CFR 154.2100. Welding Processes, 1994, IBR approved certification under 33 CFR 154.2022(d); (4) ANSI B31.3, Chemical Plant and for 33 CFR 154.735. (ii) All components that are to be Petroleum Refinery Piping, 1987 (2) NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, tested; and (including B31.3a–1988, B31.3b–1988, 1987, IBR approved for 33 CFR 154.735. (iii) Procedures for testing each and B31.3c–1989 addenda), IBR (3) NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, component. approved for 33 CFR 154.510 and 2002, IBR approved for 33 CFR 154.2100 (5) The VCS description required by 154.2100. and 154.2102. paragraph (b)(1) of this section must (d) American Society for Testing and (h) Oil Companies International include— Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Marine Forum (OCIMF), 29 Queen (i) A list of all cargoes the VCS is Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428– Anne’s Gate, London, SW1H 9BU, approved to control; and 2959. England. (ii) Copies of any Coast Guard letters (1) ASTM F 631–93, Standard Guide (1) International Safety Guide for Oil exempting the VCS from regulatory for Collecting Skimmer Performance Tankers and Terminals, Fifth Ed., 2006 requirements. Data in Controlled Environments (‘‘ISGOTT’’), IBR approved for 33 CFR (6) The VCS description required by (‘‘ASTM F 631’’), IBR approved for 33 154.735, 154.2101, and 154.2203. paragraph (b)(1) of this section must CFR part 154, Appendix C. (2) [Reserved] include detailed operating instructions

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65164 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

for a cargo line clearance system as vessel’s transfer procedure documents b. In paragraph (i), remove the described in 33 CFR 154.2104, if such which identifies the products that may reference ‘‘§ 154.804 of this part’’ and a system is used by a facility; be transferred through a hose bearing add, in their place, the reference ‘‘33 (7) The VCS description required by that symbol. CFR 154.2023’’. paragraph (b)(1) of this section must (f) Each hose also must be marked 7. Remove subpart E (consisting of include the following for a tank barge with the following, except that the §§ 154.800 through 154.850) in its cleaning facility: information required by paragraphs entirety. (i) A physical description of the (f)(2) and (3) of this section need not be 8. Reserve subparts J through O. facility and facility plan showing marked on the hose if it is recorded in 9. Add new subpart P to read as mooring areas, locations where cleaning the hose records of the vessel or facility, follows: operations are conducted, control and the hose is marked to identify it Subpart P—Marine Vapor Control Systems stations, and locations of safety with that information: equipment; (1) Maximum allowable working General (ii) The sizes, types, and number of pressure; Sec. tank barges from which the facility can (2) Date of manufacture; and 154.2000 Applicability. conduct cleaning operations (3) Date of the latest test required by 154.2001 Definitions. simultaneously; and 33 CFR 156.170. Certifying Entities (iii) The minimum number of persons (g) The hose burst pressure and the 154.2010 Qualifications for acceptance as a required to be on duty during cleaning pressure used for the test required by 33 certifying entity. operations and the duties of each. CFR 156.170 must not be marked on the 154.2011 Application for acceptance as a * * * * * hose and must be recorded elsewhere at certifying entity. 4. Revise § 154.500 to read as follows: the facility as described in paragraph (f) of this section. Certification, Recertification, and § 154.500 Hose assemblies. (h) Each hose used to transfer fuel to Operational Review Each hose assembly used for a vessel that has a fill pipe for which 154.2020 Certification and recertification— transferring oil or hazardous material containment cannot practically be Owner/operator responsibilities. must meet the following requirements: provided must be equipped with an 154.2021 Operational review—Owner/ (a) The minimum design burst operator responsibilities. automatic back pressure shutoff nozzle. 154.2022 Certification, recertification, or pressure for each hose assembly must be 5. In § 154.735— operational review—Certifying entity at least four times the sum of the a. In paragraph (q), remove the term responsibilities, generally. pressure of the relief valve setting (or ‘‘NFPA 70’’ and add, in its place, the 154.2023 Certification, recertification, or four times the maximum pump pressure words ‘‘NFPA 70 (incorporated by operational review—Certifying entity when no relief valve is installed) plus reference, see 33 CFR 154.106)’’; and documentation. the static head pressure of the transfer b. Revise paragraph (s) to read as Personnel system, at the point where the hose is follows: installed. 154.2030 Transfer facilities. 154.2031 Tank barge cleaning facilities. (b) The maximum allowable working § 154.735 Safety requirements. pressure (MAWP) for each hose * * * * * Transfer Facilities—VCS Design and assembly must be more than the sum of (s) Tank-cleaning or gas-freeing Installation the pressure of the relief valve setting operations conducted by the facility on 154.2100 Vapor control system, general. (or the maximum pump pressure when vessels carrying oil residues or mixtures 154.2101 Requirements for facility vapor no relief valve is installed) plus the must be conducted in accordance with connections. static head pressure of the transfer sections 11.3 and 11.4 of OCIMF 154.2102 Facility requirements for vessel system, at the point where the hose is ISGOTT (incorporated by reference, see liquid overfill protection. 33 CFR 154.106), except that— 154.2103 Facility requirements for vessel installed. vapor overpressure and vacuum (c) Each nonmetallic hose must be (1) Prohibitions in ISGOTT against the use of recirculated wash water do not protection. usable for oil or hazardous material 154.2104 Cargo line clearance system. service. apply if the wash water is first 154.2105 Fire, explosion, and detonation (d) Each hose assembly must either processed to remove product residues; protection. have— (2) The provisions in ISGOTT section 154.2106 Detonation arresters installation. (1) Full threaded connections; 11.3.6.10 that removal of sludge, scale, 154.2107 Inerting, enriching, and diluting (2) Flanges that meet ANSI B16.5 or and sediment do not apply if personnel systems. ANSI B.16.24 (both incorporated by use breathing apparatuses which protect 154.2108 Vapor-moving devices. reference, see 33 CFR 154.106); or them from the tank atmosphere; and 154.2109 Vapor recovery and vapor (3) Quick-disconnect couplings that (3) Upon the request of the facility destruction units. meet ASTM F 1122 (incorporated by owner or operator in accordance with 33 154.2110 Vapor balancing requirements. 154.2111 Vapor control system connected reference, see 33 CFR 154.106). CFR 154.107, the COTP may approve to a facility’s main vapor control system. (e) Each hose must be marked with the use of alternate standards to ISGOTT 154.2112 Vapors with potential to one of the following: if the COTP determines that the polymerize or freeze—Special (1) The name of each product for alternative standards provide an equal requirements. which the hose may be used; or level of protection to the ISGOTT 154.2113 Alkylene oxides—Special (2) For oil products, the words ‘‘OIL standards. requirements. SERVICE’’; or * * * * * Transfer Facilities—Operations (3) For hazardous materials, the words ‘‘HAZMAT SERVICE—SEE LIST’’ § 154.740 [Amended] 154.2150 General requirements. followed immediately by a letter, 6. In § 154.740— Alternative Analyzer and Pressure Sensor number or other symbol that a. In paragraph (g), remove the Reliability Testing corresponds to a list or chart contained reference ‘‘subpart E’’ and add, in their 154.2180 Alternative testing program— in the facility’s operations manual or the place, the reference ‘‘subpart P’’; and Generally.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65165

154.2181 Alternative testing program—Test which is not offloading cargo must have calculations for vapor control system requirements. approval from the Commandant. designs and to conduct inspections and Tank Barge Cleaning Facilities—VCS Design (f) A tank vessel that has a permanent witness tests of vapor control system and Installation or portable vapor processing unit installations. 154.2200 Applicable transfer facility design located onboard must meet the Cleaning operation means any and installation requirements. requirements of this subpart to the stripping, gas-freeing, or tank-washing 154.2201 Vapor control system—General satisfaction of the Commandant, in operation of a barge’s cargo tanks requirements. addition to complying with the conducted at a cleaning facility. 154.2202 Vapor line connections. requirements of 46 CFR part 39. Combustible liquid means any liquid 154.2203 Facility requirements for barge (g) This subpart does not apply to the that has a flashpoint above 80 °F (as vapor overpressure and vacuum collection of vapors of liquefied determined from an open-cup tester, as protection. flammable gases as defined in 46 CFR used to test burning oils) and includes 154.2204 Fire, explosion, and detonation 30.10–39. Grade D and Grade E combustible protection. (h) This subpart does not require a liquids defined in 46 CFR 30.10–15. Tank Barge Cleaning Facilities—Operations facility or a vessel to control vapor, or Commandant means Commandant 154.2250 General requirements. a vessel to take away vapor from (CG–522), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 2nd facilities; however, if a facility operates St., SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC General a VCS to control vapor to or from 20593–7126. vessels, the facility must comply with Detonation arrester means a device § 154.2000 Applicability. the requirements of this subpart. that is acceptable to the Commandant (a) Except as specified by paragraphs (i) In this subpart, regulatory and includes a detonation arrester that (b) through (g) of this section, this measurements, whether in the metric or is designed, built, and tested in subpart applies to— English system, are sometimes followed accordance with Appendix A of this (1) Each facility that controls vapors by approximate equivalent part or by another method acceptable to emitted to or from vessel cargo tanks; measurements in parentheses, which are the Commandant for arresting flames (2) A vessel, other than a tank vessel, given solely for the reader’s and detonations. that has a vapor processing unit located convenience. Regulatory compliance Diluting means introducing a non- onboard for recovery, destruction, or with the regulatory measurement is flammable and non-combustible gas dispersion of vapors from a tank vessel’s required. with the objective of reducing the cargo tanks; hydrocarbon content of a vapor mixture § 154.2001 Definitions. (3) Certifying entities that review, to below the lower flammable limit so inspect, test, and certificate facility As used in this subpart only: that it will not burn. Ambient temperature means the vapor control systems (VCSs); or Drip leg means a section of piping that temperature of the environment in (4) A facility VCS that receives cargo extends below piping grade to collect which an experiment is conducted or in vapor from a vessel when the VCS is liquid passing through the vapor line which any physical or chemical event connected to a facility’s main VCS that and that has a diameter no more than occurs. the diameter of the pipe in which it is serves plant processing areas, such as Barge cargo connection means the tank storage areas or tank truck or installed. point in a barge’s cargo system where it Elevated temperature means the railcar loading areas, unrelated to tank connects with the hose assembly or temperature that exceeds 70 percent of vessel operations. The requirements of loading arm used for cargo transfer. the auto-ignition temperature, in this subpart apply between the vessel Barge vapor connection means the degrees Celsius, of the vapors being vapor connection and the point where point in a barge’s piping system where collected. the VCS connects to the facility’s main it connects to a vapor collection hose or Enriching means introducing a VCS. arm. This may be the same as the barge’s flammable gas with the objective of (b) Each facility that has an existing cargo connection as it controls vapors raising the hydrocarbon content of a certified VCS that meets the during barge cargo tank-cleaning vapor mixture above the upper requirements of this subpart and that operations. flammable limit so that it will not burn. has been operating since July 23, 1990, Base loading means a method of Existing vapor control system means a must comply with this amended subpart inerting, enriching, or diluting such that vapor control system that satisfies the by [DATE THREE YEARS AFTER sufficient inerting, enriching, or diluting requirements of this subpart as certified EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]. gas, for the worst concentration of vapor by a certifying entity prior to (c) A facility with a Coast Guard- coming from the vessel, is injected into [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]. approved VCS operating prior to July the vapor line during the entire loading Facility main vapor control system 23, 1990, must comply with 33 CFR operation so that the vapor mixture is means a vapor control system that 154.2150 but otherwise need not inerted, enriched, or diluted at the primarily serves plant processing areas comply with this subpart so long as it maximum loading rate. For inerting and unrelated to tank vessel operations, does not have any design or enriching systems, ‘‘worst such as the refinery process, tank configuration alterations after its concentration’’ means the vapor stream storage areas, or tank truck or railcar approval and receives cargo vapor only contains no cargo vapor. For a diluting loading areas. from the specific vessels for which it system, ‘‘worst concentration’’ means the Facility operations manual means the was originally approved. vapor stream is saturated with cargo manual required by 33 CFR 154.300, the (d) A facility that uses a vapor vapor. contents of which are described in 33 balancing system to transfer vapor from Captain of the Port (COTP) means the CFR 154.310. a railcar or a tank truck to a vessel cargo cognizant Coast Guard Captain of the Facility vapor connection means the tank while offloading the vessel must Port as defined in 33 CFR 154.105. point in a facility’s vapor collection have approval from the Commandant. Certifying entity means an individual system where it connects to a vapor (e) A facility that transfers vapor from or organization accepted by the collection hose or the base of a vapor a facility tank to a cargo tank of a vessel Commandant to review plans, data, and collection arm and is located at the dock

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65166 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

as close as possible to the tank vessel to Inerting or padding or purging means system after cargo transfer or during minimize the length of the flexible introducing an inert gas to lower the cleaning operations. vapor collection hose, thus reducing the oxygen content of a vapor mixture. Tank barge cleaning facility or TBCF hazards associated with the hose. Line clearing or pigging means the means a facility used or capable of being Fail-safe means a piece of equipment transfer of residual cargo from a cargo used to conduct cleaning operations on or instrument that is designed such that loading line by using compressed gas to a tank barge. if any element should fail, it would go propel a ‘‘pig’’ through the line toward Transfer facility means a facility as to a safe condition. a cargo tank. defined in 33 CFR 154.105, excluding Fixed stripping line means a pipe Liquid knockout vessel means a tank barge cleaning or stripping extending to the low point of each cargo device, other than a drip leg, used to facilities. tank, welded through the deck and separate liquid from vapor. Vacuum displacement system means terminating above the deck with a valve Maximum allowable gas-freeing rate a system that removes vapors from a plugged at the open end. means the maximum volumetric rate at barge’s cargo tanks during gas freeing by Flammable liquid means any liquid which a barge may be gas-freed during sweeping air through the cargo tank that gives off flammable vapors (as cleaning operations. hatch openings. determined by flashpoint from an open- Maximum allowable stripping rate Vapor balancing means the transfer of cup tester, as used to test burning oils) means the maximum volumetric rate at vapor displaced by incoming cargo from at or below a temperature of 80 °F, and which a barge may be stripped during the tank of a vessel or facility receiving includes Grades A, B, and C flammable cleaning operations prior to the opening cargo into a tank of the vessel or facility liquids defined in 46 CFR 30.10–22. of any hatch and/or fitting in the cargo delivering cargo via facility vapor Flame arrester means a device that is tank being stripped. collection system. designed, built, and tested in Maximum allowable transfer rate Vapor collection system means an accordance with ASTM F 1273 or UL means the maximum volumetric rate at arrangement of piping and hoses used to 525 (both incorporated by reference, see which a vessel may receive cargo or collect vapor emitted to or from a 33 CFR 154.106) for use in end-of-line ballast. vessel’s cargo tanks and to transport the applications for arresting flames. Minimum oxygen concentration for vapor to a vapor processing unit or a Flame screen means a fitted single combustion or MOCC means the lowest tank. screen of corrosion-resistant wire of at level of oxygen in a vapor or a vapor Vapor control system or VCS means least 30-by-30 mesh, or two fitted mixture that will support combustion. an arrangement of piping and screens, both of corrosion-resistant wire, Multi-breasted barge-loading equipment used to control vapor of at least 20-by-20 mesh, spaced apart operations are those in which barges emissions collected to or from a vessel not fewer than 12.7 millimeters (0.5 load side by side with the outboard and includes the vapor collection inch) or more than 38.1 millimeters (1.5 barge’s vapor collection system system and the vapor processing unit or inches). connected to a facility vapor connection a tank. Fluid displacement system means a through the inboard barge, as opposed Vapor destruction unit means a vapor system that removes vapors from a to single-breasted operations involving a processing unit that destroys cargo barge’s cargo tanks during gas freeing single barge. vapor by a thermal destruction method. through the addition of an inert gas or Multiple facility vapor collection Vapor dispersion unit means a vapor other medium into the cargo tank. system junction means the point in the processing unit that releases cargo vapor Fluid injection connection means the vapor collection system where two or into the atmosphere through a venting point in a fluid displacement system at more branch lines originating from system not located on the tank vessel. which the fixed piping or hose that separate facility vapor connections are Vapor processing unit means the supplies the inert gas or other medium connected. components of a vapor control system connects to a barge’s cargo tanks or New vapor control system means a that recover, destroy, or disperse vapor fixed piping system. vapor control system that is not an collected from a vessel. Gas freeing means the removal of existing vapor control system. Vapor recovery unit means a vapor vapors from a tank barge. Padded or partially inerted means the processing unit that recovers cargo Grade A, B, C, D, or E means any oxygen content of the vapor space in a vapor by nondestructive means. Grade A, B, or C flammable liquid tank is reduced to below what is Vessel vapor connection means the defined in 46 CFR 30.10–22 or any normally present in the atmosphere by point in a vessel’s fixed vapor collection Grade D or E combustible liquid defined the addition of an inert gas such as system where it connects to a vapor in 46 CFR 30.10–15. nitrogen or carbon dioxide, but not to collection hose or arm. High flash point cargoes means Grade the concentration that meets the Certifying Entities E cargoes and cargoes having a closed- definition of ‘‘inerted’’ in this section. cup flash point higher than 60 °C (140 Pig means any device designed to § 154.2010 Qualifications for acceptance °F), carried at a temperature no higher maintain a tight seal within a cargo line as a certifying entity. than 5 °C (9 °F) below their flash points. while being propelled by compressed To qualify for acceptance as a vapor Inerted means the oxygen content of gas towards a cargo tank, for the control system (VCS) certifying entity, the vapor space in a tank vessel’s cargo purpose of transferring residual cargo the entity must demonstrate to the tank is reduced to 60 percent or less by from the cargo loading line to the cargo satisfaction of the Commandant that it volume of the vapor’s minimum oxygen tank. possesses the following minimum concentration for combustion, or to 8 Pre-transfer conference means the qualifications: percent by volume or less for the vapor conference required by 33 CFR (a) The ability to review and evaluate of crude oil, gasoline blends, or 156.120(w). design drawings and failure analyses for benzene, by addition of an inert gas, in Stripping means the removal, to the compliance to this subpart; accordance with the inert gas maximum extent practicable, of cargo (b) The knowledge of the applicable requirements of 46 CFR 32.53 or 46 CFR residue remaining in the barge’s cargo regulations of this subpart, including 153.500. tanks and associated fixed piping the standards incorporated by reference;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65167

(c) The ability to monitor and evaluate (d) The acceptance of a certifying (d) To apply for certification, the test procedures and results for entity may be terminated by the owner or operator of a facility VCS must compliance with the operational Commandant for failure to review, submit plans, calculations, requirements of this subpart; inspect, or test a system properly in specifications, and other related (d) The ability to perform inspections accordance with this subpart. information, including a qualitative and witness tests of bulk liquid cargo- (e) A certifying entity may not certify failure analysis, to the certifying entity. handling systems; a facility VCS if that certifying entity Suggested guidance for preparing (e) That the applicant is not was involved in the design or qualitative and optional quantitative controlled by an owner or operator of a installation of the system. ‘‘Design or failure analyses can be obtained from vessel or facility engaged in controlling installation’’ includes but is not limited http://homeport.uscg.mil. The analysis vapor emissions; to— must demonstrate that— (f) That the applicant is not (1) Performing calculations; (1) The VCS can operate continuously dependent upon Coast Guard (2) Providing chemical data; and safely while controlling cargo acceptance under this section to remain (3) Developing plans, specifications, vapors to or from tankships or tank in business; and and drawings; barges over the full range of transfer (4) Conducting failure analysis; and (g) That the person in charge of VCS rates expected at the facility; (5) Installing systems or components. (2) The VCS has the proper alarms certification is currently a licensed (f) A certifying entity may not conduct and automatic shutdown systems professional engineer. the failure analysis of a facility VCS it required by this subpart to prevent an § 154.2011 Application for acceptance as a is certifying. The certifying entity may unsafe operation; certifying entity. only point out shortcomings shown by (3) The VCS has sufficient automatic (a) An applicant seeking Coast Guard the failure analysis and may not propose or passive devices to minimize damage acceptance as a certifying entity of changes to correct the shortcomings. to personnel, property, and the vapor control systems (VCSs) must (g) A certifying entity may not certify environment if an accident were to submit a signed, written application to the VCS of any vessel or facility owner occur; (4) If a quantitative failure analysis is the Commandant. The applicant’s or operator that owns or has a also conducted, the level of safety signature certifies that the information controlling interest in the certifying attained is at least one order of in the application is true and that the entity. magnitude greater than that calculated applicant is not dependent upon Coast Certification, Recertification, and for operating without a VCS; and Guard acceptance under this section to Operational Review (5) If a facility uses a cargo line remain in business and constitutes § 154.2020 Certification and clearance system to clear cargo in the consent for the Coast Guard to verify cargo line back to the tank vessel with any information contained in the recertification—Owner/operator responsibilities. the VCS connected, the qualitative application, through personal (a) Prior to operating, a new vapor failure analysis must demonstrate that examination of persons named in the the cargo line clearance system has at application, or otherwise. If an control system (VCS) installation must be certified under 33 CFR 154.2023 by least the same levels of safety required applicant knowingly and willfully by paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3) of provides any false statement or a certifying entity as meeting the requirements of this subpart. this section to prevent overpressure of misrepresentation, or conceals a the vessel’s cargo tanks and account for material fact in the application, the (b) A certified VCS or a Coast Guard- approved VCS that was operating prior the probability that the pig is destroyed application may be denied or during line-clearing operations. terminated, and the applicant may be to July 23, 1990 must be recertified by a certifying entity under 33 CFR (e) The VCS owner or operator must subject to prosecution under the maintain at the facility— provisions of 18 U.S.C. 1001. 154.2023 before it can— (1) Control vapors other than those for (1) A copy of VCS design (b) An application must include the which it was originally certified; documentation, including plans, following general information: (2) Receive vapors from vessels other drawings, calculations, and (1) The name and address of the than those for which it was approved, specifications for the VCS; applicant, including subsidiaries and if the VCS was in operation prior to July (2) The facility operations manual, including the list of cargoes that the divisions if applicable; 23, 1990; (2) A description of the experience (3) Operate under any changed design facility is approved to vapor control; and qualifications of any person who or configuration; and (3) Any certification or recertification would review or test systems on behalf (4) Operate as part of multi-breasted letter issued under 33 CFR 154.2023. of the applicant, showing that the barge-loading operations, if the VCS was person is familiar with or otherwise not originally approved or certified for § 154.2021 Operational review—Owner/ qualified to implement Coast Guard such operations; or operator responsibilities. VCS regulations; and (5) Be connected to a tank vessel if a (a) Each facility vapor control system (3) A letter from a facility owner or cargo line clearance system is used to (VCS) must undergo an operational operator stating his or her intent to use clear cargo in the cargo line back to the review by a certifying entity within the services of the applicant to certify tank vessel. three years of its initial certification or VCS installations. (c) Prior to operating a VCS to control last operational review, to ensure its (c) The Commandant reviews each vapor from a tank vessel during cargo proper operation and maintenance. application and either issues a letter of line clearing if a cargo line clearance (b) The VCS owner or operator must acceptance as a certifying entity to the system is used to clear cargo in the coordinate with the certifying entity and applicant, or notifies the applicant that cargo line back to the tank vessel, the provide the entity with all necessary it is not accepted, and maintains a list cargo line clearance system must be documentation and records to conduct of currently accepted certifying entities reviewed by a certifying entity as the operational review. that is available to the public at http:// meeting the requirements of 33 CFR (c) The VCS owner or operator must homeport.uscg.mil. 154.2104. notify the Captain of the Port (COTP) of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65168 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

a scheduled operational review. The manual, training plans, and VCS test conditions of any vapor-moving device, COTP, at his or her discretion, may procedures; through testing of the vacuum breaker; witness the operational review. (2) Proper maintenance and operation (3) That VCS shutdown occurs (d) The VCS owner or operator must of VCS components, through visual correctly, through the startup of the VCS maintain, at the facility, the latest inspection; and and tripping of each shutdown loop operational review letter issued under (3) That cargo transfer or tank- while the VCS is not connected to a 33 CFR 154.2023. cleaning barge operational procedures vessel; are properly followed and the VCS (4) That VCS startup, normal § 154.2022 Certification, recertification, or operates properly, through observation operation, and shutdown occur operational review—Certifying entity of the initial stages of transfer or responsibilities, generally. properly, through witnessing the cleaning, including 24-hour pre-transfer relevant portions of a test loading or (a) Before certifying or recertifying a tests required by 33 CFR 154.2150(b) or unloading of one vessel, or a test facility vapor control system (VCS), the 33 CFR 154.2250(b), the pre-transfer cleaning of one tank barge at a tank certifying entity must— conference, and initial system startup (1) Review all VCS design barge cleaning facility; and procedures. documentation, including plans, (5) That the automatic liquid block (c) For each of the following, if valve successfully stops flow of liquid drawings, calculations, specifications, applicable, the certifying entity’s review and failure analysis, to ensure that the to the vessel during a system shutdown, of chemical data must ensure that— through witnessing the relevant portions VCS design meets the requirements of (1) Each chemical’s maximum this subpart; of a test loading or test cargo tank experimental safe gap, minimum oxygen cleaning. (2) Review all chemical data in concentration for combustion (MOCC), accordance with paragraph (c) of this (e) Prior to recertifying the VCS for and upper and lower limits of the control of additional cargo vapors, section, to confirm that the VCS is flammability have been correctly properly designed for controlling each the certifying entity must review the determined, which may be determined VCS design to ensure that, with respect specific chemical vapor; using Coast Guard guidance available at (3) Conduct an initial onsite to each additional vapor, the— http://homeport.uscg.mil; inspection to ensure that the VCS (1) System complies with 33 CFR (2) Each detonation arrester used in 154.2103(a) and (b) or 33 CFR installation conforms to the VCS plans, the VCS is correct for each chemical’s drawings, and specifications reviewed; 154.2203(a) and (b); maximum experimental safe gap; (2) Inerting, enriching, or diluting (4) Conduct onsite reviews and (3) Setpoints for each oxygen analyzer witness tests in accordance with system is adequate; used in the VCS are correct for each (3) Vapor recovery or destruction unit paragraph (d) of this section, to ensure chemical’s MOCC; the VCS’s proper operation in is adequate; (4) Setpoints for each oxygen or (4) Mechanical equipment and accordance with its design and hydrocarbon analyzer used in the VCS compliance with applicable regulations systems are suitable; are correct for each chemical’s upper or (5) Vapor properties and and the facility’s operations manual; lower flammability limit; (5) Review, inspect, and witness tests characteristics are addressed, including (5) Each vapor-controlled chemical is freezing point, polymerization potential, of all design or configuration alterations compatible with other chemicals and before recertifying a VCS that was solubility, and cargo compatibility; with inerting, enriching, or diluting (6) VCS’s failure analysis addresses certified or approved for operation prior gases added to the VCS per 46 CFR part to July 23, 1990, to ensure that the any new hazards presented; and 150, Table I and Table II; (7) Facility operations manual’s VCS altered system complies with applicable (6) Each vapor-controlled chemical is regulations; addendum has been modified to list compatible with all VCS components; each additional vapor. (6) Review the VCS design in (7) Each vapor-controlled chemical is (f) Prior to certifying or recertifying a accordance with paragraph (e) of this listed in one of the following: 46 CFR VCS to control vapors from barge cargo section, prior to recertifying the VCS for part 30, Table 30.25–1; 46 CFR part 151, tanks during multi-breasted barge- the control of additional cargo vapors; Table 151.05; 46 CFR part 153, Table 1 loading operations, the certifying entity (7) Review the VCS in accordance and Table 2; or as specified in writing must confirm that— with paragraph (f) of this section, prior by the Commandant; to certifying or recertifying it to control (8) The flash point for any cargo with (1) The overfill control system vapors from barge cargo tanks during a closed-cup flash point of 60 °C (140 required by 33 CFR 154.2102 will multi-breasted barge-loading operations; °F) or higher is properly determined; process a liquid overfill condition (8) Review a cargo line clearance (9) Any test program used for within any one cargo tank on each system as meeting the requirements of instrument testing and calibration barge; 33 CFR 154.2104 if such a system is conforms with 33 CFR 154.2180 and 33 (2) If multi-breasted loading is used to clear cargo in the cargo line back CFR 154.2181; and conducted using more than one liquid to a tank vessel prior to certifying or (10) Any calculation to determine the transfer hose from the shore facility, the recertifying a VCS to control vapor from duration of purging required by 33 CFR facility is capable of activating the the tank vessel during cargo line 154.2150(o) is correct. emergency shutdown system required clearance operations; and (d) The certifying entity must by 33 CFR 154.550, and can (9) Review the facility operations ensure— automatically stop the cargo flow to manual to ensure that it meets the (1) That each alarm and shutdown, each transfer hose simultaneously, in requirements of 33 CFR 154.310(b). shown on the piping and the event an upset condition occurs that (b) In conducting an operational instrumentation diagrams and reviewed closes the remotely operated cargo review to ensure that the VCS is in the hazard analysis as part of the vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR properly operating and maintained, the system, responds properly, through 154.2101(a); certifying entity must ensure, at a simulation of emergency conditions to (3) The facility operations manual has minimum— activate the alarm or shutdown; been modified to include the procedures (1) The completeness, currency, and (2) That maximum vacuum can be for multi-breasted barge-loading accuracy of the facility operations maintained at the maximum operating operations; and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65169

(4) The facility operations manual able to demonstrate, through drills and not use the services of anyone, as a describes how to make proper display of practical knowledge, the facility person in charge of a cleaning connections, on the facility side, proper VCS operational procedures for operation unless the person has been between the alarm and shutdown normal and emergency conditions. The properly trained and certified by the systems of the VCS and of each barge training program must cover the facility with a minimum of 60 hours of being loaded. following subjects: experience in cleaning operations. (1) Purpose of the VCS; § 154.2023 Certification, recertification, or (2) Principles of the VCS; Transfer Facilities—VCS Design and operational review—Certifying entity (3) Components of the VCS; Installation documentation. (4) Hazards associated with the VCS; § 154.2100 Vapor control system, general. (a) If the certifying entity is satisfied (5) Coast Guard regulations in this that the facility’s vapor control system (a) Vapor control system (VCS) design subpart; and installation must eliminate (VCS) has successfully undergone the (6) Operating procedures, including: potential overpressure and vacuum reviews, inspections, and tests required (i) Transfer, testing, and inspection hazards, overfill hazards, sources of by 33 CFR 154.2022(a) for certification requirements; ignition, and mechanical damage to the or recertification, and that the VCS will (ii) Pre-transfer procedures; maximum practicable extent. Each operate properly and safely, the (iii) Chemicals approved for remaining hazard source that is not certifying entity must certify or recertify collection; the VCS by issuing a certification letter (iv) Material safety data sheet review; eliminated must be specifically to the facility owner or operator, and by (v) Connection procedures; addressed in the protection system sending copies of the letter to the (vi) Startup procedures; design and system operational Captain of the Port (COTP) and the (vii) Normal operating conditions and requirements. Commandant. The certification letter how to handle deviations from normal (b) Vapor collection system pipe and must refer by date to the certifying conditions; fitting components must be in entity’s letter of acceptance issued (viii) Normal shutdown procedures; accordance with ANSI B31.3 under 33 CFR 154.2011(c), and must— and (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR (1) State that the facility complies (ix) Operating procedures for cargo 154.106) with a maximum allowable with applicable regulations and with its line clearing if a cargo line clearance working pressure (MAWP) of at least operations manual, and list any system is installed in accordance with 150 pounds per square inch gauge exemptions to the applicable regulations 33 CFR 154.2104; and (psig). Valves must be in accordance that have been approved by the Coast (7) Emergency procedures. with ANSI B16.34, 150 pound class Guard; (b) Personnel overseeing VCS (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR (2) Report on all reviews, inspections, maintenance must be familiar with— 154.106). Flanges must be in accordance and tests undergone by the VCS in (1) Inspection of detonation arresters; with ANSI B16.5 or B16.24, 150 pound accordance with 33 CFR 154.2022(a); and class (both incorporated by reference, (3) List all plans and drawings that (2) Procedures for equipment and see 33 CFR 154.106). The following were reviewed by the certifying entity; instrumentation testing required by 33 components and their associated (4) State if the VCS may control CFR 156.170(g). equipment do not have a minimum vapors from tank barges that are specified MAWP, but must be required to have a shore-side, explosion- § 154.2031 Tank barge cleaning facilities. constructed to acceptable engineering proof receptacle or an overfill control (a) In addition to complying with 33 standards and have the appropriate system required by 33 CFR 154.2102(a) CFR 154.2030, a tank barge cleaning mechanical strength to serve the and (b); and facility (TBCF) person in charge of a intended purpose: Knockout drums, (5) List all cargoes that the certifying barge cargo tank-cleaning operation that liquid seals, blowers/compressors, flare entity approves for control by the VCS. uses a vapor control system (VCS) must stacks/incinerators, and other vapor (b) If the certifying entity is satisfied complete a training program covering processing units. that the facility’s VCS has successfully the particular systems installed at the (c) All VCS electrical equipment must undergone the operational review facility and on the barge. As part of the comply with NFPA 70 (incorporated by required by 33 CFR 154.2022(b), the training program, personnel must be reference, see 33 CFR 154.106). certifying entity must issue an able to demonstrate, through drills and (d) Any pressure, flow, or operational review letter to the facility practical knowledge, the proper VCS concentration indication required by owner or operator, and send copies of operation procedures for normal and this part must provide a remote the letter to the COTP and the emergency conditions. The training indicator on the facility where the cargo Commandant. The operational review program must— transfer system and VCS are controlled, letter must— (1) Satisfy the requirements of 33 CFR unless the local indicator is clearly (1) List each item reviewed and 154.2030(a)(1) through (a)(7) and 33 visible and readable from the operator’s inspected; CFR 154.2030(b) and cover— normal position at the control stations. (2) Describe the transfer or cleaning (i) Purpose, principles, components, (e) Any condition requiring an alarm operation observed; and and hazards associated with stripping as specified in this part must activate an (3) Summarize the review’s results. and gas-freeing; audible and visible alarm where the Personnel (ii) Special hazards associated with cargo transfer and VCSs are controlled. the accumulation and discharge of static (f) For a VCS installed after § 154.2030 Transfer facilities. electricity; and [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE], (a) Personnel in charge of a transfer (iii) Operating procedures, including an alarm or shutdown must be activated operation using a vapor control system pre-cleaning procedures, and safeguards if electrical continuity of an alarm or (VCS) must have completed a training to prevent static electricity discharge. shutdown sensor required by this program covering the particular VCS (b) In addition to the requirements subpart is lost. installed at the facility. As part of the contained in 33 CFR 154.710, no person (g) The VCS piping surface training program, personnel must be may serve, and the facility operator may temperature must not exceed 177 °C

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65170 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

(350 °F) or 70 percent of the auto- (5) Have a local valve position (2) Have the last 1 meter (3.3 feet) of ignition temperature in degrees Celsius indicator, or be designed so that the the arm marked in accordance with of the vapors being transferred, valve position can be readily paragraph (b) of this section. whichever is lower, during normal determined from the valve handle or (g) The facility vapor connection must operations. This must be achieved by valve stem position; and be electrically insulated from the vessel either separating or insulating the entire (6) If the valve seat is fitted with vapor connection in accordance with VCS from external heat sources. resilient material, be a Category A valve OCIMF ISGOTT section 17.5 (h) The VCS must be equipped with as defined by 46 CFR 56.20–15 and not (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR a mechanism to eliminate any liquid allow appreciable leakage when the 154.106). In order to prevent electrical condensate from the vapor collection resilient material is damaged or arcing during connection and system that carries over from the vessel destroyed. disconnection of the transfer hose/arm, or condenses as a result of an (b) Except when a vapor collection the transfer hose/arm must be fitted enrichment process. arm is used, the first 1 meter (3.3 feet) with an insulating flange or a single (1) If a liquid knockout vessel is of vapor piping downstream of the length of non-conducting hose to ensure installed to eliminate any liquid facility vapor connection must be— electrical discontinuity between the condensate, it must have— (1) Painted in the sequence of red/ vessel and facility. The insulating (i) A mechanism to indicate the level yellow/red. The width of the red bands flange/hose must not be electrically of liquid in the device; must be 0.1 meter (0.33 foot) and the bypassed. (ii) A high liquid level sensor that width of the middle yellow band must (h) A vapor collection system, fitted activates an alarm, meeting the be 0.8 meter (2.64 feet); and with a gas injection system that operates requirements of paragraph (e) of this (2) Labeled with the word ‘‘VAPOR’’ at a positive gauge pressure at the section; painted in black letters at least 50.8 facility vapor connection, must be fitted (iii) A high-high liquid level sensor millimeters (2 inches) high. with a mechanism to prevent backflow that closes the remotely operated cargo (c) Each facility vapor connection of vapor to the vessel’s vapor collection vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR flange face must have a permanent stud system during loading. 154.2101(a), and shuts down any vapor- projecting outward that is 12.7 moving devices before carrying liquid millimeters (0.5 inch) in diameter and is § 154.2102 Facility requirements for vessel over from the vessel to the vapor- at least 25.4 millimeters (1 inch) long. liquid overfill protection. moving device. One sensor with two It must be located at the top of the flange This section does not apply to stages may accomplish both this face, midway between boltholes, and in facilities collecting vapors emitted from requirement and the requirement of line with the bolthole pattern. vessel cargo tanks while inerting the paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of this section; and (d) Each hose that transfers vapors cargo tanks. (2) If a drip leg is used to eliminate must— (a) Each facility that receives cargo any liquid condensate, a mechanism to (1) Have a design burst pressure of at vapor from a tank barge that is fitted remove liquid from the low point. least 25 pounds per square inch gauge with overfill protection, in accordance (i) Vapor collection piping must be (psig); with 46 CFR 39.2009(a)(1)(iii), must electrically grounded and must be (2) Have a maximum allowable provide a 120-volt, 20-amp explosion- electrically continuous. proof receptacle for the overfill (j) If the facility handles inerted working pressure no less than 5 psig; (3) Be capable of withstanding at least protection system that meets— vapors of cargoes containing sulfur, the a 2 pounds per square inch (psi) (1) NEMA WD–6 (incorporated by facility must control heating from reference, see 33 CFR 154.106); pyrophoric iron sulfide deposits in the vacuum without collapsing or constricting; (2) NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, vapor collection line. 2002, Articles 410–57 and 501–12 (k) All VCS components, including (4) Be electrically continuous with a (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR piping, hoses, and gaskets, must be maximum resistance of 10,000 ohms; 154.106); and suitable for use with the vapor in the (5) Have flanges with— (3) 46 CFR 111.105–9. VCS. (i) A bolthole arrangement complying with the requirements for 150 pound (b) Each facility that receives cargo § 154.2101 Requirements for facility vapor class flanges, ANSI B16.5 (incorporated vapor from a tank barge that is fitted connections. by reference, see 33 CFR 154.106); and with an intrinsically safe cargo tank (a) A remotely operated cargo vapor (ii) One or more 15.9 millimeter level sensor system complying with 46 shutoff valve must be installed in the (0.625 inch) diameter holes in the flange CFR 39.2009(b), as a means of overfill vapor collection line between the face, located midway between boltholes, protection, must have an overfill control facility vapor connection and the and in line with the bolthole pattern; system on the dock capable of powering nearest point where any inerting, (6) Be resistant to abrasion and and receiving an alarm and shutdown enriching, or diluting gas is introduced kinking; signal from the cargo tank level sensor into the vapor collection line, or where (7) Be compatible with vapors being system that— a detonation arrester is fitted. The valve controlled; and (1) Closes the remotely operated cargo must— (8) Have the last 1 meter (3.3 feet) of vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR (1) Close within 30 seconds after each end of the vapor hose marked in 154.2101(a) and activates the emergency detection of a shutdown condition of accordance with paragraph (b) of this shutdown system required by 33 CFR any component required by this subpart; section. 154.550 when— (2) Close automatically if the control (e) Vapor hoses must be adequately (i) A tank overfill signal is received signal or electrical power to the system supported to prevent kinking, collapse, from the barge; or is interrupted; or contact with metal surfaces on the (ii) Electrical continuity of the cargo (3) Activate an alarm meeting 33 CFR dock during loading or offloading. tank level sensor system is interrupted; 154.2100(e) when a signal to shut down (f) Fixed vapor collection arms must— (2) Activates an audible and visible is received from a component; (1) Meet the requirements of alarm that warns barge and facility (4) Be capable of manual operation or paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(5) of this personnel when a tank overfill signal, or manual activation; section; and an optional high-level signal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65171

corresponding to a liquid level lower the transferring temperature must be collection system, the vapor collection than the tank overfill sensor setting, is used when determining the vapor hose or arm, and any vapor line up to received from the barge; growth. the point where the pressure sensor is (3) Has a mechanism to test the alarms (b) A facility VCS must be designed to located; and automatic shutdown systems prevent the pressure in a vessel’s cargo (2) A pressure corresponding to 90 electrically and mechanically before tanks from going below 80 percent of percent of the setting of the pressure operating the vapor control system the highest setting of any of the vessel’s relief valve at the facility vapor (VCS); vacuum relief valves or exceeding 80 connection, if the facility vapor (4) Has suitable means, such as percent of the lowest setting of any of connection is installed with a pressure approved intrinsic safety barriers able to the vessel’s pressure relief valves for a relief valve; or accept passive devices, so that the non-inerted tank vessel. A facility VCS (3) A lower pressure than the pressure overfill and optional alarm circuits on also must be designed to prevent the in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this the barge side of the overfill control pressure in a vessel’s cargo tanks from section that is agreed upon at the pre- system, including cabling, normally going below 0.2 pounds per square inch transfer conference. closed switches, and pin and sleeve gauge (psig) or exceeding 80 percent of (g) If a facility draws vapors from a connectors, are intrinsically safe; the lowest setting of any of the vessel’s vessel with a vapor-moving device, the (5) Is labeled at the dock with the pressure relief valves for an inerted tank facility vapor connection must have a maximum allowable inductance (in vessel. The system must sustain the pressure-sensing device, independent of millihenrys) and capacitance (in pressure in the vessel’s cargo tanks the device used to activate the alarm microfarads) to be connected to the within this range at any cargo transfer required by paragraph (e) of this section, facility overfill protection system as rate less than or equal to the maximum which closes the remotely operated specified by the equipment transfer rate determined at the pre- cargo vapor shutoff valve required by 33 manufacturer; and transfer conference. CFR 154.2101(a) when the vacuum at (6) Has a female connecting plug for (c) The pressure measured at the the facility vapor connection is more the tank barge level sensor system with facility vapor connection must be than the higher (lesser vacuum) of the a five-wire, 16-ampere connector body corrected for pressure drops across the following: meeting IEC 60309–1 and IEC 60309–2 vessel’s vapor collection system, vapor (1) A vacuum corresponding to 90 (both incorporated by reference, see 33 collection hose or arm, and vapor line percent of the vessel’s highest vacuum CFR 154.106), which is— up to the location of the pressure sensor. relief valve setting; (i) Configured with pins S2 (N) and (d) The facility vapor connection must (2) A vacuum corresponding to 90 R1 (L3) for the tank overfill sensor have a pressure-sensing device that percent of the setting of the vacuum circuit, pin G connected to the cabling meets the installation requirements of relief valve at the facility vapor shield, and pins N (L2) and T3 (L1) paragraph (h) of this section, which connection, if the facility vapor reserved for an optional high-level activates an alarm that meets 33 CFR connection is installed with a vacuum alarm connection; 154.2100(e) when the pressure at the relief valve; or (ii) Labeled ‘‘Connector for Barge facility vapor connection exceeds (3) A lesser vacuum than the vacuum Overfill Control System’’; and either— in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this (iii) Connected to the overfill control (1) The pressure corresponding to the section that is agreed upon at the pre- system by a shielded flexible cable. upper pressure determined in paragraph transfer conference. (b) of this section; or (h) The pressure-sensing devices § 154.2103 Facility requirements for vessel (2) A lower pressure agreed upon at vapor overpressure and vacuum protection. required by paragraphs (d) and (f) of this the pre-transfer conference. In this section, the requirements of (e) If a facility draws vapor from a section must be located in the vapor having a flame arrester or a flame screen vessel with a vapor-moving device, the collection line between the facility at the opening of a pressure relief valve facility vapor connection must have a vapor connection and the following: or a vacuum relief valve apply only to pressure-sensing device, which activates (1) Any isolation valve, unless an facilities collecting vapors of flammable, an alarm meeting 33 CFR 154.2100(e) interlock is provided that prevents combustible, or non-high flash point when the pressure at the facility vapor operation of the system when the liquid cargoes. connection falls below either— isolation valve is closed; and (a) A facility’s vapor control system (1) The pressure corresponding to the (2) Any components that could plug (VCS) must have the capacity for lower pressure determined in paragraph and cause a blockage in the vapor line. collecting cargo vapor at a rate of not (b) of this section; or (i) A pressure-indicating device must less than the facility’s maximum liquid (2) A higher pressure agreed upon at be provided that displays the pressure transfer rate for cargoes that are vapor the pre-transfer conference. in the vapor collection line between the controlled plus the vapor growth for the (f) The facility vapor connection must facility vapor connection and any cargoes and any inerting, diluting, or have a pressure-sensing device, isolation valve or any devices which enriching gas that may be added to the independent of the device used to could cause a blockage in the vapor line. system. Vapor growth must be activate the alarm required by paragraph (j) If a facility draws vapor from the considered as 25 percent of the cargo’s (d) of this section, meeting the vessel with a vapor-moving device true vapor pressure in pounds per installation requirements of paragraph capable of drawing more than 1 pound square inch absolute (psia) at 115 °F, (h) of this section, which activates the per square inch (psi) vacuum, a vacuum divided by the vapor pressure of emergency shutdown system required relief valve must be installed in the gasoline at 115 °F (12.5 psia), unless by 33 CFR 154.550 when the pressure at vapor collection line between the vapor- there is experimental data for actual the facility vapor connection exceeds moving device and the facility vapor vapor growth for turbulent transferring the lower of the following: connection, which— under the most severe conditions for (1) A pressure corresponding to 90 (1) Relieves at a predetermined vapor growth. If the cargo is transferred percent of the vessel’s lowest pressure pressure such that the pressure at the at temperatures above 115 °F, the relief valve setting, corrected for facility vapor connection is maintained cargo’s true vapor pressure (in psia) at pressure drops across the vessel’s vapor at or above 13.7 psia (¥1 psig);

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65172 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

(2) Has a relieving capacity equal to (2) The discharge is not fitted with a (e) A means to detect arrival of the pig or greater than the capacity of the vapor- flame arrester. at the pig-receiving device. moving device; (n) A facility that collects vapors § 154.2105 Fire, explosion, and detonation (3) Has a flame arrester or flame emitted from vessel cargo tanks while protection. screen fitted at the vacuum relief inerting cargo tanks must— This section applies only to facilities opening; and (1) Provide a pressure-sensing device that control vapors of flammable, (4) Has been tested for relieving that activates an alarm meeting 33 CFR combustible, or non-high flash point capacity in accordance with paragraph 154.2100(e) when the pressure of the liquid cargoes. 1.5.1.3 of API 2000 (incorporated by inerting gas exceeds either the pressure (a) A vapor control system (VCS) with reference, see 33 CFR 154.106) with a corresponding to the higher pressure a single facility vapor connection that flame arrester or flame screen fitted. determined in paragraph (b) of this receives inerted cargo vapor from a (k) When a facility collects cargo section or a lower pressure agreed upon vessel and processes it with a vapor vapor through an extensive length of at the pre-transfer conference; recovery unit must— vapor piping before reaching the first (2) Provide a pressure-sensing device, (1) Be capable of inerting the vapor pressure sensor and vacuum relief independent of the device required by collection line in accordance with 33 valve, the vacuum relief valve may be paragraph (n)(1) of this section, which CFR 154.2107(a) before receiving the set at a vacuum greater than 1 psi automatically stops the flow of inerting, vessel’s vapor and have at least one vacuum, provided the pressure controls padding, or purging gas to the vessel oxygen analyzer, which satisfies the take into account the pressure drop when the pressure of the inerting gas requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107(f)(1), across the vessel’s vapor collection exceeds 90 percent of the lowest setting (f)(2), (g), (h)(2), and (h)(3), sampling the system, any vapor collection hoses, and of any pressure relief valve on the vapor concentration continuously at a the vapor piping as a function of the vessel; and point as close as practicable to the actual transfer rate. (3) Locate the pressure-sensing facility vapor connection. The total pipe (l) If the pressure in the vapor devices required by paragraphs (n)(1) length between the analyzer and the collection system can exceed 1.5 psig and (n)(2) of this section in the inerting facility vapor connection must not during a malfunction of a pressure piping downstream of any devices that exceed 6 meters (19.7 feet); or regulator or control valve in an inerting, could potentially isolate the vessel from (2) Have a detonation arrester located enriching, or diluting system, a pressure the sensing devices. as close as practicable to the facility relief valve must— vapor connection. The total pipe length (1) Be located between where the § 154.2104 Cargo line clearance system. between the detonation arrester and the inerting, enriching, or diluting gas is If a line clearance (pigging) system is facility vapor connection must not introduced into the vapor collection used to clear cargo in the cargo lines to exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet). system and the facility vapor the tank vessel while the vessel is (b) A VCS with a single facility vapor connection; connected to the facility vapor control connection that receives only inerted (2) Relieve at the higher of the system (VCS), the pigging system must cargo vapor from a vessel and processes following two pressures: be designed with the following safety it with a vapor destruction unit must— (i) A pressure such that the pressure features: (1) Satisfy the requirements of at the facility vapor connection does not (a) A bypass loop installed in the paragraph (a)(1) of this section and have exceed 1.5 psig; or main liquid cargo line that contains the a detonation arrester located as close as (ii) The lowest pressure relief valve pig-receiving device, through which all practicable to the facility vapor setting of vessels that control vapors at the liquid flow is channeled during connection. The total pipe length the facility; pigging operations. The pig must act as between the detonation arrester and the (3) Have a relieving capacity equal to a seal to separate the vessel from the facility vapor connection must not or greater than the maximum capacity of compressed gas that is used to propel it exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); or the facility inerting, enriching, or as the pig travels from the pig launcher (2) Have an inerting system that meets diluting gas source flowing through the to the pig-receiving device; the requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. (c) A VCS with a single facility vapor failed pressure regulator or control (b) A mechanism for restricting liquid connection that receives vapor from a valve, taking into account the pressure and gas flow so that the vessel, vessel with cargo tanks that are not drops across any flame arrester or personnel, and environment are not inerted or are partially inerted, and discharge piping fitted at the relief endangered. The compressed gas flow processes it with a vapor recovery unit valve’s discharge; capacity that this mechanism secures must— (4) Have a flame arrester or flame must not be more than 95 percent of the (1) Have a detonation arrester located screen fitted at the discharge opening, if combined capacity of all vessel and as close as practicable to the facility the design does not secure a minimum facility VCS relief valves located vapor connection. The total pipe length vapor discharge velocity of 30 meters upstream of the facility’s remotely between the detonation arrester and the (98.4 feet) per second; and operated cargo vapor shutoff valve facility vapor connection must not (5) Have been tested for relieving required by 33 CFR 154.2101(a); exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); or capacity in accordance with paragraph (c) An automatic shutoff valve, which (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or 1.5.1.3 of API 2000. closes on a high-pressure signal from diluting system that meets the (m) The relieving capacity test the pressure sensor required by 33 CFR requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. required by paragraph (l)(5) of this 154.2103(f), located in the liquid bypass (d) A VCS with a single facility vapor section must be carried out with a flame loop downstream of the pig-receiving connection that receives vapor from a screen fitted at the discharge opening device; vessel with cargo tanks that are not if— (d) An interlock with the main cargo inerted or are partially inerted, and (1) The design of the pressure relief line manual block valve so that line- processes the vapor with a vapor valve does not secure a minimum vapor clearing operations cannot begin unless destruction unit must— discharge velocity of 30 meters (98.4 the main cargo line manual block valve (1) Have a detonation arrester located feet) per second; and is closed; and as close as practicable to the facility

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65173

vapor connection. The total pipe length (i) A VCS that uses a vapor balancing a minimum of two-volume exchanges of between the detonation arrester and the system in which cargo vapor from a inerting, enriching, or diluting gas, facility vapor connection must not vessel or facility storage tank is downstream of the injection point. exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); and transferred through the facility vapor (b) A VCS that uses an inerting, (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or collection system to facility storage enriching, or diluting system must be diluting system that satisfies the tanks or a vessel must meet the equipped, except as permitted by 33 requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. requirements of 33 CFR 154.2110. CFR 154.2105(a), with a gas injection (e) A VCS with multiple facility vapor (j) Each outlet of a VCS that vents to and mixing arrangement located as close connections that receives vapor from the atmosphere, except for a discharge as practicable to the facility vapor vessels with cargo tanks that carry vent from a vapor destruction unit or connection. The total pipe length inerted, partially inerted, non-inerted, relief valve installed to comply with 33 between the arrangement and the or combinations of inerted, partially CFR 154.2103(j) and (k) or 33 CFR facility vapor connection must not inerted, and non-inerted cargoes, and 154.2203(e), (k), and (l), must— exceed 22 meters (72.2 feet). The processes them with a vapor recovery (1) Have a detonation arrester located arrangement must be such that it unit, must have a detonation arrester at the outlet; or provides complete mixing of the gases located as close as practicable to each (2) Have a flame arrester if— within 20 pipe diameters of the facility vapor connection. The total pipe (i) The discharge vent stream’s total injection point. length between the detonation arrester flammable concentration is proven to be (c) A VCS that uses an inerting or and each facility vapor connection must less than 50 percent of the lower enriching system may not be operated at not exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet). flammable limit at all times by an outlet a vacuum after the injection point (f) A VCS with multiple facility vapor concentration analyzer for carbon beds, unless— connections that receives only inerted proof of correct operating temperature (1) There are no vacuum relief valves cargo vapor from vessels and processes for refrigeration systems, or proof of or other devices that could allow air it with a vapor destruction unit must— scrubbing medium flow for scrubbers; into the vapor collection system (1) Satisfy the requirements of and downstream of the injection point, and paragraph (a)(1) of this section for each (ii) The proving devices in paragraph pipe connections are flanged, threaded, facility vapor connection and have a (j)(2)(i) of this section close the remotely or welded so no air can leak into the detonation arrester located as close as operated cargo vapor shutoff valve VCS; or practicable to each facility vapor required in 33 CFR 154.2101(a) and shut (2) An additional analyzer is used to connection. The total pipe length down any vapor-moving device if monitor the downstream vapor between the detonation arrester and operating outside the conditions concentration and a mechanism is each facility vapor connection must not necessary to maintain the discharge vent provided to inject additional inerting or exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); or non-combustible. enriching gas. (d) A VCS that uses analyzers to (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or § 154.2106 Detonation arresters control the amount of inerting, diluting system that meets the installation. enriching, or diluting gas injected into requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. This section applies only to facilities the vapor collection line must be (g) A VCS with multiple facility vapor collecting vapors of flammable, equipped with at least two analyzers. connections that receives vapor from combustible, or non-high flash point The analyzers must be connected so vessels with non-inerted or partially liquid cargoes. that— inerted cargoes, and processes the vapor (a) Each detonation arrester required (1) When two oxygen analyzers are with a vapor destruction unit must— by this part must be installed with a used, the higher oxygen concentration (1) Have a detonation arrester located minimum distance of 0.6 meters (2 feet) reading controls the inerting or as close as practicable to each facility from the arrester flange face to any pipe enriching system and activates the vapor connection. The total pipe length bend, shutoff valve, or other device that alarm and automatic shutdown system between the detonation arrester and restricts the flow area of the piping. required by paragraph (h), (j), or (k)(2) each facility vapor connection must not (b) Detonation arresters must be of this section; exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); and installed in accordance with the (2) When more than two oxygen (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or guidelines outlined in the arrester analyzers are used, the majority pair diluting system that meets the manufacturer’s acceptance letter controls the inerting or enriching system requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. provided by the Coast Guard. and activates the alarm and automatic (h) A VCS with multiple facility vapor (c) Line size expansions in a straight shutdown system required by paragraph connections that simultaneously pipe run must be no closer than 120 (h), (j), or (k)(2) of this section; receives vapor from vessels with times the pipe’s diameter from the (3) When two hydrocarbon analyzers inerted, partially inerted, and non- detonation arrester unless the are used, the lower hydrocarbon inerted cargoes, and processes the vapor manufacturer has test data to show the concentration reading controls the with a vapor destruction unit must— expansion can be closer. enriching system and activates the (1) Have a detonation arrester located alarm and automatic shutdown system as close as practicable to each facility § 154.2107 Inerting, enriching, and diluting required by paragraph (i) of this section; vapor connection. The total pipe length systems. (4) When more than two hydrocarbon between the detonation arrester and This section applies only to facilities analyzers are used, the majority pair each facility vapor connection must not that control vapors of flammable, controls the enriching system and exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); and combustible, or non-high flash point activates the alarm and automatic (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or liquid cargoes. shutdown system required by paragraph diluting system that meets the (a) Before receiving cargo vapor, a (i) of this section; requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107; or vapor control system (VCS) that uses a (5) When two hydrocarbon analyzers (3) Have a base loading system that gas for inerting, enriching, or diluting are used, the higher hydrocarbon meets the requirements of 33 CFR must be capable of inerting, enriching, concentration reading controls the 154.2107(m). or diluting the vapor collection line, at diluting system and activates the alarm

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65174 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

and automatic shutdown system (4) Have a detonation arrester and a percentage points, whichever yields a required by paragraph (l) of this section; mechanism to prevent the backflow of higher oxygen concentration; and flammable vapors installed between the (2) Close the remotely operated cargo (6) When more than two hydrocarbon combustion device and the inert gas vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR analyzers are used, the majority pair injection point, if a combustion device 154.2101(a) and shut down any vapor- controls the diluting system and is used to produce the inert gas; and moving device when the oxygen activates the alarm and automatic (5) Have an alarm value in paragraph concentration in the vapor collection shutdown system required by paragraph (h)(2) of this section that is at least one line exceeds a level corresponding to (l) of this section. percentage point less than the shutdown either a total flammable concentration of (e) A VCS that uses volumetric value in paragraph (h)(3) of this section. 150 percent by volume of the upper measurements to control the amount of If the analyzers used to measure oxygen flammable limit or the upper flammable inerting, enriching, or diluting gas concentrations cannot accurately limit plus 7.5 percentage points, injected into the vapor collection line differentiate between the alarm value whichever yields a higher oxygen must be equipped, except as permitted and the shutoff value, the alarm value concentration; by paragraph (m) of this section, with at must be lowered until the analyzers (3) Have an alarm value in paragraph least one analyzer to activate the alarms become operable. (j)(1) of this section that is at least one and automatic shutdown systems (i) An enriching system must— percentage point less than the shutdown required by this section. (1) Supply sufficient compatible value in paragraph (j)(2) of this section. (f) Each oxygen or hydrocarbon hydrocarbon vapor to the vapor stream If the oxygen analyzers used to measure analyzer required by this section must— to make sure that the total flammable oxygen concentrations cannot (1) Be installed in accordance with concentration downstream of the accurately differentiate between the API 550 (incorporated by reference, see injection point is maintained either at or alarm value and the shutdown value, 33 CFR 154.106); above 170 percent by volume of the the alarm value must be lowered until (2) Have a system response time of not upper flammable limit or above the the analyzers become operable; and more than one minute from sample upper flammable limit plus 10 (4) Have an upper flammable limit input to 95 percent of final stable value percentage points, whichever is lower; listed in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of as tested per 33 CFR 154.2180 and 33 (2) Activate an alarm that satisfies the this section which is either the cargo’s CFR 154.2181; and requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) upper flammable limit or the enriching (3) Continuously sample the vapor when the total flammable concentration gas’s upper flammable limit, whichever concentration not more than 30 pipe in the vapor collection line either falls is higher. Alternatively, the mixture’s diameters from the gas injection point. below 170 percent by volume of the upper flammable limit, which may be (g) A VCS must not use oxygen upper flammable limit or below the determined by using methods found in analyzers that operate at elevated upper flammable limit plus 10 Coast Guard guidance available at temperatures (i.e., zirconia oxide or percentage points, whichever is lower; http://homeport.uscg.mil, may be used. thermomagnetic). (3) Close the remotely operated cargo (k) An enriching system may be used (h) An inerting system must— vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR in a VCS that receives inerted cargo (1) Supply sufficient inert gas to the 154.2101(a) and shut down any vapor- vapor from a vessel if— vapor stream to ensure that the oxygen moving device when the total (1) Hydrocarbon analyzers are used to concentration downstream of the flammable concentration in the vapor comply with paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(3) injection point is maintained at or collection line either falls below 150 of this section; or below 60 percent by volume of the percent by volume of the upper (2) Oxygen analyzers are used, in minimum oxygen concentration for flammable limit or below the upper which case the analyzers must— combustion (MOCC) for the specific flammable limit plus 7.5 percentage (i) Activate an alarm meeting 33 CFR combination of cargo vapors and inert points, whichever is lower; and 154.2100(e) when the oxygen gas being processed, which may be (4) Have an upper flammable limit concentration in the vapor collection determined by using Coast Guard listed in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and line exceeds 60 percent by volume of guidance available at http:// (i)(3) of this section which is either the the MOCC for the specific combination homeport.uscg.mil; cargo’s upper flammable limit or the of cargo vapors and gases; and (2) Activate an alarm that satisfies the enriching gas’s upper flammable limit, (ii) Close the remotely operated cargo requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) whichever is higher. Alternatively, the vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR when the oxygen concentration in the mixture’s upper flammable limit, which 154.2101(a) and shut down any vapor- vapor collection line exceeds 60 percent may be determined by using methods moving device when the oxygen by volume of the MOCC for the specific found in Coast Guard guidance available concentration exceeds 70 percent by combination of cargo vapors and inert at http://homeport.uscg.mil, may be volume of the MOCC for the specific gas being processed, which may be used. combination of cargo vapors and gases; determined by using Coast Guard (j) Oxygen analyzers may be used and guidance available at http:// instead of hydrocarbon analyzers in a (3) The MOCC in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) homeport.uscg.mil; VCS using an enriching system that and (k)(2)(ii) of this section is either the (3) Close the remotely operated cargo receives cargo vapor only from a vessel cargo’s MOCC or the enriching gas’s vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR with non-inerted cargo tanks, providing MOCC, whichever is lower. 154.2101(a) and shut down any vapor- that the analyzers— Alternatively, the mixture’s MOCC, moving device when the oxygen (1) Activate an alarm satisfying the which may be determined using Coast concentration in the vapor collection requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) Guard guidance available at http:// line exceeds 70 percent by volume of when the oxygen concentration in the homeport.uscg.mil, may be used. the MOCC for the specific combination vapor collection line exceeds a level (l) An air dilution system must— of cargo vapors and inert gas being corresponding to either a total (1) Supply a sufficient amount of processed, which may be determined by flammable concentration of 170 percent additional air to the vapor stream to using Coast Guard guidance available at by volume of the upper flammable limit keep the total flammable concentration http://homeport.uscg.mil; or the upper flammable limit plus 10 downstream of the injection point below

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65175

30 percent by volume of the lower guidance available at http:// construction of the blades or housing flammable limit; homeport.uscg.mil, may be used. must be one of the following: (2) Activate an alarm that satisfies the (o) For controlling vapors of inert and (1) Blades or housing of nonmetallic requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) non-inert cargoes at multiple berths construction; when the total flammable concentration while using enriching gas— (2) Blades and housing of nonferrous in the vapor collection line exceeds 30 (1) The lowest MOCC of the cargo or material; percent by volume of the lower enriching gas is used to determine the (3) Blades and housing of corrosion flammable limit; and analyzer alarm and shutdown setpoints resistant steel; (3) Close the remotely operated cargo at all berths. Alternatively, the mixture’s (4) Ferrous blades and housing with vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR MOCC, which may be determined using one-half inch or more design tip 154.2100(a) and shut down any vapor- Coast Guard guidance available at clearance; moving device when the total http://homeport.uscg.mil, may be used; (5) Nonferrous blades and ferrous flammable concentration in the vapor or housing with one-half inch or more collection line exceeds 50 percent by (2) A base loading method meeting design tip clearance; or volume of the lower flammable limit. the requirements of paragraph (m) of (6) Blades of aluminum or magnesium (m) An enriching system may use a this section is used for all berths. alloy and a ferrous housing with a base loading method to control the nonferrous insert sleeve at the periphery amount of enriching gas in a vapor § 154.2108 Vapor-moving devices. of the impeller. collection system if— (a) Paragraphs (b) and (e) of this § 154.2109 Vapor recovery and vapor (1) The flow rate of enriching gas is section apply only to facilities collecting destruction units. determined by assuming the vapor vapors of flammable, combustible, or Paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) of this entering the facility vapor connection non-high flash point liquid cargoes. section apply only to facilities collecting consists of 100 percent air; (b) Each inlet and outlet to a vapor- vapors of flammable, combustible, or (2) Two independent devices are used moving device that handles vapor that to verify the correct enriching gas non-high flash point liquid cargoes. has not been inerted, enriched, or (a) The inlet to a vapor recovery unit volumetric flow rate. One of the two diluted in accordance with 33 CFR that receives vapor that has not been devices must be a flow meter; 154.2107 must be fitted with a (3) One of the devices activates an inerted, enriched, or diluted in detonation arrester; however, the outlet accordance with 33 CFR 154.2107 must alarm that satisfies the requirements of detonation arrester may be omitted if 33 CFR 154.2100(e) when the amount of be fitted with a detonation arrester. the vapor-moving device is within 50 (b) The inlet to a vapor destruction enriching gas added results in a total times the pipe’s diameter of the unit must— flammable concentration in the vapor detonation arrester required by 33 CFR (1) Have a liquid seal that meets the collection line either below 170 percent 154.2109(a). requirements of paragraph (e) of this by volume of the upper flammable limit (c) If the vapor is handled by a section, except as specified by or below the upper flammable limit plus reciprocating or screw-type compressor paragraph (b)(3) of this section; and 10 percentage points, whichever is in the vapor collection system, the (2) Have two quick-closing stop valves lower; compressor must be installed with installed in the vapor line. One of them (4) The second device activates indicators and audible and visible must be installed upstream of the closure of the remotely operated cargo alarms to warn against the following detonation arrester required by vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR conditions: paragraph (c)(2) of this section. The 154.2101(a) and shuts down any vapor- (1) Excessive gas temperature at the quick-closing stop valves must— moving device when the amount of compressor outlet; (i) Close within 30 seconds after enriching gas added results in a total (2) Excessive cooling water detection of a shutdown condition by a flammable concentration in the vapor temperature; control component required by this collection line either below 150 percent (3) Excessive vibration; subpart for a vapor control system (VCS) by volume of the upper flammable limit (4) Low lube oil level; with a vapor destruction unit; or below the upper flammable limit plus (5) Low lube oil pressure; and (ii) Close automatically if the control 7.5 percentage points, whichever is (6) Excessive shaft bearing signal is lost; lower; and temperature. (iii) Have a local valve position (5) The upper flammable limit in (d) If the vapor is handled by a liquid indicator or be designed so that the paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this ring-type compressor in the vapor valve position is readily determined section is either the cargo’s upper collection system, it must be installed from the valve handle or valve stem flammable limit or the enriching gas’s with indicators and audible and visible position; and upper flammable limit, whichever is alarms to warn against the following (iv) If the valve seat is fitted with higher. Alternatively, the mixture’s conditions: resilient material, not allow appreciable upper flammable limit, which may be (1) Low level of liquid sealing leakage when the resilient material is determined using Coast Guard guidance medium; damaged or destroyed; and available at http://homeport.uscg.mil, (2) Lack of flow of the liquid sealing (3) Instead of a liquid seal as required may be used. medium; by paragraph (b)(1) of this section, have (n) For controlling vapors of different (3) Excessive temperature of the the following: cargoes at multiple berths while using liquid sealing medium; (i) An anti-flashback burner approved enriching gas, the highest upper (4) Low lube oil level; by the Commandant and installed at flammable limit or the lowest MOCC of (5) Low lube oil pressure, if each burner within the vapor the cargo or enriching gas, whichever is pressurized lubricating system; and destruction unit; and applicable, is used to determine the (6) Excessive shaft bearing (ii) A differential pressure sensor that analyzer alarm and shutdown setpoints. temperature. activates the quick-closing stop valves Alternatively, the mixture’s upper (e) If the vapor is handled by a as required by paragraph (b)(2) of this flammable limit or MOCC, which may centrifugal compressor, fan, or lobe section upon sensing a reverse flow be determined by using Coast Guard blower in the vapor collection system, condition.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65176 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

(c) A vapor destruction unit must— (4) For inert cargo systems, have at (3) A mechanism to prevent backflow (1) Not be within 30 meters (98.8 feet) least one oxygen analyzer in the vapor of vapors to the marine vapor line. of any tank vessel berth or mooring at line that activates an alarm that satisfies (b) Vapors from plant processing areas the facility; the requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) unrelated to tank vessel operations must (2) Have a detonation arrester fitted in when the oxygen concentration in the not enter the vapor line of a marine VCS the inlet vapor line; and vapor line exceeds 60 percent by before the devices required by (3) Activate an alarm that satisfies the volume of the minimum oxygen paragraph (a) of this section. requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) and concentration for combustion (MOCC) (c) A facility that wants to connect a shut down when a flame is detected on for the specific combination of cargo facility vapor line, which collects vapor the detonation arrester. vapor and inert gas, which may be from other plant processing areas that (d) When a vapor destruction unit determined using Coast Guard guidance are not related to tank vessel operations, shuts down or has a flame-out available at http://homeport.uscg.mil. to a marine VCS, must receive approval condition, the vapor destruction unit (b) A vapor balancing system, while in writing from the Commandant. control system must— in operation to transfer vapor to or from § 154.2112 Vapors with potential to (1) Activate and close the quick- a vessel cargo tank and connected by polymerize or freeze—Special closing stop valves required by way of the facility storage tank vent to requirements. paragraph (b)(2) of this section; a facility’s main VCS with a vapor (a) A vapor control system (VCS) that (2) Close the remotely operated cargo destruction unit, must have— controls vapors with the potential to vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR (1) A mechanism to prevent backflow polymerize at a normal ambient 154.2101(a); and of vapor from the facility’s main VCS to condition must— (3) Automatically shut down any the marine vapor line; and (1) Be designed to prevent vapor-moving devices installed in the (2) Two fail-safe, quick-closing valves condensation of monomer vapor. VCS. installed in the marine vapor line at the Methods such as heat tracing and (e) If a liquid seal is installed at the facility storage tank that automatically insulation are permitted if they do not inlet to a vapor destruction unit, then— close when— result in an increased risk of (1) The liquid used in the liquid seal (i) Flame is detected on the facility polymerization; must be compatible with the vapors storage tank; or (2) Be designed so that polymerization being controlled; (ii) The temperature of the facility can be detected. Any points suspected (2) For partially or totally soluble storage tank’s vapor space reaches of being sites for potential cargoes that can polymerize in solution, 177 °C (350 °F) or 70 percent of the polymerization buildup must be there must be an adequate amount of vapor’s auto-ignition temperature in equipped with inspection openings; and inhibitor in the liquid seal; degrees Celsius, whichever is lower. (3) Include devices to measure the (3) The liquid seal must be compatible (c) Transferring vapor from a non- pressure drop across detonation with the design of the VCS and must not inerted facility storage tank to a vessel arresters due to polymerization. Any contribute to the flammability of the cargo tank that is required to be inerted device used for this purpose, including vapor stream; and in accordance with 46 CFR 32.53, differential pressure monitors, must not (4) The liquid seal must have a low- 153.500, or Table 151.05, is prohibited. have the capability of transmitting a level alarm and a low-low level (d) A vapor balancing system that detonation across the detonation shutdown. transfers vapor to a vessel cargo tank arrester. § 154.2110 Vapor balancing requirements. must not use a vapor-moving device to (b) A VCS that controls cargo vapors assist vapor transfer or inject inerting, that potentially freeze at ambient Paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(4), (b), and (c) of enriching, or diluting gas into the vapor temperature must have a design that this section apply only to facilities line without approval from the prevents the freezing of vapors or transferring vapors of flammable, Commandant. condensate at ambient temperature or combustible, or non-high flash point that detects and removes the liquid liquid cargoes. § 154.2111 Vapor control system condensate and solids to prevent (a) A vapor control system (VCS) that connected to a facility’s main vapor control accumulation. uses a vapor balancing system in which system. cargo vapor is transferred from a vessel (a) When a marine vapor control § 154.2113 Alkylene oxides—Special cargo tank or facility storage tank system (VCS) is connected to a facility’s requirements. through the facility vapor collection main VCS serving other plant A vapor control system (VCS) that system to a facility storage tank or vessel processing areas that are not related to controls vapors of an alkylene oxide cargo tank must— tank vessel operations, the marine vapor must comply with the following: (1) Have facility storage tank high- line, before the point where the marine (a) The VCS’s equipment, hoses, level alarm systems and facility storage VCS connects to the facility’s main VCS, piping, and all piping components, tank overfill control systems arranged to must be fitted with— including valves, flanges, and fittings, prevent the cargo from entering the (1) A detonation arrester, unless both which must be of a type and constructed vapor return line; the marine VCS and the facility’s main out of materials suitable for use with (2) Have a detonation arrester located VCS only control vapors of cargoes that alkylene oxide; within the storage tank containment are non-flammable, non-combustible, or (b) The VCS used for collecting an area and a detonation arrester located as that have high flashpoints; alkylene oxide vapor must not be used close as practicable to the facility vapor (2) Two fail-safe, quick closing valves, for collecting other vapors and must be connection. The total pipe length one on each side of any detonation separated from any other VCS, except as between the detonation arrester and the arrester required by paragraph (a)(1) of specified by paragraph (c) of this facility vapor connection must not this section, which automatically close section; and exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); when a flame is detected on the (c) The VCS must be adequately (3) Meet the overpressure and over- detonation arrester or a VCS shutdown cleaned in accordance with 33 CFR vacuum protection requirements of 33 condition occurs, or when the facility’s 154.2150(p) and recertified by a CFR 154.2103; and marine VCS is not in operation; and certifying entity if—

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65177

(1) The VCS is used to control other be checked for calibration response by shutdowns required by 33 CFR 154.2103 vapors; or use of a span gas as defined by the test active, before and during line-clearing (2) The VCS is returned to alkylene program contained in 33 CFR 154.2180 operations; oxide service after being used to control and 33 CFR 154.2181, and comply with (2) Personnel performing the line- other cargo vapors. the minimum requirements as defined clearing operation must be adequately in 33 CFR 154.2180 and 33 CFR trained on the specific line-clearing Transfer Facilities—Operations 154.2181, instead of the test required by system being used. Accurate written § 154.2150 General requirements. paragraph (c)(4) of this section; and procedures that address event sequence, (a) No transfer operation using a vapor (6) The vacuum and pressure relief equipment, safety precautions, and control system (VCS) may be conducted valves required by 33 CFR 154.2103 overpressurization hazards must be unless the facility operator has a copy must be checked not more than 24 hours made available to all personnel involved of the facility operations manual, with before each transfer to make sure they in the line-clearing operations; the VCS addendum, marked by the local are operating without constraint and to (3) Line-clearing procedures must be Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) ensure that any required flame screens reviewed by both the vessel and facility as required by 33 CFR 154.325(d). or flame arresters are not damaged. personnel in charge as part of the pre- (b) Personnel in charge of a facility (d) The proper position of all valves transfer conference. Topics of must ensure that— in the vapor line between the vessel’s discussion during the pre-transfer (1) The facility controls vapor only tanks and the facility vapor collection conference must include, but need not from cargoes that are properly system must be verified before the start be limited to— authorized for vapor control in the of the transfer operation. (i) Event sequence; (e) A tank barge overfill control facility’s certification letter; (ii) Equipment; system that meets the requirements of (iii) Safety precautions; (2) The facility transfers vapor only to 46 CFR 39.2009(a)(2) must— (iv) Overpressurization hazards; or from a vessel that has its certificate (1) Not be connected to an overfill (v) Personnel roles; of inspection or certificate of sensor circuit that exceeds the system’s (vi) Gas volumetric flow rates; compliance endorsed in accordance rated inductance and capacitance; and (vii) Gas pressures; with 46 CFR 39.1013 or 46 CFR 39.1015 (2) Be tested for proper operation after (viii) Volume of residual cargo in the for each cargo intended for transfer; and connection is made with the vessel by line; (3) If the vessel tanks to be vapor simulating liquid high level and overfill (ix) Amount of ullage space that is controlled contain vapor from previous at each tank. available for line displacement and cargo transfers other than the cargo or (f) When receiving vapor from a vessel connections; cargoes intended for transfer, the facility with cargo tanks that are required to be (x) Valve alignment; and vessel must be authorized to control inerted in accordance with 46 CFR (xi) Units of measure; the additional vapor from the previous 32.53, 46 CFR 153.500, or 46 CFR Table (xii) Terminology; and cargo transfers. Any oxygen or 151.05, the remotely operated cargo (xiii) Anticipated duration of the hydrocarbon analyzer alarm and vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR evolution; shutdown setpoints must be set to 154.2101(a) must not be opened until (4) The pig must be inspected to accommodate all of the cargo vapors. the pressure at the facility vapor ensure that it is of sufficient durability (c) The facility personnel in charge connection exceeds 0.2 pounds per and condition; be of an appropriate size, must ensure that safety system testing is square inch gauge (psig). type, and construction for the intended conducted as follows: (g) The initial cargo transfer rate must operation; and be inspected for defects (1) Pressure sensors, alarms, and not exceed the rate agreed upon at the before each use and replaced if automatic shutdown systems required pre-transfer conference and 46 CFR necessary; by 33 CFR 154.2103, 154.2107, and 39.3001(g). (5) Personnel performing line-clearing 154.2110, except as exempted by (h) The cargo transfer rate must not operations must monitor pig movement paragraph (c)(2) or (c)(3) of this section, exceed the maximum allowable transfer at all times. The facility and vessel must be tested by applying the test rate as determined by the lesser of the manifold valves must be closed pressure at the sensors not more than 24 following: immediately after the pig reaches the hours before each transfer; (1) A transfer rate corresponding to pig-receiving device; and (2) The pressure sensors required by the maximum vapor processing rate for (6) If the pigging system contains 33 CFR 154.2103 may meet the the VCS, as specified in the facility pressure-sensing, relieving, or alarming requirements of the test program operations manual; or components in addition to those contained in 33 CFR 154.2180 and 33 (2) The vessel’s maximum transfer required by 33 CFR 154.2103, the CFR 154.2181 instead of the current rate in accordance with 46 CFR components must be periodically tested program, which mandates tests within 39.3001(d). in accordance with paragraphs (c) and 24 hours before each transfer as required (i) While transferring cargo to a vessel (q) of this section. by paragraph (c)(1) of this section; connected to a VCS, compressed air or (k) If one or more analyzers required (3) Visible and audible alarm gas may be used to clear cargo hoses and by 33 CFR 154.2107 and 154.2110 indicators must be tested not more than loading arms, but must not be used to become inoperable during a transfer 24 hours before each transfer; clear cargo lines unless a cargo line operation, the operation may continue, (4) The analyzers required by 33 CFR clearance (pigging) system that meets 33 provided that at least one analyzer 154.2105, 154.2107, and 154.2110, CFR 154.2104 is provided. remains operational; however, no except as exempted by paragraph (c)(5) (j) If a pigging system is used to clear further transfer operations may start of this section, must be checked for cargo lines to the tank vessel while the until all inoperable analyzers are calibration response by using a span gas vessel is connected to the facility VCS, replaced or repaired. not more than 24 hours before each the following operational requirements (l) Whenever a condition results in a transfer; apply: shutdown of the VCS, the emergency (5) The analyzers required by 33 CFR (1) The VCS must be in operation, shutdown system required by 33 CFR 154.2105, 154.2107, and 154.2110 may with all of the high-pressure alarms and 154.550 must be automatically activated

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65178 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

to terminate cargo loading into tanks Alternative Analyzer and Pressure quarterly tests are completed, the person which are being vapor controlled. Sensor Reliability Testing in charge must ensure that the vapor (m) If it is suspected that a flare in the control alarms and automatic shutdown § 154.2180 Alternative testing program— system are tested no more than 24 hours VCS has had a flashback, or if a flame Generally. is detected on a detonation arrester prior to any transfer or tank barge (a) As an alternative to complying cleaning operation. required by 33 CFR 154.2109(c)(2), the with the vapor control system (VCS) transfer operation must stop and cannot (g) Analyzers required by 33 CFR analyzer and pressure sensor safety 154.2105(a) and (j) and 154.2107(d) and restart until that detonation arrester and testing requirements provided by 33 any quick-closing stop valves (e) must be checked for calibration using CFR 154.2150(c) and 33 CFR a span gas. downstream of the detonation arrester 154.2250(c), the facility person in (h) The facility operator must are inspected and found to be in charge may administer a reliability maintain and make available upon the satisfactory condition. assurance test program in accordance request of the Commandant and the (n) Before each transfer operation, the with this section and 33 CFR 154.2181. certifying entity that certifies the VCS freezing point of each cargo must be (b) As used in this section: the following reliability assurance test determined. If there is a possibility that (1) Calibration drift or CD means the program documents for two years: the ambient air temperature during difference in the analyzer output (1) All test procedures; transfer operations will be at or below readings from the established reference (2) The dates of all tests, type of tests the freezing point of the cargo, adequate value after a stated period of operation made, and who conducted the tests; precautions must be taken to prevent during which no unscheduled (3) Results of the tests, including the freezing of vapor or condensate, or to maintenance, repair, or adjustment took ‘‘as found’’ and ‘‘as left’’ conditions; and detect and remove the frozen liquid and place; (4) A record of the date and time of condensation to prevent accumulation. (2) Calibration error or CE means the repairs made. difference between the gas (o) Before each transfer operation, the concentration exhibited by the gas § 154.2181 Alternative testing program— cargo vapor must be evaluated to analyzer and the known concentration Test requirements. determine its potential to polymerize, of the cylinder gas; (a) The safety system function test and adequate precautions must be taken (3) Response time or RT means the required by 33 CFR 154.2180 must be to prevent and detect polymerization of time interval between the start of a step performed once every two weeks and the cargo vapors. change in the system input (e.g., change test for the proper operation and (p) Mixing of incompatible vapors is of calibration gas) and the time when interaction of the analyzer or pressure prohibited. The VCS piping, equipment, the data recording system displays 95 sensor/switch with shutdown hoses, valves, and arresters must be percent of the final stable value; and interlocks, and audible and visible purged between vapor control (4) Sampling system bias or SSB alarm devices. operations that involve incompatible means the difference between the gas (b) The calibration error (CE) test chemical vapors in accordance with the concentrations indicated by the required by 33 CFR 154.2180 must be following: measurement system when a known performed once every month and cylinder gas is introduced at the outlet documented as shown in Forms (1) Chemical compatibility must be 154.2181(b)(2) and 154.2181(b)(3) of this determined by using the procedures of the sampling probe and when the same gas is introduced directly to the section, to document the accuracy and contained in 46 CFR part 150; analyzer. linearity of the monitoring equipment (2) Purge gas must be an inert gas, air, (c) All analyzers used in a VCS must for the entire measurement range. or enriching gas, and must be adequate be safety system function tested and (1) The CE test must expose the to reduce the level of residual vapor to tested for CE, CD, RT, and SSB, in measurement system, including all a level at which reaction with the accordance with 33 CFR 154.2181. monitoring components (e.g., sample subsequent vapor cannot occur; and (d) All pressure sensors/switches used lines, filters, scrubbers, conditioners, (3) The required duration of purge in a VCS must be safety system function and as much of the probe as time must be calculated and approved tested and tested for CE and CD, in practicable), to the calibration gases, by the certifying entity during the accordance with 33 CFR 154.2181. introduced through an injection port certification or recertification. (e) The facility person in charge must located so as to allow a check of the ensure the following: entire measurement system when (q) VCS equipment and (1) Calibration of instrumentation calibration gases are introduced; instrumentation must be tested as using standard procedures provided by (2) The CE test must check the required by 33 CFR 156.170(g), with a the manufacturer or service provider; calibrated range of each analyzer using representative of the COTP invited to (2) Monitoring of all interlocks, a lower (zero) and upper (span) witness these tests. The test procedure alarms, and recording devices for proper reference gas standard. Three and a checklist must be approved by the operation while instrumentation is measurements must be taken against certifying entity during the initial being calibrated; each standard and recorded as shown in certification of the system and (3) Use of a certified 2 percent or Form 154.2181(b)(2) of this section, incorporated into the facility operations better gas standard to calibrate the with the average of the three values in manual. analyzers; and each case then used to calculate the CE (r) A transfer operation that includes (4) Use of a certified secondary according to this equation (where CE = collection of vapor emitted to or from a standard to calibrate the pressure percentage calibration error based upon vessel’s cargo tanks must meet the sensors/switches. span of the instrument, R = reference transfer requirements of 33 CFR (f) Upon failing any test under 33 CFR value of zero or high-level calibration 156.120(aa), and a declaration of 154.2181, the facility person in charge gas introduced into the monitoring inspection meeting the requirements of must ensure that all monthly and system, A = actual monitoring system 33 CFR 156.150 must be completed quarterly tests, including CE, CD, RT, response to the calibration gas, and S = before each transfer. and SSB, are conducted; and until all span of the instrument):

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65179

RA− CE = ×100 S

FORM 154.2181(b)(2)—CALIBRATION ERROR DETERMINATION

Calibration Monitor Difference Value Response Zero Span

1—Zero

1—Span

2—Zero

2—Span

3—Zero

3—Span

Mean Difference =

Calibration Error = % %

(3) The CE test must check each and record the desired setting and the recorded on the test instrument, and pressure sensor/switch for upscale as-found set pressure. Calculate and S = span of the instrument): (activate) and downscale (deactivate) record the difference of the two settings. hysteresis around the sensor/switch set Calculate the error percentage using this RA− pressure. The calibration error must be equation (where CE = percentage CE = ×100 calculated and recorded as shown in calibration error based upon span of the S Form 154.2181(b)(3) of this section. Test instrument, R = reference setting of the Record sensor ‘‘as-left’’ setting only if the pressure sensor/switch three times instrument, A = actual response as an adjustment is made.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP21OC10.004 EP21OC10.005 65180 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

FORM 154.2181(b)(3)—SWITCH CALIBRATION ERROR

(c) The calibration drift (CD) test (1) The CD measurement must be (between 75 and 95 percent of the required by 33 CFR 154.2180 must be conducted once daily for seven instrument span). performed once every quarter and consecutive days without making any (3) Calculate and record the CD for documented as shown in Form adjustments to the instruments. seven consecutive days using the 154.2181(c)(3) of this section, to verify (2) Conduct the CD test at zero level equations in paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) the ability of the instrument to conform (between 0 and 20 percent of the of this section and Form 154.2181(c)(3) to the established calibration. instrument span) and at high level of this section.

FORM 154.2181(c)(3)—CALIBRATION DRIFT DETERMINATION

Reference Value Difference Percent of RV Day Day/Time (RV) Monitor Value (Error) (Drift)

Low-Level:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP21OC10.006 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65181

FORM 154.2181(c)(3)—CALIBRATION DRIFT DETERMINATION—Continued

Reference Value Difference Percent of RV Day Day/Time (RV) Monitor Value (Error) (Drift)

High-Level:

(d) The response time (RT) test (i) Inject span (or zero) cylinder gas which 95 percent of the step change required by 33 CFR 154.2180 must be into the sample system as close to the occurred. performed once every quarter and sample probe as possible; (i) To find this value, take 5 percent documented as shown in Form (ii) Allow the analyzer to stabilize and of the average step change value and 154.2181(d) of this section, to determine record the stabilized value. A stable subtract the result from the cylinder gas the RT which is the largest average reading is achieved when the analyzed value as shown in the response time in the upscale or concentration reading deviates less than following equation: downscale direction. 6 percent from the measured average 95% step change value = cylinder gas ¥ × (1) For systems that normally operate concentration in 6 minutes or if it value (0.05 avg. step change) below 20 percent of calibrated range, deviates less than 2 percent of the (ii) Inject span (or zero) cylinder gas only a span (upscale) test is required. monitor’s span value in 1 minute; into the sample system as close to the sample probe as possible, and measure (2) Record the span (upscale) value, (iii) Stop the span (or zero) gas flow, allow the monitor to stabilize back to the time it takes to reach the 95 percent zero (downscale) cylinder gas value, and step change value. stable, initial process-measured variable the measured variable value, and record the stabilized value; and (iii) Repeat the previous step value. (paragraph (d)(5)(ii) of this section) a (3) Determine the step change, which (iv) Repeat this procedure a total of total of three times each with span and is equal to the average difference three times and subtract the average zero cylinder gas to determine average between the initial process-measured final monitor reading from the average upscale and downscale response times. starting monitor value to determine the variable value and the average final (iv) Compare the response times average upscale (or downscale) step stable cylinder gas-measured value. achieved for the upscale and downscale change. tests. The longer of these two times (4) To determine both upscale and (5) Determine the response time, equals the response time for the downscale step change intervals— which is equal to the elapsed time at analyzer.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65182 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

FORM 154.2181(d)—RESPONSE TIME

(e) The sample system bias (SSB) test (1) Oxygen analyzers must not deviate Tank Barge Cleaning Facilities—VCS required by 33 CFR 154.2180 must be from the reference value of the zero- or Design and Installation performed once every quarter and high-level calibration gas by more than documented, to establish that the § 154.2200 Applicable transfer facility 0.5 percent of full scale; design and installation requirements. system has no additional influence on (2) Total hydrocarbon analyzers must the measurement being made by the A tank barge cleaning facility’s not deviate from the reference value of analyzer. (TBCF’s) vapor control system (VCS) the zero- or high-level calibration gas by must meet the following design and (1) Conduct a close CE test in more than 1 percent of full scale; and accordance with paragraph (b) of this installation requirements of this subpart section, by injecting calibration gas as (3) Pressure sensors/switches must for a transfer facility’s VCS: close as possible to the analyzer, not deviate from the reference value of (a) 33 CFR 154.2100(b), (c), (f), (g), (i), eliminating as much of the sample the zero- or high-level calibration gas by (j), and (k): general design and system components as possible, while more than 1.5 percent of full range. installation requirements; still simulating the normal source (g) For RT tests, each oxygen or (b) 33 CFR 154.2106: detonation operating conditions. hydrocarbon analyzer must respond, in arrester installation; (2) If system integrity is maintained, less than 1 minute, to 95 percent of the (c) 33 CFR 154.2107: inerting, and it has not become contaminated, the final stable value of a test span gas. enriching, and diluting systems; difference between the close and (h) For SSB tests, the analyzer system (d) 33 CFR 154.2108: vapor-moving standard CE tests should be the same. bias must be less than 5 percent of the devices; (f) For CE and CD tests, analyzers and average difference between the standard (e) 33 CFR 154.2109: vapor recovery pressure sensors must meet the CE test and the close CE test, divided by and vapor destruction units; following minimum compliance the individual analyzer span. (f) 33 CFR 154.2111: VCS connected requirements: to a facility’s main VCS;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP21OC10.007 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65183

(g) 33 CFR 154.2112: special installed in the fluid injection supply corresponding to the upper pressure requirements for vapors with the line between the point where the inert determined in paragraph (b) of this potential to polymerize or freeze; and gas or other medium is generated and section or a lower pressure agreed upon (h) 33 CFR 154.2113: special the fluid injection connection. The by the facility and barge persons in requirements for alkylene oxides. valve must comply with 33 CFR charge. The pressure-sensing device 154.2101(a)(1) through (a)(6). must be located in the fluid § 154.2201 Vapor control system—General (d) Each hose used for transferring displacement system’s piping requirements. vapors must— downstream of any devices that could (a) Vapor control system (VCS) design (1) Have a design burst pressure of at potentially isolate the barge’s vapor and installation must eliminate least 25 pounds per square inch gauge collection system from the pressure- potential overpressure and vacuum (psig); sensing device. The pressure measured hazards, sources of ignition, and (2) Have a maximum allowable by the sensing device must be corrected mechanical damage to the maximum working pressure (MAWP) no less than for pressure drops across any barge practicable extent. Each remaining 5 psig; piping, hoses, or arms that are used to hazard source that is not eliminated (3) Be capable of withstanding at least inject the fluid. must be specifically addressed in the the maximum vacuum rating of the (d) A fluid displacement system must protection system design and system vapor-moving device without collapsing provide a pressure-sensing device that is operational requirements. or constricting; independent of the device required by (b) Any pressure, flow, or (4) Be electrically continuous, with a paragraph (c) of this section. This concentration indication required by maximum resistance of 10,000 ohms; pressure-sensing device must activate this part must provide a remote (5) Have flanges with a bolthole the fluid displacement system indicator on the facility where the VCS arrangement complying with the emergency shutdown and close the is controlled, unless the local indicator requirements for Class 150 ANSI B16.5 remotely operated cargo vapor shutoff is clearly visible and readable from the flanges (incorporated by reference, see valve required by 33 CFR 154.2101(a). It operator’s normal position at the VCS 33 CFR 154.106); must also close the remotely operated control station. (6) Be abrasion and kinking resistant; shutoff valve required by 33 CFR (c) Any condition requiring an alarm and 154.2202(c) when the pressure at the as specified in this part must activate an (7) Be compatible with vapors being fluid injection connection reaches 90 audible and visible alarm where the transferred. percent of the lowest setting of any VCS is controlled. (e) Fixed vapor collection arms must pressure relief valve on the barge. The (d) A mechanism must be developed meet the requirements of paragraph (d) pressure-sensing device must be located and used to eliminate any liquid from of this section. in the fluid displacement system’s the VCS. piping downstream of any device that (e) A liquid knockout vessel must be § 154.2203 Facility requirements for barge could potentially isolate the barge’s VCS installed between the facility vapor vapor overpressure and vacuum protection. from the pressure-sensing device. The connection and any vapor-moving In this section, the requirements of pressure measured by the sensing device in systems that have the having a flame arrester or a flame screen device must be corrected for pressure potential for two-phase (vapor/liquid) at the opening of a pressure relief valve drops across any barge piping, hoses, or flow from the barge or the potential for or a vacuum relief valve apply only to arms that are used to inject the fluid. liquid condensate to form as a result of facilities collecting vapors of flammable, (e) If a vapor-moving device capable the enrichment process. The liquid combustible, or non-high flash point of drawing more than 0.5 pounds per knockout vessel must have— liquid cargoes. (1) A means to indicate the level of (a) A facility vapor collection system square inch gauge (psig) vacuum is used liquid in the device; must have a capacity for collecting to draw vapor, air, inert gas, or other (2) A high liquid level sensor that cleaning facility vapors at a rate of no medium from the barge, a vacuum relief activates an alarm that satisfies the less than 1.1 times the facility’s valve must be installed on the facility’s requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e); maximum allowable gas-freeing rate, fixed vapor collection system piping and plus any inerting, diluting, or enriching between the facility vapor connection (3) A high-high liquid level sensor gas that may be added to the system. and the vapor-moving device. The that closes the remotely operated cargo (b) A facility vapor control system vacuum relief valve must— vapor shutoff valve required by 33 CFR (VCS) must be designed to prevent the (1) Relieve at a pressure such that the 154.2101(a) and shuts down any vapor- pressure in a vessel’s cargo tanks from pressure at the facility vapor connection going below 80 percent of the highest is maintained at or above 14.2 pounds moving device before liquid is carried ¥ over to the vapor-moving device. One setting of any of the barge’s vacuum per square inch absolute (psia) ( 0.5 sensor with two stages may be used to relief valves or exceeding 80 percent of psig); meet this requirement as well as the lowest setting of any of the barge’s (2) Have a relieving capacity equal to paragraph (e)(2) of this section. pressure relief valves. The VCS must be or greater than the maximum capacity of capable of maintaining the pressure in the vapor-moving device; § 154.2202 Vapor line connections. the barge’s cargo tanks within this range (3) Have a flame arrester or flame (a) 33 CFR 154.2101(a), (e), and (g) at any gas-freeing rate less than or equal screen fitted at the vacuum relief apply to a tank barge cleaning facility’s to the maximum gas-freeing rate opening; (TBCF’s) vapor control system (VCS). determined by the requirements in 46 (4) Have been tested for relieving (b) The remotely operated cargo vapor CFR 39.6007(c). capacity in accordance with paragraph shutoff valve required by 33 CFR (c) A fluid displacement system must 1.5.1.3 of API 2000 (incorporated by 154.2101(a) must be located upstream of provide a pressure-sensing device that reference, see 33 CFR 154.106), with a the liquid knockout vessel required by activates an alarm that satisfies the flame arrester or flame screen fitted; and 33 CFR 154.2201(e). requirements of 33 CFR 154.2100(e) (5) Be constructed of materials (c) A fluid displacement system must when the pressure at the fluid injection compatible with the vapors being gas- have a remotely operated shutoff valve connection exceeds either the pressure freed.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65184 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

(f) The vacuum relief valve displays the pressure in the vapor (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR requirements of paragraph (e) of this collection line upstream of any isolation 154.106). section may include a valve to isolate it valve and any devices, such as strainers, (n) If the pressure relief valve is not from the facility vapor collection piping, that could cause a blockage in the vapor designed with a minimum vapor provided— line. discharge velocity of 30 meters (98.4 (1) The isolation valve must be (j) A fluid displacement system must feet) per second, the relieving capacity interlocked with any vapor-moving include a pressure-indicating device test required by paragraphs (k)(4) and device such that the vapor-moving that displays the pressure in the fluid (l)(5) of this section must be carried out device cannot activate unless the displacement system injection line. This with a flame screen or flame arrester isolation valve is in the full open device must be within 6 meters (19.7 fitted at the discharge opening. position (i.e., the vacuum relief valve is feet) of the fluid injection connection. (o) A pressure indicating device must not isolated); and (k) If a fluid displacement system be provided by the facility for (2) The isolation valve can only be used to inject inert gas or another installation at the connection required closed after the facility person in charge medium into the cargo tank of a barge by 46 CFR 39.6003(b). has acknowledged that the hatch being gas-freed is capable of producing opening required by 33 CFR 154.2250(i) § 154.2204 Fire, explosion, and detonation a pressure greater than 2 psig, a pressure protection. is open and secured. relief valve must be installed in the (g) If a vapor-moving device capable fluid displacement system injection line This section applies to tank barge of drawing more than 0.5 psig vacuum between the fluid injection source and cleaning facilities (TBCFs) collecting is used to draw vapor, air, inert gas, or the fluid injection connection that— vapors of flammable, combustible, or non-high flash point liquid cargoes. other medium from the barge, the (1) Relieves at a predetermined (a) A vapor control system (VCS) with facility must install portable, pressure such that the pressure in the a single facility vapor connection that intrinsically safe, pressure-sensing fluid displacement system at the fluid processes vapor with a vapor recovery devices on any cargo tank at the injection connection does not exceed unit must— connection required by 46 CFR 1.5 psig; (1) Have a detonation arrester located 39.6003(b) before any cleaning (2) Has a relieving capacity equal to operation begins on the tank. A as close as practicable to the facility or greater than the maximum volumetric vapor connection. The total pipe length pressure-sensing device must be flow capacity of the fluid displacement provided that— between the detonation arrester and the system; facility vapor connection must not (1) Activates an alarm that satisfies 33 (3) Has a flame screen or flame CFR 154.2100(e) when the pressure in exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); or arrester fitted at the relief opening; and (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or the cargo tank being cleaned falls below (4) Has been tested for relieving 80 percent of the highest setting of any diluting system that meets the capacity in accordance with paragraph requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. of the barge’s vacuum relief valves, or a 1.5.1.3 of API 2000, when fitted with a higher pressure agreed upon by the (b) A VCS with a single facility vapor flame screen or flame arrester. connection that processes vapor with a facility and barge persons in charge; and (l) When using the fluid displacement (2) Activates the emergency shutdown vapor destruction unit must— system, if the pressure in the facility’s system for the vapor-moving device and (1) Have a detonation arrester located fixed vapor collection system can closes the remotely operated cargo as close as practicable to the facility exceed 2 psig during a malfunction in vapor shutoff valve described in 33 CFR vapor connection. The total pipe length an inerting, enriching, or diluting 154.2101(a) when the pressure in the between the detonation arrester and the system, a pressure relief valve must— cargo tank being cleaned falls below 90 facility vapor connection must not (1) Be installed between the point percent of the highest setting of any of exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); and where inerting, enriching, or diluting the barge’s vacuum relief valves, or a (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or gas is added to the facility’s fixed vapor higher pressure agreed upon by the diluting system that meets the collection system piping and the facility facility and barge persons in charge. requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. vapor connection; This pressure-sensing device must be (c) A VCS with multiple facility vapor (2) Relieve at a predetermined independent of the device used to connections that processes vapor with a pressure such that the pressure at the activate an alarm required by paragraph vapor recovery unit must have a facility vapor connection does not (g)(1) of this section. detonation arrester located as close as (h) The pressure-sensing devices exceed 1.5 psig; practicable to each facility vapor required by paragraph (g) of this section (3) Have a relieving capacity equal to connection. The total pipe length must— or greater than the maximum capacity of between the detonation arrester and (1) Have suitable means, such as the facility’s inerting, enriching, or each facility vapor connection must not approved intrinsic safety barriers that diluting gas source; exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet). are able to accept passive devices, so (4) Have a flame screen or flame (d) A VCS with multiple facility vapor that the under-pressure alarm circuits of arrester fitted at the relief opening; connections that processes vapor with a the barge side of the under-pressure (5) Have been tested for relieving vapor destruction unit must— control system, including cabling, capacity in accordance with paragraph (1) Have a detonation arrester located normally closed switches, and pin and 1.5.1.3 of API 2000, when fitted with a as close as practicable to each facility sleeve connectors, are intrinsically safe; flame screen or flame arrester; and vapor connection. The total pipe length (2) Be connected to the under- (6) Be constructed of materials between the detonation arrester and pressure alarm system by a four-wire, compatible with the vapors being gas- each facility vapor connection must not 16-ampere shielded flexible cable; and freed. exceed 18 meters (59.1 feet); and (3) Have cable shielding grounded to (m) For fluid displacement systems, (2) Have an inerting, enriching, or the under-pressure alarm system. the fluid injection connection must be diluting system that meets the (i) A pressure-indicating device must electrically insulated from the fluid requirements of 33 CFR 154.2107. be provided within 6 meters (19.7 feet) injection source in accordance with (e) 33 CFR 154.2105(j) applies to a of the facility vapor connection which OCIMF ISGOTT section 17.5 TBCF’s VCS.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65185

Tank Barge Cleaning Facilities— and the facility vapor collection system (3) Each required detonation arrester Operations is correctly positioned to allow the has been inspected internally within the collection of vapors; last year, or more frequently if § 154.2250 General requirements. (2) A vapor collection hose or arm is operational experience has shown that (a) No tank barge cleaning operation connected to the barge’s vapor frequent clogging or rapid deterioration using a vapor control system (VCS) may collection system; is likely. be conducted unless the facility (3) The electrical insulating devices (f) If one or more analyzers required operator has a copy of the facility required by 33 CFR 154.2101(g) and by 33 CFR 154.2107(d) and (e) become operations manual, with the VCS 154.2203(m) are installed; inoperable during gas-freeing addendum, marked by the local Coast (4) The maximum allowable gas- operations, the operation may continue, Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) as freeing rate as determined by the lesser provided that at least one analyzer required by 33 CFR 154.325(d). of the following: remains operational; however, no (b) The facility person in charge must (i) A gas-freeing rate corresponding to further gas-freeing operations may be ensure that a facility can receive vapors the maximum vapor processing rate for started until all inoperable analyzers are only from a barge with a VCS that has the tank barge cleaning facility’s repaired or replaced. been approved by the Coast Guard (TBCF’s) VCS, as specified in the facility (g) Whenever a condition results in a Marine Safety Center as meeting the operations manual; or shutdown of the VCS, the cleaning requirements of 46 CFR 39.6000. (ii) The barge’s maximum gas-freeing operations must be immediately (c) The facility person in charge must rate determined in accordance with 46 terminated. The operation may not ensure that safety system tests are CFR 39.6007(c); resume until the cause of the shutdown conducted as follows: (5) The gas-freeing rate does not has been investigated and corrective (1) Pressure sensors, alarms, and exceed the maximum allowable gas- action taken. automatic shutdown systems required freeing rate as determined in paragraph (h) If it is suspected that a flare in the by 33 CFR 154.2203, except as (d)(4) of this section; VCS has had a flashback, or if a flame exempted by paragraph (c)(2) or (c)(3) of (6) The maximum allowable stripping is detected on a detonation arrester this section, must be tested by applying rate is determined and does not exceed required by 33 CFR 154.2109(c)(2), the the test pressure at the sensors not more the volumetric capacity of the barge’s cleaning operation must be stopped and than 24 hours before each cleaning vacuum relief valve at the valve’s may not resume until the detonation operation; setpoint for the cargo tank being arrester and any quick-closing stop (2) The pressure sensors required by stripped; valves downstream of the detonation 33 CFR 154.2203 may meet the test (7) The barge’s maximum and arrester have been inspected and found program in accordance with 33 CFR minimum operating pressures; to be in satisfactory condition. 154.2180 and 33 CFR 154.2181 instead (8) Each vapor collection hose has no (i) If a vacuum displacement system is of the test within 24 hours before each unrepaired or loose covers, kinks, used for gas-freeing, the facility person cleaning operation as required by bulges, soft spots, or any other defects in charge of the cleaning operation must paragraph (c)(1) of this section; that would permit the discharge of verify the following items: (3) Visible and audible alarm vapor through the hose material; and no (1) The minimum amount of open indicators must be tested not more than external gouges, cuts, or slashes that area for air flow on the barge has been 24 hours before each cleaning operation; penetrate the first layer of hose determined so that the pressure in the (4) The analyzers required by 33 CFR reinforcement; cargo tank cannot be less than 14.5 154.2105(j) and 154.2107(d) and (e), (9) The freezing point of each cargo. pounds per square inch absolute (psia) except as exempted by paragraph (c)(5) If there is a possibility that the ambient (¥0.2 pounds per square inch gauge of this section, must be checked for air temperature during cleaning (psig)) at the maximum flow capacity of calibration response by use of a span gas operations will be at or below the the vapor-moving device; not more than 24 hours before each freezing point of the cargo, adequate (2) Any hatch or fitting providing the cleaning operation; precautions have been taken to prevent minimum open area has been secured (5) The analyzers required by 33 CFR freezing of vapor or condensate, or to open so that accidental closure is not 154.2105(j) and 154.2107(d) and (e) may detect and remove the frozen liquid and possible; and be checked for calibration response by condensate to prevent accumulation; (3) The hatch and/or fitting must be use of a span gas as defined by the test and opened before the pressure in the cargo program contained in 33 CFR 154.2180 (10) The cargo vapor is evaluated for tank falls below 10 percent of the and 33 CFR 154.2181, and comply with the potential to polymerize, and highest setting of any of the barge’s the minimum requirements as defined adequate precautions have been taken to vacuum relief valves. in 33 CFR 154.2180 and 33 CFR prevent and detect polymerization of (j) 33 CFR 154.2150(p) and (q) apply 154.2181, instead of as provided by the cargo vapors. to a TBCF’s VCS. paragraph (c)(4) of this section; and (e) A vapor collection system must (6) The vacuum and pressure relief not be used unless the following tests Appendix B to Part 154 [Removed and valves required by 33 CFR 154.2203 and inspections are completed to the Reserved] must be checked not more than 24 hours satisfaction of the facility person in 10. Remove and reserve Appendix B before each cleaning operation to make charge: to part 154. sure they are operating without (1) Each vapor collection hose, vapor constraint and that any required flame collection arm, pressure or vacuum PART 155—OIL OR HAZARDOUS screens or flame arresters are not relief valve, and pressure sensor is MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION damaged. tested and inspected in accordance with REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS (d) The facility person in charge must 33 CFR 156.170(b), (c), and (f); verify the following before beginning (2) Each remote operating or 11. The authority citation for part 155 cleaning operations: indicating device is tested for proper is revised to read as follows: (1) Each valve in the vapor collection operation in accordance with 33 CFR Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231, 1321(j), system between the barge’s cargo tank 156.170(f); and 1903(b); 46 U.S.C. 3703; E.O. 11735, 3 CFR,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65186 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

1971–1975 Comp., p. 793; Department of (10) The freezing point of each cargo Comp., p. 277; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. has been determined. If there is a CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of Section 155.490 also issued under section possibility that the ambient air Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 4110(b) of Pub. L. 101–380. temperature during transfer operations 17. Revise § 35.35–5 to read as § 155.750 [Amended] will be at or below the freezing point of follows: 12. In § 155.750(d)— the cargo, adequate precautions have § 35.35–5 Electrical bonding—TB/ALL. a. Remove the citation ‘‘46 CFR 39.30– been taken to prevent freezing of vapor 1(d)(1) through (d)(3)’’, wherever it or condensate, or to detect and remove A vessel must use an insulating flange appears, and add, in its place, the the liquid condensate and solids to or one continuous length of citation ‘‘46 CFR 39.3001(d)(1) through prevent accumulation; nonconductive hose between the vessel (d)(3); (11) If the cargo has the potential to and the shore transfer facility. The b. Remove the citation ‘‘46 CFR 39.30– polymerize, adequate precautions have operator may not use external cables or 1(b)’’, wherever it appears, and add, in been taken to prevent and detect straps to achieve electrical bonding. its place, the citation ‘‘46 CFR polymerization of the cargo vapors; and 18. In § 35.35–20— (12) The VCS has been cleaned, in 39.3001(c)’’; and a. In paragraph (m) introductory text, accordance with 33 CFR 154.2150(p), c. Remove the citation ‘‘46 CFR 39.30– after the words ‘‘collection of cargo between transfers of incompatible 1(h)’’, wherever it appears, and add, in vapor’’, add the words ‘‘to or’’; cargoes. its place, the citation ‘‘46 CFR b. In paragraph (m)(1), after the words 39.3001(g)’’. * * * * * ‘‘vapor to flow to’’, add the words ‘‘or 15. In § 156.170— from’’; and PART 156—OIL AND HAZARDOUS a. In paragraph (g), after the words MATERIAL TRANSFER OPERATIONS ‘‘collects vapor emitted’’, add the words c. Revise paragraph (m)(9) to read as ‘‘to or’’; follows: 13. The authority citation for part 156 b. In paragraph (g)(3), remove the is revised to read as follows: § 35.35–20 Inspection before transfer of words ‘‘and § 154.828(a) of this chapter cargo—TB/ALL. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231, 1321(j); or 46 CFR 39.40–3(d), and each flame * * * * * 46 U.S.C. 3703, 3703a, 3715; E.O. 11735, 3 arrester required by § 154.826(a), (m) * * * CFR 1971–1975 Comp., p. 793; Department of § 154.828(a) and (c) of this chapter’’ and Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. add, in their place, the words ‘‘33 CFR (9) The oxygen content in the vapor 14. In § 156.120— 154.2109, 154.2110, and 154.2111 or 46 space of each of the vessel’s inerted a. Revise paragraph (aa) introductory CFR 39.4003, and each flame arrester cargo tanks connected to the vapor text to read as set out below; required by 33 CFR 154.2105(j)’’; collection system is— b. In paragraph (aa)(4), remove the c. In paragraph (g)(4), remove the (i) At or below 60 percent by volume word ‘‘loading’’ and add, in its place, the words ‘‘§ 154.820(a) and § 154.824(d) of the cargo’s minimum oxygen word ‘‘transfer’’; and (e) of this chapter’’ and add, in their concentration for combustion at the start c. In paragraph (aa)(7) introductory place, the words ‘‘33 CFR 154.2105(a) of cargo transfer; or text, after the words ‘‘the transfer and (j), 154.2107(d) and (e), and (ii) At or below 8 percent by volume, operation’’, add the words ‘‘or in 154.2110’’; and at the start of cargo transfer, for vapor accordance with 33 CFR 154.2150(b)’’; d. Add new paragraph (i) to read as of crude oil, gasoline blends, or d. In paragraph (aa)(7)(ii), remove the follows: benzene. words ‘‘§ 154.820(a), § 154.824(d) and (e) 19. In § 35.35–30— of this chapter’’ and add, in their place, § 156.170 Equipment tests and inspections. a. In paragraph (c) introductory text, the words ‘‘33 CFR 154.2105(a) and (j) after the words ‘‘collection of cargo * * * * * and 154.2107(d) and (e)’’; vapor’’, add the words ‘‘to or’’; e. Revise paragraph (aa)(9) to read as (i) Upon the request of the owner or operator, the Commandant may approve b. In paragraph (c)(1), after the words set out below; ‘‘vapor to flow to’’, add the words ‘‘or f. Add paragraphs (aa)(10), (aa)(11), alternative methods of compliance to from’’; and and (aa)(12) to read as follows: the testing and inspection requirements of paragraph (g)(3) of this section if the c. Revise paragraph (c)(8) to read as § 156.120 Requirements for transfer. Commandant determines that the follows: * * * * * alternative methods provide an § 35.35–30 ‘‘Declaration of Inspection’’ for (aa) A transfer operation which equivalent level of safety and protection tank vessels—TB/ALL. includes collection of vapor emitted to from fire, explosion, and detonation. * * * * * or from a vessel’s cargo tanks through a Criteria to consider when evaluating (c) * * * vapor control system (VCS) not located requests for alternative methods may on the vessel must have the following include, but are not limited to: (8) Has the oxygen content in the verified by the person in charge: Operating and inspection history, type vapor space of each of the vessel’s inerted cargo tanks connected to the * * * * * of equipment, new technology, and site- (9) The oxygen content in the vapor specific conditions that support the vapor collection system been verified to space of each of the vessel’s cargo tanks requested alternative. be— connected to the vapor collection (i) At or below 60 percent by volume, 46 CFR—SHIPPING system, if inerted, is— at the start of cargo transfer, of the cargo’s minimum oxygen concentration (i) At or below 60 percent by volume PART 35—OPERATIONS of the cargo’s minimum oxygen for combustion; or concentration for combustion; or 16. The authority citation for part 35 (ii) At or below 8 percent by volume, (ii) At or below 8 percent by volume, is revised to read as follows: at the start of cargo transfer, for vapor at the start of cargo transfer, for vapor Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231, 1321(j); of crude oil, gasoline blends, or of crude oil, gasoline blends, or 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 6101; 49 U.S.C. 5103, benzene. benzene; 5106; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 20. Revise part 39 to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65187

PART 39—VAPOR CONTROL 39.6007 Operational requirements for tank such pursuant to 33 CFR part 154, SYSTEMS barge cleaning—B/ALL. subpart P. 39.6009 Barge person in charge: Cleaning facility means a facility used Subpart 39.1000—General Designation and qualifications—B/ALL. or capable of being used to conduct Sec. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231; 42 U.S.C. cleaning operations on a tank barge. 39.1001 Applicability—TB/ALL. 7511b(f)(2); 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 3715(b); Cleaning operation means any 39.1003 Definitions—TB/ALL. E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., stripping, gas-freeing, or tank-washing 39.1005 Incorporation by reference—TB/ p. 277; Department of Homeland Security operation of a barge’s cargo tanks ALL. Delegation No. 0170.1. conducted at a cleaning facility. 39.1009 Additional tank vessel vapor Commandant means the Commandant processing unit requirements—TB/ALL. Subpart 39.1000—General 39.1011 Personnel training requirements— (CG–522), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 2nd TB/ALL. § 39.1001 Applicability—TB/ALL. St., SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC 39.1013 U.S.-flagged tank vessel (a) This part applies to tank vessels 20593–7126. certification procedures for vapor control that use a vapor control system (VCS) to Facility vapor connection means the system designs—TB/ALL. collect vapors emitted to or from a point in a facility’s fixed vapor 39.1015 Foreign-flagged tank vessel vessel’s cargo tanks while operating in collection system where the system certification procedures for vapor control connects with the vapor collection hose system designs—TB/ALL. the navigable waters of the United States, except— or the base of the vapor collection arm. 39.1017 Additional certification Fixed stripping line means a pipe procedures for a tank barge vapor (1) Tank vessels with an operating extending to the low point of each cargo collection system design—B/ALL. vapor collection system approved by the tank, which is welded through the deck Coast Guard prior to July 23, 1990, for Subpart 39.2000—Equipment and and terminated above deck with a valve, the collection and transfer of cargo Installation and plugged at the open end. vapor to specific facilities. Such tank 39.2001 Vapor collection system—TB/ALL. Flammable liquid means a liquid as vessels are only subject to 46 CFR 39.2003 Cargo gauging system—TB/ALL. defined in 46 CFR 30.10–22. 39.2007 Tankship liquid overfill 39.1013, 39.3001, and 39.4005; and Fluid displacement system means a protection—T/ALL. (2) A tank barge that collects vapors system that removes vapors from a 39.2009 Tank barge liquid overfill emitted from its cargo tanks during gas- barge’s cargo tanks during gas freeing protection—B/ALL. freeing or cleaning operations at a through the addition of an inert gas or 39.2011 Vapor overpressure and vacuum cleaning facility. This type of tank barge protection—TB/ALL. other medium into the cargo tank. is only subject to 46 CFR part 39, Fluid injection connection means the 39.2013 High and low vapor pressure subparts 39.1000 and 39.6000, and must protection for tankships—T/ALL. point in a fluid displacement system at 39.2014 Polymerizing cargoes safety— comply with requirements of these two which the fixed piping or hose that TB/ALL. subparts at the time of its next supplies the inert gas or other medium 39.2015 Tank barge pressure-vacuum inspection for certification required by connects to a barge’s cargo tanks or indicating devices—B/ALL. 46 CFR 31.10–15, but no later than fixed piping system. [DATE 5 YEARS AFTER EFFECTIVE Subpart 39.3000—Vapor Collection Gas freeing means the removal of Operations During Cargo Transfer DATE OF FINAL RULE]. vapors from a tank barge. (b) This part does not apply to the Independent as applied to two 39.3001 Operational requirements for collection of vapors of liquefied vapor control systems during cargo systems means that one system will transfer—TB/ALL. flammable gases as defined in 46 CFR operate when there is a failure of any 30.10–39. part of the other system. Subpart 39.4000—Vessel-to-Vessel (c) In this part, regulatory Inerted means the oxygen content of Transfers Using Vapor Balancing measurements, whether in the metric or the vapor space in a cargo tank is 39.4001 General requirements for vapor English system, are sometimes followed reduced in accordance with the inert gas balancing—TB/ALL. by approximate equivalent requirements of 46 CFR 32.53 or 39.4003 Design and equipment for vapor measurements in parentheses, which are 153.500. If a cargo vapor in a cargo tank balancing—TB/ALL. given solely for the reader’s 39.4005 Operational requirements for that is connected to the vapor collection vapor balancing—TB/ALL. convenience. Regulatory compliance system is defined as inerted at the start with the regulatory measurement is of cargo transfer, the oxygen content in Subpart 39.5000—Multi-Breasted Loading required. the vapor space of the cargo tank must Using a Single Facility Vapor Connection not exceed 60 percent by volume of the § 39.1003 Definitions—TB/ALL. 39.5001 General requirements for multi- cargo’s minimum oxygen concentration breasted loading—B/CLBR. As used in this part only: for combustion, or 8 percent by volume 39.5003 Additional requirements for multi- Barge vapor connection means the for vapor of crude oil, gasoline blends, breasted loading using inboard barge point in a barge’s piping system where or benzene. vapor collection system—B/CLBR. it connects to a vapor collection hose or 39.5005 Additional requirements for multi- Marine Safety Center (MSC) means breasted loading using a ‘‘dummy’’ vapor arm. This may be the same as the barge’s the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast header—B/CLBR. cargo connection while controlling Guard Marine Safety Center, 2100 2nd vapors during tank barge cargo tank- Street, SW., Stop 7102, Washington, DC Subpart 39.6000—Tank Barge Cleaning cleaning operations. Operations With Vapor Collection 20593–7102. Cargo deck area means that part of the Maximum allowable gas-freeing rate 39.6001 Design and equipment of vapor weather deck that is directly over the means the maximum volumetric rate at collection and stripping systems— cargo tanks. which a barge may be gas-freed during B/ALL. Cargo tank venting system means the 39.6003 Underpressure protection during cleaning operations. stripping and gas-freeing operations— venting system required by 46 CFR Maximum allowable stripping rate B/ALL. 32.55. means the maximum volumetric rate at 39.6005 Inspection prior to conducting gas- Certifying entity means a certifying which a barge may be stripped during freeing operations—B/ALL. entity accepted by the Coast Guard as cleaning operations prior to the opening

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65188 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

of any hatch and/or fitting on the cargo approval of the Director of the Federal 4.1 2005–12, IBR approved for 46 CFR tank being stripped. Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 39.2009. Maximum allowable transfer rate 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition (f) International Maritime means the maximum volumetric rate at other than that specified in this section, Organization (IMO), 4 Albert which a vessel may receive cargo or the Coast Guard must publish notice of Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United ballast. change in the Federal Register and the Kingdom. Minimum oxygen concentration for material must be available to the public. (1) International Convention for the combustion (MOCC) means the lowest All approved material is available for Safety of Life at Sea, Consolidated Text level of oxygen in a vapor or vapor inspection at the National Archives and of the 1974 SOLAS Convention, the mixture that will support combustion. Records Administration (NARA). For 1978 SOLAS Protocol, the 1981 and New vapor collection system means a information on the availability of this 1983 SOLAS Amendments (1986) vapor collection system that is not an material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or (‘‘SOLAS’’), IBR approved for 46 CFR existing vapor collection system. go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_ 39.2001. Service vessel means a vessel that register/code_of_federal_regulations/ (2) [Reserved] transports bulk liquid cargo between a ibr_locations.html. Also, it is available (g) National Electrical Manufacturers facility and another vessel. for inspection at the Coast Guard, Office Set pressure means the pressure at Association (NEMA), 1300 North 17th of Operating and Environmental which the pressure or vacuum valve Street, Suite 1752, Rosslyn, VA 22209. Standards (CG–522) 2100 2nd Street, begins to open and the flow starts (1) ANSI/NEMA WD–6—Wiring SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC 20593– through the valve. Devices, Dimensional Requirements, Stripping means the removal, to the 7126, and is available from the sources 1988 (‘‘NEMA WD–6’’), IBR approved for maximum extent practicable, of cargo indicated in this section. 46 CFR 39.2009. residue remaining in the barge’s cargo (b) American Petroleum Institute (2) [Reserved] tanks and associated fixed piping (API), 1220 L Street, NW., Washington, (h) National Fire Protection system after cargo transfer or during DC 20005. Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch (1) API Standard 2000, Venting cleaning operations. Park, Quincy, MA 02169–7471. Vacuum displacement system means Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Storage (1) NFPA 70—National Electrical a system that removes vapors from a Tanks (Non-refrigerated and Code, 1987, IBR approved for 46 CFR barge’s cargo tanks during gas-freeing by Refrigerated), Third Edition, January 39.2009. ‘‘ sweeping air through the cargo tank 1982 (reaffirmed December 1987)( API (2) [Reserved] ’’ hatch openings. 2000 ), incorporation by reference (IBR) (i) Oil Companies International Vapor balancing means the transfer of approved for 46 CFR 39.2011. Marine Forum (OCIMF), 29 Queen (2) [Reserved] vapor displaced by incoming cargo from Anne’s Gate, London SWIH 9BU, the tank of a vessel or facility receiving (c) American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street, England. cargo into a tank of the vessel or facility (1) International Safety Guide for Oil delivering cargo via a vapor collection 4th floor, New York, NY 10036. (1) ANSI B16.5, Steel Pipe Flanges Tankers and Terminals, Fifth Edition, system. 2006 (‘‘ISGOTT’’), IBR approved for 46 Vapor collection system means an and Flanged Fittings, 1981, IBR approved for 46 CFR 39.2001 and CFR 39.3001, 39.5001, 39.6001, and arrangement of piping and hoses used to 39.6005. collect vapor emitted to or from a 39.6001. (2) [Reserved] (2) [Reserved] vessel’s cargo tanks and to transport the (d) American Society for Testing and vapor to a vapor processing unit or a § 39.1009 Additional tank vessel vapor Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor processing unit requirements—TB/ALL. tank. Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428– Vapor control system (VCS) means an 2959. (a) Vapor piping, fitting, valves, arrangement of piping and equipment (1) ASTM F1122—Standard flanges, and pressure vessels comprising used to control vapor emissions Specification for Quick Disconnect the construction and installation of a collected to or from a vessel. It includes Couplings, 1992, IBR approved for 46 permanent or portable vapor processing the vapor collection system and vapor CFR 39.2001. unit onboard a tank vessel must meet processing unit or a tank. (2) ASTM F1271—Standard the marine engineering requirements of Vapor processing unit means the Specification for Spill Valves for Use in 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter F. components of a VCS that recover, Marine Tank Liquid Overpressure (b) Electrical equipment comprising destroy, or disperse vapor collected Protection Applications, December 29, the construction and installation of a from a vessel. 1989, IBR approved for 46 CFR 39.2009. permanent or portable vapor processing Vessel-to-vessel transfer (direct or (e) International Electrotechnical unit onboard a tank vessel must meet through a shore loop) means either— the electrical engineering requirements (1) The transfer of a bulk liquid cargo Commission (IEC), Bureau Central de la Commission Electrotechnique of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter J. from a tank vessel to a service vessel; or (c) In addition to complying with the (2) The transfer of a bulk liquid cargo Internationale, 3, rue de Varembe´, P.O. rules of this part, tank vessels with a from a service vessel to another vessel Box 131, CH—1211 Geneva 20, permanent or portable vapor processing in order to load the receiving vessel to Switzerland. unit must meet the requirements of 33 a deeper draft. (1) IEC 60309–1—Plugs, Socket- Vessel vapor connection means the Outlets and Couplers for Industrial CFR part 154, subpart P to the point in a vessel’s fixed vapor collection Purposes—Part 1: General satisfaction of the Commandant. system where the system connects with Requirements, Edition 4.1 2005–12, IBR (d) When the requirements of 46 CFR the vapor collection hose or arm. approved for 46 CFR 39.2009. chapter I, subchapters F and J, conflict (2) IEC 60309–2—Plugs, Socket- with 33 CFR part 154, subpart P, the § 39.1005 Incorporation by reference— Outlets and Couplers for Industrial requirements of 46 CFR chapter I, TB/ALL. Purposes—Part 2: Dimensional subchapters F and J apply, unless (a) Certain material is incorporated by Interchangeability Requirements for Pin specifically authorized by the Marine reference into this part with the and Contact-tube Accessories, Edition Safety Center.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65189

§ 39.1011 Personnel training § 39.1015 Foreign-flagged tank vessel section, excluding paragraph (i)(5), and requirements—TB/ALL. certification procedures for vapor control meet the following additional Personnel responsible for operating system designs—TB/ALL. requirements: the vapor control system (VCS) must As an alternative to meeting the (i) The installation of flexible hoses complete a training program prior to the requirements in 33 CFR 39.1013(a), (b), must include an isolation valve operation of the system installed and (c), the owner or operator of a mounted on the tank side of the onboard the tank vessel. As part of the foreign-flagged tank vessel may submit connection; and training program, personnel must be certification by the classification society (ii) Hose connections permitted under able to demonstrate, through drills and that classifies vessels under their foreign paragraph (a)(2) of this section are practical knowledge, the proper VCS flags to the Marine Safety Center. Upon exempt from the requirements of operation procedures for normal and receipt of the certification stating that paragraph (h) of this section. emergency conditions. The training the vapor control system (VCS) meets (b) When collecting incompatible program must cover the following the requirements of this part, the Officer vapors simultaneously, vapors must be subjects: in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) kept separate throughout the entire (a) Purpose of a VCS; will endorse the vessel’s Certificate of vapor collection system. (b) Principles of the VCS; Compliance for foreign-flagged tank (c) Vapor collection piping must be (c) Components of the VCS; vessels. electrically bonded to the hull and must (d) Hazards associated with the VCS; be electrically continuous. § 39.1017 Additional certification (e) Coast Guard regulations in this (d) The vapor collection system must procedures for a tank barge vapor have a mechanism to eliminate liquid part; collection system design—B/ALL. (f) Vapor control operation procedures condensation, such as draining and (a) For a tank barge vapor collection during cargo transfer or tank barge collecting liquid from each low point in system intended for operation in multi- cleaning, including: the line. breasted loading using a single facility (1) Testing and inspection (e) For a tankship that has an inert gas vapor connection, the tank barge owner requirements; system, a mechanism must be in place or operator must submit plans, (2) Pre-transfer or pre-cleaning to isolate the inert gas supply from the calculations, and specifications to the procedures; vapor control system (VCS). The inert (3) Connection sequence; Marine Safety Center (MSC) for review gas main isolation valve required by (4) Startup procedures; and and approval before beginning a multi- chapter II–2, Regulation 62.10.8 of (5) Normal operations; and breasted loading operation. SOLAS (incorporated by reference, see (b) For a tank barge intended for (g) Emergency procedures. 46 CFR 39.1005), may be used to satisfy collecting vapors emitted from its cargo this requirement. § 39.1013 U.S.-flagged tank vessel tanks during gas-freeing or cleaning (f) The vapor collection system must certification procedures for vapor control operations at a cleaning facility, the not interfere with the proper operation system designs—TB/ALL. barge owner or operator must submit the of the cargo tank venting system. (a) For an existing Coast Guard- following items to the MSC for review (g) The tank vessel owner or operator approved vapor control system (VCS) and approval: must install an isolation valve capable that has been operating before July 23, (1) Stripping system plans and of manual operation. It must be located 1990, the tank vessel owner or operator specifications; and at the vessel vapor connection and must must submit detailed engineering (2) Stripping and/or gas-freeing rate clearly show whether the valve is in the drawings, calculations, and calculations. open or closed position via an indicator, specifications to the Marine Safety (c) Once the vapor collection system valve handle, or valve stem. Center (MSC) for review and approval satisfies the requirements of this part, (h) The last 1.0 meter (3.3 feet) of before modifying the system or the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection vapor piping upstream of the vessel transferring vapor to a facility that was (OCMI) will endorse the Certificate of vapor connection and each end of a not approved by the Coast Guard for Inspection that the tank barge is vapor hose must be— that kind of vapor transfer. acceptable for collecting vapors during (1) Painted in the sequence of red/ (b) For a Coast Guard-approved VCS cleaning operations. yellow/red. The width of the red bands that has been operating since July 23, must be 0.1 meter (0.33 foot) and the Subpart 39.2000—Equipment and 1990, the tank vessel owner or operator width of the middle yellow band must Installation must submit plans, calculations, and be 0.8 meter (2.64 feet); and (2) Labeled with the word ‘‘VAPOR’’ specifications to the MSC for review and § 39.2001 Vapor collection system—TB/ painted in black letters at least 50.8 approval before modifying the system. ALL. millimeters (2 inches) high. (c) A tank vessel owner or operator (a) Vapor collection piping must be (i) Hoses that transfer vapors must must submit plans, calculations, and fixed piping and the vessel’s vapor meet the following requirements: specifications for a new tank vessel VCS connection must be located as close as (1) Have a design burst pressure of at to the MSC for review and approval practicable to the loading manifold, least 25 pounds per square inch gauge before installing the system. A except— (psig); permanent or portable vapor processing (1) As allowed by the Commandant; (2) Have a maximum allowable unit onboard a tank vessel will be and working pressure no less than 5 psig; reviewed, together with the tank vessel, (2) A vessel certificated to carry cargo (3) Be capable of withstanding at least as a complete and integrated system. listed in 46 CFR, part 151, Table 151.05 a 2.0 pounds per square inch (psi) (d) Once the plan review and or part 153, Table 1 may use flexible vacuum without collapsing or inspection of the tank vessel VCS satisfy hoses no longer than three meters (9.84 constricting; the requirements of this part, the Officer feet) for interconnection between fixed (4) Be electrically continuous with a in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) piping onboard the vessel to preserve maximum resistance of 10,000 ohms; will endorse the Certificate of segregation of cargo systems. These (5) Have flanges with— Inspection for the U.S.-flagged tank flexible hoses must also meet the (i) A bolthole arrangement complying vessel. requirements in paragraph (i) of this with the requirements for 150 pound

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65190 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

class ANSI B16.5 flanges (incorporated (3) Be visible from all cargo control § 39.2009 Tank barge liquid overfill by reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005); and areas. protection—B/ALL. (ii) One or more 15.9 millimeter (a) Each cargo tank of a tank barge (0.625 inch) diameter hole(s) located § 39.2007 Tankship liquid overfill must have one of the following liquid midway between boltholes and in line protection—T/ALL. overfill protection arrangements: with the bolthole pattern; and (a) Each cargo tank of a tankship must (1) A system meeting the (6) Be abrasion and kinking resistant. be equipped with an intrinsically safe requirements of 46 CFR 39.2007 that— (j) Each vessel vapor connection high-level alarm and a tank overfill (i) Includes a self-contained power flange face must have a permanent stud alarm. supply; (ii) Is powered by generators on the projecting outward that has a 12.7 (b) If installed after July 23, 1990, the barge; or millimeter (0.5 inch) diameter and is at high-level alarm and tank overfill alarm least 25.4 millimeters (1 inch) long. It (iii) Receives power from a facility required by paragraph (a) of this section and is fitted with a shore tie cable and must be located at the top of the flange must— face, midway between boltholes, and in a 120-volt, 20-ampere explosion-proof line with the bolthole pattern. (1) Be independent of each other; plug that meets— (k) Quick disconnect couplings (2) Activate an alarm in the event of (A) NEMA WD–6 (incorporated by (QDCs) may be used instead of flanges loss of power to the alarm system; reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005); at the flexible hose connection and fixed (3) Activate an alarm during the (B) NFPA 70, Articles 410–57 and piping on tankships provided they meet failure of electrical circuitry to the tank 501–12 (incorporated by reference, see ASTM F1122 (incorporated by level sensor; and 46 CFR 39.1005); and (C) 46 CFR 111.105–9; reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005) and are (4) Be able to be inspected at the tank ‘‘ ’’ (2) An intrinsically safe overfill designed as Standard Class QDC. for proper operation prior to each (l) Hose saddles that provide adequate control system that— transfer. This procedure may be support to prevent kinking or collapse (i) Is independent of the cargo-gauging achieved with the use of an electronic of hoses must accompany vapor hose device required by 46 CFR 39.2003(a); handling equipment. self-testing feature that monitors the (ii) Activates an alarm and automatic (m) For cargoes that have toxic condition of the alarm circuitry and shutdown system at the facility overfill properties, listed in 46 CFR Table sensor. control panel 60 seconds before the tank 151.05 with the ‘‘Special requirements’’ (c) The high-level alarm required by is 100 percent liquid-full during a column referring to 46 CFR 151.50–5, an paragraph (a) of this section must— facility-to-vessel cargo transfer; (iii) Activates an alarm and automatic overfill alarm and shutdown system that (1) Activate an alarm once the cargo shutdown system on the vessel meet the requirements of 46 CFR level reaches 95 percent of the tank receiving cargo 60 seconds before the 39.2007(a), 39.2009(a), or 39.2009(b) capacity or higher, but before the tank tank is 100 percent liquid-full during a must be used for primary overfill overfill alarm; protection. If the vessel is also equipped vessel-to-vessel cargo transfer; (2) Be identified with the legend (iv) Can be inspected at the tank for with spill valves or rupture disks, their ‘‘High-level Alarm’’ in black letters at setpoints must be set higher than the proper operation prior to each loading; least 50.8 millimeters (2 inches) high on (v) Consists of components that, vessel’s pressure relief valve setting as a white background; and required by 46 CFR 39.2009(c)(1). individually or in series, will not (3) Activate a visible and audible generate or store a total of more than 1.2 § 39.2003 Cargo gauging system—TB/ALL. alarm so that it can be seen and heard volts (V), 0.1 amperes (A), 25 megawatts (a) A cargo tank of the tank vessel on the vessel where cargo transfer is (MW), or 20 microJoules (μJ); connected to a vapor collection system controlled. (vi) Has at least one tank overfill must be equipped with a permanent or (d) The tank overfill alarm required by sensor switch per cargo tank that is portable cargo gauging device that— paragraph (a) of this section must— designed to activate an alarm when its (1) Is a closed type as defined in 46 normally closed contacts are open; (1) Be independent of the cargo (vii) Has all tank overfill sensor CFR 151.15.10(c) that does not require gauging system; opening the tank to the atmosphere switches connected in series; during cargo transfer; (2) Be identified with the legend (viii) Has interconnecting cabling that (2) Allows the operator to determine ‘‘TANK OVERFILL ALARM’’ in black meets 46 CFR 111.105–11(b) and (d), the level of liquid in the tank for the full letters at least 50.8 millimeters (2 and 46 CFR 111.105–17(a); and range of liquid levels in the tank; inches) high on a white background; (ix) Has a male plug with a five-wire, (3) Has an indicator for the level of (3) Activate a visible and audible 16–A connector body meeting IEC liquid in the tank that is located where alarm so that it can be seen and heard 60309–1 and IEC 60309–2 (both cargo transfer is controlled; and on the vessel where cargo transfer is incorporated by reference, see 46 CFR (4) If portable, is installed on the tank controlled and in the cargo deck area; 39.1005), that is— during the entire transfer operation. and (A) Configured with pins S2 and R1 (b) Each cargo tank of a tank barge (4) Activate an alarm early enough to for the tank overfill sensor circuit, pin must have a high-level indicating allow the person in charge of transfer G connected to the cabling shield, and device, unless the barge complies with operations to stop the cargo transfer pins N and T3 reserved for an optional 46 CFR 39.2009(a). The high-level before the tank overflows. high-level alarm circuit meeting the indicating device must— requirements of this paragraph; and (1) Indicate visually the level of liquid (e) If a spill valve is installed on a (B) Labeled ‘‘Connector for Barge in the cargo tank when the liquid level cargo tank fitted with a vapor collection Overflow Control System’’ and labeled is within a range of 1 meter (3.28 feet) system, it must meet the requirements of with the total inductance and of the top of the tank; 46 CFR 39.2009(c). capacitance of the connected switches (2) Show a permanent mark to (f) If a rupture disk is installed on a and cabling; indicate the maximum liquid level cargo tank fitted with a vapor collection (3) A spill valve that meets ASTM permitted under 46 CFR 39.3001(e) at system, it must meet the requirements of F1271 requirements (incorporated by even keel conditions; and 46 CFR 39.2009(d). reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005), and—

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65191

(i) Relieves at a predetermined vacuum relief valve is not designed to pressure vacuum in the main vapor pressure higher than the pressure at ensure a minimum vapor discharge collection line and have a pressure which the pressure relief valves meeting velocity of 30 meters (98.4 feet) per indicator located where the cargo the requirements of 46 CFR 39.2011 second; and transfer is controlled. operate; (3) If installed after July 23, 1991, (ii) Limits the maximum pressure at have a mechanism to check that it Subpart 39.3000—Vapor Collection the top of the cargo tank during liquid operates freely and does not remain in Operations During Cargo Transfer the open position. overfill to not more than the maximum § 39.3001 Operational requirements for design working pressure for the tank (c) A liquid filled pressure-vacuum vapor control systems during cargo when at the maximum loading rate for breaker may be used for vapor transfer—TB/ALL. overpressure and vacuum protection the tank; and (a) Vapor from a tank vessel may not (iii) Has a means to prevent opening subject to Commandant approval. be transferred to a facility in the United due to cargo sloshing while the vessel (d) Vapor growth must be calculated States, or vapor from a facility storage is in ocean or coastwise service; or using a method approved by the Marine tank may not be transferred to a tank (4) A rupture disk arrangement that Safety Center. vessel, unless the facility’s marine vapor meets paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (a)(3)(ii), and § 39.2013 High and low vapor pressure control system (VCS) is certified by a (a)(3)(iii) of this section and is approved protection for tankships—T/ALL. certifying entity as meeting the by the Commandant. requirements of 33 CFR part 154, (b) A tank barge authorized to carry a Each tankship with a vapor collection subpart P and the facility’s facility cargo having toxic properties, meaning system must be fitted with a pressure- operations manual is marked by the they are listed in 46 CFR Table 151.05 sensing device, located as close as local Coast Guard Captain of the Port with the ‘‘Special requirements’’ column practicable to the vessel vapor (COTP) as required by 33 CFR referring to 46 CFR 151.50–5, must connection, that measures the pressure 154.325(d). comply with the requirements of 46 CFR in the main vapor collection line, (b) Vapor from a tank vessel may not 39.2001(l). which— (a) Has a pressure indicator located on be transferred to a vessel that does not § 39.2011 Vapor overpressure and vacuum the tankship where the cargo transfer is have its certificate of inspection or protection—TB/ALL. controlled; and certificate of compliance endorsed as (a) The cargo tank venting system (b) Has a high-pressure and a low- meeting the requirements of this part required by 46 CFR 32.55 must— pressure alarm that— and for controlling vapor of the cargo (1) Be capable of discharging cargo (1) Gives an audible and a visible being transferred. vapor at the maximum transfer rate plus warning on the vessel where the cargo (c) For each cargo transferred using a the vapor growth for the cargo such that transfer is controlled; vapor collection system, the pressure the pressure in the vapor space of each (2) Activates an alarm when the drop through the vapor collection tank connected to the vapor control pressure-sensing device measures a high system from the most remote cargo tank system (VCS) does not exceed— pressure of not more than 90 percent of to the vessel vapor connection, (i) The maximum design working the lowest pressure relief valve setting including vapor hoses if used by the pressure for the tank; or in the cargo tank venting system; and vessel, must be— (ii) If a spill valve or rupture disk is (3) Activates an alarm when the (1) Calculated at the maximum fitted, the pressure at which the device pressure-sensing device measures a low transfer rate and at lesser transfer rates; operates; pressure of not less than 0.144 pounds (2) Calculated using a density (2) Relieve at a pressure per square inch gauge (psig) for an estimate for the cargo vapor and air corresponding to a pressure in the cargo inerted tankship, or the lowest vacuum mixture, or vapor and inert gas mixture, tank vapor space not less than 1.0 relief valve setting in the cargo tank based on a partial pressure (partial pounds per square inch gauge (psig); venting system for a non-inerted molar volumes) method for the mixture, (3) Prevent a vacuum, which tankship. assuming ideal gas law conditions; generates in any tank connected to the § 39.2014 Polymerizing cargoes safety— (3) Calculated using a vapor growth vapor collection system during the TB/ALL. rate as stated in 46 CFR 39.2011(d) for withdrawal of cargo or vapor at (a) Common vapor headers for the cargo being transferred; and maximum rates, in a cargo tank vapor polymerizing cargoes must be (4) Included in the vessel’s transfer space from exceeding the maximum constructed with adequate means to procedures as a table or graph, showing design vacuum; and permit internal examination of vent the liquid transfer rate versus the (4) Not relieve at a vacuum headers. pressure drop. corresponding to a vacuum in the cargo (b) Vapor piping systems and (d) The rate of cargo transfer must not tank vapor space between 14.7 pounds pressure-vacuum valves that are used exceed the maximum allowable transfer per square inch absolute (psia) (0 psig) rate as determined by the lesser of the ¥ for polymerizing cargoes must be and 14.2 psia ( 0.5 psig). inspected internally at least annually. following: (b) Each pressure-vacuum relief valve (c) Pressure-vacuum valves and spill (1) 80 percent of the total venting must— valves which are used for polymerizing capacity of the pressure relief valves in (1) Be of a type approved under 46 cargoes must be tested for proper the cargo tank venting system when CFR 162.017, for the pressure and movement prior to each transfer. relieving at the set pressure; vacuum relief setting desired; (2) The total vacuum relieving (2) Be tested for venting capacity in § 39.2015 Tank barge pressure-vacuum capacity of the vacuum relief valves in accordance with paragraph 1.5.1.3 of indicating device—B/ALL. the cargo tank venting system when API 2000 (incorporated by reference, see A fixed pressure-indicating device relieving at the set pressure; and 46 CFR 39.1005). The test must be must be installed as close as practicable (3) For a given pressure at the facility carried out with a flame screen fitted at to the vessel vapor connection on a tank vapor connection, or if vessel-to-vessel the vacuum relief opening and at the barge with a vapor collection system. transfer at the vapor connection of the discharge opening if the pressure- The indicating device must measure the service vessel, then the rate based on

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65192 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

pressure drop calculations at which the (j) Unless equipped with an automatic calibration and testing of the oxygen pressure in any cargo tank connected to self-test and circuit-monitoring feature, analyzer. the vapor collection system exceeds 80 each high-level alarm and tank overfill (b) If the cargo tanks are not inerted percent of the setting of any pressure alarm on a cargo tank being loaded, on a vessel discharging cargo during relief valve in the cargo tank venting required by 46 CFR 39.2007 or 39.2009, transfer operations, and the cargo is system. must be tested at the tank for proper flammable or combustible, the vapor (e) Cargo tanks must not be filled operation within 24 hours prior to the collection line on the service vessel higher than— start of cargo transfer. must be fitted with a detonation arrester (1) 98.5 percent of the cargo tank that meets the requirements of 33 CFR volume; or Subpart 39.4000—Vessel-to-Vessel 154.2106, and be located within 3 (2) The level at which an overfill Transfers Using Vapor Balancing meters (9.74 feet) of the vessel vapor alarm complying with 46 CFR 39.2007 § 39.4001 General requirements for vapor connection. or 39.2009(a)(2) is set. balancing—TB/ALL. (c) An electrical insulating flange or (f) A cargo tank should remain sealed (a) Vessels using vapor balancing one length of non-conductive hose must from the atmosphere during cargo be provided between the vessel vapor transfer operations. The cargo tank may while conducting a vessel-to-vessel transfer operation, directly or through a connection on each vessel operating a only be opened temporarily for gauging vessel-to-vessel cargo transfer. or sampling while the tank vessel is shore loop, must meet the requirements connected to a VCS as long as the of this subpart in addition to the § 39.4005 Operational requirements for following conditions are met: requirements of 46 CFR part 39, vapor balancing—TB/ALL. (1) The cargo tank is not being filled subparts 39.1000, 39.2000, and 39.3000. (a) During a vessel-to-vessel transfer or no vapor is being transferred into the Arrangements other than vapor operation, each cargo tank being loaded cargo tank; balancing used to control vapor must be connected by the vapor (2) For cargo loading, any pressure in emissions during a vessel-to-vessel collection system to a cargo tank that is the cargo tank vapor space is first transfer operation must receive approval being discharged. reduced to atmospheric pressure by the from the Commandant. (b) If the cargo tanks on both the VCS, except when the tank is inerted; (b) A vapor balancing operation must vessel discharging cargo and the vessel (3) The cargo is not required to be receive approval from the Commandant receiving cargo are inerted, the closed or restricted gauged by 46 CFR to use a compressor or blower to assist following requirements must be met: part 151, Table 151.05 or part 153, Table vapor transfer. (1) Each tank on a vessel receiving 1; and (c) Vapor balancing is prohibited cargo, which is connected to the vapor (4) For static accumulating cargo, all when the cargo tanks on a vessel collection system, must be tested prior metallic equipment used in sampling or discharging cargo are inerted and the to cargo transfer to ensure that the gauging must be electrically bonded to cargo tanks on a vessel receiving cargo oxygen content in the vapor space does the vessel and remain bonded to the are not inerted. not exceed 60 percent by volume of the (d) A vessel that intends to collect vessel until it is removed from the tank, cargo’s minimum oxygen concentration vapors (during a vessel-to-vessel transfer and if the tank is not inerted, 30 for combustion (MOCC), or 8 percent by operation) from cargoes not previously minutes must have elapsed after any volume for vapor of crude oil, gasoline approved must receive specific approval cargo transfer to the tank is stopped, blends, or benzene. The oxygen content from the Commandant before beginning before the equipment is put into the of each tank, or each area of a tank transfer operations. tank. formed by each partial bulkhead, must (g) For static accumulating cargo, the § 39.4003 Design and equipment for vapor be measured at a point 1 meter (3.28 initial transfer rate must be controlled in balancing—TB/ALL. feet) below the tank top and at a point accordance with OCIMF ISGOTT (a) During transfer operations, if the equal to one-half of the ullage; Section 11.1.7 (incorporated by cargo tanks are inerted on a vessel (2) Prior to starting transfer reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005), in order discharging cargo to a receiving vessel operations, the oxygen analyzer to minimize the development of a static with inerted cargo tanks, the service required by 46 CFR 39.4003(a) must be electrical charge. vessel must— tested for proper operation; (h) If cargo vapor is collected by a (1) Inert the vapor transfer hose prior (3) During transfer operations the facility that requires the vapor from the to transferring cargo vapor; and oxygen content of vapors being vessel to be inerted in accordance with (2) Have an oxygen analyzer with a transferred must be continuously 33 CFR 154.2105, the oxygen content in sensor or sampling connection fitted monitored; the vapor space of each cargo tank within 3 meters (9.74 feet) of the vessel (4) Cargo transfer must be terminated connected to the vapor collection vapor connection that— if the oxygen content exceeds 60 percent system must not exceed 60 percent by (i) Activates a visible and an audible by volume of the cargo’s MOCC, or 8 volume of the cargo’s minimum oxygen alarm on the service vessel where cargo percent by volume for vapor of crude concentration for combustion (MOCC), transfer is controlled when the oxygen oil, gasoline blends, or benzene; or 8 percent by volume for vapor of content in the vapor collection system (5) Transfer operations may resume crude oil, gasoline blends, or benzene, exceeds 60 percent by volume of the once the oxygen content in the tanks of at the start of cargo transfer. The oxygen cargo’s minimum oxygen concentration the vessel receiving cargo is reduced to content of each tank, or each area of a for combustion (MOCC), or 8 percent by 60 percent by volume or less of the tank formed by each partial bulkhead, volume for vapor of crude oil, gasoline cargo’s MOCC, or 8 percent by volume must be measured at a point 1.0 meter blends, or benzene; or less for vapor of crude oil, gasoline (3.28 feet) below the tank top and at a (ii) Has an oxygen concentration blends, or benzene; and point equal to one-half of the ullage. indicator located on the service vessel (6) Prior to starting vapor transfer (i) If the vessel is equipped with an where the cargo transfer is controlled; operations, the vapor transfer hose must inert gas system, the isolation valve and be purged of air and inerted. required by 46 CFR 39.2001(e) must (iii) Has a connection for injecting a (c) The isolation valve located on the remain closed during vapor transfer. span gas of known concentration for service vessel required by 46 CFR

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65193

39.2001(g) must not be opened until the header. This must include proper (2) Have a diameter at least as large as pressure in the vapor collection system connections for the facility VCS’s alarm/ the diameter of the largest pipe in the on the vessel receiving cargo exceeds shutdown system to the alarm/ vapor collection system of the outboard the pressure in the vapor collection shutdown system of the barge being barge; system on the vessel discharging cargo. loaded at the time. (3) Be marked in accordance with 46 (d) The vessel discharging cargo must (e) Barge owners and operators must CFR 39.2001(h); and control the cargo transfer rate so that the comply with any additional operational (4) Meet the same design and transfer rate does not exceed— requirements imposed by the local installation requirements for the vapor (1) The authorized maximum Captain of the Port (COTP) in whose collection piping onboard the same discharge rate of the vessel discharging zone the shore facility is located. The barge. cargo; barge owner or operator must identify (b) Flanges must meet the same design (2) The authorized maximum loading the specific facilities at which a multi- and installation requirements for flanges rate of the vessel receiving cargo; or breasted loading operation will be in the vapor collection system onboard (3) The processing rate of the conducted and provide the the same barge. approved vessel vapor processing Commandant with a list of these (c) A stud must be permanently system, if one is used to process the facilities. These facilities must be attached, as required in 46 CFR vapor collected during the transfer certified for conducting such an 39.2001(j), to the vapor connection operations. operation. flange on the ‘‘dummy’’ header. (e) The pressure in the vapor space of § 39.5003 Additional requirements for any cargo tank connected to the vapor Subpart 39.6000—Tank Barge Cleaning multi-breasted loading using an inboard Operations with Vapor Collection collection line on either the vessel barge vapor collection system—B/CLBR. receiving cargo or the vessel discharging (a) Each barge must have at least one § 39.6001 Design and equipment of vapor cargo must not exceed 80 percent of the liquid overfill protection system that collection and stripping systems—B/ALL. lowest setting of any pressure relief fulfills the requirements of 46 CFR (a) Each barge engaged in cleaning valve during ballasting or cargo transfer. 39.2009. operations at an approved cleaning (f) Impressed current cathodic (b) The vapor header of an inboard facility must have a conductive fixed protection systems must be de-energized barge that is used during outboard barge stripping line installed in each cargo during cargo transfer operations. loading must— tank. The line must extend to the low (g) Tank washing is prohibited unless (1) Be aligned with the vapor header point of each cargo tank, extend through the cargo tanks on both the vessel of the outboard barge; and be welded to the top of the cargo discharging cargo and the vessel (2) Have a diameter at least as large as tank, and terminate above deck with a receiving cargo are inerted, or the tank the diameter of the largest pipe in the full port valve plugged at the open end. is isolated from the vapor collection vapor collection system of the outboard (b) An existing fixed stripping system line. barge; and may be used instead of the stripping (3) Be marked in accordance with 46 Subpart 39.5000—Multi-breasted line required in paragraph (a) of this CFR 39.2001(h). section. Loading Using a Single Facility Vapor (c) A licensed tankerman, trained in (c) Each stripping line must be labeled Connection and familiar with multi-breasted loading at an on-deck location with the words operations, must be onboard each barge § 39.5001 General requirements for multi- ‘‘Stripping Line-Tank,’’ followed by the during transfer operations. The breasted loading—B/CLBR. tank’s number, name, or location. tankerman serves as the barge person-in- (a) Each barge must be owned and (d) Vapors may be collected from the charge (PIC). During transfer operations, operated by the same entity and must barge’s cargo tanks through a common the barge PICs must maintain constant have an approved vapor control system fixed vapor header, through the fixed communication with each other as well (VCS). liquid cargo header, or through flanged as with the facility PIC. (b) The crossover vapor hose must— flexible hoses located at the top of each (d) If multi-breasted loading will be (1) Be marked in accordance with 46 cargo tank. conducted using more than one liquid CFR 39.2001(h); (e) The vapor collection system must transfer hose from the shore facility, the (2) Meet the qualifications of 46 CFR not interfere with the proper operation facility must be capable of activating the 39.2001(i); of the cargo tank venting system. emergency shutdown system required (3) Not extend more than 7.62 meters (f) A barge being gas-freed by a fluid by 33 CFR 154.550. This will (25 feet) between two barges during displacement system must fulfill the automatically stop the cargo flow to transfer operations; and following requirements: each transfer hose simultaneously, in (4) Have a diameter at least as large as (1) If the fluid medium is a the event an upset condition occurs that the diameter of the largest pipe in the compressible fluid, such as inert gas, it closes the remotely operated cargo VCS on the outboard barge. must be injected into the barge’s cargo vapor shutoff valve in the facility’s (c) The hazards associated with barge- tanks through a common fixed vapor vapor control system. Multi-breasted to-barge or barge-to-shore electric header, through the fixed liquid cargo loading is prohibited unless the shore currents must be controlled in header, or through flanged flexible facility can comply with this accordance with sections 11.9 or 17.5 of hoses located at the top of each cargo requirement. OCIMF ISGOTT (incorporated by tank; reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005). § 39.5005 Additional requirements for (2) If the fluid medium is a non- (d) The cargo transfer procedures multi-breasted loading using a ‘‘dummy’’ compressible fluid, such as water, it must reflect the procedures to align and vapor header–B/CLBR. must be injected into the barge’s cargo disconnect a facility VCS to and from an (a) Each inboard barge ‘‘dummy’’ tanks through the fixed liquid cargo inboard barge, and alternately, to and header used during outboard barge header only; and from an outboard barge through the loading must— (3) If the fluid medium is a non- vapor cross-over hose and the inboard (1) Be aligned with the vapor header compressible fluid, such as water, the barge’s vapor header, or ‘‘dummy’’ of the outboard barge; barge must be equipped with a liquid

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 65194 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

overfill protection arrangement and (c) For stripping operations with not exceed the volumetric flow capacity fulfill the requirements for tank barge closed cargo tanks, the maximum of the vacuum relief valve protecting the liquid overfill protection contained in stripping rate must not exceed the cargo tank. 46 CFR 39.2009. volumetric flow capacity of the vacuum (c) The maximum gas-freeing rate is (g) The barge vapor connection must relief valve protecting the cargo tank. determined by the following: be electrically insulated from the facility (1) For a vacuum displacement vapor connection and the fluid injection § 39.6005 Inspection prior to conducting system: gas-freeing operations—B/ALL. connection must be electrically (i) The maximum allowable gas- insulated from the fluid injection (a) The following inspections must be freeing rate is a function of the area source, if fitted, in accordance with conducted by the barge person in charge open to the atmosphere for the cargo OCIMF ISGOTT section 17.5 prior to commencing gas-freeing tank being gas-freed. The area open to (incorporated by reference, see 46 CFR operations, and show that— the atmosphere must be large enough to 39.1005). (1) Each part of the barge’s vapor maintain the pressure in the cargo tank (h) Vapor collection piping must be collection system is aligned to allow being gas-freed at or above 14.5 pounds electrically bonded to the barge hull and vapor to flow to a cleaning facility’s per square inch absolute (psia) (¥0.2 must be electrically continuous. vapor control system (VCS); pounds per square inch gauge (psig)); (i) All equipment used on the barge (2) If a fluid displacement system is (ii) The maximum allowable gas- during cleaning operations must be used to conduct gas-freeing operations— freeing rate must be calculated from electrically bonded to the barge and (i) The fluid supply line is connected Table 1 of this section, using the area tested to ensure electrical continuity to the fluid injection connection; and open to the atmosphere for the cargo prior to each use. (ii) The maximum fluid injection rate tank being gas-freed as the entering (j) Hoses used for the transfer of is determined in accordance with 46 determination; vapors during cleaning operations must CFR 39.6007(c)(2); (2) For a fluid displacement system, meet the requirements of 46 CFR (3) The maximum stripping or gas- the maximum allowable gas-freeing rate 39.2001(i) and have markings as freeing rate is determined in accordance is determined by the lesser of the required in 46 CFR 39.2001(h). with 46 CFR 39.6003(c) or 39.6007(c), following: (k) Hoses used for the transfer of respectively, and adequate openings (i) Eighty percent of the total venting liquids during cleaning operations required by 46 CFR 39.6007(c)(1) are capacity of the pressure relief valve in must— available and identified; (1) Have a designed burst pressure of (4) The pressure-sensing and the cargo tank venting system when at least 600 pounds per square inch pressure-indicating devices required by relieving at its set pressure; gauge (psig); 33 CFR 154.2203 are connected as (ii) Eighty percent of the total vacuum (2) Have a maximum allowable required by 46 CFR 39.6003(b); relieving capacity of the vacuum relief working pressure of at least 150 psig; (5) The maximum and minimum valve in the cargo tank venting system (3) Be capable of withstanding at least operating pressures of the barge being when relieving at its set pressure; or the maximum vacuum rating of the cleaned are determined; (iii) The rate based on pressure drop cleaning facility’s vapor-moving device (6) Unrepaired loose covers, kinks, calculations at which, for a given without collapsing or constricting; bulges, gouges, cuts, slashes, soft spots, pressure at the facility vapor (4) Be electrically continuous with a or any other defects which would connection, the pressure in the cargo maximum resistance of 10,000 ohms; tank being gas-freed exceeds 80 percent (5) Have flanges with a bolthole permit the discharge of vapors through the vapor recovery hose material must of the setting of any pressure relief valve arrangement complying with the in the cargo tank venting system. requirements for 150 pound class ANSI be detected during inspection and repaired prior to operation; (d) Any hatch and/or fitting used to B16.5 flanges (incorporated by calculate the minimum area required to reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005); and (7) The facility vapor connection is electrically insulated from the barge be open to the atmosphere must be (6) Be abrasion and kinking resistant opened and secured in such a manner and compatible with the liquids being vapor connection and the fluid injection connection is electrically insulated from as to prevent accidental closure during transferred. gas freeing. All flame screens for the (l) If a hose is used to transfer either the fluid injection source, if fitted, in accordance with OCIMF ISGOTT hatch and/or fitting opened must be vapor or liquid from the barge during removed in order to allow for maximum cleaning operations, hose saddles that section 17.5 (incorporated by reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005); and airflow. The hatch and/or fitting must provide adequate support to prevent the be secured open before the pressure in collapse or kinking of hoses must (8) All equipment is bonded in accordance with 46 CFR 39.6001(h). the cargo tank falls below 10 percent of accompany hose handling equipment. the highest setting of any of the barge’s § 39.6003 Underpressure protection during § 39.6007 Operational requirements for vacuum relief valves. stripping and gas-freeing operations— tank barge cleaning—B/ALL. (e) ‘‘Do Not Close Hatch/Fitting’’ signs B/ALL. (a) During cleaning operations, vapors must be conspicuously posted near the (a) The cargo tank venting system from a tank barge cannot be transferred hatch and/or fitting opened during gas- required by 46 CFR 32.55 must not to a cleaning facility which does not freeing operations. exceed the maximum design working have a marine vapor control system (f) To minimize the dangers of static pressure or the maximum design (VCS) certified by a certifying entity, electricity, all equipment used on the vacuum for the cargo tank. and its facility operations manual barge during gas-freeing and cleaning (b) Each barge must be fitted with a endorsed by the Captain of the Port operations must be electrically bonded means for connecting the pressure- (COTP) as meeting the requirements of to the barge and tested to ensure sensing and pressure-indicating devices 33 CFR part 154, subpart P. electrical continuity before each use. required by 33 CFR 154.2203 on each (b) Prior to commencing stripping (g) If the barge is equipped with an cargo tank top. The valve connection operations, the maximum allowable inert gas system, the inert gas main point must be labeled ‘‘Pressure Sensor stripping rate must be determined. The isolation valve must remain closed Connection’’. maximum allowable stripping rate must during cleaning operations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65195

(h) Vapors from incompatible cargoes entire vapor collection system. procedures contained in 46 CFR 150, that are collected simultaneously must Chemical compatibility must be part A. be kept separated throughout the barge’s determined in accordance with the

TABLE 1 TO § 39.6007—MINIMUM OPEN AREA FOR BARGE CLEANING HATCHES

Air flow Air flow (CFS) Open area Diameter opening Square opening (CFM) (cubic feet/ (square inches) (inches) (inches) (cubic feet/minute) second)

500 ...... 8.3 10.7 3.7 3.3 600 ...... 10.0 12.8 4.0 3.6 700 ...... 11.7 15.0 4.4 3.9 800 ...... 13.3 17.1 4.7 4.1 900 ...... 15.0 19.3 5.0 4.4 1000 ...... 16.7 21.4 5.2 4.6 1100 ...... 18.3 23.6 5.5 4.9 1200 ...... 20.0 25.7 5.7 5.1 1300 ...... 21.7 27.8 6.0 5.3 1400 ...... 23.3 30.0 6.2 5.5 1500 ...... 25.0 32.1 6.4 5.7 1600 ...... 26.7 34.3 6.6 5.9 1700 ...... 28.3 36.4 6.8 6.0 1800 ...... 30.0 38.5 7.0 6.2 1900 ...... 31.7 40.7 7.2 6.4 2000 ...... 33.3 42.8 7.4 6.5 2100 ...... 35.0 45.0 7.6 6.7 2200 ...... 36.7 47.1 7.7 6.9 2300 ...... 38.3 49.3 7.9 7.0 2400 ...... 40.0 51.4 8.1 7.2 2500 ...... 41.7 53.5 8.3 7.3 2600 ...... 43.3 55.7 8.4 7.5 2700 ...... 45.0 57.8 8.6 7.6 2800 ...... 46.7 60.0 8.7 7.7 2900 ...... 48.3 62.1 8.9 7.9 3000 ...... 50.0 64.2 9.0 8.0 3100 ...... 51.7 66.4 9.2 8.1 3200 ...... 53.3 68.5 9.3 8.3 3300 ...... 55.0 70.7 9.5 8.4 3400 ...... 56.7 72.8 9.6 8.5 3500 ...... 58.3 75.0 9.8 8.7 3600 ...... 60.0 77.1 9.9 8.8 3700 ...... 61.7 79.2 10.0 8.9 3800 ...... 63.3 81.4 10.2 9.0 3900 ...... 65.0 83.5 10.3 9.1 4000 ...... 66.7 85.7 10.4 9.3

§ 39.6009 Barge person in charge: 155.700 and 33 CFR 155.710(a)(2) apply Dated: October 4, 2010. Designation and qualifications—B/ALL. to the barge person in charge. J.G. Lantz, The designation and qualification Director of Commercial Regulations and requirements contained in 33 CFR Standards, U.S. Coast Guard. [FR Doc. 2010–25384 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:07 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCP3.SGM 21OCP3 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Thursday, October 21, 2010

Part IV

Department of Housing and Urban Development 24 CFR Part 905 Use of Public Housing Capital Funds for Financing Activities; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65198 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Federal Information Relay Service at made, any financing commitments URBAN DEVELOPMENT 800–877–8339. based on Capital Fund expenditures SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: over a period of years must explicitly be 24 CFR Part 905 made subject to the availability of I. Background appropriated funds. [Docket No. FR–4843–F–02] Section 9 of the U.S. Housing Act of More detailed information regarding RIN 2577–AC49 1937 (1937 Act) (42 U.S.C. 1437g) states the background of this rulemaking, that Capital Funds can be used for including HUD’s initial proposal, can be Use of Public Housing Capital Funds activities including ‘‘development, found in the preamble of the proposed for Financing Activities financing, and modernization’’ (see 42 rule published on July 18, 2007, at 72 U.S.C. 1437g(d)(1)(A)). Section 30 of the FR 39546–39547. AGENCY: Office of the Assistant 1937 Act provides that HUD may II. This Final Rule Secretary for Public and Indian authorize a PHA to mortgage or Housing, HUD. otherwise grant a security interest in As noted in the ‘‘Summary’’ of this ACTION: Final rule. any public housing project or other final rule, the proposed rule published property of the PHA upon such terms on July 18, 2007, addressed the use of SUMMARY: This final rule implements a and conditions as the Secretary may both public housing Capital Funds and program to allow public housing prescribe. (See 42 U.S.C. 1437g(g), Operating Funds for financing activities; agencies (PHAs) to use proceeds of their which sets limitations on the use of this final rule proceeds to promulgate Capital Fund program for financing Capital Funds.) regulations for the Capital Fund activities, including payment of debt Under section 9(g)(3)(A) of the 1937 Financing Program (CFFP) only. Public service and housing development and Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g(g)(3)(A)), Capital comments raised issues on the modernization activities. A PHA may Funds may not be used for new Operating Fund Financing Program grant a security interest in future Capital construction of housing units if such (OFFP) component of the July 18, 2007, Fund grants, subject to the construction would result in a net proposed rule, such that HUD appropriation of those funds by increase from the number of public determined further consideration must Congress. This final rule follows a July housing units owned, assisted, or be given to those comments before 18, 2007, proposed rule that addressed operated by the PHA on October 1, promulgating final regulations on the the use of public housing Capital Funds 1999. There are two exceptions to this OFFP component. HUD, however, is and Operating Funds for financing statutory requirement. First, section ready to proceed with issuing final activities, and takes into consideration 9(g)(3)(B) of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. regulations for the Capital Fund the public comments received on that 1437g(g)(3)(B)) provides an exception component of the July 18, 2007, rule. for units that are affordable for low- proposed rule. This final rule addresses only the use income families in excess of this Some of the key changes made to the of public housing Capital Funds for limitation, but the Capital Fund formula CFFP component at this final rule stage financing activities. Given the public shall not provide additional funding for include the following: • comment received on the proposed rule, the specific purpose of construction and The entire section is recodified as HUD determined that further operation of housing in excess of this subpart E of part 905, and section consideration must be given to HUD’s limitation. Second, section 9(g)(3)(C) of numbers redesignated accordingly, so proposal for use of operating funds for the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g(g)(3)(C)) that, for example, proposed § 905.700 is financing activities. The final rule provides an exception to the Capital in this final rule § 905.500. • makes changes to the proposed rule in Fund formula limitation for the This final rule permits PHAs to response to public comments, including operation and modernization of mixed- pledge up to 100 percent of their a streamlined approval process for finance housing, or housing that replacement housing factor (RHF) funds standard and high-performing PHAs otherwise leverages significant other for debt service, provided that such that have borrowings against their investment, if the estimated cost of the pledge constitutes no more than 50 Capital Funds within certain limits, or useful life of the project is less than the percent of the PHA’s combined future that propose to use their Capital Fund estimated cost of providing tenant-based Capital Funds (i.e., formula funds and financing proceeds in a mixed-finance section 8 assistance for the same period RHF funds). Acceleration of Capital development. The final rule, also in of time. Fund-financed debt is allowed, but only response to comment, provides greater In any financing transaction that with HUD approval. HUD will allow specificity than the proposed rule with involves pledges of future PHAs to pledge 100 percent of their respect to submission requirements for appropriations of Capital Funds, the RHF due, in part, to the fact that the requests for Capital Fund financing Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1431) maximum term that PHAs can transactions. applies. The Antideficiency Act states, underwrite RHF for is 10 years, which in relevant part, as follows: ‘‘An officer is the maximum period of time a PHA DATES: Effective date: December 20, or employee of the United States can receive a tier of RHF. This is half 2010. Government or of the District of the maximum term of 20 years FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Columbia government may not make or permitted where PHAs pledge Capital Jeffrey Riddel, Director, Office of Capital authorize an expenditure or obligation Fund formula funds for the payment of Improvements, Office of Public and exceeding an amount available in an debt service, and therefore considerably Indian Housing, Department of Housing appropriation or fund for the more conservative. The 50 percent cap and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, expenditure or obligation; involve either is being established to limit the amount SW., Washington, DC 20410–8000; government in a contract or obligation of RHF funds that PHAs can pledge. telephone number 202–708–1640, for the payment of money before an This limitation will be triggered for extension 4999 (this is not a toll-free appropriation is made unless authorized those PHAs where RHF makes up such number). Hearing- or speech-impaired by law. * * * ’’ a significant portion of their overall individuals may access this number Because funds cannot be obligated in Capital Fund that the pledge will cause through TTY by calling the toll-free advance of an appropriation being the total amount pledged to exceed 50

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65199

percent of the PHA’s combined future below provides examples of the Capital Funds and RHF funds. The table potential impact of the 50 percent cap.

Max debt service from Debt service Capital fund Total capital capital fund Debt service from Total debt formula RHF grants fund grants grants from RHF formula service grant (50% of grants grant total)

Scenario 1...... $5,000 $500 $5,500 $2,750 $500 $1,667 $2,167 Scenario 2...... 1,000 500 1,500 750 500 250 750 Scenario 3...... 500 500 1,000 500 500 0 500 Scenario 4...... 200 500 700 350 350 0 350 (1) In Scenario 1, because the RHF is much less than the Capital Fund formula grant, the PHA can leverage 100 percent ($500) of its pro- jected RHF and 33 percent ($1,667) of its projected Capital Fund formula grants. (2) In Scenario 2, the 50 percent cap is triggered. The PHA will leverage 100 percent ($500) of its projected RHF, but may leverage no more than 25 percent ($250) of its projected Capital Fund formula grants because borrowing more would exceed the 50 percent cap. (3) In Scenario 3, the 50 percent cap is triggered. The PHA will be able to leverage 100 percent ($500) of its RHF, but will not be able to lever- age any Capital Fund formula grants because borrowing more would exceed the 50 percent cap. (4) In Scenario 4, the 50 percent cap is triggered. The cap results in the PHA being able to use only a portion of its RHF and none of its Cap- ital Funds formula grants for debt service because borrowing more would exceed the 50 percent cap. This is due to the fact that the Capital Fund formula grants represent only a small portion of the PHA’s overall funding.

• Where the proposed rule would their CFFP based only upon the submitted as part of the CFFP Financing have permitted PHAs to pledge ‘‘more projected receipt of RHF. Finally, as part Proposal. than’’ 33 percent of its projected future of its processing of Capital Fund • The 40-year use restriction in annual Capital Fund grants for debt Financing Proposals on a case-by-case section 9(d)(3) of the 1937 Act (42 service upon a showing to HUD that the basis, HUD had been requiring PHAs to U.S.C. 1437g(d)(3)) is stated at PHA has sufficient Capital Fund grants include in their cover letter the status of § 905.505(c). This section follows the to meet its needs, it was silent on the other HUD approvals needed to utilize statutory language and provides for issue of existing grants. The final rule CFFP proceeds, such as the approval of exceptions as ‘‘provided in’’ the 1937 makes explicit that PHAs may pledge up development proposals where the Act. Such exceptions would include, for to 33 percent of its future Capital Fund proceeds are proposed to be used for example, demolition of obsolete units grants, and may pledge 100 percent of development. This final rule removes under section 18 of the 1937 Act (42 its RHF grants, provided that such that information as a required part of the U.S.C. 1437p) and required conversion pledge constitutes no more than 50 Capital Fund Financing Proposal. In the under section 33 of the 1937 Act (42 percent of the PHA’s combined future future, HUD will make the U.S.C. 1437z–5). • Capital Funds (i.e., formula grant funds determination of required approvals The required contents of the and RHF funds). Subject to a based upon the PHA’s description of the transmittal letter under 24 CFR reasonableness test, PHAs may pledge proposed use of proceeds. HUD will 905.510(b)(1) are specified. The letter more than 33 percent of their existing condition any CFFP Financing must contain a description of the Capital Fund grants. approvals upon the receipt of any other proposed financing and use of proceeds, • HUD approvals needed to use the the percentage of Capital Funds being A streamlined procedure is dedicated to debt service, the percentage provided for mixed-finance proposals proceeds. • of the PHA’s public housing units and Capital Fund Financing Proposals In response to comments to clarify benefiting from the financing the impact from PHAs: (1) That are standard or the requirements of a Capital Fund of the financing on the public housing high performers under the Public Financing Proposal in the rule, and portfolio, and any additional Housing Assessment System (PHAS) limit the number of requirements for information that may be required. and have cumulative CFFP transactions PHAs to make submittals in accordance • Financing schedules, including of less than $2 million, or (2) that are with terms and conditions as debt service and sources and uses, are high PHAS performers and have determined by HUD, § 905.510(b) is required by § 905.510(b)(3) of this final cumulative CFFP transactions of less revised to list the submittal rule. than $20 million. For standard or high requirements for a Capital Fund • A Capital Fund Plan currently performing PHAs, management Financing Proposal. The Capital Fund consisting of a CFP Annual Statement/ assessments under the following Financing Proposal requirements as Performance and Evaluation Report regulations—24 CFR 905.505(e), fairness presented in this final rule are based (form HUD–50075.1, and CFP 5-Year opinions under 24 CFR 905.505(k), and upon the proposal requirements for the Action Plan (form HUD–50075.2) are demonstration of construction program as it is currently being described in § 905.505(h) and (n). The management and financial controls implemented on a case-by-case basis. In PHA must provide evidence that the under 24 CFR 905.505(l)—may not be addition to the streamlining for certain PHA has conformed to the requirements required as part of the Capital Fund transactions referenced above, changes related to the Declaration of Trust (DOT) Financing Proposal. HUD retains the in this final rule from what HUD has as described in § 905.505(c)(4) and discretion to require assessments, required on a case-by-case basis for all mentioned in § 905.510(b)(6). opinions, or controls in certain cases. In proposals include: (1) The cover letter is • The PHA must provide a board addition, physical needs assessments no longer required to include a narrative resolution authorizing the PHA to and quarterly reporting have been on the status of ancillary approvals finance a loan up to a specified amount, removed as requirements for PHAs that required to use the CFFP proceeds; and to provide all the security interests use the CFFP in mixed-finance (2) an effective cost of financing required by the loan, and authorizing transactions, and for PHAs that size schedule is no longer required to be the Executive Director of the PHA to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65200 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

negotiate and execute required legal Fund and Operating Fund programs, of private partners to enter into these documents as required by lenders will likely charge higher fees transactions. § 905.510(b)(7). and impose additional credit Response: HUD initially implemented • The PHA must provide an opinion enhancements or performance the CFFP on a case-by-case basis, to of counsel stating that the PHA has standards, resulting in higher costs to allow maximum flexibility in initial authority to enter into the transaction finance capital improvements. implementation of the program, and and that the transaction complies with Response: While it is true that the provide PHAs and HUD an opportunity the 1937 Act, Federal regulations, and Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1431) to learn from collective experience at the applicable Annual Contributions requires all future-year financing to be the inception of the program. However, Contract (ACC) as described in subject to the availability of one of the consequences of this § 905.510(b)(7). appropriations, investors have approach was that the process of • If a PHA is proposing direct debt developed a level of comfort with the reviewing and approving transactions service payments through HUD’s Line of CFFP. Certainly, the CFFP has been took longer than HUD believes would Credit Control System (LOCCS), the more stable than other similar have otherwise been the case if HUD PHA must execute a Capital Fund investments in the recent past. Since had initiated implementation of the Financing Amendment to the ACC as HUD began implementing the CFFP in program through rulemaking. HUD required by § 905.510(b)(8). 2000, rates have remained remarkably believes that rulemaking will make III. Summary of Public Comments stable. The CFFP has been structured in implementation more standardized and a way so that most transactions receive consistent, but, if done earlier, might The public comment period closed on unenhanced, underlying AA 1 ratings have hampered the ability to more September 17, 2007, and HUD received from Standard & Poor’s. Other costs for expeditiously implement changes 21 public comments. HUD received CFFP transactions have been during the early evolution of the public comments from a variety of comparable to similar financing program. HUD now has sufficient sources, including private citizens, six mechanisms in the marketplace. While experience both to implement PHAs, three trade associations, four law investor perception may change if rulemaking, and to ensure a more firms, and several housing development appropriations decrease below current streamlined review process. Reviews consultants. A summary of the issues levels, to date the CFFP has provided a now take approximately 2 to 3 months raised and HUD’s responses to these financing tool with pricing similar to on average, the same length of time as issues are as follows. financing options available to HUD’s in the Mixed-Finance Development Comment: The proposed rule will not multifamily portfolio. Program, for which HUD’s regulations succeed as long as the Operating Fund Comment: The process for approving are found in 24 CFR part 941, subpart and Capital Fund are so severely Capital Fund financing arrangements is F. However, there continue to exist underfunded. too extensive and cumbersome and may opportunities to further streamline the Response: These comments concern require an entire year or more from process and make it more efficient. appropriation levels, and are therefore planning through closing. Commenters This final rule therefore makes the outside of the scope of this rule. made recommendations to simplify the following streamlining changes: Furthermore, there exists a multiplicity (1) The rule removes the effective cost approval process by making it similar to of sources that PHAs can combine with of financing schedule as a program that of mixed-finance housing programs; Capital Funds to help meet the needs of requirement. HUD will continue to to eliminate the requirement for a their public housing portfolio. These make this tool available to PHAs as a fairness opinion for transactions include public housing sources, such as mechanism whereby they can complete borrowing less than $2 million; to energy performance contracts, as well as an ‘‘apples-to-apples’’ comparison of eliminate the requirement for third- nonpublic housing sources such as low different financial structures. party management reviews as income housing tax credits (LIHTCs), Nonetheless, PHAs remain obligated duplicative and costly; and to eliminate funds from the Federal Home Loan pursuant to 2 CFR part 225 (cost management assessments for any Banks’ Affordable Housing Program, principals for state, local, and Tribal transaction where the Capital Funding and local funds. Creative, proactive governments, OMB Circular A–87) to being financed is less than $20 million, housing authorities can utilize Capital assure the cost reasonableness of their and the PHA is not classified as a poor- Funds and Capital Fund financing in financial transactions, and the performing PHA. conjunction with other sources to meet reasonableness of the proposal remains Similarly, several commenters stated the needs of their public housing a requirement for approval. that PHAs have experienced delays in portfolios. (2) Management assessments In regard to the Operating Fund, HUD getting HUD approvals and that these (proposed § 905.705(e)), fairness received many comments from delays add costs or may negatively opinions (proposed § 905.705(k)), and respondents that, at current levels of impact the deals. These commenters information about financial and pro-ration, the OFFP is not feasible. recommended that HUD establish clear construction management controls These comments warrant careful time frames for the review and approval (proposed § 905.705(l)) are no longer consideration. In order to provide the process, recommending a range of dates required where Capital Fund Financing level of rigor necessary to meaningfully such as 30, 45, or 60 days. The Proposals being pursued as part of respond to the comments received on commenters all noted that clear mixed-finance transactions, the PHA is the OFFP, and yet not encumber the timelines will improve the willingness a standard or high performer under processing of the CFFP rule, HUD has PHAS and is undertaking a CFFP 1 In the Standard & Poor’s rating system, an AA decided to decouple the processing of rating is the second-highest rating (AAA being the transaction of less than $2 million the CFFP rule from the OFFP rule. highest), and indicates that the obligor’s capacity to cumulatively, or the PHA is a high Comment: Private lenders must accept meet its financial commitment on the obligation is performer under PHAS and is the risk of continued and sufficient very strong. Unenhanced, underlying ratings refer undertaking less than $20 million in to debt obligations not supported by financial congressional appropriations to pay off guarantees, structuring techniques, multiple-party cumulative CFFP transactions. HUD the debt. Given the uncertain level of features, or other external credit support. See retains the discretion to require congressional funding for the Capital http://www.standardandpoors.com. assessments, opinions, or controls in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65201

certain cases. The removal of submittal Therefore, quarterly reports are the only requirements that are also included in requirements for financial and mechanism at HUD’s disposal by which the Capital Fund Financing Amendment construction management controls it can monitor the project. to the ACC. applies only to the demonstration of Comment: Several items in the rule Comment: HUD should establish safe such controls within the Capital Fund provide that requirements must be harbors for financing transactions with Financing Proposal itself. PHAs still accomplished by the PHA ‘‘in a form Capital Funds. Such safe harbors could must adhere to public housing and manner to be determined by HUD’’ include: The PHA has not been requirements in regard to the use of or that additional ‘‘terms and designated as troubled, the PHA has not CFFP proceeds. conditions’’ may be determined by HUD. defaulted on loan or obligations secured (3) Proposed § 905.705(c)(5) (final HUD should work with PHAs and other by Capital Funds, the PHA has § 905.505(c)(4)) has been modified for outside parties to clarify these points described the proposed transaction in CFFP use with a mixed-finance project before the rule is published as a final its PHA plan, the PHA pledges no more such that the evidence of Declarations of rule. than one-third of its annual allocation of Trust (DOTs) will be part of the mixed- Response: HUD agrees with the Capital Funds under section 9(d) of the finance evidentiary approval process. comment that a clearly defined set of 1937 Act, the PHA is in compliance (4) Proposed § 905.705(h)(2) (final rules will result in a more efficient with obligation and expenditure § 905.505(h)(2)) has been modified to process for assembling Capital Fund requirements under section 9(j) of the remove the requirement for the Financing Proposals, and for HUD’s 1937 Act, and the PHA submits a submission of a budget detailing the use review of those proposals. Since the fairness opinion of an independent of CFFP proceeds for certain PHAs. This Capital Fund Financing Proposal qualified third party. requirement has been eliminated for process which HUD has implemented Response: Cost controls and safe PHAs that size their loans based only on a case-by-case basis is a defined harbor standards work well for upon RHF funds, as well as those that process with known submittal transactions where industry norms are use the CFFP proceeds as part of a requirements, this final rule revises established and readily identifiable and mixed-finance transaction. CFFP § 905.710 (now § 905.510 in the final few variations are expected, such as approval letters for these transactions rule) to state the general submittal with development or management fees. will be conditioned upon the approval requirements, while retaining HUD’s Financing does not lend itself to such of the related development proposal. administrative discretion in approving standards being established. Interest (5) Proposed § 905.705(p) (final Capital Fund Financing Proposals that rates change daily. As recent events in § 905.505(p)) has been revised to may present unique or complex the area of mortgage financing have eliminate quarterly reporting financing for modernization and demonstrated, the financial markets, requirements under this program where development. including the home financing market, the CFFP proceeds are being used as This final rule revises § 905.510(b)(1) can be turbulent, if not volatile. Safe part of a mixed-finance transaction, and to describe in more detail the harbor standards are simply not for PHAs that size their transactions requirements for the transmittal letter workable in this environment. based only upon RHF funds. and § 905.510(b)(2) to provide the Instead of safe harbor standards, the (6) This final rule removes proposed requirement for incorporating a table of CFFP establishes a requirement for an § 905.710(b)(4). Proposed § 905.710(b)(4) contents and contact information in the independent third-party fairness would have requested redundant proposal. This final rule also revises opinion, with certain exceptions where information. § 905.510(b)(3) to reflect the required there are other indications of reduced Comment: HUD’s submission and financing schedules that must be risk. The requirement for a fairness reporting requirements for this program submitted. These include the debt opinion, as opposed to cost control and are excessive. Commenters stated that service schedule, sources and uses safe harbor standards, permits HUD to HUD is bringing fewer resources to the schedule, and portfolio schedule. The maintain flexibility in implementing the project but is imposing requirements as effective-cost-of-financing schedule was program. This approach allows PHAs to though funding the entire project. They dropped as a submittal requirement, structure financial transactions that best recommended that HUD reporting although HUD will continue to make it meet their needs, provided that the requirements be proportional to its available on its Web site to assist PHAs fairness opinion establishes that the financial stake in the project and that in assessing the overall financial costs of transaction is fair and reasonable given they reflect a more business-like different financial structures. current market conditions. approach to partnering with the private This final rule revises § 905.510(b)(4) HUD believes that the streamlining sector. to summarize other submittal items process introduced in this rule (and Response: This final rule reduces required pursuant to proposed § 905.705 described elsewhere in this preamble) reporting requirements for PHAs that that were not delineated elsewhere in will also assist with the issue. HUD’s combine CFFP with mixed-finance proposed § 905.710. New § 905.510(b)(6) review process for complete Capital projects. PHAs that pursue mixed- incorporates the requirement for Fund Financing Proposals now averages finance projects have both HUD and evidence regarding DOTs. New approximately 2 to 3 months, and this investor reporting requirements § 905.510(b)(7) incorporates the shorter process time should allow PHAs associated with the mixed-finance requirement for a board resolution and to lower costs and respond to market transaction, and HUD agrees that the a counsel’s opinion. New § 905.510(b)(8) conditions, which HUD believes is a CFFP reporting requirements could be states the requirement for a Capital better solution than safe harbor reduced. In fact, this final rule Fund Financing Amendment to the ACC standards for this purpose. streamlines those requirements, as be executed as part of the CFFP Comment: The rule will provide little described above in the preamble. transaction. This final rule revises assistance to small PHAs. HUD should However, for non-mixed-finance proposed § 905.705(j) to specify consider other forms of incentive to projects, quarterly reporting is still requirements associated with variable assist those PHAs. necessary. Unlike Capital Funds, CFFP rate transactions. This final rule also Response: HUD recognizes and proceeds do not appear in the Line of revises proposed § 905.705(n) (final appreciates that the relative cost of Credit Control System (LOCCS). § 905.505(n)) to state specific additional financing is more expensive for smaller

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65202 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

PHAs. As a result, HUD has revised the more in line with financing for other approach would be further precluded rule to streamline procedures for rental housing. The rule should allow for any PHA that has already smaller PHAs based on the size of their PHAs to pledge public housing undertaken a CFFP. financings. Operating Funds, Capital Funds, rents, Comment: Proposed § 905.705(c)(5), For those PHAs that are standard or and the underlying property. Another which would require that an effective high performers with cumulative commenter remarked that banks DOT be recorded in the first position, borrowings of less than $2 million, the evaluate market-rate apartments on their will severely hamper the amount of requirement for the submission of ability to generate sufficient rents to private funds that can be leveraged, management assessments and fairness cover expenses and have sufficient because the lender would discount the opinions, and a demonstration of funds remaining to cover the debt, and value of any land and improvements construction management and financial if not, on the ability of the property to pledged as security, due to the lender’s controls is limited. HUD reserves the generate sufficient sales proceeds to pay security interest being subordinate to right to require a fairness opinion or off the loan and cover expenses in the the DOT. return the proposal if financing costs are event of a foreclosure. That commenter Response: HUD’s experience shows outside of what HUD considers further stated that, given the nature of that there is limited value in allowing anticipated norms. This streamlining public housing, lenders cannot view PHAs to provide security interests in should assist small PHAs in reducing PHAs or their stand-alone projects as real estate as part of the CFFP. As noted the costs of financing. market-rate financing, but rather that elsewhere, the appropriations-based Comment: The proposed rule refers to private and public housing are at CFFP program has demonstrated broad mortgaging public housing properties opposite ends of the financing market acceptance, as well as strong under section 30 of the 1937 Act (42 spectrum. Other commenters noted that, ratings and attractive pricing from the U.S.C. 1437z–2), but does not establish at current proration levels, PHAs will investment community. The CFFP regulations for mortgaging public not have the cash flow necessary to regularly achieves ratings of AA, which housing property. HUD should support financing. is a similar or better rating than that implement provisions related to Response: HUD recognizes that public provided to strong multifamily housing mortgaging public housing property. housing financing is quite different from projects, and has been used to leverage Also, in implementing section 30 of the financing in the private sector. Since, in substantial funding. 1937 Act, HUD should allow PHAs to operating pro-formas (standard financial Comment: The rule fundamentally subordinate the DOT. Otherwise, the projections), changes in revenue have errs in treating borrowings secured by rule risks devaluing PHA real estate and disproportionate impacts on net RHF funds as identical to borrowings destroying the potential utility of operating income (NOI), changes in the secured by Capital Funds. There is no section 30 of the 1937 Act. Other current appropriations level could cause reason why the leveraging of RHF funds comments stated that HUD should the NOI to be volatile. The potential for should be subject to any greater HUD remove this authority. One commenter volatility in the NOI, and thus, by review than the direct expenditure of states that the authority is not needed extension, the debt coverage ratio, them. Another commenter stated that and lenders might unnecessarily require should PHAs undertake conventional HUD should allow for 80 percent pledges of real estate collateral; another NOI-based financing, present additional pledging of the RHF funds, and allow states that the granting of security constraints on adopting a private sector the market to determine if 80 percent is interests in public housing property model. an acceptable risk. other than Capital Funds is already Moreover, the unique regulatory Response: In general, HUD agrees that addressed in 24 CFR part 941, subpart environment in which public housing CFFP transactions that are sized F (mixed-finance development). operates essentially precludes the assuming that only RHF funds will be Response: HUD may provide more adoption of a private sector model. used for the payment of debt service detailed guidance to PHAs regarding While, pursuant to asset management, could be treated differently than CFFP mortgaging their properties in the PHAs must now undertake project- transactions that are underwritten to future. In the meantime, this final rule based accounting, except for mixed- include formula funds for the payment does not remove the basic authority to finance projects, the public housing of debt service. However, generally, mortgage real property. While it is true property in any PHA’s portfolio is all transactions that size loans based upon that in entering into financing owned by a single legal entity, namely the receipt of RHF funds have always transactions PHAs should aggressively the PHA. This is entirely different than also included formula funds for the represent their interest with financing the private sector model, where separate payment of debt service. Moreover, providers, the overall success of the properties are normally owned by transactions that pledge RHF funds have CFFP program is demonstrated by the distinct legal entities, even if ultimately always also included a pledge of fact that HUD has approved more than controlled by an individual or other formula funds. To date, there has not $3 billion in CFFP transactions to date. overarching entity. been a financing transaction involving These transactions have been structured Furthermore, HUD has approved more RHF funds that isolates the remainder of on an appropriations-based financing than $3 billion in Capital Fund the Capital Fund (i.e., formula funds) model; that is, where future Financing Proposals involving almost from the transaction, for debt service appropriations, not real estate, 200 PHAs, many of these amongst the payments or for security purposes. represents the security interest provided largest PHAs in the country. The CFFP Thus, there is not a clear distinction to lenders. Since the appropriations- model is based upon a PHA-wide between the two types of transactions. based financing approach has been pledge, and is not property specific. Nonetheless, HUD agrees that the rule accepted by the housing finance market, Given the nature of the covenants should allow for different treatment of lenders will have no basis to involved in CFFP transactions, it would proposals where the sizing of the loan unnecessarily demand pledges of real not be possible for PHAs that have is based only upon the use of RHF funds estate collateral. undertaken those transactions to for the payment of debt service, if such Comment: The proposed rule missed provide mortgages in underlying a transaction occurs. This final rule the opportunity to encourage innovative properties without first refinancing their revises proposed § 905.705(g) (final financing for public housing that is CFFP debt. Thus, a property-based § 905.505(g)) to provide that

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65203

transactions structured in the above- is necessarily more limited as to pledges copies can be submitted as electronic noted manner shall not be required to of future Capital Fund grants because of copies. complete or submit a physical needs the possibility of other capital needs Comment: Given the condition of assessment as part of their CFFP arising. This final rule also revises HUD’s information management and Financing Proposal. proposed §§ 905.705(i)(1) and program systems, PHAs may be In addition to the above, while RHF 905.705(i)(3) as final §§ 905.505(i)(1) prevented from participating in the funds and loan proceeds for such and 905.505(i)(2), to clarify that PHAs CFFP due to erroneous or missing transaction must still be identified in may exceed the 33 percent of future information in HUD’s PHAS. schedules in the PHA’s CFP Annual projected Capital Funds threshold only Response: HUD disagrees. The PHAS Statement/Performance and Evaluation if they are utilizing RHF grants to size has consistently provided data in a time Report and CFP Five-Year Action Plan, their financing. These revised sections frame sufficient to permit the timely those schedules are not required to be allow PHAs utilizing RHF funds to conclusion of financing transactions. submitted as part of the Capital Fund exceed 33 percent leverage in their Comment: Given the $18 billion Financing Proposal. This final rule overall future Capital Funds (PHAs are backlog of capital needs, it is revises proposed § 905.705(h) to remove permitted to pledge up to 50 percent of unreasonable to require PHAs to the requirement for PHAs that size their their overall future Capital Fund, complete a physical needs assessment at loans based only upon the future receipt including formula funds and RHF the project level that covers the PHA’s of RHF to submit a budget as part of funds), in order to leverage up to 100 entire public housing portfolio before their Capital Fund Financing Proposal percent of their RHF funds. seeking approval of a CFFP or OFFP (final § 905.505(h)(2)). Comment: In the context of a project transaction. No PHA can legitimately Finally, HUD agrees that RHF funds using an LIHTC, operating agreements demonstrate an ability to address all the should be treated differently than and CFP Annual Statement/Performance capital needs of its stock. formula funds, for underwriting and Evaluation Reports should allow The requirement of a physical needs purposes. Therefore, this final rule the use of these funds to pay the annual assessment should be removed and revises § 905.505(i)(2) (redesignated LIHTC fund investment management fee HUD should rely on information in the from proposed § 905.705(i)(2)) to permit specified in the respective operating CFP Annual Statement/Performance and PHAs to pledge up to 100 percent of agreement governing the investment of Evaluation Report and CFP Five-Year their RHF funds for debt service, these LIHTC funds in a development or Action Plan. Rather than conducting a provided that this constitutes no more modernization activity. The investment physical needs assessment, PHAs than 50 percent of the PHA’s combined management fee should be specified in should be required to consider Capital Funds (i.e., formula funds and the initial operating agreement, should alternative sources of financing. The RHF funds). HUD will allow PHAs to not escalate faster than the consumer physical needs assessment should be pledge 100 percent of their RHF due, in price index, and should initially not permissive rather than mandatory. part, to the fact that the maximum term exceed $8,000 annually. Proposed § 905.705(g) should be PHAs can underwrite RHF for is 10 Response: As a cost of financing, the clarified to indicate how current the years, which is the maximum period of fee would be a permissible Capital Fund physical needs assessment must be. time a PHA can receive a tier of RHF. expenditure, provided it is proportional Response: This final rule revises This is half the maximum term of 20 to the ratio of public housing units to proposed § 905.705(g) to remove the years permitted where PHAs pledge non-public housing units in the project. requirement that PHAs demonstrate, Capital Fund formula funds for the Comment: The time deadlines for based on the physical needs assessment, payment of debt service, and, therefore, HUD review of documentation should that they can maintain their public considerably more conservative. The 50 be waived in a mixed-finance housing portfolio over the term of the percent cap is being established to limit development transaction. The rule financing. Instead, this final rule, the amount of RHF funds PHAs can should permit PHAs to submit executed responsive to public comments, requires pledge in addition to formula Capital copies of the required legal documents that the PHA demonstrate that the Funds. This limitation will be triggered to HUD when they become available. financing will not negatively impact the for those PHAs where RHF funds make Response: Submission of executed ability of the PHA to meet the ongoing up a significant portion of their overall closing documents to HUD is required needs of its public housing portfolio Capital Fund such that pledging RHF so that HUD may upload the debt over the term of the financing. In order funds could exceed the 50 percent service schedule into LOCCS. However, to make this analysis, PHAs will need overall cap. as a business practice for Capital Fund to project their future funding, and the Comment: One commenter questioned Financing Proposals that are part of demand for that funding from both the practical value of proposed mixed-finance transactions, HUD capital and non-capital activities. PHAs § 905.705(i)(1), given that proposed regularly conditions its CFFP approval that borrow more than $2 million § 905.705(i)(2) permits a PHA to pledge on the receipt of approval of the mixed- cumulatively and are not leveraging more than 33 percent of its annual finance program. This final rule revises non-public housing funds must Capital Fund grant upon a showing that § 905.715(b)(2) to reflect this business demonstrate that they have considered is essentially duplicative of the physical practice. Section 905.515(b)(2), as leveraging. As noted previously, PHAs needs assessment required by proposed revised by this final rule, requires that size their loans based only upon the § 905.705(g). closing documents to be submitted receipt of future RHF, or that use their Response: HUD agrees that some within 60 days of the date of HUD’s CFFP as part of mixed-finance further explanation of these related approval letter; that letter sets transactions, are not required to meet sections is necessary. Accordingly, this conditions that must be met prior to the requirements of proposed final rule removes proposed closing (rather than using the closing § 905.705(g) (final § 905.505(g)). § 905.705(i)(2) and adds § 905.505(i)(3), date). HUD continues to make efforts to In response to comments that HUD to make explicit HUD’s policy that, as reduce paper submittal requirements, should not require a physical needs long as it is reasonable to do so, a PHA and now requires that only one hard assessment at all, but rather require may exceed 33 percent when pledging copy of the Capital Fund Financing PHAs to seek alternative means of its existing Capital Fund grant. The PHA Proposal be submitted. The remaining financing, or make the physical needs

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65204 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

assessment permissive, HUD notes that PHA to take the fee once from the CFFP language in § 905.505(h)(5) of this final CFFP loans result in PHAs obligating a proceeds, and then a second time from rule to specify that CFFP proceeds may significant portion of long-term future the Capital Funds used to repay the reimburse only predevelopment costs funding streams to pay off the loans. For CFFP financing. incurred in accordance with regulatory this reason, long-term capital planning PHAs should use their Capital Funds requirements. is an essential part of undertaking the to cover any eligible administrative Comment: Proposed § 905.705(j)(1) obligations and commitments associated costs associated with CFFP transactions, should permit CFFP financing terms with CFFP financing. However, the within the allowable limits. The rule anywhere from 30 to 40 years. underlying point, that PHAs should proposed in § 905.705(h)(4) an Response: Given the nature of consider alternative financing sources exception to the use of CFFP proceeds appropriations-based financing, terms in when structuring their CFFP for administrative costs for mixed- excess of 20 years are difficult to transactions, is valid, as it maximizes finance projects. support. By way of reference, the funding for the PHA. Therefore, this In response to public comments, the restrictive covenant associated with the final rule revises final § 905.505(g) such final rule revises proposed use of Capital Funds for modernization that PHAs that borrow in excess of $2 § 905.705(h)(4) (final § 905.505(h)(5)) to is limited to 20 years. This final rule million and do not leverage non-public add a clarification that CFFP proceeds revises the language in § 905.505(j)(l) to housing funds must state why the may be used, in addition to for the clarify the limitation of the term to 20 proposed borrowing is appropriate in modernization and construction of years. light of other alternatives available. public housing dwelling units, for the Comment: One commenter In response to the comment that the development or modernization of non- recommended that § 905.705(j)(2) be rule should clarify the timing of the dwelling space. However, PHAs that clarified to provide that ‘‘any loan with physical needs assessment, at present, have significant physical needs in their mandatory debt service payments shall the requirements stated in 24 CFR public housing dwellings should take have a cap on such payments and shall 968.315 apply. PHAs must conduct a measures to ensure that they meet the be self-amortizing.’’ Another commenter new physical needs assessment at least test in § 905.505(g) if they propose to recommended that the prohibition on once every 5 years. use CFFP proceeds for non-dwelling acceleration be removed. The Comment: One commenter noted that facilities. commenter stated that such a restriction the rule’s prohibition on the use of This final rule also revises proposed could negatively impact the financing proceeds for central office cost § 905.705(h)(4) (final § 905.505(h)(5)) to marketability of the program. center costs raises numerous questions, clarify that CFFP proceeds may be used Response: All CFFP transactions have including whether the application is a to reimburse predevelopment costs only mandatory debt service payments, and central office or project cost, whether to the extent that those costs were pursuant to § 905.705(j)(1) they are fully HUD is suggesting that property incurred in accordance with regulatory amortizing. HUD’s policy in managers set up affiliates to perform requirements. Section 941.302 limits implementing the CFFP has been not to developer duties, and how the project- predevelopment costs for traditional permit acceleration provisions. Given based requirements would be met if the public housing to 3 percent of total that HUD has approved more than $3 proceeds were used for predevelopment development costs. Section 941.612 billion in Capital Fund Financing or new development purposes. Several specifies the process for drawing down Proposals, there is broad market commenters recommended that funds for predevelopment costs for acceptance of the program, including proposed § 905.705(h)(4) be eliminated. mixed-finance transactions. HUD’s policy on acceleration. Another commenter stated that the Comment: Individual projects may Nonetheless, there may be provisions should be changed to permit not be able to fund the debt service, and circumstances in which a PHA proposes PHAs to use CFFP financing proceeds to the asset management project level may and can justify the inclusion of an pay for costs directly incurred by the change with ongoing demolition, acceleration provision in a CFFP central office cost center. redevelopment, and realignment. As a transaction. This final rule revises Response: The limitation concerning result, the regulations should be § 905.505(j)(2) to allow for that the use of CFFP proceeds for expanded to include a method to use possibility. administrative and central office cost Capital Funds for debt service at the Comment: The requirement for a center costs effectively precludes PHAs agency level. fairness opinion will add significant from doubling the amount of Capital Response: This CFFP final rule expense to a PHA’s financing of a new Funds that PHAs can use for permits PHAs to size their financing development. Financial markets are administrative costs. Currently, and either on the project level, or on an competitive and if a PHA has under the revised rules issued pursuant agency level. The pledge of CFFP, thoroughly ‘‘shopped’’ its financing to asset management, administrative however, is at an agency level. Further, needs, the PHA will receive a fair and and central office cost center costs are this final rule allows PHAs to size their competitive rate. Therefore, this eligible costs under the CFFP. loans based on a pledge of up to 100 requirement should be removed. Administrative and cost center costs are percent of their RHF funds (final One commenter recommended that generally among the first costs set aside § 905.505(i)(2)). This revision should HUD require a fairness opinion only if by PHAs each year as they budget their provide considerable resources to PHAs the opinion has a conclusive effect and use of Capital Funds. Therefore, any that wish to utilize the CFFP to realign if redundant determinations regarding Capital Funds used by PHAs to pay debt their public housing portfolio. commercial fairness will not be made by service will already be the net of Comment: One commenter HUD. Another commenter administrative or central office cost recommended that HUD define the term recommended that the fairness opinion center costs. Since CFFP debt is repaid ‘‘costs already incurred’’ in proposed be limited to a determination that the from Capital Funds, if the rule § 905.705(h)(4). ‘‘interest rate, points and costs are permitted PHAs to use CFFP proceeds Response: This final rule removes the reasonable given market conditions.’’ for these costs as well, the rule would phrase ‘‘cost already incurred’’ from Response: The requirement for a in effect be doubling the ceiling on such proposed § 905.705(h)(4) (final fairness opinion permits HUD to use of Capital Funds, by allowing the § 905.505(h)(5)), and clarifies the maintain flexibility in implementing the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65205

program. This approach allows PHAs to HUD does not anticipate establishing in the same manner as other uses of a structure financial transactions that best separate criteria for bond pools. PHAs PHA’s Capital Funds. In addition, the meet their needs, provided that the participating in bond pools are treated use of Capital Funds for the payment of fairness opinion establishes that the in the same manner as PHAs that submit debt service needs to be included in the transaction is fair and reasonable given stand-alone Capital Fund Financing CFP Annual Statement/Performance and current market conditions. Proposals. As such, the standards for Evaluation Report and CFP Five-Year HUD will continue its general requiring or waiving the submission of Action Plan in the same manner as other requirement to have independent third- a fairness opinion will be the same for uses of Capital Funds. party fairness opinions completed. all PHAs, whether or not they HUD requires that PHAs report However, this final rule eliminates that participate in a pooled bond transaction. quarterly in regard to CFFP transactions, requirement for several types of Comment: The requirements for because data on the use of CFFP transactions that present a reduced risk. construction management and financial proceeds are not included in automated For example, fairness opinions are controls at proposed § 905.705(l) are HUD systems in the same manner as eliminated for borrowings of less than duplicative of the requirement that Capital Funds, for which current data $2 million, because of the relatively PHAs obtain approval for changes for on obligation and expenditure can be small amount of funds at risk; for high work items at proposed § 905.705(m) accessed. performers up to $20 million, because and add unnecessary layers of Comment: Proposed § 905.710(b)(3) high performers have a demonstrated administrative requirements. would require parties to dedicate time ability to effectively implement their Response: Proposed § 905.705(l) (final and resources to negotiating an public housing program; and in mixed- § 905.505(l)) is aimed at obtaining agreement without the confidence that finance transactions, because PHAs in representations from PHAs that they they would ultimately obtain HUD mixed-finance transactions are generally have sufficient construction approval. The rule should strike a better represented by a strong development management and financial controls in balance between protecting HUD’s team and have increased regulatory place to offer protections from fraud, limited resources and requiring private oversight under the mixed-finance waste, or abuse. Proposed § 905.705(m) parties to commit extensive resources to program. In any of these cases, HUD can (final § 905.505(m)) is a mechanism a transaction that may not be approved. require a fairness opinion if the whereby PHAs may obtain approval Response: HUD’s review of the transaction does not meet industry from HUD for modifications to their documents associated with CFFP norms. This final rule adds approved budgets. Obtaining such transactions is for conformance with § 905.507(a)(2) to eliminate the approvals from HUD does not substitute program requirements only. As such, requirement for a fairness opinion for for the value of effective internal any negotiations should already be standard or high-performing PHAs that controls on the part of the PHA. complete and the documents should be have cumulative CFFP transactions of Nonetheless, toward the underlying in their final form before the Capital less than $2 million, PHAs that were goal of streamlining the regulations Fund Financing Proposal is submitted high performers under PHAS and have where possible, this final rule at to HUD. cumulative CFFP borrowings of less § 905.507 removes this requirement for HUD nevertheless does recognize and than $20 million, and PHAs that assurances regarding construction appreciate that clarity and transparency propose to use their CFFP proceeds as management and financial controls for in policy and programmatic part of a mixed-finance transaction. PHAs that meet the following criteria: requirements increases the efficiency of Notwithstanding these changes, if HUD PHAs that have cumulatively less than the overall process, both in structuring determines that the interest or other $2 million in CFFP financing and are the Capital Fund Financing Proposal, costs are not in line with industry standard or high performers, as well as and in HUD’s review after the proposal norms, HUD may require a fairness high-performing PHAs that have is submitted. Toward this end, HUD has opinion or return the application. cumulatively less than $20 million in been developed legal guidance for bond Regarding the request to limit fairness CFFP financing, and all PHAs using the documents. The legal guidance will opinions, fairness opinions are already proceeds to undertake mixed-finance provide sample provisions that the PHA limited to the business terms of transactions. could adopt at its discretion. Although financing transactions. As such, they are Comment: Proposed § 905.705(p) the legal provisions would be optional, a low-cost and efficient mechanism for would establish burdensome and costly such provisions could provide a ensuring the reasonableness of the requirements on PHAs and should be reference point for structuring Capital financing terms given current market changed. One commenter suggested that Fund Financing Proposals, removing conditions. HUD does not currently such information should be submitted some of the uncertainty that PHAs may contemplate further reducing the scope semi-annually rather than quarterly. now experience in structuring their of fairness opinions. Another suggested that HUD limit its transactions. Comment: For pooled bond requirements to the PHA’s annual Comment: While the proposed rule transactions or a single bond reports and copies of reports submitted required PHA to submit a complete set transaction, the fairness opinion should to the financing institution. Other of financing documents be required only for transactions above commenters questioned the need for (§ 905.705(b)(3)), the proposed rule did $10 million. these reports altogether, since HUD not specify the documents that are to be Response: This final rule relaxes should be able to get this information submitted. More importantly, the requirements for fairness opinions. from other reports submitted as part of proposed rule did not indicate how the PHAs that have cumulative CFFP the PHA’s CFP Annual Statement/ documents are to be evaluated. borrowings under $2 million, high- Performance and Evaluation Report or One commenter recommended that performing PHAs with cumulative CFFP PHA Annual Plan. § 905.710(b)(3) be removed and made borrowings of less than $20 million, and Response: Section 905.505(h)(1) now more like the streamlined requirements all PHAs using the proceeds to clarifies that the use of CFFP proceeds for mixed-finance projects. Another undertake mixed-finance transactions shall be included in the CFP Annual commenter recommended that HUD generally are not required to submit Statement/Performance and Evaluation establish a process to approve LIHTC fairness opinions. Report and CFP Five-Year Action Plan LLC (Limited Liability Company)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65206 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

operating agreements and critical third- security interest provided pursuant to eventual re-use of the income cannot be party financing documents before these this program has been well established, known with any certainty given the fact documents are made final. accepted by the marketplace, and that the re-use is in the future. This final Response: Financing documents vary should be familiar to all program rule modifies § 905.705(j)(1) to formalize significantly from one transaction to the participants. the existing policy that CFFP next, even for similar transactions, such In terms of reviewing financing transactions may not be structured in a as direct loans or private placements. documents that are still under manner that generates program income, There is no definitive way that HUD can negotiation or making the requirement unless otherwise approved by HUD. identify in a regulation the entire list of for financing documents optional, HUD financing documents that each PHA will is not a party to the agreements between IV. Findings and Certifications enter into as part of a CFFP. PHAs and their lenders or bondholders, Paperwork Reduction Act In regard to eliminating the although these negotiations concern The information collection requirement for financing documents as substantial Federal funding. HUD’s part of a streamlined process similar to review of the documents associated requirements contained in this rule have the mixed-finance program, HUD has with CFFP transactions is necessary for been approved by the Office of had much greater experience with conformance with program Management and Budget (OMB) under mixed-finance public housing than with requirements and to determine that the the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the CFFP. Although HUD has been proposed use of Capital Funds is sound (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) and given OMB implementing the CFFP on a case-by- and consistent with use requirements. control numbers 2577–0157 and 2577– case basis since 2000, it was not until As such, HUD review can be useful only 0226. In accordance with the Paperwork 2005 that the program began to be more if negotiations are complete and the Reduction Act, an agency may not widely used. As such, the CFFP is not financing documents are in their final conduct or sponsor, and a person is not deemed to be ripe for the same form and provided to HUD. required to respond to, a collection of streamlining efforts as are currently Comment: HUD’s proposed information, unless the collection being promulgated for HUD’s mixed- amendments to part 905 do not address displays a currently valid OMB control finance program. Nonetheless, HUD whether Capital Fund financing number. appreciates the need to continually proceeds may be used for short-term Regulatory Planning and Review increase the efficiency of HUD loans or bridge loans. The final rule programs, and this final rule does should expressly provide for these uses. OMB reviewed this rule under introduce some streamlining of HUD’s current informal position Executive Order 12866 (entitled procedure as have already been appears to be that proceeds from CFFP ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’). discussed in this preamble. financings cannot be used to generate OMB determined that this rule is In regard to HUD establishing a program income, and recommended that significant as meant by the order, process to approve LIHTC LLC this type of structure be permitted. although it is not an economically Operating Agreements before the Response: This final rule revises significant regulatory action as defined documents are finalized, it is important proposed § 905.705(j)(1) (final in 3(f)(1) of the order. This rule creates to note that LIHTC documents, and § 905.505(j)(1)) to explicitly allow for transfers in that it permits Capital Funds HUD’s review thereof, are subject to the short-term or bridge loans, provided that would be expended in future years mixed-finance program regulations at 24 they are fully amortizing. However, the to be expended earlier on eligible CFR part 941. On December 27, 2006, commenter is correct that it has been activities such as large capital HUD published a proposed rule entitled HUD’s position, while implementing the improvements; however, this does not ‘‘Streamlined Application Process in program on a case-by-case basis, that the result in economically significant Public/Private Partnerships for the transactions may not be structured in differences in expenditures or transfers Mixed-Finance Development of Public such a way so as to allow for the to and among stakeholders. Rather, it Housing Units.’’ The streamlined generation of program income. The merely time-shifts funding in a way that process would substantially reduce the rationale for this approach is related to enables PHAs to obtain the benefits of legal documents that must be submitted the differences in financial controls for future funding at an earlier time. In the to HUD for review as part of the mixed- grant and non-grant programs. HUD course of time, however, PHAs would finance process. permits Capital Funds and HOPE VI use the same future streams of Capital Comment: Proposed § 905.710(b)(3) funds to be used in a manner that Funds absent this rule. While the (final § 905.510(b)(5)), which provides generates program income. These are expenses of financing must be that HUD will not review preliminary both grant programs, where the focus is considered, these do not rise to the level financing documents that are still under on the initial use of the grant. Part 85 of economic significance. This rule will negotiation, is problematic. The rule of HUD’s regulations (24 CFR part 85) have no direct budgetary impact. should make this requirement an option explicitly addresses the generation of The rule in itself does not add any at HUD’s discretion. PHAs may need program income in grant programs. The new cost to the financing program and assurance that HUD will approve the CFFP, however, is a financing program. does not create any significant transfers. security interests prior to concluding Given the long-term implications of The only new costs to the program negotiations. CFFP financings, one of HUD’s participant are transaction fees and Response: The CFFP is an objectives in reviewing such interest cost associated with borrowing appropriations-based financing applications is to ensure, to the extent under the CFFP rule. These fees and program. As an appropriations-based feasible, that the proposed financing, cost would constitute transfers under form of financing involving the CFFP, including the use of the proceeds, will this rule. For example a municipal bond the security interest provided by PHAs not have a negative effect on the would cost on average 2 percent in fees, to lenders or bondholders is a pledge of viability of the PHA’s public housing in addition to the coupon interest rate, future Capital Funds, subject to the over the term of the financing. In order which is also 5 percent on average. To availability of appropriations. As HUD to make this analysis, the permanent use date, HUD’s office overseeing the CFFP has approved more than $3 billion in of the proceeds must be known. In the report that to date, about $183.4 million Capital Fund Financing Proposals, the case of program income, however, the has been allocated to debt service

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65207

(interest and principal). Applying this improvements. If the average cost for elsewhere in this economic impact rule of thumb, the $183.4 million improving a unit fell as the number of statement. annual payment would have generated units improved increases, then it would In conclusion and notwithstanding transfers of about $3.7 million initially make economic sense to increase the the financing costs under the CFFP, the in fees (2 percent), and about $9.2 number of units improved. These implementation of the final rule would million annual in interest costs. HUD’s benefits may warrant undertaking the not have any budgetary impact on the argument on these transfers is that a costs of debt. Federal budget, and would not create well-managed PHA would not • The lump sum of loan proceeds will any significant transfers, but rather undertake an investment if the net make possible large-scale improvements would advantageously time-shift the use present value were less than zero. Thus, at the PHA’s biggest sites that could not of Capital Funds. The rule would also the option would be exercised only by be undertaken on the basis of annual comply with the statutory requirement those PHAs for whom there is an CFP allocations. This is corroborated that requires the Secretary of HUD to expected benefit. The CFFP final rule using the findings of a study by Abt establish guidelines for the use of public would permit PHAs to borrow for uses Associates and funded by HUD (Abt housing Capital Funds for financial such as issuing bond debt to be repaid Associates, Capital Needs of the Public activities. out of future CFP subsidy allocations. Housing Stock in 1998: Formula Capital HUD also considered alternatives to The financing costs associated with Study, January 2000; hereafter, ‘‘the this rulemaking. As an alternative to bond transactions are as follows. A study’’). The study estimated the total publishing a rule on the CFFP, HUD municipal bond would cost on average inspection-based existing modernization could continue to implement the CFFP 2 percent in fees, in addition to the needs for the 1,194,370 units of public on a case-by-case basis without coupon interest rate, which is also 5 housing to be $22.5 billion in 1998—an publishing a rule, as we have been percent on average. To date, according average of $18,847 per unit, and another doing since 2000. This is not an optimal to HUD’s office overseeing the CFFP, $2 billion to address ongoing accrual approach, as the rulemaking process about $183.4 million has been allocated needs or, on average, $1,679 per unit, enables HUD to solicit comment from to debt service (interest and principal). assuming that the inspection-based the public on the proposed rule, and to That is about 7 percent of annual existing modernization needs were incorporate changes into the program appropriation for the CFFP program. In completely met. based on those comments to the extent HUD determines it to be feasible. addition, this final rule also permits • Large-scale repair work will Furthermore, a final rule published in PHAs to pledge up to 100 percent of diminish the backlog of deterioration at the Federal Register and then the CFR their Replacement Housing Factor (RHF) key sites now, saving future CFP dollars will serve to establish rules of general funds for debt service, provided that and better securing the portfolio for the applicability and make those rules such pledge constitutes no more than 50 future. percent of the PHA’s combined future • accessible to the public. Making repairs now using loan Another possible alternative would Capital Funds (i.e., formula funds and proceeds should also result in lower RHF funds). In 2008, a total of 294 PHAs involve changing the terms we deem operating costs, linking the capital received RHF funds: 251 PHAs received approvable in a CFFP transaction. For investment with the need for properties $97,936,944 RHF in first increment, and example, we could allow a PHA to to stand on their own financially under 123 PHAs received $112,825,095 RHF in pledge more than 33 percent of its HUD’s new subsidy and asset second increment funding. Five years Capital Funds, or borrow for a period in management rules. excess of 20 years. Since HUD has been after the implementation of the RHF • phasedown, the $113 million second Allowing more flexibility in implementing the CFFP on a case-by- increment funding would be eliminated planning will allow PHAs to take case basis since 2000, 33 percent and redistributed by formula to all advantage of economic trends. The appears to be an appropriate debt eligible 3,138 PHAs. This means that in optimal investment decision depends coverage ratio. At that ratio, PHAs can time, debt supported by about $98 upon expectations concerning the borrow a sufficient sum to enable them million in RHF (or as much as $500 direction of critical variables. For to address a substantial scope of work, million, if one assumes level payments example, if the manager of a PHA but at the same time leave a sufficient and a 5-year term) could be added to the observes that construction costs are amount of Capital Funds after the $10.2 billion ‘‘debt ceiling.’’ Data from rising faster than the costs of debt, there payment of debt service to mitigate for HUD’s office of CFFP also show that the would be a reason to invest sooner and changes in appropriations, and to enable cost of insurance for CFFP transactions at a higher intensity than if construction PHAs to address ongoing modernization approved in 2008 and 2009 were, on costs were declining. This rule allows needs. With regard to changing the average, 1.2 percent of the amount the flexibility to invest at varying levels period of years for which a PHA could approved. of intensity. Indeed, the Department borrow funds for, while extending the This final rule provides the regulatory believes that a well-managed PHA period would increase borrowing framework for compliance with the would not undertake an investment if it capacity, it would greatly increase the statute and establishes an approval did not view the transaction as having amount of Capital Funds used to pay process for PHAs to request a positive impact on its Capital Fund interest costs. Furthermore, authorization from HUD to pledge program. Thus, the option would be synchronizing the term of the CFFP Capital Funds for debt service exercised only by those PHAs for whom with the term of the Capital Fund ACC payments, including payments of debt there is an expected benefit. amendment that PHAs signed each year service and customary financial costs • There are also costs of the use of when they receive Capital Fund grants for the modernization and development Capital Funds for financial activities. would provide consistency between the of public housing—including public The CFFP final rule would permit PHAs financing program and its intended housing in mixed-finance development. to borrow and issue bond debt to be funding source. Key benefits of the use of Capital Funds repaid out of future Capital Fund HUD’s economic impact analysis is for financial activities include: program subsidy allocations. However, contained in the docket file, which is • There exist economies of scale in there are financing costs associated with available for public inspection between making large-scale housing such transactions that are discussed the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65208 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

in the Regulations Division, Office of using their Capital Funds. However, the ■ 2. Designate §§ 905.10 and 905.120 as General Counsel, Department of decision whether to use this capability subpart A, and add a heading for Housing and Urban Development, 451 will be left to each PHA. Although some subpart A before current § 905.10 to 7th Street, SW., Room 10276, small entities may participate in the read as follows: Washington, DC 20410–0500. Due to program, the rule does not impose any security measures at the HUD legal requirement or mandate upon Subpart A—Capital Fund Headquarters building, an advance them and, accordingly, will not have a ■ 3. Revise the heading of § 905.120 to appointment to review the docket file significant impact on small PHAs. This read as follows: must be scheduled by calling the final rule also grants some procedural Regulations Division at 202–708–3055 exemptions to small PHAs, as measured § 905.120 Penalties for slow obligation or (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing- by their total financings. Therefore, the expenditure of Capital Fund program or speech-impaired individuals may undersigned certifies that this rule will assistance. access this number through TTY by not have a significant economic impact * * * * * calling the toll-free Federal Information on a substantial number of small ■ 4. Add and reserve subparts B through Relay Service at 800–877–8339. entities, and an initial regulatory D, and add subpart E, consisting of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act flexibility analysis is not required. §§ 905.500 through 905.515, to read as follows: Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Executive Order 13132, Federalism Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531– Executive Order 13132 (entitled Subpart E—Use of Capital Funds for 1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements ‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits, to the extent Financing for Federal agencies to assess the effects practicable and permitted by law, an of their regulatory actions on State, agency from promulgating a regulation Sec. 905.500 Purpose and description. local, and Tribal governments and the that has federalism implications and private sector. This final rule does not 905.505 Program requirements. either imposes substantial direct 905.507 Streamlined application impose any Federal mandate on any compliance costs on State and local State, local, or Tribal government or the requirements for standard and high- governments and is not required by performing PHAs. private sector within the meaning of statute or preempts State law, unless the 905.510 Submission requirements. UMRA. relevant requirements of section 6 of the 905.515 HUD review and approval. Environmental Impact Executive Order are met. This rule does § 905.500 Purpose and description. not have federalism implications and A Finding of No Significant Impact (a) This subpart provides the does not impose substantial direct with respect to the environment was requirements necessary for a PHA to compliance costs on State and local made, at the proposed rule stage, in participate in the Capital Fund governments or preempt State law accordance with HUD regulations at 24 Financing Program (CFFP), under which within the meaning of the Executive CFR part 50, which implement section the PHA may obtain HUD approval to Order. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental borrow private capital and pledge a Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. Congressional Review of Final Rules portion of its annual Capital Fund grant 4332(2)(C)). That Finding of No or public housing assets and other This rule constitutes a ‘‘major rule’’ as Significant Impact remains applicable to public housing property of the public defined in the Congressional Review this final rule and is available for public housing agency as security. inspection between the hours of 8 a.m. Act (5 U.S.C. Chapter 8). This rule has (b) Under the CFFP, PHAs are and 5 p.m. weekdays in the Regulations a 60-day delayed effective date and will permitted to borrow private capital to Division, Office of General Counsel, be submitted to the Congress in finance public housing development or Department of Housing and Urban accordance with the requirements of the modernization activities. A PHA may Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Congressional Review Act. use a portion of its Capital Fund for debt Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410– Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance service payments and usual and 0500. Due to security measures at the Number customary financing costs associated HUD Headquarters building, an advance with public housing development or appointment to review the docket file The Catalog of Federal Domestic modernization (including public must be scheduled by calling the Assistance number for 24 CFR part 905 housing in mixed-finance Regulations Division at 202–708–3055 is 14.850. developments). A PHA that undertakes (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing- List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 905 such financing activities may, subject to or speech-impaired individuals may HUD’s written approval, grant a security access this number through TTY by Grant programs—housing and interest in its future annual Capital calling the toll-free Federal Information community development, Fund grants, which shall be subject to Relay Service at 800–877–8339. Modernization, Public housing, the appropriation of those funds by Reporting and recordkeeping Regulatory Flexibility Act Congress. The PHA’s financing activities requirements. are not obligations or liabilities of the The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) ■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, Federal Government. The Federal (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires HUD amends 24 CFR part 905 as Government does not assume any an agency to conduct a regulatory follows: liability with respect to any such pledge flexibility analysis of any rule subject to of future appropriations, and the notice and comment rulemaking PART 905—THE PUBLIC HOUSING Federal Government neither guarantees requirements, unless the agency certifies CAPITAL FUND PROGRAM nor provides any full faith and credit for that the rule will not have a significant these financing transactions. economic impact on a substantial ■ 1. The authority citation for 24 CFR number of small entities. The regulatory part 905 is amended to read as follows: § 905.505 Program requirements. changes made by this final rule will Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1437g, 42 U.S.C. (a) Written approval. A PHA shall allow PHAs additional flexibility in 1437z–2, and 3535(d). obtain written HUD approval for all

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65209

Capital Fund financing transactions that (d) Public Housing Assessment its public housing portfolio over the pledge, encumber, or otherwise provide System (PHAS) designation. Generally, a term of the financing. In making this a security interest in public housing PHA shall be designated a standard demonstration, PHAs must reduce any assets or other property, including performer or high performer under projected future Capital Fund grants to Capital Funds, and use Capital Funds PHAS (24 CFR part 902), and must be account for planned or anticipated for the payment of debt service or other a standard performer or higher on the activities that would have the effect of financing costs. HUD approval shall be management and financial condition reducing or otherwise limiting the based on: indicators. HUD will consider requests availability of future Capital Fund (1) The ability of the PHA to complete from a PHA designated as troubled grants. PHA projections must be the financing transaction along with the under PHAS when the PHA is able to detailed on the portfolio schedule form associated improvements; show that it has developed appropriate prescribed by HUD, and shall project a (2) The reasonableness of the management and financial capability stabilized number of units (Stabilized provisions in the Capital Fund and controls that demonstrate its ability Base Unit Count) to be reached in no Financing Proposal considering the to successfully undertake the Capital more than 5 years after all planned or other pledges or commitments of public Fund Financing Proposal. The PHA anticipated activities have been housing assets, the PHA’s capital needs, must comply with all applicable fair completed that would reduce future and the pledge being proposed; and housing and civil rights requirements in Capital Fund grants. PHAs must also (3) Whether the PHA meets the 24 CFR 5.105(a). If a PHA has received take into consideration projected use of requirements of this subpart. a letter of findings, charge, or lawsuit Capital Funds for other eligible (b) Antideficiency. Any pledge of involving ongoing systemic activities under part 905, and may take future year Capital Fund grants under noncompliance under Title VI of the into consideration alternative sources of this section is subject to the availability Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of financing that are available to help meet of appropriations by Congress for that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Fair its needs. year. All financing documents related to Housing Act, or Section 109 of the (3) For PHAs that are proposing to future year Capital Fund amounts must Housing and Community Development borrow more than $2 million on a include a statement that the pledging of Act of 1974, and the letter of findings, cumulative basis, to the extent that: (i) Capital and other eligible Capital funds is subject to the availability of charge, or lawsuit has not been resolved Fund needs exceed projected Capital appropriations. to HUD’s satisfaction, then unless the Fund program funding amounts, and the (c) Conditions on use—(1) Capital Fund Financing Proposal is part of a plan to address such findings, PHA is not leveraging non-public Development. Any public housing that housing funds as part of its Capital is developed using amounts under this charge, or lawsuit, the PHA will not be eligible for financing pursuant to the Fund Financing Proposal transaction, part (including proceeds from financing CFFP. HUD will determine if actions to then authorized under this part) shall be resolve the charge, lawsuit, or letter of (ii) The PHA must demonstrate that it operated under the terms and findings taken are sufficient to resolve has considered leveraging non-public conditions applicable to public housing the matter. housing funds, and state why the during the 40-year period that begins on (e) Management capacity. A PHA proposed financing is appropriate in the date on which the project becomes shall have the capacity to undertake and light of alternative sources available. available for occupancy, except as administer private financing and (iii) Notwithstanding paragraphs otherwise provided in the 1937 Act. construction or modernization of the (g)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section, PHAs (2) Modernization. Any public size and type contemplated. In order to that size their financing by utilizing housing or portion of public housing determine capacity, HUD may require only replacement housing factor (RHF) that is modernized using amounts under the PHA to submit a management funds, or PHAs that propose to use their this part (including proceeds from assessment conducted by an Capital Fund Financing Proposal financing authorized under this part) independent third party, in a form and proceeds as part of a mixed-finance shall be maintained and operated during manner prescribed by HUD. modernization transaction, are not the 20-year period that begins on the (f) Existing financing. A PHA shall required to comply with § 905.505(g). latest date on which the modernization identify the nature and extent of any (h) CFP Plan. (1) The use of the CFFP is completed, except as otherwise existing encumbrances, pledges, or proceeds shall be included in a form provided in the 1937 Act. other financing commitments of public and manner as required by HUD for CFP (3) Applicability of latest expiration housing funds undertaken by the PHA. planning and budgeting and in a same date. Public housing subject to the use (g) Need for financing. (1) A PHA manner as a Capital Fund grant. The conditions described in paragraph (c) of must complete a physical needs CFFP proceeds shall be included as a this section, or to any other provision of assessment at the project level, in the separate Capital Fund grant to the same law mandating the operation of housing form and manner prescribed by HUD extent that PHAs are required to plan as public housing for a specific length that covers the PHA’s entire public and budget Capital Fund grants. The use of time, shall be maintained and housing portfolio for the term of the of Capital Funds for the payment of debt operated as required until the latest financing and that takes into service and related costs shall be such expiration date. consideration existing needs and the planned and budgeted as would other (4) Declaration of Trust. All public lifecycle repair and replacement of eligible uses of Capital Funds. housing rental projects must show major building components. The (2) As part of its Capital Fund evidence satisfactory to HUD of an activity to be financed must be Financing Proposal, the PHA shall effective Declaration of Trust being identified as a need in the physical submit a Capital Fund financing budget, recorded in first position, meeting the needs assessment. in the form and manner required by requirements of paragraph (c) of this (2) Based on the assessment under HUD, detailing the proposed use of the section and covering the term of the paragraph (g)(1) of this section, the PHA Capital Fund Financing Proposal financing. If part of a mixed-finance must demonstrate that the financing proceeds. There shall be no requirement project, this evidence will be with the will not negatively impact the ability of for PHAs to submit a Capital Fund mixed-finance evidentiary documents. the PHA to meet the ongoing needs of financing budget as part of their Capital

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65210 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

Fund financing proceeds where the service, taking into account adjustments (4) Variable interest rate. All variable- sizing of the financing is based upon the for activities that would reduce the rate transactions shall include an use of RHF funds for debt service, or receipt of Capital Funds, is called the interest-rate cap. The financing where the Capital Fund Financing ‘‘Debt Coverage Percentage.’’ documents must specify that the PHA Proposal proceeds are being used as part (2) A PHA may pledge up to 100 shall not be liable to pay debt service of a mixed-finance transaction. percent of any projected replacement with public housing funds, and that Approval letters for mixed-finance and housing factor (RHF) grants for debt there shall be no recourse to public RHF-related Capital Fund financing service payments, provided that the housing assets, beyond the interest-rate transactions shall be conditioned upon pledge extends to the formula fund cap. The limitation on the pledge of the approval of the mixed-finance portion of its Capital Fund grants also, Capital Funds specified in § 905.505(i) proposal, or, in the case of conventional but that not more than 50 percent of its shall be calculated based on the interest- development, upon the approval of the overall projected Capital Fund grants rate cap. development proposal and the (including formula funds and RHF (5) Other pledges or commitments. execution of an associated construction funds) are pledged. RHF projections PHAs seeking approval of a pledge of contract with which the Capital Fund shall account for any projected public housing assets must describe the financing proceeds would be used. reductions in RHF over the term of the nature and extent of existing (3) The work financed with Capital financing. Unless otherwise approved commitments or pledges of public Funds and described in the Capital by HUD, PHAs shall be limited to sizing housing assets, providing Fund financing budget will be based on their loans based upon increments of documentation of such other the physical needs assessment. The RHF currently being received by the commitments or pledges to the extent Capital Fund financing budget shall list PHA. CFFP transactions pledging RHF required by HUD. the work items (e.g., roof replacement, funds shall include accelerated (6) Terms and conditions. Financing window replacement, accessibility amortization provisions, requiring all documents must include any other modifications) by development. These RHF funds received by the PHA to pay terms and conditions as required by work items will constitute performance debt service as those RHF funds are HUD. measures upon which the PHA’s received. A RHF grant shall be used (k) Fairness opinion. The PHA shall performance will be evaluated. A only to develop or pay financing costs provide an opinion, in a form and general representation of the work (e.g., for the development of replacement manner prescribed by HUD, from a ‘‘ ’’ rehabilitation of the development ) is public housing units in accordance with qualified, independent, third-party not sufficient. § 905.10. financial advisor attesting that the terms (4) The CFP Plan (submission (as (3) Subject to the reasonableness test and conditions of the proposed described in paragraph (h) of this in § 905.505(a)(2), PHAs may exceed 33 financing transaction are reasonable section) shall include a copy of the percent when pledging existing Capital given current market conditions with physical needs assessment described in § 905.505(g). Fund grants and RHF grants for the respect to such matters as interest rate, (5) Financing proceeds under this part payment of debt service. Existing grants fees, costs of issuance, call provisions, may be used only for the modernization are grants that have been received by the and reserve fund requirements. or development of public housing and PHA at the time of HUD’s approval of (l) Financial controls and related costs including the the Capital Fund Financing Proposal. construction management. (1) The PHA modernization or development of non- (j) Terms and conditions of financing. shall have a financial control and dwelling space. Financing proceeds may The terms and conditions of all construction management plan not be used for administration or central financing shall be reasonable based on describing how the PHA will ensure office cost center costs (except for current market conditions. The that: mixed-finance projects), management financing documents shall include the (i) Adequate controls are in place improvements, or upon non-viable following, as applicable: regarding the use of the Capital Fund projects, such as those subject to (1) Term. The term of the Capital financing proceeds; and required conversion. Financing Fund financing transaction shall not be (ii) The improvements will be proceeds may be used to reimburse more than 20 years. All Capital Fund developed and completed in a timely predevelopment costs, but only to the financing transactions shall be fully manner consistent with the contract extent they were incurred in amortizing. Bridge loans and other documents. conformance with applicable regulatory short-term loans are permitted; (2) This plan shall contain protocols requirements. however, unless otherwise approved by and financial control mechanisms that (i) Debt Coverage Percentage. (1) HUD, the CFFP Financing transaction address the design of the improvements, Except as stated in § 905.505(i)(2), a may not be structured in a manner that construction inspections, construction PHA shall not pledge more than 33 generates program income. draws, and requisition approval checks percent of its annual future Capital (2) Acceleration. Unless otherwise and balances. A PHA that is designated Fund grants for debt service payments, approved by HUD, the financing troubled under PHAS, or other PHAs as assuming level Capital Fund documents shall provide that HUD determined by HUD, may be required to appropriations over the term of the debt approval is required before a lender may institute risk mitigation measures to obligation and any reduction accelerate a PHA’s debt obligation, for ensure that the funds are used properly attributable to activities projected by the default or otherwise. and for the purposes intended. PHA to occur during the term of the (3) Public housing assets. A PHA may (m) Work items. To the extent that any financing such as demolition, not pledge any public housing assets changes in work items financed by disposition, or conversion of public unless specifically approved in writing Capital Fund financing proceeds meet housing units or other occurrences that by HUD. PHAs seeking approval of a or exceed the following threshold could limit the availability of Capital pledge of public housing assets must requirements determined by HUD, Funds, including a voluntary submit documentation to HUD that PHAs must obtain written approval of compliance agreement. This percentage details the nature and priority of the amendments to their Capital Fund of Capital Funds dedicated for debt pledge. financing budget from HUD:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 65211

(1) A change in the type of activity Capital Fund Financing Proposal basis to evaluate a PHA’s performance. being financed (for example, if the proceeds to comply with section 9(j) of Failure to meet performance measures approved Capital Fund financing budget the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g(j)). Bond may result in: contemplated the proceeds being used and loan documents shall include (1) Failure to receive HUD approval for modernization, but after the proposal appropriate provisions such that for future financing transactions; is approved, the PHA decides instead to prepayment shall be made by the (2) Failure to be considered for future pursue development); lender, trustee, or appropriate third- competitive grant programs; and (2) A change in the project being party servicer approved by HUD, (3) Other sanctions HUD deems modernized or developed with the without any action by HUD post- appropriate and authorized by law or proceeds; approval; regulation. (3) A reduction in 20 percent or more (5) HUD agrees, subject to the (p) Reporting requirements. (1) The in the number of public housing units availability of appropriations, to use of the CFFP proceeds shall be being modernized; or approve immediately upon receipt from reported in the same manner as a (4) An increase of 20 percent or more the PHA (subject to any legal Capital Fund grant. The PHA shall of the cost of non-dwelling space. requirements or constraints applicable submit a performance and evaluation (n) Applicability of other Federal at the time), a CFP Plan document (as report on a quarterly basis. PHAs that requirements. The proceeds of the described in 24 CFR 905.505(h)) and/or utilize their Capital Fund financing Capital Fund financing are subject to all an annual CFF ACC Amendment, to the proceeds as part of a mixed-finance laws, regulations, and other extent and in an amount sufficient to transaction, and PHAs that size their requirements applicable to the use of make the applicable debt service financing based upon RHF in their Capital Fund grants made under 24 CFR payment; Capital Fund financing transactions, are part 905, unless otherwise approved by (6) Prior to cumulatively reducing its not required to submit quarterly reports. HUD in writing. PHAs undertaking inventory of public housing units by (2) Each CFFP transaction and/or CFFP transactions shall be subject to the more than 5 percent of the Stabilized development project is subject to fiscal following requirements, which shall be Base Unit Count, if, after the removal of closeout in the same manner of a Capital further enumerated in a Capital Fund units from inventory, the Debt Coverage Fund grant. Fiscal closeout includes the Financing Amendment to the Annual Percentage under § 905.505(i)(1) would submission of an Actual Modernization Contributions Contract (CFF ACC constitute more than 33 percent of Cost Certificate (AMCC) or Actual Amendment): future Capital Funds, the PHA shall Development Cost Certificate (ADCC), (1) Amounts payable to the PHA by prepay the financing such that the an audit, if applicable, a final quarterly HUD pursuant to the CFFP and pledged reduction in inventory shall not cause report, and a final Performance and to the payment of debt service by the the Debt Coverage Percentage to Evaluation report. PHA shall be used exclusively for debt increase. If the reduction in inventory is service in accordance with the debt required by law or public housing § 905.507 Streamlined application service schedule approved by HUD and requirements, the prepayment is not requirements for standard and high- shall not be available for any other required to be made prior to the performing PHAs. purpose; reduction in inventory, but instead shall (a) PHAs with cumulative CFFP (2) The financing does not constitute be made as soon as possible after the borrowings of less than $2 million and a debt or liability of HUD or the United PHA becomes aware of the requirement that are standard or high performers States, the full faith and credit of the of law or public housing requirements, under PHAS; PHAs that are high United States are not pledged to the but only to the extent that Capital Funds performers under PHAS with payment of debt service, and debt are not otherwise needed by the PHA to cumulative CFFP borrowings of less service is not guaranteed by HUD or the address the health and safety issues or than $20 million; PHAs that propose to United States; other requirements of law in the PHA’s use their CFFP proceeds in a mixed- (3) Nothing in this CFF ACC public housing portfolio, all as finance transaction, or proposals where Amendment or 24 CFR part 905 is determined by HUD. For PHAs that size the sizing of the financing is based only intended to diminish HUD’s authority to their loans based upon the projected upon the use of RHF funds for debt administer, monitor, and regulate the receipt of RHF funds, prior to service, shall not be required to submit: public housing program, including undertaking an activity that will reduce (1) A third-party management HUD’s authority to exercise any its RHF units below the number of units assessment under § 905.505(e); administrative sanction or remedy projected in the Capital Fund Financing (2) A third-party fairness opinion provided by law; provided, however, Proposal as required by § 905.505(i)(3), under § 905.505(k); that except as required by law, HUD the PHA shall prepay its loan such that (3) An assurance of financial controls will not assert any claim or right under debt service does not exceed 100 and construction management under the ACC, including the exercise of percent of projected RHF after § 905.505(l). administrative sanctions and remedies, accounting for the reduction in RHF (b) Notwithstanding § 905.507(a), if if and to the extent that the effect of units, all as determined by HUD. HUD determines that interest or other such claim or right would be to reduce (o) Performance measures. Pursuant costs do not appear to meet industry the payment of Capital Fund moneys to to 24 CFR 905.505(h) a PHA is required norms, or other aspects of the proposal the PHA below the level necessary to to identify in its CFP Plan documents present atypical risks, HUD retains the pay debt service or delay the time for specific items of work that will be discretion to require assessments, payment of such moneys such that accomplished using the proceeds of the opinions, or controls, or to return the required amounts would not be proposed financing. The identified proposal. available to pay debt service when due; items, which shall be quantifiable, shall (4) The financing is subject to be the basis on which HUD evaluates a § 905.510 Submission requirements. mandatory prepayment prior to the PHA’s performance. HUD may also (a) All requests for HUD approval of obligation end date and expenditure end utilize the Capital Fund financing CFFP transactions shall be submitted to date of the Capital Fund financing budget, and Capital Fund Financing the Office of Public and Indian Housing proceeds to the extent necessary for the Proposal approval documents as the (PIH), Attention: Office of Capital

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 65212 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

Improvements, in such form and in such (4) Other required submissions. The § 905.515 HUD review and approval. number of copies as designated by PIH following submissions must be (a) After receipt of a Capital Fund through direct notice. incorporated in the proposal to the Financing Proposal, HUD shall review (b) Each Capital Fund Financing extent required to be submitted by this the proposal for completeness. HUD Proposal shall be tabbed and presented part: Capital fund financing budget, will return to the PHA all incomplete or with the following information in the management assessment, fairness unapprovable proposals, identifying the order listed: opinion, and physical needs assessment. deficiencies, and will not take any (1) PHA transmittal letter. The PHA (5) Financing documents. The PHA further action. HUD will also return must submit a letter signed by the PHA must submit a complete set of the legal Executive Director (or Chief Executive proposals submitted by entities other documents that the PHA will execute in than the PHA (e.g., the PHA’s Officer, if applicable) briefly describing connection with the CFFP transaction. the proposed financing and use of consultants). HUD shall review all The legal documents must identify the complete proposals for compliance with proceeds, the percentage of Capital nature and extent of any security being Funds being dedicated to debt service, the requirements under this subpart. provided, as well as the position of any HUD may require the PHA to make the percent of the PHA’s public housing security interest (e.g., first lien position, units benefiting from the financing, and modifications to any of the CFFP second lien position). The legal documents submitted and may require the impact of the financing upon the documents are to be submitted to HUD public housing portfolio, and transmit the PHA to resubmit all or any portion only after they have been negotiated and of the proposal. After HUD determines to HUD a request for approval of the agreed upon by the parties to the CFFP transaction. The transmittal letter that a proposal complies with all transaction. HUD will not review applicable requirements, HUD shall shall provide any additional preliminary documents that are still information required pursuant to this notify the PHA in writing of its approval under negotiation. and any condition(s) of the approval. subpart including, but not limited to: (6) Declaration of Trust requirements. (i) Describing the transaction being (b) (1) A copy or copies of the CFF The PHA must submit evidence that the proposed; ACC Amendment shall accompany the PHA has conformed to the Declaration (ii) Describing in detail any existing approval letter. financing or similar commitments of of Trust requirements in accordance with this subpart. (2) Within 60 days of the date of public housing funds; HUD’s approval of the transaction or, if (iii) Describing and providing (7) Board resolution and counsel’s opinion. The PHA must submit HUD sets conditions on its approval, justification for significant financial or within 60 days of the date that the PHA legal provisions, such as variable evidence of a PHA Board resolution that authorizes the PHA to: Undertake the satisfies such conditions (as evidenced interest or acceleration provisions; by documentation retained in the PHA’s (iv) Describing construction loan up to a specified amount, provide file and available to HUD upon request), management and financial controls. all security interests required by the (2) Term sheet, table of contents, and loan, and repay the loan with Capital but in no event longer than 120 days contact information. The PHA must Funds (including RHF funds, when after the HUD approval, unless the time submit the HUD-prescribed term sheet applicable) as required by the financing has otherwise been extended by HUD in that describes the basic terms of the documents. The Board resolution must writing, the PHA must submit: transaction and financing structure, also provide authorization for the (i) Closing documents as directed by including the proposed amount of the Executive Director or other executive HUD; and financing, the term, interest rates, staff to negotiate and enter into all legal (ii) All documents required by HUD to security, and reserve requirements. A documents required as part of the take certain actions such as initiating table of contents must identify the transaction. The PHA must submit PHA debt service payments through HUD’s materials submitted, as well as list the counsel’s opinion, which opines that automated systems. materials the PHA is not required to the PHA has the authority to enter into (3) Failure to provide the required submit pursuant to this rule. Contact the transaction, and affirms that the documents to HUD within the time information for all of the participating transaction complies with the frame required under § 905.515(b)(2) parties is also required. requirements of the 1937 Act, as may result in HUD rescinding its (3) Financing schedules. The PHA amended; Federal regulations; and the approval. must submit financing schedules that ACC, as amended. include a debt service schedule, sources (8) Depository Agreement and ACC. Dated: October 8, 2010. and uses schedule, and a portfolio The PHA must submit a Depository Sandra B. Henriquez, schedule (including projections for Agreement (form HUD–51999) and a Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian RHF, as appropriate), and an adequacy- CFF ACC Amendment. Housing. of-Capital Funds schedule, all in a (9) Other documents as required by [FR Doc. 2010–26404 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] format prescribed by HUD. HUD. BILLING CODE 4210–67–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:28 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21OCR2.SGM 21OCR2 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 203 Thursday, October 21, 2010

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–741–6000 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 741–6000 the revision date of each title. Presidential Documents 3 CFR Proposed Rules: Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 30...... 62330 Proclamations: The United States Government Manual 741–6000 32...... 62330 8571...... 62295 33...... 62330 Other Services 8572...... 62297 34...... 62330 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 8573...... 62299 35...... 62330 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 8574...... 62301 36...... 62330 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 8575...... 62303 37...... 62330, 62694 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 8576...... 62305 39...... 62330 8577...... 62307 51...... 62330 8578...... 62449 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 70...... 63725 8579...... 62451 71...... 62330 World Wide Web 8580...... 62453 73...... 62330, 62695 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 8581...... 63035 429...... 61361, 64173 is located at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html 8582...... 63037 430...... 64173 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 8583...... 63691 431...... 64173 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: 8584...... 63693 433...... 63404 http://www.archives.gov/federallregister 8585...... 64613 435...... 63404 E-mail 8586...... 64615 12 CFR FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 8587...... 64617 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 8588...... 64619 25...... 61035 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form Executive Orders: 228...... 61035 of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 13553...... 60567 261a...... 63703 PDF links to the full text of each document. 13554...... 62313 345...... 61035 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Administrative Orders: 563e...... 61035 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list Memorandums: 702...... 64786 (or change settings); then follow the instructions. Memorandum of 703...... 64786 704...... 64786 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail September 29, 709...... 64786 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 2010 ...... 61033 Memorandum of 747...... 64786 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html October 4, 2010 ...... 62309 Proposed Rules: and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Notices: 380...... 64173 the instructions. Notice of October 14, 560...... 63107 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 2010 ...... 64109 704...... 60651 respond to specific inquiries. Ch. XIII...... 61653 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 5 CFR Federal Register system to: [email protected] 870...... 60573 13 CFR The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 1201...... 61321 121 ...... 61591, 61597, 61604, regulations. Proposed Rules: 62258 Reminders. Effective January 1, 2009, the Reminders, including 831...... 60643 123...... 60588 Rules Going Into Effect and Comments Due Next Week, no longer 841...... 60643 124...... 62258 appear in the Reader Aids section of the Federal Register. This 842...... 60643 125...... 62258 information can be found online at http://www.regulations.gov. 930...... 61998 126...... 62258 CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no 1605...... 63106 127...... 62258 longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be 134...... 62258 7 CFR found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. Proposed Rules: 319...... 62455 107...... 63110 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, OCTOBER 1219...... 61589 115...... 63419 2902...... 63695 14 CFR 60567–61034...... 1 Proposed Rules: 61034–61320...... 4 6...... 62692 39 ...... 60602, 60604, 60608, 61321–61588...... 5 205...... 62693 60611, 60614, 61046, 61337, 61589–61974...... 6 319...... 62484 61341, 61343, 61345, 61348, 61975–62294...... 7 983...... 64681 61352, 61975, 61977, 61980, 62295–62448...... 8 989...... 63724 61982, 61985, 61987, 61989, 62449–62674...... 12 1217...... 61002, 61025 62319, 63039, 63040, 63042, 62675–63038...... 13 63045, 63048, 63050, 63052, 63039–63378...... 14 9 CFR 63054, 63058, 63060, 63062, 63379–63694...... 15 77...... 60586 63064, 64111, 64633, 64636 63695–64110...... 18 71 ...... 61609, 61610, 61611, 64111–64614...... 19 10 CFR 61993, 62457, 62458, 62459, 64615–64948...... 20 50...... 61321, 64949 62460, 62461, 63066, 63706, 64949–65212...... 21 430...... 64621, 64636 63708, 63709

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:53 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\21OCCU.LOC 21OCCU hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 ii Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Reader Aids

91...... 61612 701...... 63425 1241...... 61051 85...... 62739 97...... 63710, 63712 1243...... 61051 86...... 62739 Proposed Rules: 21 CFR 1290...... 61051 122...... 62358 1...... 62640 522...... 62468 Proposed Rules: 257...... 64974 39 ...... 60655, 60659, 60661, 529...... 63085 56...... 62024 261 ...... 60689, 62040, 64974 60665, 60667, 60669, 61114, 1306...... 61613 57...... 62024 264...... 64974 61361, 61363, 61655, 61657, 70...... 64412 265...... 64974 61999, 62002, 62005, 62331, 22 CFR 71...... 64412 268...... 64974 62333, 62716, 63420, 63422, Proposed Rules: 72...... 64412 271...... 64974 63727, 64681, 64960, 64963 62...... 60674 75...... 64412 300...... 63140, 64976 71 ...... 61660, 63730, 64965, 90...... 64412 302...... 64974 64966, 64968, 64969, 64970, 24 CFR 926...... 61366 600...... 62739 64971, 64972 905...... 65198 31 CFR 41 CFR 91...... 62640 Proposed Rules: 117...... 62486, 63424 203...... 62335 1...... 61994, 64147 Ch. 301 ...... 63103 120...... 62640 103...... 63382 301-10...... 63103 121...... 62486, 63424 26 CFR Proposed Rules: 301-11...... 63103 135...... 62640 1 ...... 63380, 64072, 64123 1...... 62737 301-50...... 63103 139...... 62008 31...... 64072 301-73...... 63103 32 CFR 15 CFR 301...... 64072 42 CFR 602...... 64072 199...... 63383 748...... 62462 Proposed Rules: 323...... 61617 110...... 63656, 64955 772...... 62675 1...... 64197 701...... 61618 412...... 60640 774...... 62675 413...... 60640 902...... 60868 28 CFR 33 CFR 415...... 60640 424...... 60640 Proposed Rules: 117 ...... 61094, 62468, 62469, 16 CFR 440...... 60640 2...... 62342 63086, 63398, 63713, 63714 1200...... 63067 165 ...... 61096, 61099, 61354, 441...... 60640 Proposed Rules: 29 CFR 61619, 62320, 63086, 63714, 482...... 60640 485...... 60640 260...... 63552 2550...... 64910 64147, 64670, 64673 489...... 60640 4022...... 63380 Proposed Rules: 17 CFR 154...... 65152 Proposed Rules: 43 CFR 44...... 63080 1910...... 64216 155...... 65152 200...... 62466, 64641 4...... 64655 1926...... 64216 156...... 65152 230...... 64642 10...... 64655 4062...... 64683 232...... 64641 34 CFR 3100...... 61624 4063...... 64683 240...... 64641, 64643 Proposed Rules: 44 CFR 241...... 60616 30 CFR 668...... 63763 243...... 61050 64...... 63399 249...... 64120, 64641 Ch. III ...... 64655 36 CFR 67...... 61358, 64165 201...... 61051 274...... 64120 Proposed Rules: 202...... 61051 2...... 64148 67 ...... 61371, 61373, 61377, Proposed Rules: 203...... 61051 242...... 63088 1...... 63732 62048, 62057, 62061, 62750, 204...... 61051 Proposed Rules: 37...... 63732 62751 206...... 61051 67...... 63428 38...... 63732 207...... 61051 39...... 63113, 63732 37 CFR 45 CFR 208...... 61051 40...... 63732 162...... 62684 210...... 61051 Proposed Rules: 140...... 63113 170...... 62686 212...... 61051 201 ...... 61116, 62345, 62488 229...... 62718, 64182 217...... 61051 230...... 64182 38 CFR 46 CFR 218...... 61051 240...... 62718, 64182 219...... 61051 3...... 61356, 61995 97...... 64586 249...... 62718, 64182 220...... 61051 17...... 61621 148...... 64586 275...... 63753 227...... 61051 Proposed Rules: 389...... 62472 Proposed Rules: 18 CFR 228...... 61051 1...... 63120 229...... 61051 2...... 63120 35...... 65152 806...... 60617 241...... 61051 17...... 62348 39...... 65152 808...... 60617 243...... 61051 47 CFR Proposed Rules: 250...... 63346, 63610 40 CFR 35...... 62023 290...... 61051 51...... 64864 1...... 62924 260...... 61365 1201...... 61051 52 ...... 60623, 62323, 62470, 2...... 62924 63717, 64155, 64673, 64675, 15...... 62476, 62924 19 CFR 1202...... 61051 1203...... 61051 64864, 64949, 64951, 64953 25...... 62924 12...... 64654 1204...... 61051 81...... 64162, 64675 73 ...... 62690, 62924, 63402 Proposed Rules: 1206...... 61051 112...... 63093 79...... 61101 210...... 60671 1207...... 61051 156...... 62323 90...... 62924 1208...... 61051 261...... 60632, 61356 Proposed Rules: 20 CFR 1210...... 61051 Proposed Rules: 20...... 63764 404...... 62676 1212...... 61051 26...... 62738 73...... 63431, 63766 416...... 62676 1217...... 61051 49...... 64221 74...... 63766 Ch. VI...... 63379 1218...... 61051 52 ...... 61367, 61369, 62024, Proposed Rules: 1219...... 61051 62026, 62354, 63139, 64235, 48 CFR 404...... 62487 1220...... 61051 64973 Proposed Rules: 405...... 62487 1227...... 61051 60...... 63260 25...... 62069 416...... 62487 1228...... 61051 63...... 61662, 65068 216...... 60690 655...... 61578 1229...... 61051 81 ...... 60680, 62026, 64241 252...... 60690

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:53 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\21OCCU.LOC 21OCCU hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Reader Aids iii

9903...... 64684 533...... 62739 648...... 63721, 64955 217...... 60694 660...... 60868, 61102 218...... 64508 49 CFR 50 CFR 679 ...... 61638, 61639, 61642, 223...... 61872 395...... 61626 17...... 62192, 63898 62482, 63104, 63402, 64172, 224...... 61872, 61904 593...... 62482 18...... 61631 64956, 64957, 64958 226...... 61690 Proposed Rules: 100...... 63088 Proposed Rules: 622 ...... 62488, 63780, 63786 195...... 63774 600...... 62326 227...... 61386 622...... 64171 17...... 61664, 62070 648...... 63791 531...... 62739 635...... 62690 21...... 60691 660...... 60709

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:53 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\21OCCU.LOC 21OCCU hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 iv Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Reader Aids

Superintendent of Documents, (Oct. 15, 2010; 124 Stat. U.S. Government Printing 3033) LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Office, Washington, DC 20402 Public Laws Electronic (phone, 202–512–1808). The S. 3196/P.L. 111–283 Notification Service This is a continuing list of text will also be made (PENS) public bills from the current available on the Internet from Pre-Election Presidential session of Congress which GPO Access at http:// Transition Act of 2010 (Oct. have become Federal laws. It www.gpoaccess.gov/plaws/ 15, 2010; 124 Stat. 3045) PENS is a free electronic mail may be used in conjunction index.html. Some laws may notification service of newly with ‘‘P L U S’’ (Public Laws enacted public laws. To not yet be available. S. 3802/P.L. 111–284 Update Service) on 202–741– subscribe, go to http:// 6043. This list is also H.R. 3619/P.L. 111–281 Mount Stevens and Ted listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ available online at http:// publaws-l.html Stevens Icefield Designation www.archives.gov/federal- Coast Guard Authorization Act register/laws.html. of 2010 (Oct. 15, 2010; 124 Act (Oct. 18, 2010; 124 Stat. Note: This service is strictly Stat. 2905) 3050) for E-mail notification of new The text of laws is not laws. The text of laws is not S. 1510/P.L. 111–282 published in the Federal Last List October 18, 2010 available through this service. Register but may be ordered United States Secret Service PENS cannot respond to in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual Uniformed Division specific inquiries sent to this pamphlet) form from the Modernization Act of 2010 address.

VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:53 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\21OCCU.LOC 21OCCU hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3