Vol. 77 Monday, No. 93 May 14, 2012

Pages 28237–28470

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER

VerDate Mar 15 2010 18:34 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\14MYWS.LOC 14MYWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS II Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012

The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records 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.ofr.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 at www.fdsys.gov, a service WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: of the U.S. Government Printing Office. 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the Register system and the public’s role in the develop- authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions ment of regulations. (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6:00 a.m. each 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and Code of Federal Regulations. graphics from Volume 59, 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register doc- Government Printing Office. Phone 202-512-1800 or 866-512-1800 uments. (toll free). E-mail, [email protected]. 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR sys- The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper tem. edition is $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, for a combined WHY: To provide the public with access to information nec- Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal essary to research Federal agency regulations which di- Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $165, rectly affect them. There will be no discussion of spe- plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half cific agency regulations. the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to llllllllllllllllll orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, WHEN: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing 9 a.m.–12:30 p.m. less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues WHERE: Office of the Federal Register of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, Conference Room, Suite 700 including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO 800 North Capitol Street, NW. Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Washington, DC 20002 Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Printing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1- RESERVATIONS: (202) 741–6008 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: 77 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 18:34 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\14MYWS.LOC 14MYWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 93

Monday, May 14, 2012

Agriculture Department Defense Department See Food and Nutrition Service NOTICES NOTICES Renewals of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Committees, 28358–28359 Submissions, and Approvals, 28349 Education Department Antitrust Division NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Notice Pursuant to National Cooperative Research and Submissions, and Approvals: Production Act of 1993: Evaluation of 21st Century Community Learning Centers Petroleum Environmental Research Forum, 28405 State Competitions, 28359–28360 Pistoia Alliance, Inc., 28404–28405 Exploratory Study on Identification of English Learners PXI Systems Alliance, Inc., 28405 with Disabilities, 28360 Antitrust Applications for New Awards: See Antitrust Division Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs, 28360– 28366 Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 28366–28368 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Employee Benefits Security Administration Submissions, and Approvals: NOTICES Legacy Data Verification Process, 28401–28402 Meetings: Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Benefit Plans, 28406 NOTICES Meetings: Energy Department Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Special Emphasis Panel, 28392–28393 NOTICES Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Meetings: Committee, 28392 Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee, 28368 Children and Families Administration Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory NOTICES Board, Hanford, 28368–28369 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Environmental Protection Agency Cross-Site Evaluation of Infant Adoption Awareness RULES Training Program for Projects Initially Funded in 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Fiscal Year 2006, 28393–28394 Standard: Coast Guard Revision of the Anti-Backsliding Provisions to Address 1- RULES Hour Contingency Measure Requirements, etc., Safety Zones: 28424–28446 America’s Cup World Series, East Passage, Narragansett Approvals and Promulgations of Air Quality Bay, Rhode Island, 28253–28255 Implementation Plans: Upper Mississippi River, Mile 183.0 to 183.5, 28255– Pennsylvania; Nonattainment New Source Review Rules, 28258 28261–28264 West Virginia; Ohio; Determination of Clean Data for Commerce Department 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Standard, See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Steubenville–Weirton Area, 28264–28266 See Industry and Security Bureau Exemptions from the Requirement of a Tolerance: See International Trade Administration Acetone, 28266–28270 See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Pesticide Tolerances: See Patent and Trademark Office Fluxapyroxad, 28270–28276 Penflufen, 28276–28281 Commission of Fine Arts Withdrawal of Revocation of Toxic Substances Control Act NOTICES Section 4 Testing Requirements: Meetings: One High Production Volume Chemical Substance, U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, 28357 28281–28282 PROPOSED RULES Corporation for National and Community Service Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation NOTICES Plans: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Maryland; Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Submissions, and Approvals, 28357–28358 Printing Regulations, 28336–28338

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:20 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\14MYCN.SGM 14MYCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Contents

Approvals and Promulgations of Air Quality Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Implementation Plans: PROPOSED RULES Maryland; Reasonably Available Control Technology for Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Pipelines, 28331 Standard, 28338–28340 NOTICES Revocation of Toxic Substances Control Act Section 4 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Testing Requirements: Submissions, and Approvals, 28369–28371 One High Production Volume Chemical Substance, Applications: 28340–28343 Lockhart Power Co., Inc., 28371–28372 NOTICES South Carolina Public Service Authority, 28372–28373 Adequacy Status of the Submitted 2008 and 2022 VOC and Baseline Filings: NOx Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Liberty Energy (Midstates) Corp., 28373 Transportation Conformity Purposes: Complaints: New Hampshire; Boston–Manchester–Portsmouth SE, Linden VFT, LLC v. New York Independent System New Hampshire, 8-Hour Ozone Area, 28375–28376 Operator, Inc., 28374 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, RC Cape May Holdings, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, Submissions, and Approvals: LLC, 28373–28374 Brownfields Program; Accomplishment Reporting, Compliance Filings: 28378–28379 SourceGas Arkansas Inc. (Formerly Arkansas Western Gas Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, 28376–28378 Co.), 28374 NESHAP for Asbestos, Renewal, 28381–28382 SourceGas Distribution LLC, 28374–28375 NESHAP for Source Categories––Generic Maximum Rate Approval Petitions: Achievable Control Technology Standards, 28380– Eagle Rock Desoto Pipeline, LP, 28375 28381 Technical Conferences: Dixie Pipeline Co. LLC, 28375 Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents Federal Highway Administration RULES National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Federal Aviation Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets RULES and Highways, 28456–28466 Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 28238–28240 Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission The Boeing Company Airplanes, 28240–28243 NOTICES Amendments of Class D Airspace: Meetings; Sunshine Act, 28387 Cocoa Beach, FL; Correction, 28243–28244 Amendments of Class D and E Airspace: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Baltimore, MD, 28244–28245 RULES Amendments of Class E Airspace: Electronic On-Board Recorders for Hours-of-Service Decatur, IL, 28247 Compliance; Withdrawal, 28448–28451 Omaha, NE, 28245–28246 Unsatisfactory Safety Rating: Tullahoma, TN, 28246–28247 Revocation of Operating Authority Registration, 28451– Operations in Class D Airspace, 28247–28250 28454 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Federal Railroad Administration Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Helicopters, 28328–28330 RULES Positive Train Control Systems, 28285–28305 Federal Communications Commission NOTICES NOTICES Charter Renewals: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, 28421 Submissions, and Approvals, 28382–28387 Meetings: Federal Reserve System Federal Advisory Committee Act; Communications NOTICES Security, Reliability, and Interoperability Council, Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank 28387 Holding Companies, 28387–28388

Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Trade Commission RULES NOTICES Suspensions of Community Eligibility, 28282–28285 Proposed Consent Orders: NOTICES Myspace, LLC; Analysis to Aid Public Comment, 28388– Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 28390 Submissions, and Approvals: National Fire Incident Reporting System, 28399 Federal Transit Administration Major Disaster Declarations: NOTICES Hawaii; Amendment No. 1, 28400 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Indiana; Amendment No. 2, 28399–28400 Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Project, Minneapolis West Virginia; Amendment No. 2, 28399 and Saint Paul, MN, 28421–28422

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:20 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\14MYCN.SGM 14MYCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Contents V

Fine Arts Commission Industry and Security Bureau See Commission of Fine Arts RULES Entity List Additions; Corrections, 28250–28252 Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Interior Department Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: See Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Expanding Incentives for Voluntary Conservation Actions See Fish and Wildlife Service Under the Endangered Species Act, 28347–28348 NOTICES International Trade Administration Endangered and Threatened Species Permit Applications, NOTICES 28402–28404 Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews; Results, Extensions, Amendments, etc.: Food and Drug Administration Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic RULES of China, 28354 Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs: Antidumping Duty Orders; Results, Extensions, Change of Sponsor; Griseofulvin Powder; Levamisole Amendments, etc.: Hydrochloride Powder; Oxytetracycline Powder, Fresh Garlic from People’s Republic of China, 28355 28252–28253 Initiations of Five-Year Sunset Reviews Correction, 28355–28356 Food and Nutrition Service Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of NOTICES Antidumping Duty Investigations: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the Socialist Republic Submissions, and Approvals: of Vietnam and Taiwan, 28356 Assessment of Roles and Effectiveness of Community- based Organizations, etc., 28349–28351 International Trade Commission Study of Food Distribution Program on Indian NOTICES Reservations, 28351–28353 Investigations: Galvanized Steel Wire from China and Mexico, 28404 Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Justice Department Proposed Production Activity: See Antitrust Division Shimadzu USA Manufacturing, Inc., Foreign-Trade Zone 45, Portland, OR, 28353 Labor Department See Employee Benefits Security Administration General Services Administration NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Submissions, and Approvals: National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979, 28405– Acquisition Regulation; Contractor’s Qualifications and 28406 Financial Information, 28390–28391 Mine Safety and Health Federal Review Commission Health and Human Services Department See Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Children and Families Administration National Highway Traffic Safety Administration See Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES See Health Resources and Services Administration Insurer Reporting Requirements: See National Institutes of Health List of Insurers Required to File Reports, 28343–28347 NOTICES Requirements and Registration for Ocular Imaging National Institutes of Health Challenge, 28391–28392 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Health Resources and Services Administration Submissions, and Approvals: NOTICES Hazardous Waste Worker Training, 28395–28396 Meetings: Meetings: National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Center for Scientific Review, 28397–28398 Human Services, 28394–28395 National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 28396 Homeland Security Department National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, See Coast Guard 28396, 28398–28399 See Federal Emergency Management Agency National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, 28397 Housing and Urban Development Department National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney NOTICES Diseases, 28396 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Study of Public Housing Agencies Engagement with RULES Homeless Households, Follow-up Sample Survey, Delay of Start Date of 2012–2013 South Atlantic Black Sea 28400–28401 Bass Commercial Fishing Season, 28305–28308

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:20 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\14MYCN.SGM 14MYCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Contents

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South NOTICES Atlantic: Major Disaster Declarations: Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Gray Triggerfish Hawaii; Amendment 1, 28419 Management Measures, 28308–28310 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: State Department Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery; Closure of the Delmarva NOTICES Access Area, 28311–28315 Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition NOTICES Determinations: Meetings: Gauguin, Cezanne, Matisse––Visions of Arcadia, 28419 North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 28357 Gustav Klimt––The Magic of Line, 28419 Pacific Fishery Management Council, 28356–28357 Meetings: United States–Peru Environmental Affairs Council, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Environmental Cooperation Commission, et al., PROPOSED RULES 28419–28420 Filing a Renewed License Application, 28316–28328 NOTICES Susquehanna River Basin Commission Draft NUREG; Availability: NOTICES Spent Fuel Transportation Risk Assessment, 28406–28407 Meetings: Draft Regulatory Guides: Susquehanna River Basin Commission, 28420–28421 Special Nuclear Material Control and Accounting Systems for Nuclear Power Plants, 28407–28408 Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration Patent and Trademark Office See Federal Highway Administration PROPOSED RULES See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration CPI Adjustment of Patent Fees for Fiscal Year 2013, 28331– See Federal Railroad Administration 28336 See Federal Transit Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES Treasury Department Product List Changes, 28408–28409 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Postal Service Submissions, and Approvals, 28422 RULES Veterans Affairs Department Mailings of Lithium Batteries, 28259–28261 RULES NOTICES Product Changes: Copayments for Medications in 2012, 28258–28259 Parcel Select and Parcel Return Service Negotiated NOTICES Draft Report; Availability: Service Agreement, 28409–28410 Strategies for Serving Our Women Veterans, 28422 Parcel Select Negotiated Service Agreement, 28410

Presidential Documents EXECUTIVE ORDERS Separate Parts In This Issue Government Agencies and Employees: Regulatory Burdens; Identifying and Reducing (EO Part II 13610), 28467–28470 Environmental Protection Agency, 28424–28446

Railroad Retirement Board Part III NOTICES Transportation Department, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Administration, 28448–28454 Submissions, and Approvals, 28410–28411 Part IV Transportation Department, Federal Highway Securities and Exchange Commission Administration, 28456–28466 NOTICES Orders of Suspension of Trading: Part V Adrenalina, Affinity Technology Group, Inc., Braintech, Presidential Documents, 28467–28470 Inc., et al., 28411 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc., 28417–28419 NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., 28414–28415 Reader Aids NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 28415–28416 Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this page for NYSE Arca, Inc., 28411–28414 phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws. Small Business Administration To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents RULES LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Small Business Size Regulations: listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Business Development/Small Disadvantaged Business archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Status Determinations; Correction, 28237–28238 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:20 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\14MYCN.SGM 14MYCN mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCN Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / 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.

3 CFR Proposed Rules: Executive Orders: 13...... 28347 13610...... 28469 17...... 28347 402...... 28347 10 CFR Proposed Rules: 54...... 28316 13 CFR 124...... 28237 14 CFR 39 (2 documents) ...... 28238, 28240 71 (5 documents) ...... 28243, 28244, 28245, 28246, 28247 91...... 28247 Proposed Rules: 39...... 28328 15 CFR 744...... 28250 18 CFR Proposed Rules: 284...... 28331 21 CFR 520...... 28252 23 CFR 655 (2 documents) ...... 28456, 28460 33 CFR 165 (2 documents) ...... 28253, 28255 37 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 28331 41...... 28331 38 CFR 17...... 28258 39 CFR 111...... 28259 40 CFR 50...... 28424 51...... 28424 52 (2 documents) ...... 28261, 28264 81...... 28424 180 (3 documents) ...... 28266, 28270, 28276 799...... 28281 Proposed Rules: 52 (2 documents) ...... 28336, 28338 799...... 28340 44 CFR 64...... 28282 49 CFR 236...... 28285 350 (2 documents) ...... 28448, 28451 385 (2 documents) ...... 28448, 28451 395 (2 documents) ...... 28448, 28451 396...... 28448 Proposed Rules: 544...... 28343 50 CFR 622 (2 documents) ...... 28305, 28308 648...... 28311

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:26 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\14MYLS.LOC 14MYLS srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS 28237

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 93

Monday, May 14, 2012

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER for award of a follow on contract. The PART 124—8(a) BUSINESS contains regulatory documents having general change was inadvertently only made to DEVELOPMENT/SMALL applicability and legal effect, most of which the Tribes and ANC provisions. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS STATUS are keyed to and codified in the Code of Therefore, SBA is correcting DETERMINATIONS Federal Regulations, which is published under § 124.110(e) and § 124.111(d) to make 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. these provisions, relating to Native ■ 1. The authority citation for part 124 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by Hawaiian Owned (NHO) entities and continues to read as follows: the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of Certified Development Companies Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6), 636(j), new books are listed in the first FEDERAL (CDCs) respectively, consistent with the 637(a), 637(d) and Pub. L. 99–661, Pub. L. REGISTER issue of each week. same language pertaining to tribally and 100–656, sec. 1207, Pub. L. 101–37, Pub. L. Alaskan Native Corporation (ANC) and 101–574, sec. 8021, Pub. L. 108–87, and 42 NHO owned entities. Additionally, SBA U.S.C. 9815. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION is changing § 124.111(d) which contains ■ a reference to SIC instead of NAICS. 2. In § 124.3 amend the definition for 13 CFR Part 124 ‘‘primary industry classification’’ by In §§ 124.112(b)(6) and (d)(1) SBA is removing the word ‘‘two-year’’ and RIN 3245–AF53 correcting typographical errors that adding in its place the word ‘‘three- result in the wrong word choice. The Small Business Size Regulations; 8(a) year’’ in the 4th sentence. word ‘‘contacts’’ is replaced with the Business Development/Small ■ word ‘‘contracts’’ in (b)(6) and the word 3. Amend § 124.110(e) by revising the Disadvantaged Business Status ‘‘though’’ is replaced with the word third sentence to read as follows: Determinations; Correction ‘‘through’’ in (d)(1) § 124.110 Do Native Hawaiian AGENCY: U.S. Small Business In § 124.513(c)(4) SBA omitted the Organizations have any special rules for Administration. word ‘‘populated’’, which is necessary applying to the 8(a) BD program? ACTION: Correcting amendments. for the public to be able to distinguish * * * * * the treatment of profit distribution (e) * * * In addition, once an SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business between populated and unpopulated applicant is admitted to the 8(a) BD Administration (SBA) published a final joint ventures. This section will be program, it may not receive an 8(a) sole rule in the Federal Register on February corrected to insert the missing word. source contract that is a follow-on 11, 2011, to amend the 8(a) Business contract to an 8(a) contract that was Development (BD) program and SBA With regard to § 124.519, SBA provided incorrect instructions to the performed immediately previously by size regulations, and the regulations another Participant (or former affecting Small Disadvantaged Federal Register for the amendments to paragraph (a) that was inconsistent with Participant) owned by the same Native Businesses (SDBs). That rule was Hawaiian Organization. * * * published with a few inadvertent errors the intended amendment as discussed that are corrected in this document. in the preamble for the final rule. * * * * * Specifically, SBA intended to amend DATES: Effective Date: This rule is ■ 4. Amend § 124.111(d) to read as only the introductory text of follows: effective May 14, 2012. § 124.519(a) but provided instructions FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that amended the entire paragraph (a) § 124.111 Do Community Development LeAnn Delaney, Deputy Associate resulting in the unintended removal of Corporations (CDCs) have any special rules Administrator, Office of Business paragraphs (1) through (3). SBA is for applying to the 8(a) BD program? Development, at (202) 205–5852, or making the correction here to reinsert * * * * * [email protected]. those paragraphs. (d) * * * In addition, once an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Finally, to avoid confusion for the applicant is admitted to the 8(a) BD program, it may not receive an 8(a) sole Need for Correction public, SBA is correcting awkward language in § 124.520(c)(3) to clearly source contract that is a follow-on In amending § 124.3, definition for articulate the standards, as discussed in contract to an 8(a) contract that was ‘‘Primary industry classification’’ SBA the preamble, for permitting a prote´ge´ performed immediately previously by intended the time period to consist of firm to have more than one mentor. another Participant (or former three years not the two years provided Participant) owned by the same for in the definition. This change from List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 124 CDC. * * * two years to three years was made in Administrative practice and * * * * * other portions of the rule but was procedures, Government procurement, ■ inadvertently not changed in 124.3. 5. Amend § 124.112 as follows: Hawaiian natives, Indians—business Correction of this oversight would make ■ a. Amend paragraph (b)(6) by and finance, Minority businesses, the section consistent with related removing the word ‘‘contacts’’ and Reporting and recordkeeping provisions of the rule. adding the word ‘‘contracts’’ in its requirements, Tribally-owned concerns, As stated in the preamble of the final place. Technical assistance. rule, SBA intended to make the ■ b. Amend the second sentence in provisions pertaining to Tribes, ANCs, Accordingly, 13 CFR part 124 is paragraph (d)(1) by removing the word NHOs, and CDCs consistent. The section corrected by making the following ‘‘though’’ and adding the word addresses when a subsidiary is eligible correcting amendments: ‘‘through’’ in its place.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28238 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

■ 6. Amend § 124.513(c)(4) by adding DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Washington 98057–3356; telephone the word ‘‘populated’’ before the word (425) 227–1405; fax (425) 227–1149. ‘‘separate.’’ Federal Aviation Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ■ 7. Amend § 124.519 by adding 14 CFR Part 39 Discussion paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) to We issued a notice of proposed read as follows: [Docket No. FAA–2011–0998; Directorate rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR Identifier 2011–NM–046–AD; Amendment part 39 to include an AD that would § 124.519 Are there any dollar limits on the 39–17042; AD 2012–09–07] amount of 8(a) contracts that a Participant apply to the specified products. That may receive? RIN 2120–AA64 NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2011 (76 FR (a) * * * Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 61641). That NPRM proposed to require (1) For a firm having a receipts-based Airplanes correct an unsafe condition for the primary NAICS code at time of program specified products. The MCAI states: AGENCY: Federal Aviation entry, the limit above which it can no Administration (FAA), Department of Cases of corrosion findings have been longer receive sole source 8(a) contracts reported on the overwing refueling aperture Transportation (DOT). is five times the size standard (used to fill the fuel tank by gravity) on the corresponding to its primary NAICS ACTION: Final rule. wing top skin. The reported corrosion was on code which is determined as of the date the mating surface of the aperture flange, SUMMARY: We are adopting a new underneath the refuel adaptor. Corrosion of SBA’s acceptance of the requirement airworthiness directive (AD) for certain findings have been repaired on a case by case for the 8(a) BD program or $100,000,000, Airbus Model A319–111, –112, and basis in accordance with approved data. whichever is less. –132 airplanes; Model A320–111, –211, For certain aeroplanes (identified by MSN (2) For a firm having an employee- –212, –214 and –232 airplanes; and in the applicability section of this [European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)] AD, the based primary NAICS code at time of Model A321–111, –211, –212, and –231 airplanes. This AD was prompted by provided repair contained instructions to program entry, the limit above which it apply primer coating on the mating surface. can no longer receive sole source 8(a) reports that corrosion was found on the Since doing those repairs, it has been found contracts is $100,000,000. overwing refueling aperture on the top that this primer coating may prevent proper wing skin, and that for certain airplanes, (3) SBA will not consider 8(a) electrical bonding provision between the repairs made using primer coating may overwing refuelling cap adaptor and the wing contracts awarded under $100,000 in prevent proper electrical bonding skin. determining whether a Participant has provision between the overwing This condition, if not corrected, could, in reached the limit identified in refueling cap adaptor and the wing skin. combination with a lightning strike in this paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this This AD requires performing an area, create a source of ignition in a fuel tank, section. electrical bonding test between the possibly resulting in a fire or explosion and consequent loss of the aeroplane. * * * * * gravity fill re-fuel adaptor and the top For the reasons described above, this skin panels on the left-hand and right- ■ 8. Amend § 124.520 by revising [EASA] AD requires a one-time electrical hand wings, and if necessary performing bonding check between the gravity fill re-fuel paragraph (c)(3) to read as follows: a general visual inspection for corrosion adaptor and the top skin panels on the § 124.520 What are the rules governing of the component interface and adjacent affected aeroplanes and, in case of findings SBA’s Mentor/Prote´ge´ program? area, and repairing the gravity fuel [a general visual inspection for corrosion of adaptor if any corrosion is found. We the component interface and adjacent area], * * * * * are issuing this AD to detect and correct the application of the associated corrective (c) * * * corrosion and improper bonding, which actions [i.e. repair]. (3) A prote´ge´ firm may generally have in combination with a lightning strike in You may obtain further information by only one mentor at a time. The AA/BD this area, could create a source of examining the MCAI in the AD docket. ignition in a fuel tank, resulting in a fire may approve a second mentor for a Comments particular prote´ge´ firm where the or explosion, and consequent loss of the We gave the public the opportunity to second relationship will not compete or airplane. DATES: This AD becomes effective June participate in developing this AD. We otherwise conflict with the business have considered the comments received. development assistance set forth in the 18, 2012. first mentor/prote´ge´ relationship and The Director of the Federal Register Request To Permit a Ferry Flight approved the incorporation by reference either: US Airways stated that there currently of a certain publication listed in this AD is no fly-back allowance in the NPRM (i) The second relationship pertains to as of June 18, 2012. a, secondary NAICS code; or (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011). US ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD Airways also stated that this makes it ´ ´ (ii) The protege firm is seeking to docket on the Internet at http:// difficult for airlines to schedule the acquire a specific expertise that the first www.regulations.gov or in person at the inspection quickly, which is the most mentor does not possess. U.S. Department of Transportation, desirable situation. * * * * * Docket Operations, M–30, West We infer that US Airways is Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Dated: May 4, 2012. requesting a ferry flight permit. We 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., partially agree with this request. Unless A. John Shoraka, Washington, DC. otherwise specified in the AD, special Associate Administrator for Government FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: flight permits are currently allowed Contracting and Business Development. Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, under section 39.23 of the Federal [FR Doc. 2012–11508 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] International Branch, ANM–116, Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.23). No BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, change is therefore necessary to the AD 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, regarding this issue.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28239

Request That the FAA Accept Published is directed to section. 3.C.(2) of the In addition, we estimate that any Service Repair Manual (SRM) Repairs Accomplishment Instructions, Subtask necessary follow-on actions (inspection as an FAA-Approved Corrective Action 571152–832–401–001—Removal of for corrosion and repair) would take for Compliance With the AD Primer—Inspection for Corrosion, of about 12 work-hours and require parts US Airways stated that it asked Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, costing $0, for a cost of $1,020 per Airbus to provide an SRM repair for dated June 14, 2010. United Airlines product. We have no way of expected findings, and that it has been stated that this subtask’s ‘‘Manpower determining the number of products informed by Airbus that a repair design Resources’’ chart specifies that it takes that may need these actions. ‘‘5 man-hours and 2.5 hours elapsed was expected to be published in the time’’ to complete that part of that Authority for This Rulemaking February 2012 revision of the SRM. US service bulletin, and that under this Title 49 of the United States Code Airways requested that a statement in subtask, Step (a), among other actions, specifies the FAA’s authority to issue the final rule be added to acknowledge requires defueling and venting of the rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, that published SRM repairs are a FAA- two fuel tanks. United Airlines also section 106, describes the authority of approved corrective action for the stated that operator experience has the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: proposed AD (76 FR 61641, October 5, shown that this procedure alone takes Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 2011). about ‘‘8 man-hours and 4 hours of detail the scope of the Agency’s We partially agree with US Airways’ elapsed time.’’ United Airlines stated it authority. request. We understand US Airways’ understands that it is not standard We are issuing this rulemaking under concern regarding the unavailability of practice to propose manufacturers’ the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, repair procedures and its effect on their service bulletin changes through the Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: scheduling of repairs since a FAA, but it would like to offer a more General requirements.’’ Under that discrepancy requires repair before accurate estimate of at least ‘‘10 man- section, Congress charges the FAA with further flight. However, we cannot hours and 6 hours elapsed time,’’ in promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in provide approval of future SRM repairs accordance with the Accomplishment air commerce by prescribing regulations in an AD by using the phrase, ‘‘or later Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin for practices, methods, and procedures FAA-approved revisions,’’ because it A320–57–1152, dated June 14, 2010. the Administrator finds necessary for violates the Office of the Federal We agree with United Airlines’ safety in air commerce. This regulation Register regulations for approving request to revise the ‘‘Costs of is within the scope of that authority materials that are incorporated by Compliance’’ section of this AD. We because it addresses an unsafe condition reference. However, we consider that have clarified the ‘‘Costs of that is likely to exist or develop on service information (including SRM Compliance’’ section by estimating that products identified in this rulemaking repair) approved by EASA (or its it would take about 2 work-hours to action. delegated agent) is equivalent to FAA- perform the initial action (electrical Regulatory Findings approved corrective action for this AD, bonding test). In addition, we have if it meets the certification basis of the estimated that it would take about 12 We determined that this AD will not affected airplanes and mitigates the work-hours to perform the follow-on have federalism implications under unsafe condition addressed in this AD. actions (inspection for corrosion and Executive Order 13132. This AD will We have not changed this AD in this repair). We have changed this AD not have a substantial direct effect on regard. accordingly. the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, Request To Revise the Costs of Conclusion Compliance or on the distribution of power and We reviewed the available data, responsibilities among the various United Airlines requested that the including the comments received, and levels of government. ‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ section of the determined that air safety and the For the reasons discussed above, I NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011) public interest require adopting the AD certify that this AD: be revised. United Airlines stated that as proposed–except for minor editorial 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory under the ‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ changes. We have determined that these action’’ under Executive Order 12866; section in the NPRM, an estimate of 6 minor changes: 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the work-hours is specified to comply with • Are consistent with the intent that DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures the NPRM. United Airlines stated that was proposed in the NPRM (76 FR (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, 61641, October 5, 2011) for correcting 3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in dated June 14, 2010, specifies a total of the unsafe condition; and Alaska; and 12.5 work-hours to accomplish this • Do not add any additional burden 4. Will not have a significant inspection. United Airlines stated that upon the public than was already economic impact, positive or negative, Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 61641, on a substantial number of small entities dated June 14, 2010, provides a more October 5, 2011). under the criteria of the Regulatory accurate representation of the work- Flexibility Act. Costs of Compliance hours required for this task, and it We prepared a regulatory evaluation requests that the FAA justify its We estimate that this AD will affect of the estimated costs to comply with proposed estimate of 6 work-hours 67 products of U.S. registry. We also this AD and placed it in the AD docket. required to comply with the NPRM. estimate that it will take about 2 work- In addition, United Airlines stated hours per product to comply with the Examining the AD Docket that, when accomplishing paragraph basic requirements (electrical bonding You may examine the AD docket on (g)(2) of the NPRM (76 FR 61641, test) of this AD. The average labor rate the Internet at http:// October 5, 2011), which requires is $85 per work-hour. Based on these www.regulations.gov; or in person at the performing a general visual inspection figures, we estimate the cost of this AD Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. for corrosion if the resistance value is to the U.S. operators to be $11,390, or and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, greater than 10 milliOhms, the operator $170 per product. except Federal holidays. The AD docket

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28240 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

contains the NPRM (76 FR 61641, area, could create a source of ignition in a are approved by the State of Design Authority October 5, 2011), the regulatory fuel tank, resulting in a fire or explosion, and (or their delegated agent). You are required evaluation, any comments received, and consequent loss of the airplane. to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service. other information. The street address for (f) Compliance the Docket Operations office (telephone You are responsible for having the actions (i) Related Information (800) 647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES required by this AD performed within the Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness section. Comments will be available in compliance times specified, unless the Directive 2011–0034, dated March 2, 2011; the AD docket shortly after receipt. actions have already been done. and Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, dated June 14, 2010; for related information. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (g) Electrical Bonding Test and General Visual Inspection if Necessary (j) Material Incorporated by Reference Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Within 24 months after the effective date safety, Incorporation by reference, (1) You must use the following service of this AD, do an electrical bonding test to information to do the actions required by this Safety. check for bonding between the re-fuel AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Adoption of the Amendment adaptor of the gravity fill and the top skin Director of the Federal Register approved the panels on the left-hand and right-hand wings, incorporation by reference (IBR) of the Accordingly, under the authority in accordance with the Accomplishment following service information under 5 U.S.C. delegated to me by the Administrator, Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51: the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 57–1152, dated June 14, 2010. (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, follows: (1) If the resistance value is 10 milliOhms dated June 14, 2010. or less at the left-hand and right-hand wing, (2) For service information identified in PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS no further action is required. this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness DIRECTIVES (2) If the resistance value is greater than 10 Office—EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, milliOhms at the left-hand or right-hand 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 wing, before further flight, do a general visual 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email continues to read as follows: inspection for corrosion of the component [email protected]; Internet interface and adjacent area, in accordance http://www.airbus.com. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. with the Accomplishment Instructions of (3) You may review copies of the service Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, § 39.13 [Amended] information at the FAA, Transport Airplane dated June 14, 2010. If any corrosion is found Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding during the inspection, before further flight, Washington. For information on the the following new AD: repair the gravity fill fuel adaptor, in availability of this material at the FAA, call 2012–09–07 Airbus: Amendment 39–17042. accordance with the Accomplishment 425–227–1221. Docket No. FAA–2011–0998; Directorate Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– (4) You may also review copies of the Identifier 2011–NM–046–AD. 57–1152, dated June 14, 2010; except where service information that is incorporated by Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1152, reference at the National Archives and (a) Effective Date dated June 14, 2010, specifies to contact Records Administration (NARA). For This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes Airbus, before further flight, repair using a information on the availability of this effective June 18, 2012. method approved by the Manager, material at an NARA facility, call 202–741– International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/ (b) Affected ADs Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ None. Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its ibr_locations.html. delegated agent). (c) Applicability Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 30, (h) Other FAA AD Provisions This AD applies to Airbus Model A319– 2012. 111, –112, and –132 airplanes; Model A320– The following provisions also apply to this Michael Kaszycki, 111, –211, –212, –214 and –232 airplanes; AD: Acting Manager, Transport Airplane and Model A321–111, –211, –212, and –231 (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. (AMOCs): The Manager, International airplanes; certificated in any category; having [FR Doc. 2012–11027 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] manufacturer serial numbers 0039, 0078, Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to 0109, 0118, 0120, 0153, 0174, 0187, 0203, approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 0215, 0218, 0226, 0227, 0228, 0236, 0237, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 0269, 0270, 0278, 0285, 0286, 0287, 0288, In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 0294, 0301, 0337, 0377, 0462, 0463, 0464, request to your principal inspector or local DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 0465, 0520, 0523, 0528, 0876, 0888, 0921, Flight Standards District Office, as 0935, 0974, 1014, 1102, 1130, 1160, 1162, appropriate. If sending information directly Federal Aviation Administration 1177, 1215, 1250, 1287, 1336, 1388, 1404, to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 1444, 1449, 1476, 1505, 1524, 1564, 1605, Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 14 CFR Part 39 1616, 1622, 1640, 1645, 1658, 1677, 1691, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 1729, and 1905. Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind [Docket No. FAA–2011–0993; Directorate Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– Identifier 2011–NM–018–AD; Amendment (d) Subject 3356; telephone (425) 227–1405; fax (425) 39–17043; AD 2012–09–08] 227–1149. Information may be emailed to: Air Transport Association (ATA) of RIN 2120–AA64 America Code 57: Wings. [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify (e) Reason your appropriate principal inspector, or Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing This AD was prompted by reports that lacking a principal inspector, the manager of Company Airplanes corrosion was found on the overwing the local flight standards district office/ AGENCY: Federal Aviation refueling aperture on the top wing skin, and certificate holding district office. The AMOC that for certain airplanes, repairs made using approval letter must specifically reference Administration (FAA), DOT. primer coating may prevent proper electrical this AD. ACTION: Final rule. bonding provision between the overwing (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement refueling cap adaptor and the wing skin. We in this AD to obtain corrective actions from SUMMARY: We are adopting a new are issuing this AD to detect and correct a manufacturer or other source, use these airworthiness directive (AD) for certain corrosion and improper bonding, which in actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective The Boeing Company Model 767–200 combination with a lightning strike in this actions are considered FAA-approved if they and –300 series airplanes. This AD was

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28241

prompted by reports of multiple site 917–6577; fax (425) 917–6590; email: actions currently required by this AD, so damage cracks in the radial web lap and [email protected]. additional rulemaking would be tear strap splices of the aft pressure SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: required. We find that delaying this bulkhead at station (STA) 1582 due to action would be inappropriate in light fatigue. This AD requires repetitive Discussion of the identified unsafe condition. We inspections for cracking of the aft We issued a notice of proposed have not changed this final rule pressure bulkhead at STA 1582, repair rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR regarding this issue. However, operators or replacement of any cracked bulkhead, part 39 to include an AD that would can always request approval of an and eventual replacement of the aft apply to the specified products. That alternative method of compliance pressure bulkhead at STA 1582 with a NPRM published in the Federal (AMOC) for AD 2004–14–19. new bulkhead. Accomplishing the Register on September 27, 2011 (76 FR Request To Clarify Terminating Action replacement terminates the repetitive 59590). That NPRM proposed to require for Other ADs inspections required by this AD. We are repetitive inspections for cracking of the issuing this AD to prevent fatigue aft pressure bulkhead at station (STA) Boeing asked that we change cracking of the aft pressure bulkhead, 1582, repair or replacement of any paragraph (g) of the NPRM (76 FR which could result in rapid cracked bulkhead, and eventual 59590, September 27, 2011) to remove decompression of the airplane and replacement of the aft pressure the terminating action for the repetitive possible damage or interference with the bulkhead at STA 1582 with a new inspections specified in paragraph (b) of airplane control systems that penetrate bulkhead. That proposed AD specified AD 2004–05–16, Amendment 39–13511 the bulkhead, and consequent loss of that accomplishing the replacement (69 FR 10917, March 9, 2004). Boeing controllability of the airplane. would terminate the repetitive stated that the inspections required by inspections specified in the NPRM. paragraph (b) of AD 2004–05–16 are not DATES: This AD is effective June 18, terminated by doing the inspections 2012. Comments required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. The Director of the Federal Register We gave the public the opportunity to Boeing added that the inspections approved the incorporation by reference participate in developing this AD. The required by AD 2004–05–16 are for of a certain publication listed in the AD following presents the comments cracking of the web of the aft pressure as of June 18, 2012. received on the proposal and the FAA’s bulkhead at the web y-chord joint. ADDRESSES: For service information response to each comment. Boeing noted that this cracking pattern, identified in this AD, contact Boeing location, and growth rate are not Support for NPRM (76 FR 59590, covered by the inspection in paragraph Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data September 27, 2011) & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, (g) of the NPRM. MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; American Airlines has no objection to We agree with the commenter for the telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; the NRPM (76 FR 59590, September 27, reasons provided. We have removed the fax 206–766–5680; email 2011), and noted that it will incorporate terminating action for the repetitive [email protected]; Internet the requirements into its maintenance inspections required by AD 2004–05–16 https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You program. (69 FR 10917, March 9, 2004) from may review copies of the referenced paragraph (g) of this AD. Request To Include AD 2004–14–19, Boeing also requested that we revise service information at the FAA, Amendment 39–13728 (69 FR 42549, paragraph (g) of the NPRM (76 FR Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 July 16, 2004) in NPRM (76 FR 59590, 59590, September 27, 2011) to specify Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. September 27, 2011) Requirements that accomplishing the inspections in For information on the availability of Boeing and Airborne Express (ABX) paragraph (g) of the NPRM terminates this material at the FAA, call 425–227– asked that the requirements in AD the ‘‘initial’’ and repetitive inspections 1221. 2004–14–19, Amendment 39–13728 (69 required by paragraphs (f) ‘‘and (h)’’ of Examining the AD Docket FR 42549, July 16, 2004), be added to AD 2005–03–11, Amendment 39–13967 the affected ADs section and the related (70 FR 7174, February 11, 2005), You may examine the AD docket on requirements of the NPRM (76 FR corrected on March 11, 2005 (70 FR the Internet at http:// 59590, September 27, 2011). Boeing 12119). www.regulations.gov; or in person at the stated that this would ensure that the We partially agree with the Docket Management Facility between initial actions in paragraphs (b), (c), and commenter. Doing the inspections 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through (d) of AD 2004–14–19 begin 50,000 required by paragraph (g) of this AD Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD flight cycles after the aft pressure replaces the inspections (repetitive) docket contains this AD, the regulatory bulkhead has been replaced. ABX required by paragraph (f) of AD 2005– evaluation, any comments received, and recommend that we add a paragraph 03–11, Amendment 39–13967 (70 FR other information. The address for the that allows a 50,000 flight cycle 7174, February 11, 2005), corrected on Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is threshold on a new aft pressure March 11, 2005 (70 FR 12119). We have Document Management Facility, U.S. bulkhead for the inspections required by revised paragraph (g) of this AD Department of Transportation, Docket AD 2004–14–19. accordingly. However, the inspection Operations, M–30, West Building We do not agree to include AD 2004– required by paragraph (h) of AD 2005– Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 14–19, Amendment 39–13728 (69 FR 03–11 is a one-time inspection of the New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 42549, July 16, 2004), in the affected ‘‘oil can’’ locations of the aft pressure DC 20590. ADs section and related requirements of bulkhead web, which is not in the same FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: this AD. We have determined that an location as the inspections required by Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, unsafe condition exists, and that the paragraph (g) of the NPRM (76 FR Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, actions this AD requires are adequate to 59590, September 27, 2011). Therefore Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, ensure the continued safety of the the requirements in paragraph (h) of AD 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, affected fleet. The commenter’s 2005–03–11 cannot be terminated by the Washington 98057–3356; phone (425) suggested changes would alter the inspections required by paragraph (g) of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28242 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

this AD. However, under the provisions Request To Include Inspection in Clarification of Effect of Winglet of paragraph (i) of this AD, we will Airworthiness Limitations Installation consider requests to provide such relief ABX asked that we add a new through approval of an AMOC if We have added new Note 1 to paragraph following paragraph (h) of the paragraph (c) of this AD to state that sufficient data are submitted to NPRM (76 FR 59590, September 27, substantiate that the terminating action supplemental type certificate (STC) 2011), which allows synchronizing the ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/ would also provide an acceptable level maintenance program and the AD _ _ _ of safety. Regulatory and Guidance Library/ requirements for all airplanes equipped rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a Boeing also asked that we revise with improved aft pressure bulkheads. 4005cdfc0/$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does paragraph (h) of the NPRM (76 FR ABX added that we should mandate the not affect the ability to accomplish the 59590, September 27, 2011) to specify airworthiness limitations (AWLs) for the actions required by this AD. Therefore, that doing the replacement specified in maintenance on aft pressure bulkheads for airplanes on which STC ST01920SE paragraph (h) of the NPRM terminates that have been replaced, in order to is installed, a ‘‘change in product’’ the actions required by paragraphs (a) relieve the burden of requesting AMOC approval request is not necessary AMOCs. ABX added that the improved and (b) of AD 2004–05–16, Amendment to comply with the requirements of 14 aft pressure bulkhead should have the 39–13511 (69 FR 10917, March 9, 2004) CFR 39.17. and the actions required by paragraphs same maintenance requirements (f) and (h) of AD 2005–03–11, whether it was installed on an airplane Conclusion in production or in service. Amendment 39–13967 (70 FR 7174, We reviewed the relevant data, February 11, 2005), corrected on March We partially agree with the commenter. We agree that the actual considered the comments received, and 11, 2005 (70 FR 12119). dimensional and material configuration determined that air safety and the We agree with the commenter. Once of the modified aft pressure bulkhead is public interest require adopting the AD the replacement required by paragraph identical to the later production with the changes described previously. (h) of this AD is done, it is not necessary airplanes. However, although the We also determined that these changes to do the inspections required by configuration is identical, the fatigue will not increase the economic burden paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 2004–05– life of the bulkhead is not. All Model on any operator or increase the scope of 16, Amendment 39–13511 (69 FR 767 airplanes, including the fatigue test the AD. 10917, March 9, 2004) and paragraphs airplanes, are subject to limit test Costs of Compliance (f) and (h) of AD 2005–03–11, pressurization loads during production. Amendment 39–13967 (70 FR 7174, This limit loading substantially We estimate that this AD affects 83 February 11, 2005), corrected on March enhances the fatigue life of the airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate 11, 2005 (70 FR 12119). We have revised structure. We have made no change to the following costs to comply with this paragraph (h) of this AD accordingly. the AD in this regard. AD:

ESTIMATED COSTS

Cost per Cost on U.S. Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators

Inspections ...... 22 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,870 per inspection cycle $0 $1,870 $155,210 Replacement ...... 1,541 work-hours × $85 per hour = $130,985 ...... 399,539 530,524 44,033,492

Authority for This Rulemaking Regulatory Findings List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Title 49 of the United States Code This AD will not have federalism Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation specifies the FAA’s authority to issue implications under Executive Order safety, Incorporation by reference, rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 13132. This AD will not have a Safety. substantial direct effect on the States, on section 106, describes the authority of Adoption of the Amendment the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: the relationship between the national Aviation Programs, describes in more government and the States, or on the Accordingly, under the authority detail the scope of the Agency’s distribution of power and delegated to me by the Administrator, authority. responsibilities among the various the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as We are issuing this rulemaking under levels of government. follows: the authority described in Subtitle VII, For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: DIRECTIVES ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866, section, Congress charges the FAA with ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in continues to read as follows: air commerce by prescribing regulations DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures for practices, methods, and procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. the Administrator finds necessary for (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation § 39.13 [Amended] safety in air commerce. This regulation in Alaska, and is within the scope of that authority (4) Will not have a significant ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding because it addresses an unsafe condition economic impact, positive or negative, the following new airworthiness that is likely to exist or develop on on a substantial number of small entities directive (AD): products identified in this rulemaking under the criteria of the Regulatory 2012–09–08 The Boeing Company: action. Flexibility Act. Amendment 39–17043; Docket No.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28243

FAA–2011–0993; Directorate Identifier exceed 1,600 flight cycles. If no crack is incorporation by reference (IBR) under 5 2011–NM–018–AD. found, repeat the inspections thereafter at U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. intervals not to exceed 1,600 flight cycles. (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– (a) Effective Date Accomplishing the inspections required by 53A0139, dated November 12, 2009. This AD is effective June 18, 2012. this paragraph terminates the inspections (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial (b) Affected ADs required by paragraph (f) of AD 2005–03–11, Amendment 39–13967 (70 FR 7174, February Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Certain requirements of this AD affect 11, 2005), corrected on March 11, 2005 (70 Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, certain requirements of AD 2004–05–16, FR 12119). Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– Amendment 39–13511 (69 FR 10917, March 544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 9, 2004), and AD 2005–03–11, Amendment (h) Replacement email [email protected]; Internet 39–13967 (70 FR 7174, February 11, 2005), Except as provided by paragraph (g) of this https://www.myboeingfleet.com. corrected on March 11, 2005 (70 FR 12119). AD: Before the accumulation of 43,000 total (3) You may review copies of the (c) Applicability flight cycles, or within 5,000 flight cycles referenced service information at the FAA, after the effective date of this AD, whichever Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind This AD applies to The Boeing Company occurs later: Replace the aft pressure Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– Model 767–200 and –300 series airplanes, bulkhead at STA 1582 with a new bulkhead, 3356. For information on the availability of certificated in any category, as identified in in accordance with the Accomplishment this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0139, Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin (4) You may also review copies of the dated November 12, 2009. 767–53A0139, dated November 12, 2009. service information that is incorporated by Note 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD: Accomplishing the replacement in this reference at the National Archives and Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) paragraph terminates the repetitive Records Administration (NARA). For ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/ inspections required by paragraph (g) of this information on the availability of this Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/ AD. Accomplishing the replacement in this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/ paragraph also terminates the inspections to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/ $FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect the required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD cfr/ibr-locations.html. ability to accomplish the actions required by 2004–05–16, Amendment 39–13511 (69 FR this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which 10917, March 9, 2004), and paragraphs (f) Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 29, STC ST01920SE is installed, a ‘‘change in and (h) of AD 2005–03–11, Amendment 39– 2012. product’’ alternative method of compliance 13967 (70 FR 7174, February 11, 2005), Michael Kaszycki, (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to corrected on March 11, 2005 (70 FR 12119). Acting Manager, Transport Airplane comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 39.17. (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) [FR Doc. 2012–11029 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] (d) Subject (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the Air Transport Association (ATA) of America authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if Code 53: Fuselage. requested using the procedures found in 14 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, (e) Unsafe Condition send your request to your principal inspector Federal Aviation Administration This AD was prompted by reports of or local Flight Standards District Office, as multiple site damage cracks in the radial web appropriate. If sending information directly 14 CFR Part 71 lap and tear strap splices of the aft pressure to the manager of the ACO, send it to the bulkhead at station (STA) 1582 due to attention of the person identified in the [Docket No. FAA–2012–0099; Airspace fatigue. We are issuing this AD to prevent Related Information section of this AD. Docket No. 12–ASO–11] fatigue cracking of the aft pressure bulkhead, Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM- which could result in rapid decompression of [email protected]. Amendment of Class D Airspace; the airplane and possible damage or (2) Before using any approved AMOC, Cocoa Beach, FL interference with the airplane control notify your appropriate principal inspector, systems that penetrate the bulkhead, and or lacking a principal inspector, the manager AGENCY: Federal Aviation consequent loss of controllability of the of the local flight standards district office/ Administration (FAA), DOT. airplane. certificate holding district office. ACTION: Final rule; technical (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable amendment, correction. (f) Compliance level of safety may be used for any repair Comply with this AD within the required by this AD if it is approved by the SUMMARY: This action corrects an error compliance times specified, unless already Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization in the legal description of a final rule; done. Designation Authorization (ODA) that has technical amendment, published in the been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO (g) Repetitive Inspections Federal Register on April 11, 2012 that to make those findings. For a repair method amends Class D airspace at Cocoa Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this to be approved, the repair must meet the AD: Before the accumulation of 43,000 total certification basis of the airplane, and the Beach, FL. flight cycles, or within 1,600 flight cycles approval must specifically refer to this AD. DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, May 31, after the effective date of this AD, whichever 2012. The Director of the Federal (j) Related Information occurs later, do detailed, low-frequency eddy Register approves this incorporation by current, and mid-frequency eddy current For more information about this AD, reference action under title 1, Code of inspections for cracking of the aft pressure contact Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to bulkhead at STA 1582, in accordance with Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind the annual revision of FAA Order Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0139, dated Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 7400.9 and publication of conforming November 12, 2009. If any crack is found, 3356; phone (425) 917–6577; fax (425) 917– amendments. before further flight, replace the bulkhead as 6590; email: [email protected]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John required by paragraph (h) of this AD, or repair the crack in accordance with the (k) Material Incorporated by Reference Fornito, Operations Support Group, Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert (1) You must use the following service Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Service Bulletin 767–53A0139, dated information to do the actions required by this Administration, P.O. Box 20636, November 12, 2009, and repeat the AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) inspections thereafter at intervals not to Director of the Federal Register approved the 305–6364.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28244 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: are being adjusted to coincide with the number of small entities under the FAA’s aeronautical database, which criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. History show the correct coordinates. This does The FAA’s authority to issue rules Federal Register Docket No. FAA– not affect the boundaries or operating regarding aviation safety is found in 2012–0099, Airspace Docket No. 12– requirements of the airspace. Title 49 of the United States Code. ASO–11, published on April 11, 2012 DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, May 14, Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the (77 FR 21662), amends Class D airspace 2012. authority of the FAA Administrator. at Cape Canaveral Skid Strip, Cocoa Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Beach, FL. A typographical error was describes in more detail the scope of the Fornito, Operations Support Group, made in the regulatory text, stating the agency’s authority. radius of controlled airspace at Cape Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation This rulemaking is promulgated Canaveral Skid Strip to be 4.4 miles, Administration, P.O. Box 20636, under the authority described in instead of 4.5 miles. This action corrects Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section this error. Class D airspace designations 305–6364. 40103. Under that section, the FAA is are published in paragraph 5000 of FAA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: charged with prescribing regulations to Order 74009.V, dated August 9, 2011, History assign the use of airspace necessary to and effective September 15, 2011, which ensure the safety of aircraft and the The FAA is adjusting the geographic is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR efficient use of airspace. This regulation location of Baltimore VORTAC, 71.1. The Class D airspace designation is within the scope of that authority as Baltimore, MD, to be in concert with the listed in this document will be it amends controlled airspace at Martin FAAs aeronautical database, which published subsequently in the Order. State Airport, Baltimore, MD. shows the correct coordinates. This is Correction to Final Rule an administrative change and does not Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Accordingly, pursuant to the affect the boundaries or operating Airspace, Incorporation by reference, authority delegated to me, the radius of requirements of the airspace; therefore, Navigation (air). the controlled Class D airspace area for notice and public procedures under 5 Cape Canaveral Skid Strip, Cocoa U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary. Adoption of the Amendment Beach, FL, as published in the Federal The Class D and E airspace In consideration of the foregoing, the Register of April 11, 2012 (77 FR 21662) designations are published in Federal Aviation Administration (FR Doc. 2012–8558) is corrected as Paragraphs 5000, 6002 and 6004 of FAA amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: follows: order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15, 2011, which PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, ASO FL D Cocoa Beach, FL [Corrected] is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR Cape Canaveral Skid Strip, FL 71.1. The Class D and E airspace TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND On page 21663, column 3, line 4 of designations listed in this document REPORTING POINTS the legal description, remove ‘‘within a will be published subsequently in the ■ 4.4-mile radius of the Cape Canaveral Order. 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Skid Strip, and insert ‘‘within a 4.5-mile The Rule radius of the Cape Canaveral Skid Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, Strip.’’ This amendment to Title 14, Code of 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 1963 Comp., p. 389. Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April amends the geographic coordinates in 30, 2012. the legal description of Class D airspace § 71.1 [Amended] Barry A. Knight, and Class E surface airspace, for Martin ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern State Airport, Baltimore, MD. This 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. update brings the geographic Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace [FR Doc. 2012–11399 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] coordinates in concert with the FAA’s Designations and Reporting Points, BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Aeronautical Products database. dated August 9, 2011, and effective The FAA has determined that this September 15, 2011, is amended as regulation only involves an established follows: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION body of technical regulations for which Paragraph 5000 Class D airspace. frequent and routine amendments are Federal Aviation Administration necessary to keep them operationally * * * * * current, is non-controversial and 14 CFR Part 71 AEA MD D Baltimore, Martin State unlikely to result in adverse or negative Airport, MD [Amended] [Docket No. FAA–2012–0014; Airspace comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a Martin State Airport, Baltimore, MD Docket No. 12–AEA–1] ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under (Lat. 39°19′32″ N., long. 76°24′50″ W.) Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Baltimore VORTAC Amendment of Class D and E ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT (Lat. 39°10′16″ N., long. 76°39′41″ W.) Airspace; Baltimore, MD Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 That airspace extending upward from the AGENCY: Federal Aviation FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) surface to and including 2,500 feet MSL Administration (FAA), DOT. does not warrant preparation of a within a 5.2-mile radius of Martin State Airport and within 4.4 miles each side of a ACTION: Final rule; technical Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a 14.7-mile radius arc of the Baltimore amendment. VORTAC extending clockwise from the routine matter that will only affect air Baltimore VORTAC 030° radial to the SUMMARY: This action amends Class D traffic procedures and air navigation, it VORTAC 046° radial, excluding that airspace and E airspace at Martin State Airport, is certified that this rule, when within the Washington Tri-Area Class B Baltimore, MD. The geographic promulgated, will not have a significant airspace area and Restricted Areas R–4001A coordinates of the Baltimore VORTAC economic impact on a substantial and R–4001B when they are in effect. This

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28245

Class D airspace area is effective during the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: detail the scope of the agency’s specific dates and times established in Scott Enander, Central Service Center, authority. This rulemaking is advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective Operations Support Group, Federal promulgated under the authority date and time will thereafter be continuously Aviation Administration, Southwest described in Subtitle VII, Part A, published in the Airport/Facility Directory. Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321– section, the FAA is charged with as surface areas. 7716. prescribing regulations to assign the use * * * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of AEA MD E2 Baltimore, Martin State History Airport, MD [Amended] airspace. This regulation is within the On December 13, 2011, the FAA scope of that authority as it amends Martin State Airport, MD ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ published in the Federal Register a controlled airspace at Eppley Airfield, (Lat. 39 19 32 N., long. 76 24 50 W.) notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) Baltimore VORTAC Omaha, NE. (Lat. 39°10′16″ N., long. 76°39′41″ W.) to amend Class E airspace for the Omaha, NE, area, creating additional List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Within a 5.2-mile radius of Martin State Airport and within 4.4 miles each side of a controlled airspace at Eppley Airfield Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 14.7-mile radius arc of the Baltimore (76 FR 77448) Docket No. FAA–2011– Navigation (air). 1126. Interested parties were invited to VORTAC extending clockwise from the Adoption of the Amendment Baltimore VORTAC 030° radial to the participate in this rulemaking effort by VORTAC 046° radial, excluding that airspace submitting written comments on the In consideration of the foregoing, the within the Washington Tri-Area Class B proposal to the FAA. No comments Federal Aviation Administration airspace area and Restricted Areas R–4001A were received. Class E airspace amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: and R–4001B when they are in effect. This designations are published in paragraph Class E airspace area is effective during the 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9V dated PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, specific dates and times established in August 9, 2011, and effective September B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective 15, 2011, which is incorporated by TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND date and time will thereafter be continuously REPORTING POINTS published in the Airport/Facility Directory. reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this ■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April document will be published part 71 continues to read as follows: 30, 2012. subsequently in the Order. Barry A. Knight, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern The Rule 40120; E. O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. This action amends Title 14 Code of 1963 Comp., p. 389. [FR Doc. 2012–11398 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by § 71.1 [Amended] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in to accommodate new standard 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION instrument approach procedures at Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Eppley Airfield, Omaha, NE. This action Designations and Reporting Points, Federal Aviation Administration is necessary for the safety and dated August 9, 2011, and effective management of IFR operations at the September 15, 2011, is amended as 14 CFR Part 71 airport. follows: [Docket No. FAA–2011–1126; Airspace The FAA has determined that this Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas Docket No. 11–ACE–22] regulation only involves an established extending upward from 700 feet or more body of technical regulations for which above the surface. Amendment of Class E Airspace; frequent and routine amendments are * * * * * Omaha, NE necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is ACE NE E5 Omaha, NE [Amended] AGENCY: Federal Aviation not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ Omaha, Eppley Airfield, NE Administration (FAA), DOT. under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not (Lat. 41°18′11″ N., long. 95°53′39″ W.) ACTION: Final rule. Omaha, Offutt AFB, NE a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 (Lat. 41 07 10 N., long. 95 54 31 W.) SUMMARY: This action amends Class E Council Bluffs, Council Bluffs Municipal FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) airspace at Omaha, NE. Additional Airport, IA does not warrant preparation of a controlled airspace is necessary to (Lat. 41°15′36″ N., long. 95°45′31″ W.) regulatory evaluation as the anticipated accommodate new Area Navigation Blair, Blair Municipal Airport, NE impact is so minimal. Since this is a ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ (RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach (Lat. 41 24 53 N., long. 96 06 32 W.) routine matter that will only affect air Procedures at Eppley Airfield. The FAA That airspace extending upward from 700 traffic procedures and air navigation, it is taking this action to enhance the feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile is certified that this rule, when radius of Eppley Airfield, and within 1 mile safety and management of Instrument promulgated, will not have a significant each side of the 000° bearing from Eppley Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the economic impact on a substantial Airfield extending from the 6.9-mile radius to airport. number of small entities under the 8.5 miles north of the airport, and within 3 DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, July criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. miles each side of the Eppley Airfield 26, 2012. The Director of the Federal The FAA’s authority to issue rules Runway 14R ILS Localizer course extending from the 6.9-mile radius to 12 miles Register approves this incorporation by regarding aviation safety is found in northwest of the airport, and within a 7-mile reference action under 1 CFR part 51, Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, radius of Offutt AFB, and within 4.3 miles subject to the annual revision of FAA Section 106, describes the authority of each side of the Offutt AFB ILS Runway 30 Order 7400.9 and publication of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, localizer course extending from the 7-mile conforming amendments. Aviation Programs, describes in more radius to 7.4 miles southeast of Offutt AFB,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28246 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

and within a 6.4-mile radius of the Council to participate in this rulemaking effort the safety of aircraft and the efficient Bluffs Municipal Airport, and within a 6.4- by submitting written comments on the use of airspace. This regulation is mile radius of Blair Municipal Airport, and ° proposal to the FAA. No comments within the scope of that authority as it within 2 miles each side of the 317 bearing were received. Class E airspace amends controlled airspace in the from the Blair Municipal Airport extending designations are published in paragraph from the 6.4-mile radius to 11.6 miles, and Tullahoma, TN area. 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9V dated within 2 miles each side of the 137° bearing Environmental Review from the Blair Municipal Airport extending August 9, 2011, and effective September from the 6.4-mile radius to 12.2 miles. 15, 2011, which is incorporated by The FAA has determined that this reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E action qualifies for categorical exclusion Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 5, under the National Environmental 2012. airspace designations listed in this document will be published Policy Act in accordance with FAA Walter L. Tweedy, subsequently in the Order. Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ ATO Central Service Center. The Rule paragraph 311a. This airspace action is [FR Doc. 2012–11549 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] This amendment to Title 14, Code of not expected to cause any potentially BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 significant environmental impacts, and amends Class E airspace extending no extraordinary circumstances exist upward from 700 feet above the surface that warrant preparation of an DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION at Tullahoma, TN. Airspace environmental assessment. reconfiguration is necessary due to the Federal Aviation Administration closing of Arnold Air Force Base, and Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 supports new standard instrument Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 14 CFR Part 71 approach procedures developed at Navigation (air). Tullahoma Regional Airport/Wm [Docket No. FAA–2011–1367; Airspace Adoption of the Amendment Docket No. 11–ASO–41] Northern Field. Controlled airspace is necessary for the continued safety and In consideration of the foregoing, the Amendment of Class E Airspace; management of IFR operations within Federal Aviation Administration Tullahoma, TN the Tullahoma, TN, area. This action amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: also adjusts the geographic coordinates AGENCY: Federal Aviation PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, Administration (FAA), DOT. of the Tullahoma Regional Airport/Wm Northern Field to be in concert with the B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR ACTION: Final rule. FAAs aeronautical database. TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS SUMMARY: This action amends Class E The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established Airspace in the Tullahoma, TN area, as ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 body of technical regulations for which the Arnold Air Force Base has been continues to read as follows: closed and controlled airspace frequent and routine amendments are Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, associated with the airport is being necessary to keep them operationally current, is non-controversial and 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– removed. Airspace reconfiguration is 1963 Comp., p. 389. necessary for the continued safety and unlikely to result in adverse or negative airspace management of Instrument comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a § 71.1 [Amended] ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Flight Rules (IFR) operations within the ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Tullahoma, TN airspace area. This 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT action also makes a minor adjustment to Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 the geographic coordinates of the Designations and Reporting Points, FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) Tullahoma Regional Airport/Wm dated August 9, 2011, effective does not warrant preparation of a Northern Field. September 15, 2011, is amended as Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, July 26, follows: impact is so minimal. Since this is a 2012. The Director of the Federal routine matter that will only affect air Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas Register approves this incorporation by traffic procedures and air navigation, it extending upward from 700 feet or more reference action under title 1, Code of is certified that this rule, when above the surface of the earth. Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to promulgated, will not have a significant * * * * * the annual revision of FAA Order economic impact on a substantial 7400.9 and publication of conforming ASO TN E5 Tullahoma, TN [Amended] number of small entities under the amendments. Tullahoma Regional Airport/Wm Northern criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Field, TN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John The FAA’s authority to issue rules (Lat. 35°22′48″ N., long. 86°14′48″ W.) Fornito, Operations Support Group, regarding aviation safety is found in Winchester Municipal Airport Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Title 49 of the United States Code. (Lat. 35°10′39″ N., long. 86°03′58″ W.) Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Subtitle I, section 106 describes the Manchester Medical Center, Point In Space Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) authority of the FAA Administrator. Coordinates ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 305–6364. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, (Lat. 35 29 56 N., long. 86 05 37 W.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: describes in more detail the scope of the That airspace extending upward from 700 agency’s authority. feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius History This rulemaking is promulgated of Tullahoma Regional Airport/Wm Northern On March 2, 2012, the FAA published under the authority described in subtitle Field and within 4 miles either side of the 360° bearing from the airport extending from in the Federal Register a notice of VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. the 7-mile radius to 12 miles north of the proposed rulemaking to amend Class E Under that section, the FAA is charged airport, and within an 11-mile radius of airspace at Tullahoma, TN (77 FR with prescribing regulations to assign Winchester Municipal Airport, and within a 12759). Interested parties were invited the use of airspace necessary to ensure 6-mile radius of the point in space (lat.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28247

35°29′56″ N., long. 86°05′37″ W.) serving August 9, 2011, and effective September Adoption of the Amendment Manchester Medical Center. 15, 2011, which is incorporated by In consideration of the foregoing, the Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E Federal Aviation Administration 30, 2012. airspace designations listed in this amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: Barry A. Knight, document will be published Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern subsequently in the Order. PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR The Rule [FR Doc. 2012–11409 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND BILLING CODE 4910–13–P This action amends Title 14 Code of REPORTING POINTS Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by ■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR amending Class E airspace extending DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION part 71 continues to read as follows: upward from 700 feet above the surface to accommodate new standard Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, Federal Aviation Administration 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– instrument approach procedures at 1963 Comp., p. 389. 14 CFR Part 71 Decatur Airport, Decatur, IL. This action is necessary for the safety and § 71.1 [Amended] [Docket No. FAA–2011–1105; Airspace management of IFR operations at the Docket No. 11–AGL–20] ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in airport. This action also adjusts the 14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal Aviation Amendment of Class E Airspace; geographic coordinates of the airport to Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Decatur, IL coincide with the FAA’s aeronautical Designations and Reporting Points, database. dated August 9, 2011, and effective AGENCY: Federal Aviation The FAA has determined that this September 15, 2011, is amended as Administration (FAA), DOT. regulation only involves an established follows: ACTION: Final rule. body of technical regulations for which Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas SUMMARY: This action amends Class E frequent and routine amendments are extending upward from 700 feet or more airspace at Decatur, IL. Additional necessary to keep them operationally above the surface. controlled airspace is necessary to current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is * * * * * accommodate new Area Navigation not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ AGL IL E5 Decatur, IL [Amended] under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not (RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach Decatur Airport, IL Procedures at Decatur Airport. The FAA a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT (Lat. 39°50′04″ N., long. 88°51′56″ W.) Regulatory Policies and Procedures is taking this action to enhance the That airspace extending upward from 700 safety and management of Instrument (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the (3) does not warrant preparation of a radius of Decatur Airport, and within 2 miles airport. The geographic coordinates of regulatory evaluation as the anticipated each side of the 299° bearing from the airport the airport are also adjusted. impact is so minimal. Since this is a extending from the 6.9-mile radius to 11 DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, July routine matter that will only affect air miles northwest of the airport. 26, 2012. The Director of the Federal traffic procedures and air navigation, it Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 5, Register approves this incorporation by is certified that this rule, when 2012. reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, promulgated, will not have a significant Walter L. Tweedy, subject to the annual revision of FAA economic impact on a substantial Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Order 7400.9 and publication of number of small entities under the ATO Central Service Center. conforming amendments. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. [FR Doc. 2012–11540 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The FAA’s authority to issue rules BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Scott Enander, Central Service Center, regarding aviation safety is found in Operations Support Group, Federal Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Aviation Administration, Southwest Section 106, describes the authority of Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Federal Aviation Administration Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321– Aviation Programs, describes in more 7716. detail the scope of the agency’s 14 CFR Part 91 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: authority. This rulemaking is [Docket No. FAA–2011–1396] History promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, RIN 2120–AK10 On December 13, 2011, the FAA Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that published in the Federal Register a section, the FAA is charged with Operations in Class D Airspace notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) prescribing regulations to assign the use to amend Class E airspace for the AGENCY: of airspace necessary to ensure the Federal Aviation Decatur, IL, area, creating additional Administration (FAA), DOT. safety of aircraft and the efficient use of controlled airspace at Decatur Airport airspace. This regulation is within the ACTION: Final rule; request for (76 FR 77450) Docket No. FAA–2011– comments. 1105. Interested parties were invited to scope of that authority as it amends participate in this rulemaking effort by controlled airspace at Decatur Airport, SUMMARY: The FAA is removing the submitting written comments on the Decatur, IL. provision describing an abbreviated taxi proposal to the FAA. No comments List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 clearance. Previously, air traffic were received. Class E airspace controllers issued abbreviated taxi designations are published in paragraph Airspace, Incorporation by reference, instructions to aircraft en route to their 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9V dated Navigation (Air). assigned departure runway, which

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28248 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

allowed pilots to cross all runways that Federal Aviation Administration, 800 including the NTSB recommendation to intersected the taxi route to their Independence Avenue SW., eliminate the issuance of a ‘‘taxi to’’ departure runway. The FAA no longer Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) clearance found in 14 CFR 91.129(i). uses these abbreviated taxi clearances 267–8783; facsimile (202) 267–9328, NTSB Safety Recommendations A– and is removing the provision of the email; [email protected]. 00–67 and A–00–68 were reiterated in regulation that describes this clearance. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: an NTSB Safety Recommendation, dated This action aligns the regulation with August 28, 2007, following the 2006 Authority for This Rulemaking current air traffic control practice and crash of Comair flight 5191, CL–600, responds to the National Transportation The FAA’s authority to issue rules which crashed during takeoff from Blue Safety Board (NTSB) Safety regarding aviation safety is found in Grass Airport (LEX), Lexington, KY. The Recommendation Numbers A–00–67 Title 49 of the United States Code. NTSB determined that a contributor to and –68. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the the probable cause of that accident, in DATES: Effective May 14, 2012. authority of the FAA Acting which the flight crew was instructed to Submit comments on or before June Administrator, including the authority take off from runway 22 but began its 13, 2012. to issue, rescind, and revise regulations. takeoff roll on runway 26, was the Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, ADDRESSES: Send comments identified FAA’s failure to require that all runway describes, in more detail, the scope of by docket number FAA–2011–1396 crossings be authorized only by ATC the agency’s authority. This rulemaking using any of the following methods: clearances specific to the runway. is promulgated under the authority • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to On September 11, 2008, the SRM described in Subtitle VII, Part A, http://www.regulations.gov and follow panel issued its ‘‘Explicit Runway Subpart I, Chapter 401, Section 40103 the online instructions for sending your Crossing Clearances Safety Risk (b), which allows the Acting comments electronically. Management Document (SRMD),’’ Administrator to regulate the use of the • Mail: Send comments to Docket which contained a proposal ‘‘to navigable airspace as necessary to Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of implement explicit runway crossing ensure the safety of aircraft and the Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey clearances per NTSB recommendation efficient use of airspace. Additionally, Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West A–00–67.’’ Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Chapter Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC In response to the NTSB’s 447, Section 44701 (c) authorizes the 20590–0001. recommendation and effective June 30, • Hand Delivery or Courier: Take Acting Administrator to carry out 2010, the FAA implemented changes to comments to Docket Operations in functions in this chapter in a way that the procedures for issuing taxi and Room W12–140 of the West Building helps to reduce or eliminate the ground movement instructions. The Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey possibility or recurrence of accidents in changes subsequently were incorporated Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between air transportation. into FAA Orders, JO 7110.65 Air Traffic 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through I. Background Control and JO 7210.3 Facility Friday, except Federal holidays. In January 1990, the National Operation and Administration. • Fax: Fax comments to Docket Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) II. Immediately Adopted Final Rule Operations at 202–493–2251. recommended that the FAA take action Privacy: The FAA will post all to address safety issues involving This action revises paragraph (i) of comments it receives, without change, runway incursions and near-collision § 91.129 by removing the sentences that to http://www.regulations.gov, including ground incidents.1 That describe a ‘‘clearance to ‘taxi to’ the any personal information the recommendation followed several high- takeoff runway assigned to the aircraft.’’ commenter provides. Using the search profile incidents, including a 1990 This language is contradictory to current function of the docket Web site, anyone ground collision at Atlanta Hartsfield air traffic control procedures and could can find and read the electronic form of Airport between an Eastern B727 and a lead to confusion and incorrect pilot all comments received into any FAA King Air (resulting in one fatality and expectations. Removing this provision docket, including the name of the one injury). does not alter the requirement to have individual sending the comment (or On August 15, 2007, an FAA ‘‘Call to an appropriate ATC clearance. The FAA signing the comment for an association, Action’’ committee issued several will continue to require all aircraft to business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s recommendations to address improving receive an ATC clearance prior to complete Privacy Act Statement can be runway safety across the National entering any taxiway or runway. found in the Federal Register published Airspace System (NAS). The committee The FAA finds, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), identified taxi clearances as a key area that notice and public comment are as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. of concern. Following the committee’s impracticable and contrary to the public Docket: Background documents or recommendations, the FAA convened a interest. Furthermore, the FAA finds comments received may be read at Safety Risk Management (SRM) panel of that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. http://www.regulations.gov at any time. subject matter experts to review the 553(d) to make this rule effective upon Follow the online instructions for committee’s recommendations, publication. The changes to this section accessing the docket or go to Docket align the rule with current air traffic Operations in Room W12–140 of the 1 NTSB Safety Recommendations A–00–67 and procedures and will not adversely affect West Building Ground Floor at 1200 A–00–68 on July 6, 2000. These actions the flow of taxiing aircraft. As this rule New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, recommended that the FAA require that all runway does not change the requirement to have DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday crossing be authorized only by specific air traffic control clearance and ensure that all U.S. pilots and an ATC clearance prior to taxiing, this through Friday, except Federal holidays. personnel assigned to move aircraft and pilots amendment will not adversely impact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For operating under 14 CFR part 129 receive adequate safety and will avoid confusion that can questions concerning this rule, contact notification of the change. The NTSB further be caused between contradictory recommended that when an aircraft needs to cross Ellen Crum, Airspace, Regulations and multiple runways, air traffic controllers must issue regulations and ATC procedures. ATC Procedures Group, Air Traffic an explicit crossing instruction for each runway Nonetheless, the FAA invites parties to Organization, Mission Support Services, after the previous runway has been crossed. comment on this proceeding. A separate

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:07 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28249

notice will be issued by the FAA runway safety across the National from establishing standards or engaging addressing any comments received. Airspace System. That committee in related activities that create identified taxi clearances as a key area unnecessary obstacles to the foreign III. Regulatory Notices and Analyses of concern. This action improves safety commerce of the United States. A. Regulatory Evaluation at no additional cost. Pursuant to these Acts, the The FAA has, therefore, determined Changes to Federal regulations must establishment of standards is not that this rule is not a ‘‘significant undergo several economic analyses. considered an unnecessary obstacle to regulatory action’’ as defined in section First, Executive Order 12866 and the foreign commerce of the United 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not Executive Order 13563 directs that each States, so long as the standard has a ‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s Federal agency shall propose or adopt a legitimate domestic objective, such as Regulatory Policies and Procedures. regulation only upon a reasoned the protection of safety, and does not operate in a manner that excludes determination that the benefits of the B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination imports that meet this objective. The intended regulation justify its costs. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 statute also requires consideration of Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a international standards and, where of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires principle of regulatory issuance that appropriate, that they be the basis for agencies to analyze the economic agencies shall endeavor, consistent with U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed impact of regulatory changes on small the objectives of the rule and of the potential effect of this rule and entities. Third, the Trade Agreements applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and determined that it will have only a Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies informational requirements to the scale domestic impact and therefore has no from setting standards that create of the businesses, organizations, and effect on international trade. unnecessary obstacles to the foreign governmental jurisdictions subject to commerce of the United States. In regulation. To achieve this principle, D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment developing U.S. standards, the Trade agencies are required to solicit and Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Act requires agencies to consider consider flexible regulatory proposals Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) international standards and, where and to explain the rationale for their requires each Federal agency to prepare appropriate, that they be the basis of actions to assure that such proposals are a written statement assessing the effects U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded given serious consideration.’’ The RFA of any Federal mandate in a proposed or Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. covers a wide-range of small entities, final agency rule that may result in an 104–4) requires agencies to prepare a including small businesses, not-for- expenditure of $100 million or more (in written assessment of the costs, benefits, profit organizations, and small 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, and other effects of proposed or final governmental jurisdictions. local, and tribal governments, in the rules that include a Federal mandate Agencies must perform a review to aggregate, or by the private sector; such likely to result in the expenditure by determine whether a rule will have a a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant State, local, or tribal governments, in the significant economic impact on a regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently aggregate, or by the private sector, of substantial number of small entities. If uses an inflation-adjusted value of $100 million or more annually (adjusted the agency determines that it will, the $143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. for inflation with base year of 1995). agency must prepare a regulatory This rule does not contain such a This portion of the preamble flexibility analysis as described in the mandate; therefore, the requirements of summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the RFA. Title II of the Act do not apply. economic impacts of this rule. However, if an agency determines that E. Paperwork Reduction Act Department of Transportation Order a rule is not expected to have a DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and significant economic impact on a The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 procedures for simplification, analysis, substantial number of small entities, (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the and review of regulations. If the section 605(b) of the RFA provides that FAA consider the impact of paperwork expected cost impact is so minimal that the head of the agency may so certify and other information collection a rule does not warrant a full evaluation, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is burdens imposed on the public. The this order permits that a statement to not required. The certification must FAA has determined that there is no that effect and the basis for it to be include a statement providing the new requirement for information included in the preamble if a full factual basis for this determination, and collection associated with this regulatory evaluation of the cost and the reasoning should be clear. This rule immediately adopted final rule. benefits is not prepared. Such a aligns the agency’s regulations with F. International Compatibility determination has been made for this current practice, responds to NTSB In keeping with U.S. obligations rule. The reasoning for this Safety Recommendation Numbers A– under the Convention on International determination follows: 00–67 and A–00–68, and with no Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to The changes to this section align the change in existing procedures there are rule with current air traffic procedures conform to International Civil Aviation no additional costs. Organization (ICAO) Standards and and will not adversely affect the flow of Therefore as the FAA Acting Recommended Practices to the taxiing aircraft. As this rule does not Administrator, I certify that this rule maximum extent practicable. The FAA change the requirement to have an ATC will not have a significant economic has determined that there are no ICAO clearance prior to taxiing, this impact on a substantial number of small Standards and Recommended Practices amendment will not adversely impact entities. safety and will avoid confusion that can that correspond to these regulations. C. International Trade Impact be caused between contradicting IV. Executive Order Determinations regulations and ATC procedures. Assessment Further this rule responds to NTSB The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism recommendations and to the August 15, (Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the The FAA analyzed this immediately 2007 FAA ‘‘Call to Action’’ Committee Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. adopted final rule under the principles recommendations to address improving L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies and criteria of Executive Order 13132,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28250 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Federalism. The agency determined that Aviation safety, Canada, Cuba, Ethiopia, However, it misspelled the name and this action will not have a substantial Freight, Mexico, Noise control, Political address for one of the persons added to direct effect on the States, or the candidates, Reporting and the Entity List. This document corrects relationship between the Federal recordkeeping requirements and those errors. Government and the States, or on the Yugoslavia. BIS published a second final rule in distribution of power and the Federal Register on Friday, April The Amendment responsibilities among the various 27, which added sixteen persons under levels of government, and, therefore, In consideration of the foregoing, the eighteen entries to the Entity List. That does not have Federalism implications. Federal Aviation Administration rule misspelled the city used in the amends chapter I of title 14, Code of B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations address for three of the persons added Federal Regulations as follows: That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, to the Entity List. This document Distribution, or Use corrects that error. Lastly, this document PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND removes a hyphen in the address for one The FAA analyzed this immediately FLIGHT RULES of the persons added to the Entity List adopted final rule under Executive in the April 27 final rule, to clarify it is Order 13211, Actions Concerning ■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows: an address and not an alias for that Regulations that Significantly Affect person added to the Entity List. Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, DATES: (May 18, 2001). The agency has 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, Effective Date: This rule is determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, effective May 14, 2012. energy action’’ under the executive 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: order and it is not likely to have a 46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles Karen Nies-Vogel, Chair, End-User significant adverse effect on the supply, 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Review Committee, Office of the distribution, or use of energy. Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180). Assistant Secretary, Export ■ Administration, Bureau of Industry and V. How To Obtain Additional 2. Amend § 91.129 by revising paragraph (i) to read as follows: Security, Department of Commerce, Information Phone: (202) 482–5991, Fax: (202) 482– A. Rulemaking Documents § 91.129 Operations in Class D airspace. 3911, Email: [email protected]. An electronic copy of a rulemaking * * * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (i) Takeoff, landing, taxi clearance. document may be obtained by using the Background Internet— No person may, at any airport with an 1. Search the Federal eRulemaking operating control tower, operate an Correcting Amendments to the April 18, Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); aircraft on a runway or taxiway, or take 2012 Final Rule 2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and off or land an aircraft, unless an On April 18, 2012, BIS published the Policies Web page at http:// appropriate clearance is received from final rule, ‘‘Addition of Certain Persons www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/or ATC. 3. Access the Government Printing on the Entity List: Addition of Persons Issued in Washington, DC, on April 19, Acting Contrary to the National Security Office’s Web page at http:// 2012. www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. or Foreign Policy Interests of the United Michael P. Huerta, States’’ in the Federal Register (77 FR Copies may also be obtained by sending Acting Administrator. 23114). This amendment corrects two a request (identified by amendment or [FR Doc. 2012–11593 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] spelling errors: one error in the name docket number of this rulemaking) to BILLING CODE 4910–13–P the Federal Aviation Administration, and one error in the address of a person Office of Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 who was added to the Entity List in the Independence Avenue SW., April 18 final rule under the destination Washington, DC 20591, or by calling DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE of Jordan. (202) 267–9680. The name and address of this person Bureau of Industry and Security should have been listed as follows: B. Small Business Regulatory (1) Masoud Est. for Medical and Enforcement Fairness Act 15 CFR Part 744 Scientific Supplies, 74 First Floor, Tla’a The Small Business Regulatory [Docket No. 111027661–2429–02] Al Ali Khali Al Salim Street, Amman, Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of Jordan 11118. RIN 0694–AF43 1996 requires FAA to comply with Correcting Amendments to the April 27, small entity requests for information or Entity List Additions; Corrections 2012 Final Rule advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its jurisdiction. AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and On April 27, 2012, BIS published the A small entity with questions regarding Security, Commerce. final rule, ‘‘Addition of Certain Persons this document may contact its local ACTION: Correcting amendments. to the Entity List’’ in the Federal FAA official, or the person listed under Register (77 FR 25055). This the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT SUMMARY: This document corrects amendment corrects the spelling of the heading at the beginning of the spelling errors in two final rules city of Sharjah, which was incorrectly preamble. To find out more about published by the Bureau of Industry and spelled in the addresses for three of the SBREFA on the Internet, visit http:// Security (BIS) amending the Export persons added to the Entity List under www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ Administration Regulations (EAR) in the destination of United Arab Emirates. rulemaking/sbre_act/. April 2012. BIS published the first final Lastly, this rule removes a hyphen from rule in the Federal Register on the address of a person who was added List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 Wednesday, April 18, 2012. That rule under the destination of Pakistan to Afghanistan, Agriculture, Air traffic added three persons to the Entity List of clarify the text is the address of this control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, the EAR (Supplement No. 1 to part 774). person and not an alias.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28251

The name and address of these four environmental, public health and safety so prior notice and opportunity for persons should have been listed as effects, distributive impacts, and comment are unnecessary. Accordingly, follows: equity). Executive Order 13563 prior notice and opportunity for emphasizes the importance of comment, as well as the delay in Pakistan quantifying both costs and benefits, of effectiveness of this rule, are hereby (1) Jalaluddin Haqqani, a.k.a., the reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, waived. Because a notice of proposed following seven aliases: and of promoting flexibility. This rule rulemaking and an opportunity for —General Jalaluddin; has been determined to be not public comment are not required to be —Haqqani Sahib; significant for purposes of Executive given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or —Maulama Jalaluddin; Order 12866. by any other law, the analytical —Maulawi Haqqani; 2. Notwithstanding any other requirements of the Regulatory —Molvi Sahib; provision of law, no person is required Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., are —Mulawi Jalaluddin; and to respond to nor be subject to a penalty not applicable. —Mullah Jalaluddin. for failure to comply with a collection List of Subject in 15 CFR Part 744 —Miram Shah, Pakistan. of information, subject to the United Arab Emirates requirements of the Paperwork Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 requirements, Terrorism. (1) Al Maskah Used Car and Spare et seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of Accordingly, part 744 of the Export Parts, Maliha Road, Industrial Area 6, information displays a currently valid Administration Regulations (15 CFR Sharjah, U.A.E.; Office of Management and Budget parts 730–774) is amended as follows: (2) Feroz Khan, a.k.a., the following (OMB) Control Number. This regulation three aliases: involves collections previously PART 744—[AMENDED] —Haaje Khan; approved by the OMB under control —Haaji Khan; and numbers 0694–0088, ‘‘Multi-Purpose ■ 1. The authority citation for 15 CFR —Firoz. Application,’’ which carries a burden part 744 continues to read as follows: Maliha Road, Industrial Area 6, hour estimate of 43.8 minutes for a Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 Sharjah, U.A.E.; and manual or electronic submission. Total U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; (3) Zurmat General Trading, Office burden hours associated with the PRA 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 No. 205, Platinum Business Center, and OMB control number 0694–0088 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, Baghdad Street, Al-Nahda 2, Al-Qusais, are not expected to increase as a result 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box No. 171452, of this rule. You may send comments 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59 Dubai, U.A.E.; and 1st Street, Industrial regarding the collection of information FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. associated with this rule, including 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. Area 4th, Sharjah, U.A.E. (Behind the 356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Toyota Showroom), and P.O. Box suggestions for reducing the burden, to Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 35470, Sharjah, U.A.E. Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR Although the Export Administration Management and Budget (OMB), by 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. Act expired on August 20, 2001, the email to 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. President, through Executive Order [email protected], or by 786; Notice of August 12, 2011, 76 FR 50661 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR, 2001 fax to (202) 395–7285. (August 16, 2011); Notice of September 21, Comp., p. 783 (2002), as extended by the 3. This rule does not contain policies 2011, 76 FR 59001 (September, 22, 2011); Notice of August 12, 2011, 76 FR 50661 with Federalism implications as that Notice of November 9, 2011, 76 FR 70319 term is defined in Executive Order (November 10, 2011); Notice of January 19, (August 16, 2011), has continued the 2012, 77 FR 3067 (January 20, 2012). Export Administration Regulations in 13132. ■ effect under the International 4. Pursuant to the Administrative 2. Supplement No. 4 to part 744 is Emergency Economic Powers Act. Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), BIS finds amended: that there is good cause to waive the ■ a. By revising under Jordan, in Rulemaking Requirements opportunity for public comment and alphabetical order, one Jordanian entity; 1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 delay in effective date for this ■ b. By revising under Pakistan, in direct agencies to assess all costs and correction. This action merely corrects alphabetical order, one Pakistani entity; benefits of available regulatory clerical errors in the previous text that and alternatives and, if regulation is have no substantive affect. Because the ■ c. By revising under the United Arab necessary, to select regulatory corrections do not affect the substantive Emirates, in alphabetical order, three approaches that maximize net benefits rights or obligations of any party, the Emirati entities. (including potential economic, public has little interest in the rule, and The revisions read as follows:

SUPPLEMENT NO. 4 TO PART 744—ENTITY LIST

Country Entity License requirement License review policy Federal Register citation

*******

JORDAN ...... Masoud Est. for Medical and Scientific For all items subject to Presumption of denial ...... 77 FR 23114, 4/18/12. Supplies, 74 First Floor, Tla’a Al Ali the EAR. (See § 744.11 Khali Al Salim Street, Amman, Jor- of the EAR). dan 11118.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28252 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENT NO. 4 TO PART 744—ENTITY LIST—Continued

Country Entity License requirement License review policy Federal Register citation

*******

PAKISTAN

*******

Jalaluddin Haqqani, a.k.a., the following For all items subject to Presumption of denial ...... 77 FR 25055, seven aliases: the EAR. (See § 744.11 4/27/12. —General Jalaluddin; of the EAR). —Haqqani Sahib; —Maulama Jalaluddin; —Maulawi Haqqani; —Molvi Sahib; —Mulawi Jalaluddin; and —Mullah Jalaluddin. Miram Shah, Pakistan.

*******

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

*******

Al Maskah Used Car and Spare Parts, For all items subject to Presumption of denial ...... 77 FR 25055, 4/27/12. Maliha Road, Industrial Area 6, the EAR. (See § 744.11 Sharjah, U.A.E. of the EAR).

*******

Feroz Khan, a.k.a., the following three For all items subject to Presumption of denial ...... 77 FR 25055, 4/27/12. aliases: the EAR. (See § 744.11 —Haaje Khan; of the EAR). —Haaji Khan; and —Firoz. Maliha Road, Industrial Area 6, Sharjah, U.A.E.

*******

Zurmat General Trading, For all items subject to Presumption of denial ...... 77 FR 25055, Office No. 205, Platinum Business the EAR. (See § 744.11 4/27/12. Center, Baghdad Street, Al-Nahda 2, of the EAR). Al-Qusais, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box No. 171452, Dubai, U.A.E.; and 1st Street, Industrial Area 4th, Sharjah, U.A.E. (Behind the Toyota Showroom), and P.O. Box 35470, Sharjah, U.A.E.

*******

Dated: May 8, 2012. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ACTION: Final rule. Bernard Kritzer, HUMAN SERVICES SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Director, Office of Exporter Services. Food and Drug Administration Administration (FDA) is amending the [FR Doc. 2012–11555 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] animal drug regulations to reflect a BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 21 CFR Part 520 change of sponsor for five abbreviated new animal drug applications [Docket No. FDA–2012–N–0002] (ANADAs) for griseofulvin powder, levamisole hydrochloride soluble Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; powder, and oxytetracycline Change of Sponsor; Griseofulvin hydrochloride soluble powder from Powder; Levamisole Hydrochloride Teva Animal Health, Inc., to Cross Powder; Oxytetracycline Powder Vetpharm Group, Ltd. AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, DATES: This rule is effective May 14, HHS. 2012.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28253

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dated: May 7, 2012. (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Safety Zones; Steven D. Vaughn, Center for Veterinary Elizabeth Rettie, America’s Cup World Series, East Medicine (HFV–100), Food and Drug Deputy Director, Office of New Animal Drug Passage, Narragansett Bay, RI’’ in the Administration, 7520 Standish Pl., Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine. Federal Register (77 FR 7025). We Rockville, MD 20855, 240–276–8300, [FR Doc. 2012–11382 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] received one comment on the proposed [email protected]. BILLING CODE 4160–01–P rule. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Teva Basis and Purpose Animal Health, Inc., 3915 South 48th St. Ter., St. Joseph, MO 64503, has DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND The legal basis for this rule is 33 informed FDA that it has transferred SECURITY U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. chapter 701, ownership of, and all rights and interest 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR in, ANADA 200–391 for Griseofulvin Coast Guard 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Public Powder, ANADAs 200–146 and 200–247 Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; and for Oxytetracycline Hydrochloride 33 CFR Part 165 Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which Soluble Powder, and ANADAs 200–313 [Docket No. USCG–2011–1172] and 200–386 for Levamisole collectively authorize the Coast Guard Hydrochloride Soluble Pig Wormer and RIN 1625–AA00 to define safety zones. Drench Powder to Cross Vetpharm This rule is necessary to provide for Group Ltd., Broomhill Rd., Tallaght, Safety Zone; America’s Cup World the safety of life and navigation for both Dublin 24, Ireland. Accordingly, the Series, East Passage, Narragansett participants and spectators involved agency is amending the regulations in Bay, RI with the America’s Cup World Series in the vicinity of Newport, RI. part 520 (21 CFR part 520) to reflect the AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. transfer of ownership and a current ACTION: Final rule. Discussion of Comments and Changes format. One comment was received, This rule does not meet the definition SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because supporting this rule. The commenter establishing two temporary safety zones believed the safety zones established by it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’ in the navigable waters of the East Therefore, it is not subject to the this rule will improve navigation safety Passage, Narragansett Bay, Rhode for all mariners and facilitate a safe congressional review requirements in 5 Island, during the America’s Cup World U.S.C. 801–808. America’s Cup World Series event. No Series (ACWS) sailing vessel racing changes were made to the language List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 520 event. contained in the NPRM. Animal drugs. DATES: This rule is effective June 13, Regulatory Analyses Therefore, under the Federal Food, 2012 until 5:00 p.m. on July 1, 2012. We developed this rule after Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under ADDRESSES: Comments and material considering numerous statutes and authority delegated to the Commissioner received from the public, as well as executive orders related to rulemaking. of Food and Drugs and redelegated to documents mentioned in this preamble Below we summarize our analyses the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 as being available in the docket, are part based on 13 of these statutes or CFR part 520 is amended as follows: of docket USCG–2011–1172 and are executive orders. available online by going to http:// PART 520—ORAL DOSAGE FORM www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– Executive Order 12866 and Executive NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 2011–1172 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and Order 13563 ■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is This rule is not a significant part 520 continues to read as follows: also available for inspection or copying regulatory action under section 3(f) of at the Docket Management Facility (M– Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 30), U.S. Department of Transportation, Planning and Review, as supplemented § 520.1100 [Amended] West Building Ground Floor, Room by Executive Order 13563, and does not W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., ■ require an assessment of potential costs 2. In paragraph (b)(2) of § 520.1100, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. remove ‘‘059130’’ and in its place add and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, Order. The Office of Management and ‘‘061623’’. except Federal holidays. ■ 3. In § 520.1242, revise the section Budget has not reviewed it under that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If heading to read as follows: Order. you have questions on this rule, call or We expect the economic impact of § 520.1242 Levamisole. email Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, this rule to be minimal. Although this ■ 4. In § 520.1242a, revise the section Waterways Management Division at regulation may have some impact on the heading to read as set forth below, and Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New public, the potential impact will be in paragraph (b)(4) remove ‘‘059130’’ England, telephone 401–435–2351, minimized for the following reasons: and in its place add ‘‘061623’’. email [email protected]. If Vessels will only be restricted from the you have questions on viewing or East Passage of Narragansett Bay by the § 520.1242a Levamisole powder. submitting material to the docket, call designated safety zone for a maximum * * * * * Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, of six hours per day for a maximum of Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 10 days; there is an alternate route, the § 520.1660d [Amended] 9826. West Passage of Narragansett Bay, that ■ 5. In § 520.1660d, in paragraphs (b)(5), SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: does not add substantial transit time, is (d)(1)(ii)(A)(3), (d)(1)(ii)(B)(3), already routinely used by mariners, and (d)(1)(ii)(C)(3), and (d)(1)(iii)(C), remove Regulatory Information will not be affected by these safety ‘‘059130’’ and in its place add On February 10, 2012, we published zones; many vessels, especially ‘‘061623’’. a notice of proposed rulemaking recreational vessels, may transit in all

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28254 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

portions of the affected waterway except responsiveness to small business. If you 13175, Consultation and Coordination for those areas covered by the safety wish to comment on actions by with Indian Tribal Governments, zones; and vessels may enter or pass employees of the Coast Guard, call because it would not have a substantial through the affected waterway with the 1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). direct effect on one or more Indian permission of the Captain of the Port The Coast Guard will not retaliate tribes, on the relationship between the (COTP) or the COTP’s representative. against small entities that question or Federal Government and Indian tribes, Notifications of the ACWS and complain about this rule or any policy or on the distribution of power and associated safety zones will be made to or action of the Coast Guard. responsibilities between the Federal mariners through the Rhode Island Port Government and Indian tribes. Safety Forum, local Notice to Mariners, Collection of Information event sponsors, and local media well in This rule calls for no new collection Energy Effects advance of the event. of information under the Paperwork We have analyzed this rule under Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Executive Order 13211, Actions Small Entities 3520). Concerning Regulations That Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Federalism (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered Distribution, or Use. We have whether this rule would have a A rule has implications for federalism determined that it is not a ‘‘significant significant economic impact on a under Executive Order 13132, energy action’’ under that order because substantial number of small entities. Federalism, if it has a substantial direct it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises effect on State or local governments and under Executive Order 12866 and is not small businesses, not-for-profit would either preempt State law or likely to have a significant adverse effect organizations that are independently impose a substantial direct cost of on the supply, distribution, or use of owned and operated and are not compliance on them. We have analyzed energy. The Administrator of the Office dominant in their fields, and this rule under that Order and have of Information and Regulatory Affairs governmental jurisdictions with determined that it does not have has not designated it as a significant populations of less than 50,000. implications for federalism. energy action. Therefore, it does not The Coast Guard certifies under 5 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act require a Statement of Energy Effects U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not under Executive Order 13211. have a significant economic impact on The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act a substantial number of small entities. of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Technical Standards This rule may affect the following Federal agencies to assess the effects of The National Technology Transfer entities, some of which might be small their discretionary regulatory actions. In and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 entities: Owners or operators of vessels particular, the Act addresses actions U.S.C. 272) directs agencies to use intending to transit, fish, or anchor in that may result in the expenditure by a voluntary consensus standards in their the East Passage of Narragansett Bay, State, local, or tribal government, in the regulatory activities unless the agency Rhode Island, during the ACWS races. aggregate, or by the private sector of provides Congress, through the Office of The rule will not have a significant $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or Management and Budget, with an economic impact on a substantial more in any one year. Though this rule explanation of why using these number of small entities for the would not result in such expenditure, standards would be inconsistent with following reasons: Vessels will only be we do discuss the effects of this rule applicable law or otherwise impractical. restricted from the designated safety elsewhere in this preamble. Voluntary consensus standards are zone for a maximum of six hours per Taking of Private Property technical standards (e.g., specifications day for a maximum of 10 days; vessels This rule would not cause a taking of of materials, performance, design, or may transit in all portions of the private property or otherwise have operation; test methods; sampling affected waterway except for those areas taking implications under Executive procedures; and related management covered by the safety zones, and vessels Order 12630, Governmental Actions and systems practices) that are developed or may enter or pass through the affected Interference with Constitutionally adopted by voluntary consensus waterway with the permission of the Protected Property Rights. standards bodies. COTP or the COTP’s representative. This rule does not use technical Civil Justice Reform standards. Therefore, we did not Assistance for Small Entities This rule meets applicable standards consider the use of voluntary consensus Under section 213(a) of the Small in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive standards. Business Regulatory Enforcement Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Environment Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), minimize litigation, eliminate in the NPRM we offered to assist small ambiguity, and reduce burden. We have analyzed this rule under entities in understanding this rule so Department of Homeland Security that they can better evaluate its effects Protection of Children Management Directive 023–01 and on them and participate in the We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, rulemaking process. Executive Order 13045, Protection of which guide the Coast Guard in Small businesses may send comments Children from Environmental Health complying with the National on the actions of Federal employees Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not Environmental Policy Act of 1969 who enforce, or otherwise determine an economically significant rule and (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and compliance with, Federal regulations to would not create an environmental risk have concluded this action is one of a the Small Business and Agriculture to health or risk to safety that might category of actions that do not Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman disproportionately affect children. individually or cumulatively have a and the Regional Small Business significant effect on the human Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Indian Tribal Governments environment. Any comments made in Ombudsman evaluates these actions This rule does not have tribal response to the previously published annually and rates each agency’s implications under Executive Order Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for this

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28255

action were also considered in arriving designated representative may be on an Dated: May 2, 2012. at this conclusion. This rule is official patrol vessel or may be on shore V.B. Gifford, Jr., categorically excluded, under figure 2– and will communicate with vessels via Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 1, paragraphs (34)(g) and (34)(h) of the VHF–FM radio or loudhailer. In Port Southeastern New England. Instruction since it involves addition, members of the Coast Guard [FR Doc. 2012–11557 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] establishment of safety zones for marine Auxiliary may be present to inform BILLING CODE 9110–04–P related events. An environmental vessel operators of this regulation. analysis checklist and a categorical (2) Official Patrol Vessels. Official exclusion determination are available in patrol vessels may consist of any Coast DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the docket where indicated under Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or SECURITY ADDRESSES. local law enforcement vessels assigned or approved by the COTP. Coast Guard List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 (3) Patrol Commander. The Coast Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Guard may patrol each safety zone 33 CFR Part 165 (water), Reporting and recordkeeping under the direction of a designated [Docket No. USCG–2012–0315] requirements, Security measures, Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The Waterways. Patrol Commander may be contacted on RIN 1625–AA00 For the reasons discussed in the Channel 16 VHF–FM (156.8 MHz) by Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 the call sign ‘‘PATCOM.’’ Mile 183.0 to 183.5 CFR part 165 as follows: (4) Spectators. All persons and vessels not registered with the event sponsor as AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION participants or official patrol vessels. ACTION: Temporary final rule. AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23 SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 165 as well as the following regulations establishing a temporary safety zone for continues to read as follows: apply to the safety zones established in all waters of the Upper Mississippi Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. conjunction with the America’s Cup River, from mile 183.0 to mile 183.5, in Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; World Series, East Passage, Narragansett the vicinity of the Merchants Bridge and 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. Bay, Newport, RI. These regulations extending the entire width of the river. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of may be enforced for the duration of the This safety zone is needed to protect Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. event. repair workers and vessels transiting the ■ 2. Add a new § 165.T1172 to read as (2) No later than 10 a.m. each day of area on the Upper Mississippi River to follows: the event, the Coast Guard will complete bridge repairs. Entry into this zone is prohibited unless specifically § 165.T1172 Safety Zones; America’s Cup announce via Safety Marine Information Broadcasts and local media which of the authorized by the Captain of the Port World Series, East Passage, Narragansett Upper Mississippi River or a designated Bay, Rhode Island. safety zones, either ‘‘North’’ or ‘‘South’’, representative. (a) Location. The following areas are will be enforced for that day’s America’s Cup World Series races. DATES: Effective Date: This rule is safety zones: effective in the CFR from May 14, 2012 (1) Safety zone ‘‘North’’, an area (3) Vessels may not transit through or until 7 p.m. on December 31, 2012. This bounded by the following coordinates: within the safety zones during periods rule is effective with actual notice for (i) 41–29.806N, 071–21.504W of enforcement without Patrol purposes of enforcement beginning 7 (ii) 41–30.049N, 071–20.908W Commander approval. Vessels permitted a.m. on April 10, 2012. (iii) 41–28.883N, 071–19.952W to transit must operate at a no-wake (iv) 41–28.615N, 071–19.952W speed, in a manner which will not ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this (2) Safety zone ‘‘South’’, an area endanger participants or other crafts in preamble as being available in the bounded by the following coordinates: the event. docket are part of docket USCG–2012– (i) 41–28.432N, 071–21.628W (4) Spectators or other vessels shall 0315 and are available online by going (ii) 41–28.898W, 071–20.892W not anchor, block, loiter, or impede the to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting (iii) 41–29.992W, 071–21.013W movement of event participants or the Advanced Docket Search option on (iv) 41–29.287N, 071–20.406W official patrol vessels in the safety zones the right side of the screen, inserting (v) 41–28.894N, 071–19.958W unless authorized by an official patrol USCG–2012–0315 in the Docket ID box, (vi) 41–28.085N, 071–21.211W vessel. pressing Enter, and then clicking on the (b) Enforcement Period. Vessels will (5) The Patrol Commander may item in the Docket ID column. They are be prohibited from entering these safety control the movement of all vessels in also available for inspection or copying zones during the America’s Cup World the safety zones. When hailed or at the Docket Management Facility (M– Series (ACWS) sailing vessel racing signaled by an official patrol vessel, a 30), U.S. Department of Transportation, events between 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. each vessel shall come to an immediate stop West Building Ground Floor, Room day from Friday, June 22, 2012 to and comply with the lawful directions W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Sunday, July 1, 2012. issued. Failure to comply with a lawful Washington, DC 20590, between 9:00 (c) Definitions. The following direction may result in expulsion from a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through definitions apply to this section: the area, citation for failure to comply, Friday, except Federal holidays. (1) Designated Representative. A or both. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If ‘‘designated representative’’ is any Coast (6) The Patrol Commander may delay you have questions on this temporary Guard commissioned, warrant or petty or terminate the ACWS at any time to rule, call or email Chief Petty Officer officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has ensure safety. Such action may be Ryan Christensen, Sector Upper been designated by the Captain of the justified as a result of weather, traffic Mississippi River Waterways Port, Sector Southeastern New England density, spectator operation or Management Department at telephone (COTP), to act on his or her behalf. The participant behavior. 314–269–2721, email

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28256 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

[email protected]. If you Merchants Bridge in the vicinity of mile does not require an assessment of have questions on viewing the docket, 183.0 to 183.5 on the Upper Mississippi potential costs and benefits under call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, River. After initial repairs, ongoing and section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– intermittent inspections and full repairs 12866 or under section 1 of Executive 9826. will continue and the Coast Guard Order 13563. The Office of Management SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: determined that a temporary safety zone and Budget has not reviewed it under is necessary to protect repair workers that those Orders. Regulatory Information and marine traffic. Establishing this Although this rule will be effective The Coast Guard is issuing this safety zone around the Merchants until December 31, 2012 unless repairs temporary final rule without prior Bridge and repair personnel and and inspections are completed sooner, it notice and opportunity to comment equipment is intended to safeguard will only be enforced for limited time pursuant to authority under section 4(a) against disruption of positioned repair periods during days scheduled for of the Administrative Procedure Act equipment, potential large falling repair work or bridge inspections. By (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision debris, and possible hazards related to enforcing this safety zone for limited authorizes an agency to issue a rule ongoing repairs in and around periods of time throughout the effective without prior notice and opportunity to commercial traffic in the vicinity of mile period, marine traffic will not be comment when the agency for good 183.0 to 183.5 on the Upper Mississippi significantly impacted. Entry into or cause finds that those procedures are River. passage through the safety zone will be ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary Discussion of Rule considered on a case-by-case basis by to the public interest.’’ the Captain of the Port Upper Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast The Coast Guard is establishing a Mississippi or designated temporary safety zone for all waters of Guard finds that good cause exists for representative. Notifications of, and the Upper Mississippi River, from mile not using the NPRM process. On April changes to, the enforcement period will 183.0 to 183.5, in the vicinity of 10, 2012, the Coast Guard received be made via broadcast notice to Merchants Bridge and extending the notice that a marine casualty caused mariners. damage to a railway bridge on April 9, entire width of the river. Entry into this 2012. Immediate repairs are now zone is prohibited to all vessels and Small Entities persons unless specifically authorized required for the bridge. This short notice Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act by the Captain of the Port Upper did not allow for the time needed to (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered Mississippi River. This rule is effective publish a NPRM and provide for a whether this rule would have a comment period. Delaying this rule by from 7 a.m. on April 10, 2012 through significant economic impact on a publishing a NPRM would be contrary 7 p.m. on December 31, 2012, but will substantial number of small entities. to the public interest by unnecessarily only be enforced during intermittent The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises delaying the bridge repairs and the repair and inspection operation periods small businesses, not-for-profit safety zone needed to protect repair that will be announced by broadcast organizations that are independently workers and vessels transiting the area notices to mariners with the greatest owned and operated and are not on the Upper Mississippi River. advance notice possible. Due to the dominant in their fields, and Additionally, delaying the repairs and unpredictability of the Upper governmental jurisdictions with inspections for the NPRM process Mississippi River, National Weather populations of less than 50,000. would unnecessarily impede the flow of Service’s forecasts will be used to The Coast Guard certifies under 5 commercial river traffic and railroad determine the most suitable conditions U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have traffic. This rule is needed to protect for bridge repairs and inspections. a significant economic impact on a repair workers and vessels transiting Advanced notice will be given to the substantial number of small entities. this area on the Upper Mississippi maximum extent possible, but despite This rule will affect the following River. best efforts, the safety zone may be entities, some of which may be small For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. established with minimal notice when entities: the owners or operators of 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that ideal work conditions are identified. vessels intending to transit the Upper good cause exists for making this rule The Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River, mile 183.0 to 183.5 effective less than 30 days after Mississippi River will inform the public during enforcement periods. The publication in the Federal Register. and maritime industry through enforcement periods will be for a Delaying this rule by providing 30 days broadcast notice to mariners of the limited duration. By enforcing this notice would be contrary to the public enforcement periods and changes to the safety zone for a limited duration of interest by unnecessarily delaying the safety zone and its enforcement. bridge repairs and the safety zone time intermittently throughout the needed to protect repair workers and Regulatory Analyses effective period, marine traffic will not vessels transiting the area on the Upper We developed this rule after be significantly impacted. This safety Mississippi River. considering numerous statutes and zone will not have a significant executive orders related to rulemaking. economic impact on a substantial Basis and Purpose Below we summarize our analyses number of small entities because this On April 9, 2012, a marine casualty based on 13 of these statutes or rule will only be enforced during involving a down bound crane barge executive orders. limited periods of time throughout the striking the Merchants Bridge resulted effective period. in structural damage to the bridge, Regulatory Planning and Review If you are a small business entity and reduced vertical clearance, hanging This rule is not a significant are significantly affected by this wreckage, and a North-side railroad regulatory action under section 3(f) of regulation, please contact Chief Petty track closure. Initial repairs to the Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Officer Ryan Christensen, Sector Upper bridge started immediately with Saint Planning and Review, as supplemented Mississippi River Response Department Louis Bridge Construction performing a by Executive Order 13563, Improving at telephone 314–269–2721, email series of repairs and inspections on the Regulation and Regulatory Review, and [email protected].

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28257

Assistance for Small Entities Civil Justice Reform not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Under section 213(a) of the Small This rule meets applicable standards Business Regulatory Enforcement in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Environment Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), We have analyzed this rule under we offer to assist small entities in minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, understanding the rule so that they can which guides the Coast Guard in better evaluate its effects on them and Protection of Children complying with the National participate in the rulemaking process. We have analyzed this rule under Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Small businesses may send comments Executive Order 13045, Protection of (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and on the actions of Federal employees Children from Environmental Health have concluded that there are no factors who enforce, or otherwise determine Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not in this case that would limit the use of compliance with, Federal regulations to an economically significant rule and a categorical exclusion under section the Small Business and Agriculture does not create an environmental risk to 2.B.2 of the Instruction. This rule Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman health or risk to safety that may establishes a safety zone related to and the Regional Small Business disproportionately affect children. effecting bridge repairs and is categorically excluded, under figure 2– Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Indian Tribal Governments Ombudsman evaluates these actions 1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, annually and rates each agency’s This rule does not have tribal from further environmental responsiveness to small businesses. If implications under Executive Order documentation because this rule is not you wish to comment on actions by 13175, Consultation and Coordination expected to result in any significant employees of the Coast Guard, call with Indian Tribal Governments, adverse environmental impact as 1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). because it does not have a substantial described in the National The Coast Guard will not retaliate direct effect on one or more Indian Environmental Policy Act of 1969 against small entities that question or tribes, on the relationship between the (NEPA). complain about this rule or any policy Federal Government and Indian tribes, An environmental analysis checklist or action of the Coast Guard. or on the distribution of power and and a categorical exclusion responsibilities between the Federal determination are available in the Collection of Information Government and Indian tribes. docket where indicated under This rule calls for no new collection Energy Effects ADDRESSES. of information under the Paperwork We have analyzed this rule under List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501— Executive Order 13211, Actions Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 3520). Concerning Regulations That (water), Reporting and recordkeeping Federalism Significantly Affect Energy Supply, requirements, Security measures, Distribution, or Use. We have Waterways. determined that it is not a ‘‘significant A rule has implications for federalism For the reasons discussed in the under Executive Order 13132, energy action’’ under that Order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Federalism, if it has a substantial direct CFR part 165 as follows: effect on State or local governments and under Executive Order 12866 and is not would either preempt State law or likely to have a significant adverse effect PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION impose a substantial direct cost of on the supply, distribution, or use of AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS compliance on them. We have analyzed energy. The Administrator of the Office this rule under that Order and have of Information and Regulatory Affairs ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 determined that it does not have has not designated it as a significant continues to read as follows: energy action. Therefore, it does not implications for federalism. Authority: 33 U.S.C., 1231; 46 U.S.C. require a Statement of Energy Effects Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; under Executive Order 13211. 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Technical Standards Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. The National Technology Transfer ■ Federal agencies to assess the effects of 2. A new temporary § 165.T08–0315 is and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 added to read as follows: their discretionary regulatory actions. In U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use particular, the Act addresses actions voluntary consensus standards in their § 165.T08–0315 Safety Zone; Upper that may result in the expenditure by a regulatory activities unless the agency Mississippi River, Mile 183.0 to 183.5. State, local, or tribal government, in the provides Congress, through the Office of (a) Location. The following area is a aggregate, or by the private sector of Management and Budget, with an safety zone: All waters of the Upper $100,000,000 or more in any one year. explanation of why using these Mississippi River, mile 183.0 to 183.5, Though this rule will not result in such standards would be inconsistent with in the vicinity of the Merchants Bridge, expenditure, we do discuss the effects of applicable law or otherwise impractical. extending the entire width of the this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Voluntary consensus standards are waterway. Taking of Private Property technical standards (e.g., specifications (b) Effective date. This rule is effective of materials, performance, design, or from 7 a.m. on April 10, 2012 through This rule will not affect a taking of operation; test methods; sampling 7 p.m. on December 31, 2012. private property or otherwise have procedures; and related management (c) Periods of Enforcement. This rule taking implications under Executive systems practices) that are developed or will be enforced intermittently during Order 12630, Governmental Actions and adopted by voluntary consensus the effective period when conditions are Interference with Constitutionally standards bodies. This rule does not use conducive for bridge repairs and Protected Property Rights. technical standards. Therefore, we did inspections based on contractor

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28258 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

availability, river forecasts, and copayment amount will automatically Regulatory Flexibility Act observed weather. The Captain of the increase in turn. Port Upper Mississippi River will DATES: Effective Date: This rule is The Secretary hereby certifies that inform the public of the enforcement effective May 14, 2012. this final rule will not have a significant periods and any changes through FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: economic impact on a substantial broadcast notice to mariners. Kristin Cunningham, Director, Business number of small entities as they are (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance Policy, Chief Business Office, 810 defined in the Regulatory Flexibility with the general regulations in § 165.23 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. This final rule of this part, entry into this zone is 20420, (202) 461–1599. (This is not a will temporarily freeze the copayments prohibited unless authorized by the toll-free number.) that certain veterans are required to pay Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An for prescription drugs furnished by VA. River or a designated representative. interim final rule amending VA’s This final rule affects individuals and (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry medical regulations concerning the has no impact on small entities. into or passage through the zone must copayment required for certain Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this request permission from the Captain of medications was published in the final rule is exempt from the initial and the Port Upper Mississippi River or a Federal Register on December 20, 2011 final regulatory flexibility analysis designated representative. The Captain (76 FR 78824). Interested persons were requirements of sections 603 and 604. of the Port Upper Mississippi River may invited to submit comments to the be contacted at 314–269–2332 or VHF– interim final rule on or before February Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 FM 16. 21, 2012, and we received no comments. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (3) All persons and vessels shall Therefore, based on the rationale set comply with the instructions of the direct agencies to assess the costs and forth in the interim final rule, VA is benefits of available regulatory Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi adopting the interim final rule as a final alternatives and, when regulation is River or their designated representative. rule with no changes. Designated Captain of the Port necessary, to select regulatory representatives include United States Administrative Procedure Act approaches that maximize net benefits Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, This document affirms as final, (including potential economic, and petty officers. without change, the interim final rule environmental, public health and safety effects, and other advantages; Dated: April 10, 2012. that is already in effect. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and (d)(3), the distributive impacts; and equity). B.L. Black, Secretary of Veterans Affairs concluded Executive Order 13563 (Improving Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the that there was good cause to dispense Regulation and Regulatory Review) Port Upper Mississippi River. with the opportunity for advance notice emphasizes the importance of [FR Doc. 2012–11539 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] and opportunity for public comment quantifying both costs and benefits, BILLING CODE 9110–04–P and good cause to publish this rule with reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and an immediate effective date. The promoting flexibility. Executive Order Secretary found that it was 12866 (Regulatory Planning and DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS impracticable, unnecessary, and Review) defines a ‘‘significant AFFAIRS contrary to the public interest to delay regulatory action,’’ which requires this regulation for the purpose of 38 CFR Part 17 review by the Office of Management and soliciting advance public comment or to Budget (OMB), as ‘‘any regulatory action RIN 2900–AO28 have a delayed effective date. Increasing that is likely to result in a rule that may: the copayment amount on January 1, (1) Have an annual effect on the Copayments for Medications in 2012 2012, might have caused a significant economy of $100 million or more or financial hardship for some veterans. AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. adversely affect in a material way the Nevertheless, the Secretary invited economy, a sector of the economy, ACTION: Final rule. public comment on the interim final rule but did not receive any comments. productivity, competition, jobs, the SUMMARY: This document affirms as environment, public health or safety, or final, without change, an interim final Effect of Rulemaking State, local, or tribal governments or rule amending the Department of Title 38 of the Code of Federal communities; (2) Create a serious Veterans Affairs (VA) medical Regulations, as revised by this inconsistency or otherwise interfere regulations concerning the copayment rulemaking, represents VA’s with an action taken or planned by required for certain medications. The implementation of its legal authority on another agency; (3) Materially alter the interim final rule froze until December this subject. Other than future budgetary impact of entitlements, 31, 2012, the copayment amount for amendments to this regulation or grants, user fees, or loan programs or the veterans in the VA health care system in governing statutes, no contrary guidance rights and obligations of recipients enrollment priority categories 2 through or procedures are authorized. All thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy 6 at the 2011 level, which was $8. The existing or subsequent VA guidance issues arising out of legal mandates, the interim final rule also froze until must be read to conform with this President’s priorities, or the principles December 31, 2012, the maximum rulemaking if possible or, if not set forth in this Executive Order.’’ annual copayment amount for possible, such guidance is superseded enrollment priority categories 2 through by this rulemaking. The economic, interagency, 6, which was $960. On January 1, 2013, budgetary, legal, and policy the copayment amounts may increase Paperwork Reduction Act implications of this regulatory action based on the prescription drug This final rule contains no collections have been examined and it has been component of the Medical Consumer of information under the Paperwork determined not to be a significant Price Index (CPI–P). If the copayment Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– regulatory action under Executive Order increases, the maximum annual 3521). 12866.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:32 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28259

Unfunded Mandates Dated: May 8, 2012. international mail. The UPU Convention Robert C. McFetridge, and regulations are consistent with the The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Director of Regulation Policy and ICAO Technical Instructions for the Safe of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that Management, Office of General Counsel, Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air agencies prepare an assessment of Department of Veterans Affairs. (Technical Instructions). The Technical anticipated costs and benefits before Instructions concerning the Transport of issuing any rule that may result in PART 17—MEDICAL Dangerous Goods by Post do not permit expenditure by State, local, and tribal ■ Accordingly, the interim final rule ‘‘dangerous goods’’ as defined by the governments, in the aggregate, or by the ICAO Technical Instructions in private sector, of $100 million or more amending 38 CFR part 17 that was published in the Federal Register at 76 international mail. The prohibition on (adjusted annually for inflation) in any mailing lithium batteries and cells given year. This rule will have no such FR 78824 on December 20, 2011, is adopted as a final rule without change. internationally also applies to mail sent effect on State, local, and tribal by commercial air transportation to and governments, or on the private sector. [FR Doc. 2012–11486 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] from an APO, FPO, or DPO location. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance BILLING CODE 8320–01–P This final rule describes the Numbers prohibitions established for mailpieces containing lithium metal or lithium-ion The Catalog of Federal Domestic POSTAL SERVICE cells or batteries and applies regardless Assistance program number and title for of quantity, size, watt hours, and this rule are as follows: 64.005, Grants 39 CFR Part 111 whether the cells or batteries are packed to States for Construction of State Home Mailings of Lithium Batteries in equipment, with equipment, or Facilities; 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation without equipment. Centers; 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. We will also revise and renumber Care; 64.009, Veterans Medical Care ACTION: Final rule. Exhibit 601.10.20.7 to reflect ‘‘watt-hour Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing ratings’’ instead of ‘‘lithium content’’ for Home Care; 64.011, Veterans Dental SUMMARY: The Postal Service will revise secondary lithium-ion batteries when Care; 64.012, Veterans Prescription the Mailing Standards of the United describing maximum quantity limits. In Service; 64.013, Veterans Prosthetic States Postal Service, Domestic Mail addition, the Postal Service has moved ® Appliances; 64.014, Veterans State Manual (DMM ) 601.10.20, to the lithium battery standards as it Domiciliary Care; 64.015, Veterans State incorporate standards that prohibit the relates to international, APO, FPO or Nursing Home Care; 64.016, Veterans outbound international mailing of DPO locations to the International Mail State Hospital Care; 64.018, Sharing lithium batteries and devices containing Manual (IMM®). Specialized Medical Resources; 64.019, lithium batteries. This prohibition also The Postal Service will also make Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and extends to the mailing of lithium parallel changes to other USPS Drug Dependence; 64.022, Veterans batteries to and from an APO, FPO, or publications that make reference to the Home Based Primary Care; and 64.024, DPO location. However, this prohibition mailing of lithium batteries such as VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per does not apply to lithium batteries Publication 52, Hazardous, Restricted, Diem Program. authorized under DMM 601.10.20 when and Perishable Mail. mailed within the United States or its Signing Authority territories. List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111 The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or DATES: Effective Date: May 16, 2012. Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service. designee, approved this document and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan authorized the undersigned to sign and Hall at 202–268–6010 or Margaret Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is submit the document to the Office of the Falwell at 202–268–2576. amended as follows: Federal Register for publication SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Postal PART 111—[AMENDED] electronically as an official document of Service is taking this action to bring its the Department of Veterans Affairs. John international mailing standards into ■ 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR R. Gingrich, Chief of Staff, Department compliance with international standards part 111 continues to read as follows: of Veterans Affairs, approved this for the acceptance of dangerous goods in Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301– document on May 7, 2012 for international mail. publication. 307; 18 U.S.C. 1692–1737; 39 U.S.C. 101, International standards have recently 401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001–3011, 3201– List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17 been the subject of discussion by the 3219, 3403–3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632, International Civil Aviation 3633, and 5001. Administrative practice and Organization (ICAO) and the Universal procedure; Alcohol abuse; Alcoholism; Postal Union (UPU), and the Postal ■ 2. Revise the following sections of the Claims; Day care; Dental health; Drug Service anticipates that on January 1, Mailing Standards of the United States abuse; Foreign relations; Government 2013, customers will be able to mail Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual contracts; Grant programs—health; specific quantities of lithium batteries (DMM): Grant programs—veterans; Health care; internationally (including to and from Mailing Standards of the United States Health facilities; Health professions; an APO, FPO, or DPO location) when Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual Health records; Homeless; Medical and the batteries are properly installed in (DMM) dental schools; Medical devices; the personal electronic devices they are Medical research; Mental health intended to operate. * * * * * programs; Nursing homes; Philippines; Until such time that a less restrictive 600 Basic Standards For All Mailing Reporting and recordkeeping policy can be implemented consistent Services requirements; Scholarships and with international standards, and in fellowships; Travel and transportation accordance with UPU Convention, 601 Mailability expenses; Veterans. lithium batteries are not permitted in * * * * *

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28260 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

10.0 Hazardous Materials and cushioned to prevent movement or b. Installed In Equipment. The * * * * * damage. following additional restrictions apply 3. The shipment must be contained in to the mailing of secondary cells or 10.20 Miscellaneous Hazardous a strong enough sealed package to batteries properly installed in Materials (Hazard Class 9) prevent crushing of the package or equipment they operate: * * * * * exposure of the contents during normal 1. The batteries installed in the handling in the mail. equipment must be protected from 10.20.5 Primary Lithium (Non- 4. The outside of the package must be damage and short circuit. Rechargeable) Cells and Batteries marked on the address side ‘‘Package 2. The equipment must be equipped [Revise 10.20.5 as follows:] Contains Primary Lithium Batteries.’’ with an effective means of preventing it Small consumer-type primary lithium 5. The mailpiece must not exceed 11 from being turned on or activated. cells or batteries (lithium metal or pounds. 3. The equipment must be cushioned lithium alloy) like those used to power d. Mailed Without Equipment. The to prevent movement or damage and be cameras and flashlights are mailable following additional restrictions apply contained in a strong enough sealed domestically under the following to the mailing of primary cells or package to prevent crushing of the conditions. Mailing batteries batteries without equipment: package or exposure of the contents internationally, or to and from an APO, 1. The primary lithium cells and during normal handling in the mail. The FPO, or DPO destination is prohibited batteries must be mailed in ‘‘the shipment must be mailed in a strong regardless of mail class. See IMM 136 originally sealed packaging.’’ outer package. for details. 2. The sealed packages of batteries c. Mailed With Equipment. The a. General. The following restrictions must be separated and cushioned to following additional restrictions apply apply to the mailability of all primary prevent short circuit, movement, or to the mailing of secondary cells or lithium (non-rechargeable) cells and damage. batteries shipped with (but not installed 3. The shipment must be contained in batteries: in) the device or equipment being a strong enough sealed package to 1. Each cell must contain no more mailed: prevent crushing of the package or than 1.0 gram (g) of lithium content per 1. The shipment cannot contain more exposure of the contents during normal cell. batteries than the number needed to handling in the mail. 2. Each battery must contain no more operate the device, up to three batteries. 4. They may only be sent via surface than 2.0 g aggregate lithium content per 2. The secondary lithium cells and transportation. battery. batteries must be package separately and 5. The outside of the package must be cushioned to prevent movement or 3. Each cell or battery must meet the marked on the address side ‘‘Surface requirements of each test in the UN damage. Mail Only, Primary Lithium Batteries— 3. The shipment must be contained in Manual of Tests and Criteria, Part III, Forbidden for Transportation Aboard and subsection 38.3 as referenced in a strong enough sealed package to Passenger Aircraft.’’ prevent crushing of the package or DOTs hazardous materials regulation at 6. The mailpiece must not exceed 5 exposure of the contents during normal 49 CFR 171.7. pounds. 4. All outer packages must have a handling in the mail. complete delivery and return address. 10.20.6 Secondary Lithium-ion 4. The outside of the package must be b. Installed In Equipment. The (Rechargeable) Cells and Batteries marked on the address side ‘‘Package following additional restrictions apply [Revise 10.20.6 as follows:] Contains Lithium-ion Batteries (no to the mailing of primary cells or Small consumer-type lithium-ion lithium metal).’’ batteries properly installed in the cells and batteries like those used to d. Mailed Without Equipment. The equipment they operate: power cell phones and laptop following additional restrictions apply 1. The batteries installed in the computers are mailable domestically to the mailing of secondary cells or equipment must be protected from under the following conditions. Mailing batteries without equipment: damage and short circuit. batteries internationally, or to and from 1. The secondary lithium cells and 2. The equipment must be equipped an APO, FPO, or DPO destinations is batteries must be mailed in ‘‘the with an effective means of preventing it prohibited regardless of mail class. See originally sealed packaging’’ and no from being turned on or activated. IMM 136 for details. more than three batteries. 3. The equipment must be cushioned a. General. The following additional 2. The sealed packages of batteries to prevent movement or damage and be restrictions apply to the mailability of must be separated and cushioned to contained in a strong enough sealed all secondary (rechargeable) lithium-ion prevent short circuit, movement, or package to prevent crushing of the cells and batteries: damage. package or exposure of the contents 1. The lithium content must not 3. The shipment must be contained in during normal handling in the mail. exceed 20 Wh (Watt-hour rating) per a strong enough sealed package to 4. The mailpiece must not exceed 11 cell. prevent crushing of the package or pounds. 2. The total aggregate lithium content exposure of the contents during normal c. Mailed With Equipment. The must not exceed 100 Wh per battery. handling in the mail. following additional restrictions apply 3. Each cell or battery must meet the 4. The outside of the package must be to the mailing of primary cells or requirements of each test in the UN marked on the address side ‘‘Package batteries shipped with (but not installed Manual of Tests and Criteria, Part III, Contains Lithium-ion Batteries (no in) the device or equipment being and subsection 38.3 as referenced in lithium metal).’’ mailed: DOTs hazardous materials regulation at * * * * * 1. The shipment cannot contain more 49 CFR 171.7. batteries than the number needed to 4. The mailpiece must not contain 10.20.7 Damaged or Recalled Batteries operate the device. more than 3 batteries. * * * * * 2. The primary lithium cells and 5. All outer packages must have a [Delete Exhibit 10.20.7, Lithium batteries must be packaged separately complete delivery and return address. Battery Mailability Chart, in its entirety.]

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28261

[Insert new item 10.20.8 and Exhibit 10.20.8 Lithium Battery Mailability metal and lithium alloy batteries, or 10.20.8 as follows:] secondary lithium-ion batteries, see To determine the mailability of exhibit below. For detailed information primary (non-rechargeable) lithium refer to 10.20.5 and 10.20.6 respectively.

EXHIBIT 10.20.8—LITHIUM BATTERY MAILABILITY CHART

Primary Lithium Batteries 12 Surface transportation Air transportation Mailpiece weight limit

Small non-rechargeable consumer-type batteries

Contained in (properly installed in equipment) ..... Mailable ...... Mailable ...... 11 lb. Packed with equipment but not installed in equip- Mailable ...... Mailable ...... 11 lb. ment. Without the equipment they operate (individual Mailable ...... Prohibited ...... 5 lb. batteries).

1. Each primary cell must not contain more than 1g lithium content. 2. Each primary battery must not contain more than 2g lithium content.

Secondary Lithium-ion Batteries 34 Surface transportation Air transportation Mailpiece battery limit

Small rechargeable consumer-type batteries

Contained in (properly installed in equipment) ..... Mailable ...... Mailable ...... No more than 3 batteries. Packed with equipment but not installed in equip- Mailable ...... Mailable ...... No more than 3 batteries. ment. Without the equipment they operate (individual Mailable ...... Mailable ...... No more than 3 batteries. batteries).

3. Each secondary cell must not contain more than 20 Wh (Watt-hour rating) per cell. 4. Each secondary battery must not exceed 100 Wh per battery.

* * * * * to satisfy the requirements related to Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market We will publish an appropriate antibacksliding. Additionally, the Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect proposed revision makes clarifying FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: these changes. changes to regulations that are not Gerallyn Duke, (215) 814–2084, or by Stanley F. Mires, related to NSR Reform. This action is email at [email protected]. Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice. being taken under the Clean Air Act SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (CAA). [FR Doc. 2012–11459 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] I. Background BILLING CODE 7710–12–P DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is Throughout this document, whenever effective on June 13, 2012. ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean ADDRESSES: EPA has established a EPA. On January 20, 2012 (77 FR 2937), ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA published a notice of proposed AGENCY docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0925. All rulemaking (NPR) for the 40 CFR Part 52 documents in the docket are listed in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The the www.regulations.gov Web site. NPR proposed approval of a SIP [EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0925; FRL–9669–3] revision pertaining to preconstruction Although listed in the electronic docket, permitting requirements under some information is not publicly Approval and Promulgation of Air Pennsylvania’s nonattainment NSR available, i.e., confidential business Quality Implementation Plans; program. The formal SIP revision was information (CBI) or other information Pennsylvania; Nonattainment New submitted by the Pennsylvania Source Review Rules whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Department of Environmental Protection Certain other material, such as AGENCY: Environmental Protection (PA DEP) on August 9, 2007. copyrighted material, is not placed on Agency (EPA). The history of this SIP, the NSR the Internet and will be publicly ACTION: Final rule. Reform Program, and South Coast Air available only in hard copy form. Quality Management District v. EPA 1 SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Publicly available docket materials are (South Coast) decision regarding Implementation Plan (SIP) revision available either electronically through antibacksliding provisions of the Eight- submitted by the Commonwealth of www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Pennsylvania on August 9, 2007. This public inspection during normal Quality Standard (69 FR 23951), are revision pertains to the preconstruction business hours at the Air Protection described in the NPR. The purpose of permitting requirements of Division, U.S. Environmental Protection this SIP revision is to incorporate Pennsylvania’s nonattainment New Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Source Review (NSR) program. The Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 1 In 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for revision is intended to update Copies of the State submittal are the District of Columbia Circuit found in et al., 472 available at the Pennsylvania F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) that NSR is a control Pennsylvania’s nonattainment NSR measure and to weaken its requirements under the regulations to meet EPA’s 2002 NSR Department of Environmental SIP would constitute impermissible backsliding Reform regulations (NSR Reform), and Protection, Bureau of Air Quality under the CAA.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28262 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

changes to Pennsylvania’s IV. Statutory and Executive Order costs on tribal governments or preempt nonattainment NSR rules made as a Reviews tribal law. result of EPA’s 2002 NSR Reform, and A. General Requirements B. Submission to Congress and the to address the antibacksliding Comptroller General provisions of the South Coast decision. Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission In summary, the current NSR Reform The Congressional Review Act, 5 that complies with the provisions of the U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Rules: (1) Provide a new method for CAA and applicable Federal regulations. determining baseline actual emissions; Business Regulatory Enforcement 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (2) adopt an actual-to-projected actual Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, methodology for determining whether a that before a rule may take effect, the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, agency promulgating the rule must major modification has occurred; and provided that they meet the criteria of submit a rule report, which includes a (3) allow major stationary sources to the CAA. Accordingly, this action copy of the rule, to each House of the comply with Plantwide Applicability merely approves state law as meeting Congress and to the Comptroller General Limits (PALs) to avoid having a Federal requirements and does not of the United States. EPA will submit a significant emissions increase that impose additional requirements beyond report containing this action and other triggers the requirements of the major those imposed by state law. For that required information to the U.S. Senate, NSR program (68 FR 63021 and 72 FR reason, this action: the U.S. House of Representatives, and • 32526). The 2002 NSR Reform Rules Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory the Comptroller General of the United require that state agencies adopt and action’’ subject to review by the Office States prior to publication of the rule in submit revisions to their SIP permitting of Management and Budget under the Federal Register. A major rule programs implementing the minimum Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, cannot take effect until 60 days after it program elements of the 2002 NSR October 4, 1993); is published in the Federal Register. Reform Rules no later than January 2, • Does not impose an information This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 2006. In addition, as a result of the collection burden under the provisions defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). South Coast decision, all one-hour of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 C. Petitions for Judicial Review ozone NAAQS major NSR requirements U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • must remain in place where Is certified as not having a Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, classifications under the newer eight- significant economic impact on a petitions for judicial review of this hour ozone standard imposed less substantial number of small entities action must be filed in the United States stringent NSR requirements. under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Court of Appeals for the appropriate (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • circuit by July 13, 2012. Filing a petition II. Summary of SIP Revision Does not contain any unfunded for reconsideration by the Administrator mandate or significantly or uniquely of this final rule does not affect the The SIP submittal consists of changes affect small governments, as described to 25 Pa. Code Chapter 121, General finality of this action for the purposes of in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act judicial review nor does it extend the Provisions, and 25 Pa. Code Chapter of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 127, Construction, Modification, • time within which a petition for judicial Does not have Federalism review may be filed, and shall not Reactivation, and Operation of Sources. implications as specified in Executive postpone the effectiveness of such rule This action will update Pennsylvania’s Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, or action. This action pertaining to nonattainment NSR regulations as 1999); Pennsylvania’ nonattainment NSR • previously approved on December 9, Is not an economically significant program may not be challenged later in 1997 (62 FR 64722). It will incorporate regulatory action based on health or proceedings to enforce its requirements. for the first time the 2002 ‘‘NSR safety risks subject to Executive Order (See section 307(b)(2).) Reform’’ provisions into Pennsylvania’s 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); nonattainment NSR program, and will • Is not a significant regulatory action List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52 subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR satisfy the requirements of the DC Environmental protection, Air 28355, May 22, 2001); Circuit Court decision in South Coast pollution control, Carbon monoxide, • Is not subject to requirements of regarding antibacksliding. The proposed Incorporation by reference, Section 12(d) of the National regulations were adopted by Administrative practice and procedure, Technology Transfer and Advancement Pennsylvania and became effective on Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because May 19, 2007. Other specific Intergovernmental relations, Lead, application of those requirements would requirements of the regulations and the Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate be inconsistent with the CAA; and rationale for EPA’s proposed action are matter, Reporting and recordkeeping • Does not provide EPA with the explained in the NPR and will not be requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile discretionary authority to address, as restated here. No public comments were organic compounds. received on the NPR. appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using Dated: April 19, 2012. III. Final Action practicable and legally permissible W.C. Early, methods, under Executive Order 12898 Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. EPA is approving the August 9, 2007 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). SIP revision, amending Pennsylvania’s In addition, this rule does not have 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: NSR construction, modification, tribal implications as specified by PART 52—[AMENDED] reactivation and operation permit Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, programs at 25 Pa. Code Section 121.1 November 9, 2000), because the SIP is and 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127, as a not approved to apply in Indian country ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. located in Pennsylvania, and EPA notes continues to read as follows: that it will not impose substantial direct Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28263

Subpart NN—Pennsylvania ■ b. Revising the existing entries for The amendments read as follows: Title 25, Sections 121.1, 127.13, ■ 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph 127.201, 127.202, 127.203, 127.204 § 52.2020 Identification of plan. (c)(1) is amended by: through 127.210, 127.212, 127.213, * * * * * ■ a. Adding entries for Title 25, Sections 127.215, and 127.217. (c) * * * 127.201a, 127.203a, and 127.218 in ■ c. Removing the entries for Sections alphanumerical order. 127.211 and 127.214. (1) * * *

State effective Additional explanation/§ 52.2063 State citation Title/subject date EPA approval date citation

Title 25—Environmental Protection

Article III—Air Resources

Chapter 121—General Provisions

Section 121.1 ...... Definitions ...... 5/19/07 5/14/2012 [Insert page number Added 36 terms; Revised 9 where the document begins]. terms; Removed 5 terms.

*******

Chapter 127—Construction, Modification, Reactivation and Operation of Sources

*******

Subchapter B—Plan Approval Requirements

Section 127.13 ...... Extensions ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins].

*******

Subchapter E—New Source Review

Section 127.201 ...... General requirements ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Paragraphs (d) through (f) where the document begins]. added; paragraph(c) revised. Section 127.201a ...... Measurements, abbreviations 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number New. and acronyms. where the document begins]. Section 127.202 ...... Effective Date ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.203 ...... Facilities subject to special per- 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Paragraphs (a) through (f) re- mit requirements. where the document begins]. vised. Section 127.203a ...... Applicability determination ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number New. where the document begins]. Section 127.204 ...... Emissions subject to this chapter 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.205 ...... Special permit requirements ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.206 ...... ERC general requirements ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.207...... Creditable emissions decrease 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. or ERC generation and cre- where the document begins]. ation. Section 127.208 ...... ERC use and transfer require- 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. ments. where the document begins]. Section 127.209 ...... ERC registry system ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.210 ...... Offset ratios ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.212 ...... Portable facilities ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.213 ...... Construction and demolition ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins]. Section 127.215 ...... Reactivation ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. where the document begins].

******* Section 127.217 ...... Clean Air Act Titles III–V appli- 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number Revised. cability. where the document begins]. Section 127.218 ...... PALs ...... 5/19/07 5/14/12 [Insert page number New. where the document begins].

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:07 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28264 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

State effective Additional explanation/§ 52.2063 State citation Title/subject date EPA approval date citation

*******

* * * * * copyrighted material, is not placed on States of Ohio and West Virginia to [FR Doc. 2012–11461 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the Internet and will be publicly submit, for the Steubenville-Weirton BILLING CODE 6560–50–P available only in hard copy form. Area, an attainment demonstration and Publicly available docket materials are associated RACM (including reasonably available either electronically through available control technology (RACT)), a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for reasonable further progress plan, AGENCY public inspection during normal contingency measures, and any other business hours at the Air Protection planning SIPs related to attainment of 40 CFR Part 52 Division, U.S. Environmental Protection the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended [EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0556; FRL-9669–5 ] Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, for so long as the Area continues to meet Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. If EPA Approval and Promulgation of Air FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In subsequently determines that this Area Quality Implementation Plans; West Region III, Asrah Khadr, Office of Air violates the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 Virginia; Ohio; Determination of Clean Program Planning, Environmental NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of Data for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 the specific requirements, set forth at 40 Particulate Standard for the Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103– CFR 51.1004(c), would no longer exist Steubenville-Weirton Area 2023. The telephone number is (215) and this area would thereafter have to address the pertinent requirements. AGENCY: Environmental Protection 814–2071. Ms. Khadr can also be This action, does not constitute a Agency (EPA). reached via electronic mail at [email protected]. In Region V, redesignation of the Steubenville- ACTION: Final rule. Carolyn Persoon, Air Planning and Weirton Area to attainment of the 24- SUMMARY: EPA is making a final Maintenance Section, Air Programs hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS under section determination regarding the two-state Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 107(d)(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Steubenville-Weirton, Ohio-West Protection Agency, Region V, 77 West Further, this action does not involve Virginia nonattainment area (hereafter Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois approving maintenance plans for the referred to as the ‘‘Steubenville-Weirton 60604–3507. Ms. Persoon’s telephone Area as required under section 175A of Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) for the 2006 24-hour number is (312) 353–8290. Ms. Persoon the CAA, nor does it find that the Area fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National can also be reached via electronic mail has met all other requirements for Ambient Air Quality Standard at [email protected]. redesignation. Even after a (NAAQS). EPA is determining that the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: determination of attainment by EPA, the Steubenville-Weirton Area has attained designation status of the Steubenville- I. What action is EPA taking? Weirton Area remains nonattainment for the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. This II. What is the effect of this action? determination is based upon complete, III. Summary of Public Comment and EPA the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS until quality assured, and certified ambient Response such time as EPA determines that the air monitoring data showing that this IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Area meets the CAA requirements for area has monitored attainment of the 24- redesignation to attainment and takes I. What action is EPA taking? action to redesignate the Steubenville- hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 2008–2010 data. EPA’s determination EPA is making a final determination Weirton Area. that the Steubenville-Weirton Area has suspends the obligation of Ohio and III. Summary of Public Comment and attained the 24-hour 2006 PM West Virginia to submit, with respect to 2.5 EPA Response NAAQS. This determination is based this area, attainment demonstrations, Comment: An Ohio resident associated reasonably available control upon complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data expressed concern for the air quality in measures (RACM), reasonable further the Steubenville-Weirton Area. The progress plans, contingency measures, showing that this area has monitored attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS resident perceives the air quality to be and other planning State poor and thus questioned how this Area Implementation Plans (SIPs) related to based on data for 2008–2010. On October 4, 2011 (76 FR 61291), will be free from requirements to create attainment of the 2006 PM standard 2.5 EPA proposed its determination of plans for air quality improvement. The for so long as the Area continues to meet attainment for the Steubenville-Weirton resident also proposed that areas with the 24-hour 2006 PM NAAQS. 2.5 Area. A discussion of the rationale air quality problems should be subject DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is behind this determination and the effect to more stringent standards. effective on June 13, 2012. of the determination were included in Response: Since 2006, the States of ADDRESSES: EPA has established a the notice of proposed rulemaking Ohio and West Virginia, as well as the docket for this action under Docket ID (NPR). One adverse comment was Federal government, have implemented Number EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0556. All submitted in response to EPA’s October various measures that have resulted in documents in the docket are listed in 4, 2011 NPR (76 FR 61291). A summary cleaner air in the Steubenville-Weirton the www.regulations.gov Web site. of the comment and EPA’s response is Area, including, the nitrogen oxides Although listed in the electronic docket, provided in section III of this document. (NOX) SIP Call which addressed some information is not publicly pollutants that can result in acid rain; available, i.e., confidential business II. What is the effect of this action? mobile source engine standards leading information (CBI) or other information Under the provisions of EPA’s PM2.5 to a decrease in NOX and direct PM2.5; whose disclosure is restricted by statute. implementation rule (40 CFR fuel standards decreasing sulfur dioxide Certain other material, such as 51.1004(c)), the requirements for the (SO2); as well as rules affecting SO2 and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28265

NOX from power plants. These and • Is not subject to requirements of reference, Particulate matter, Sulfur other measures have resulted in a Section 12(d) of the National oxides, Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and decrease in monitored PM2.5 Technology Transfer and Advancement recordkeeping requirements. concentrations in the Steubenville- Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Dated: February 15, 2012. Weirton Area. Questions regarding the application of those requirements would W.C. Early, stringency of existing air standards are be inconsistent with the CAA; and not relevant to this determination. The • Does not provide EPA with the Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. sole concern of this determination is discretionary authority to address, as Dated: April 18, 2012. whether the Area has attained the 2006 appropriate, disproportionate human Susan Hedman, health or environmental effects, using PM2.5 24-hour standard. Since 2008, Regional Administrator, Region V. based on complete, quality assured and practicable and legally permissible certified data, this Area has monitored methods, under Executive Order 12898 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: attainment of that standard, set by EPA (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). PART 52—[AMENDED] to protect human health and the In addition, this rule does not have environment. The Area continues to tribal implications as specified by attain the standard. At this time, Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 therefore, no additional attainment November 9, 2000), because the SIP is continues to read as follows: planning or measures related to not approved to apply in Indian country Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour located in the state, and EPA notes that standard are needed. In the future, it will not impose substantial direct Subpart KK—Ohio should EPA determine that a violation costs on tribal governments or preempt of the standard occurs, the States of tribal law. ■ 2. In § 52.1880, paragraph (r) is added Ohio and West Virginia will then be B. Submission to Congress and the to read as follows: required to submit an attainment Comptroller General demonstration, associated RACM, a § 52.1880 Control strategy: Particulate matter. reasonable further progress plan, The Congressional Review Act, 5 contingency measures, and other U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small * * * * * Business Regulatory Enforcement planning SIPs related to attainment of (r) Determination of Attainment. EPA Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides the standard. has determined, as of May 14, 2012, that that before a rule may take effect, the based on 2008 to 2010 ambient air IV. Statutory and Executive Order agency promulgating the rule must quality data, the Steubenville-Weirton Reviews submit a rule report, which includes a nonattainment area has attained the 24- copy of the rule, to each House of the A. General Requirements hour 2006 PM NAAQS. This Congress and to the Comptroller General 2.5 determination, in accordance with 40 This action merely makes an of the United States. EPA will submit a CFR 52.1004(c), suspends the attainment determination based on air report containing this action and other requirements for this area to submit an quality data and does not impose any required information to the U.S. Senate, attainment demonstration, associated additional requirements. For that the U.S. House of Representatives, and reasonably available control measures, a reason, this action: the Comptroller General of the United • reasonable further progress plan, Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory States prior to publication of the rule in contingency measures, and other action’’ subject to review by the Office the Federal Register. A major rule planning SIPs related to attainment of of Management and Budget under cannot take effect until 60 days after it the standard for as long as this area Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, is published in the Federal Register. continues to meet the 24-hour 2006 October 4, 1993); This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as • PM NAAQS. Does not impose an information defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 2.5 collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 C. Petitions for Judicial Review Subpart XX—West Virginia U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, • Is certified as not having a petitions for judicial review of this ■ 3. In § 52.2526, paragraph (g) is added significant economic impact on a action must be filed in the United States to read as follows: substantial number of small entities Court of Appeals for the appropriate § 52.2526 Control strategy: Particulate under the Regulatory Flexibility Act circuit by July 13, 2012. Filing a petition matter. (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); for reconsideration by the Administrator * * * * * • Does not contain any unfunded of this final rule does not affect the mandate or significantly or uniquely finality of this action for the purposes of (g) Determination of Attainment. EPA affect small governments, as described judicial review nor does it extend the has determined, as of May 14, 2012, that in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act time within which a petition for judicial based on 2008 to 2010 ambient air of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); review may be filed, and shall not quality data, the Steubenville-Weirton • Does not have Federalism postpone the effectiveness of such rule nonattainment area has attained the 24- implications as specified in Executive or action. This clean data determination hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. This Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, for the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for determination, in accordance with 40 1999); the Steubenville-Weirton Area may not CFR 52.1004(c), suspends the • Is not an economically significant be challenged later in proceedings to requirements for this area to submit an regulatory action based on health or enforce its requirements. (See section attainment demonstration, associated safety risks subject to Executive Order 307(b)(2).) reasonably available control measures, a 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); reasonable further progress plan, • Is not a significant regulatory action List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 contingency measures, and other subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Environmental protection, Air planning SIPs related to attainment of 28355, May 22, 2001); pollution control, Incorporation by the standard for as long as this area

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28266 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

continues to meet the 24-hour 2006 excluding legal holidays. The Docket proper receipt by EPA, you must PM2.5 NAAQS. Facility telephone number is (703) 305– identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– [FR Doc. 2012–11184 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 5805. OPP–2008–0039 in the subject line on BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the first page of your submission. All Mark Dow, Registration Division objections and requests for a hearing (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, must be in writing, and must be ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 received by the Hearing Clerk on or AGENCY Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, before July 13, 2012. Addresses for mail DC 20460–0001; telephone number: and hand delivery of objections and 40 CFR Part 180 (703) 305–5533; email address: hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b). [EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0039; FRL–9344–2] [email protected]. In addition to filing an objection or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Acetone; Exemption From the hearing request with the Hearing Clerk Requirement of a Tolerance I. General Information as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing that does not AGENCY: Environmental Protection A. Does this action apply to me? contain any CBI for inclusion in the Agency (EPA). You may be potentially affected by public docket. Information not marked ACTION: Final rule. this action if you are an agricultural confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 producer, food manufacturer, or may be disclosed publicly by EPA SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an pesticide manufacturer. Potentially without prior notice. Submit a copy of exemption from the requirement of a affected entities may include, but are your non-CBI objection or hearing tolerance for residues of acetone (67– not limited to: request, identified by docket ID number 64–1) when used as an inert ingredient • Crop production (NAICS code 111). EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0039, by one of as a solvent or co-solvent, 40 CFR • Animal production (NAICS code the following methods: 180.930, in pesticides products applied 112). • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// to animals. Whitmire Micro-Gen (now • Food manufacturing (NAICS code www.regulations.gov. Follow the online affiliated with BASF Corp.; 3568 Tree 311). instructions for submitting comments. Court Industrial Blvd., St. Louis, MO • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS • Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 63112) submitted a petition to EPA code 32532). (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), under the Federal Food, Drug, and This listing is not intended to be Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting exhaustive, but rather provides a guide Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, establishment of an exemption from the for readers regarding entities likely to be DC 20460–0001. • requirement of a tolerance. This affected by this action. Other types of Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public regulation eliminates the need to entities not listed in this unit could also Docket (7502P), Environmental establish a maximum permissible level be affected. The North American Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One for residues of acetone. Industrial Classification System Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries DATES: This regulation is effective May (NAICS) codes have been provided to 14, 2012. Objections and requests for assist you and others in determining are only accepted during the Docket hearings must be received on or before whether this action might apply to Facility’s normal hours of operation July 13, 2012, and must be filed in certain entities. If you have any (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through accordance with the instructions questions regarding the applicability of Friday, excluding legal holidays). provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also this action to a particular entity, consult Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY the person listed under FOR FURTHER Docket Facility telephone number is INFORMATION). INFORMATION CONTACT. (703) 305–5805. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a B. How can I get electronic access to docket for this action under docket other related information? II. Petition for Exemption identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– You may access a frequently updated In the Federal Register of February 6, OPP–2008–0039. All documents in the electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 2008 (73 FR 6966) (FRL–8350–9), EPA docket are listed in the docket index through the Government Printing issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA available at http://www.regulations.gov. Office’s e-CFR site at http:// section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing Although listed in the index, some ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text- the filing of a pesticide petition (PP information is not publicly available, idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/ 7E7239) by Whitmire Micro-Gen (now e.g., Confidential Business Information 40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test affiliated with BASF Corp.; 3568 Tree (CBI) or other information whose guidelines referenced in this document Court Industrial Blvd., St. Louis, MO disclosure is restricted by statute. electronically, please go to http:// 63112). The petition requested that 40 Certain other material, such as www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test CFR 180.930 be amended by copyrighted material, is not placed on Methods and Guidelines.’’ establishing an exemption from the the Internet and will be publicly requirement of a tolerance for residues available only in hard copy form. C. How can I file an objection or hearing of acetone (Cas Reg. No. 67–64–1) when Publicly available docket materials are request? used as an inert ingredient as a solvent available in the electronic docket at Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 or co-solvent in pesticide formulations http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an applied to animals. That notice available in hard copy, at the OPP objection to any aspect of this regulation referenced a summary of the petition Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– and may also request a hearing on those prepared by Whitmire Micro-Gen (now 4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), objections. You must file your objection affiliated with BASF Corp.; 3568 Tree 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The or request a hearing on this regulation Court Industrial Blvd., St. Louis, MO Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. in accordance with the instructions 63112), the petitioner, which is to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure available in the docket, http://

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28267

www.regulations.gov. Comments were toxicity of the inert in conjunction with (mg/kg/bw/day). Rats treated with received on the notice of filing. EPA’s possible exposure to residues of the acetone via gavage for 90 days exhibited response to these comments is inert ingredient through food, drinking decreased body weight and increased discussed in Unit V.C. water, and through other exposures that relative kidney and liver weights, occur as a result of pesticide use in hemosiderosis of the spleen and an III. Inert Ingredient Definition residential settings. If EPA is able to increased incidence and severity of Inert ingredients are all ingredients determine that a finite tolerance is not nephropathy at 1,700 mg/kg/day. The that are not active ingredients as defined necessary to ensure that there is a NOAEL in rats was 900 mg/kg/day. In in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are reasonable certainty that no harm will a subchronic toxicity study in rats via not limited to, the following types of result from aggregate exposure to the gavage, acetone resulted in kidney ingredients (except when they have a inert ingredient, an exemption from the weight changes and lesions at 500 mg/ pesticidal efficacy of their own): requirement of a tolerance may be kg/day. The NOAEL in this study was Solvents such as alcohols and established. 100 mg/kg/day. Male Sprague-Dawley hydrocarbons; surfactants such as Consistent with FFDCA section rats were exposed to acetone via polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in inhalation at a concentration of 19,000 acids; carriers such as clay and FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has ppm (45,106 mg/m3) for 3 hours/day, 5 diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as reviewed the available scientific data days/week, for 8 weeks. Groups were carrageenan and modified cellulose; and other relevant information in sacrificed after 2, 4, and 8 weeks and 2 wetting, spreading, and dispersing support of this action. EPA has weeks post-exposure. No treatment agents; propellants in aerosol sufficient data to assess the hazards of related effects were observed in this dispensers; microencapsulating agents; and to make a determination on study at exposure concentrations of and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not aggregate exposure for acetone 19,000 ppm (equal to 11,703 mg/kg/ intended to imply nontoxicity; the including exposure resulting from the day). No dermal toxicity studies were ingredient may or may not be exemption established by this action. available. chemically active. Generally, EPA has EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks Acetone was evaluated in a exempted inert ingredients from the associated with acetone follows. requirement of a tolerance based on the reproduction screening test with mice low toxicity of the individual inert A. Toxicological Profile via gavage at a dose of 3,500 mg/kg/day ingredients. EPA has evaluated the available and controls receiving no test toxicity data and considered their compound. Toxicity was manifested as IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and validity, completeness, and reliability as decreased reproductive index, increased Determination of Safety well as the relationship of the results of gestation length, reduced birth weights, Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA the studies to human risk. EPA has also decreased neonatal survival and allows EPA to establish an exemption considered available information increased neonatal weight gain at 3,500 from the requirement for a tolerance (the concerning the variability of the mg/kg/day. In a 2-generation legal limit for a pesticide chemical sensitivities of major identifiable reproduction study conducted in rats residue in or on a food) only if EPA subgroups of consumers, including with isopropanol, the maternal NOAEL determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ infants and children. Specific was 500 mg/kg/day based on increased Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA information on the studies received and in liver and kidney weights (absolute defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a the nature of the adverse effects caused and relative) seen at the LOAEL of 1,000 reasonable certainty that no harm will by acetone as well as the no-observed- mg/kg/day. The offspring toxicity result from aggregate exposure to the adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the NOAEL was 500 mg/kg/day based on pesticide chemical residue, including lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level reduced pup body weights and a slight all anticipated dietary exposures and all (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are increase in pup mortality seen at the other exposures for which there is discussed in this unit. LOAEL of 1,000 mg/kg/day. No reliable information.’’ This includes The toxicity data base for acetone reproductive parameters were altered at exposure through drinking water and in includes data relative to acetone per se doses up to 1,000 mg/kg/day. Two residential settings, but does not include as well as to isopropanol. Since developmental toxicity studies in occupational exposure. Section isopropanol readily metabolizes to rodents exposed to acetone via the 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to acetone in the body, the Agency has inhalation route of exposure were also give special consideration to exposure concluded that the data regarding available for review. In mice, maternal of infants and children to the pesticide isopropanol may be used in conjunction (increased incidence of late resorptions) chemical residue in establishing a with the data regarding acetone to and fetal (reduced weight) toxicities tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a characterize the toxicity of acetone. were observed at the same dose, 6,600 reasonable certainty that no harm will Acetone has low acute toxicity. It is ppm (approximately 4,066 mg/kg/day). result to infants and children from not a skin irritant or sensitizer but is a No teratogenic effects were observed in aggregate exposure to the pesticide defatting agent to the skin. Acetone is an mice. The NOAEL was 2,200 ppm chemical residue * * *.’’ eye irritant. (equivalent to 1,348 mg/kg/day). In rats, EPA establishes exemptions from the The toxicity of acetone was evaluated maternal (reduction in body weight, requirement of a tolerance only in those in several subchronic toxicity studies in uterine weight and extra-gestational cases where it can be clearly mice and rats via drinking water, gavage weight gain) and fetal (malformations) demonstrated that the risks from and inhalation. The most notable toxicities were observed at the same aggregate exposure to pesticide findings in subchronic studies were dose, 11,000 ppm (approximately 6,773 chemical residues under reasonably increased liver and kidney weights, and mg/kg/day). The NOAEL was 2,200 ppm foreseeable circumstances will pose no decreased spleen weights. In mice (equivalent to 1,348 mg/kg/day). In a appreciable risks to human health. In administered acetone via drinking developmental toxicity study in rats via order to determine the risks from water, adverse effects (liver and kidney gavage with isopropanol, the NOAELs aggregate exposure to pesticide inert toxicity) were observed at doses ≥1,600 for maternal and developmental ingredients, the Agency considers the milligrams/kilogram/bodyweight/day toxicities were 400 mg/kg/day based on

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28268 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

slightly increased mortality at 800 mg/ www.regulations.gov in the document study in the case of acetone may not be kg/day and reduced gestational body ‘‘Acetone—Decision Document for appropriate for the long term risk weight and reduced gravid uterine Pesticide Petition 7E7239, Acetone, CAS assessments. As indicated in this Unit, weights at 1,200 mg/kg/day. Reduced No. 67–64–1; PC Code 844101’’, in the lowest NOAEL identified in the fetal body weights were observed at 800 docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008– database is 900 mg/kg/bw/day. For all and 1,200 mg/kg/day. There was also a 0039. practical purposes, that is the Agency’s developmental toxicity study in rabbits identified limit dose. For materials that B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ treated with isopropanol via gavage. show no signs of toxicity at or above the Levels of Concern Maternal toxicity was manifested as limit dose, quantitative risk assessment reduced body weight and food Once a pesticide’s toxicological is not necessary. Since no endpoint of consumption at 480 mg/kg/day. The profile is determined, EPA identifies concern was identified for the acute and NOAEL was 240 mg/kg/day. There were toxicological points of departure (POD) chronic dietary exposure assessment no treatment related effects observed in and levels of concern to use in and short and intermediate dermal and fetuses up to the highest dose tested evaluating the risk posed by human inhalation exposure, a quantitative risk (480 mg/kg/day). In a developmental exposure to the pesticide. For hazards assessment for acetone is not necessary. neurotoxicity study in rats with that have a threshold below which there C. Exposure Assessment isopropanol, no developmental is no appreciable risk, the toxicological neurotoxicity was observed at doses up POD is used as the basis for derivation No hazard endpoint of concern was to 1,200 mg/kg/day. of reference values for risk assessment. identified for the acute and chronic Subchronic neurotoxicity studies PODs are developed based on a careful dietary assessment (food and drinking were available in rats administered analysis of the doses in each water), or for the short, intermediate, acetone via the inhalation or dietary toxicological study to determine the and long term dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. Repeated daily dose at which no adverse effects are residential assessments, therefore, acute exposures up to 14,240 mg/m3 of observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest and chronic dietary and short-, acetone produced an inhibition of dose at which adverse effects of concern intermediate-,and long-term dermal and avoidance behavior but did not produce are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/ inhalation residential exposure any signs of motor imbalance. Following safety factors are used in conjunction assessments are not necessary. acetone administered via inhalation, with the POD to calculate a safe Cumulative effects from substances rats exhibited transient ataxia at >28,480 exposure level—generally referred to as with a common mechanism of toxicity. ppm (approximately 17,544 mg/kg/day). a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA When acetone was administered in the reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin requires that, when considering whether diet for 14 weeks, neurotoxicity was not of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold to establish, modify, or revoke a observed at concentrations up to 1.0% risks, the Agency assumes that any tolerance, the Agency consider (approximately 5,000 mg/kg/day). amount of exposure will lead to some ‘‘available information’’ concerning the Information on the carcinogenicity of degree of risk. Thus, the Agency cumulative effects of a particular acetone is available from dermal studies estimates risk in terms of the probability pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other performed with acetone used as a of an occurrence of the adverse effect substances that have a common vehicle. An increased incidence of expected in a lifetime. For more mechanism of toxicity.’’ tumor formation was not observed up to information on the general principles EPA has not found acetone to share a 0.2 milliliter (ml) of acetone in mice. EPA uses in risk characterization and a common mechanism of toxicity with Carcinogenicity studies in rodents complete description of the risk any other substances, and acetone does administered isopropanol via assessment process, see http:// not appear to produce a toxic metabolite inhalation, did not exhibit an increased www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/ produced by other substances, however, incidence of tumor formation up to riskassess.htm. isopropanol is readily metabolized to 5,000 ppm (approximately 3,086 mg/kg/ Acetone is currently permitted for use acetone in humans. For both day). as an inert ingredient in pesticide isopropanol and its metabolite, acetone, Acetone is normally eliminated formulations applied pre and post no endpoint of concerns were identified mainly by enzymatic metabolism (70– harvest under 40 CFR 180.910. Acetone for various dietary and non-dietary 80% of the total body burden) or occurs or is found in a variety of foods exposure scenarios. For the purposes of excreted via urine or exhaled following and consumer products. Acetone has this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has inhalation exposure (human volunteer been approved by FDA as a secondary assumed that acetone does not have a study). The first step includes the direct food additive (21 CFR 173.210). common mechanism of toxicity with oxidation to acetol by acetone The available toxicity studies indicate other substances. For information monooxygenase, associated with that acetone has very low toxicity. The regarding EPA’s efforts to determine cytochrome P450IIE1. This step is NOAELs were 900 mg/kg/day and above which chemicals have a common followed by two different pathways that except one 90-day toxicity study in rats mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate both lead to the formation of pyruvate via gavage in which the NOAEL of 100 the cumulative effects of such which—as a key product of mg/kg/day was based on kidney toxicity chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at intermediary metabolism—can enter seen at the LOAEL of 500 mg/kg/day. http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ various pathways, e.g. gluconeogenesis Differences in the observed effect level cumulative. or the citric acid cycle. Acetone is between the drinking water/dietary excreted mainly via the lung both study and the gavage study may relate D. Safety Factor for Infants and unchanged and, following metabolism, to the metabolism of acetone. EPA’s Children as carbon dioxide. Integrated Risk Information System In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of Specific information on the studies (IRIS) concluded that the drinking water FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply received and the nature of the adverse route is considered to more closely an additional tenfold (10X) margin of effects caused by acetone as well as the mimic potential long-term human safety for infants and children in the NOAEL and the LOAEL from the exposure scenarios. For this reason, EPA case of threshold effects to account for toxicity studies can be found at http:// concluded that the results of gavage prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28269

completeness of the database on toxicity international standards whenever entitled ‘‘Protection of Children from and exposure unless EPA determines possible, consistent with U.S. food Environmental Health Risks and Safety based on reliable data that a different safety standards and agricultural Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). margin of safety will be safe for infants practices. EPA considers the This final rule does not contain any and children. This additional margin of international maximum residue limits information collections subject to OMB safety is commonly referred to as the (MRLs) established by the Codex approval under the Paperwork FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 this provision, EPA either retains the required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). et seq., nor does it require any special default value of 10X, or uses a different The Codex Alimentarius is a joint considerations under Executive Order additional safety factor when reliable United Nation Food and Agriculture 12898, entitled ‘‘Federal Actions to data available to EPA support the choice Organization/World Health Address Environmental Justice in of a different factor. Organization food standards program, Minority Populations and Low-Income The toxicity database is sufficient for and it is recognized as an international Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, acetone and potential exposure is food safety standards-setting 1994). adequately characterized given the low organization in trade agreements to Since tolerances and exemptions that toxicity of the chemical. In terms of which the United States is a party. EPA are established on the basis of a petition hazard, there are no concerns and no may establish a tolerance that is under FFDCA section 408(d), such as residual uncertainties regarding prenatal different from a Codex MRL; however, the tolerance in this final rule, do not and/or postnatal toxicity. The lowest FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that require the issuance of a proposed rule, NOAEL identified in the database for EPA explain the reasons for departing the requirements of the Regulatory risk assessment is 900 mg/kg/day. No from the Codex level. Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et evidence of increased susceptibility was The Codex has not established a MRL seq.) do not apply. observed in the available reproduction for acetone. This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, studies, developmental studies and C. Response to Comments developmental neurotoxicity study and food retailers, not States or tribes, (isopropanol). In these studies The Agency received one comment nor does this action alter the developmental toxicity was observed in from a private citizen who opposed the relationships or distribution of power the presence maternal toxicity and at or proposed exemption. The Agency and responsibilities established by above the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day. understands the commenter’s concerns Congress in the preemption provisions Therefore, a safety factor analysis has and recognizes that some individuals of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, not been used to assess risk. believe that no residue of pesticides the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct Accordingly, there is no reason to apply should be allowed. However, under the effect on States or tribal governments, an additional safety factor to protect existing legal framework provided by on the relationship between the national infants and children. section 408 of the FFDCA, EPA is authorized to establish pesticide government and the States or tribal E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of tolerances or exemptions where persons governments, or on the distribution of Safety seeking such tolerances or exemptions power and responsibilities among the Given the lack of concern for hazard have demonstrated that the pesticide various levels of government or between posed by acetone, EPA concludes that meets the safety standard imposed by the Federal Government and Indian there are no dietary or aggregate dietary/ the statute. tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled non-dietary risks of concern as a result VI. Conclusions of exposure to acetone in food and water ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, Therefore, an exemption from the or from residential exposure. As 1999) and Executive Order 13175, requirement of a tolerance is established discussed in this unit, EPA expects entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination under 40 CFR 180.930 for acetone (67– aggregate exposure to acetone to pose no with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 64–1) when used as an inert ingredient appreciable dietary risk given that the 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply (as solvent or co-solvent) in pesticide data show a lack of systemic toxicity at to this final rule. In addition, this final formulations applied to animals. doses ≥900 mg/kg/day and a lack of any rule does not impose any enforceable increased susceptibility of infants and VII. Statutory and Executive Order duty or contain any unfunded mandate children. Taking into consideration of Reviews as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 all available information on acetone, This final rule establishes an EPA concludes that there is a reasonable (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). exemption from the requirements of a This action does not involve any certainty that no harm will result to the tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) technical standards that would require general population, or to infants and in response to a petition submitted to Agency consideration of voluntary children from aggregate exposure to the Agency. The Office of Management consensus standards pursuant to section acetone residues. and Budget (OMB) has exempted these 12(d) of the National Technology V. Other Considerations types of actions from review under Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 Executive Order 12866, entitled (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). An analytical method is not required FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because for enforcement purposes since the this final rule has been exempted from VIII. Congressional Review Act Agency is establishing an exemption review under Executive Order 12866, The Congressional Review Act, 5 from the requirement of a tolerance this final rule is not subject to Executive U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides without any numerical limitation. Order 13211, entitled ‘‘Actions that before a rule may take effect, the Concerning Regulations That agency promulgating the rule must B. International Residue Limits Significantly Affect Energy Supply, submit a rule report to each House of In making its tolerance decisions, EPA Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May the Congress and to the Comptroller seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, General of the United States. EPA will

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28270 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

submit a report containing this rule and Agricultural commodities, Pesticides PART 180—[AMENDED] other required information to the U.S. and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping Senate, the U.S. House of requirements. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Representatives, and the Comptroller Dated: May 2, 2012. General of the United States prior to Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. publication of this final rule in the Lois Rossi, Federal Register. This final rule is not Director, Registration Division, Office of ■ 2. In § 180.930, the table is amended a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. Pesticide Programs. by adding alphabetically the following inert ingredients to read as follows: 804(2). Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 amended as follows: § 180.930 Inert ingredients applied to animals; exemptions from the requirement Environmental protection, of a tolerance. Administrative practice and procedure, * * * * *

Inert ingredients Limits Uses

******* Acetone (Cas Reg. No. 67–64–1) ...... solvent or cosolvent.

*******

[FR Doc. 2012–11623 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] available only in hard copy form. Industrial Classification System BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Publicly available docket materials are (NAICS) codes have been provided to available in the electronic docket at assist you and others in determining http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only whether this action might apply to ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION available in hard copy, at the OPP certain entities. If you have any AGENCY Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– questions regarding the applicability of 4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), this action to a particular entity, consult 40 CFR Part 180 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The the person listed under FOR FURTHER [EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0421; FRL–9346–7] Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. INFORMATION CONTACT. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, B. How can I get electronic access to excluding legal holidays. The Docket Fluxapyroxad; Pesticide Tolerances other related information? Facility telephone number is (703) 305– AGENCY: Environmental Protection 5805. You may access a frequently updated Agency (EPA). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Olga electronic version of EPA’s tolerance ACTION: Final rule. Odiott, Registration Division (7505P), regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through Office of Pesticide Programs, the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR SUMMARY: This regulation establishes Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/ tolerances for residues of fluxapyroxad Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/ in or on multiple commodities which DC 20460–0001; telephone number: Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the are identified and discussed later in this (703) 308–9369; email address: OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document. BASF Corporation requested [email protected]. document electronically, please go these tolerances under the Federal Food, http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ‘‘Test Methods and Guidelines.’’ DATES: This regulation is effective May I. General Information 14, 2012. Objections and requests for C. How can I file an objection or hearing A. Does this action apply to me? hearings must be received on or before request? July 13, 2012, and must be filed in You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 accordance with the instructions U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially objection to any aspect of this regulation Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY and may also request a hearing on those INFORMATION). affected entities may include, but are not limited to those engaged in the objections. You must file your objection ADDRESSES: EPA has established a following activities: or request a hearing on this regulation docket for this action under docket • Crop production (NAICS code 111). in accordance with the instructions identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– • Animal production (NAICS code provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure OPP–2010–0421. All documents in the 112). proper receipt by EPA, you must docket are listed in the docket index • Food manufacturing (NAICS code identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– available at http://www.regulations.gov. 311). OPP–2010–0421 in the subject line on Although listed in the index, some • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS the first page of your submission. All information is not publicly available, code 32532). objections and requests for a hearing e.g., Confidential Business Information This listing is not intended to be must be in writing, and must be (CBI) or other information whose exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide received by the Hearing Clerk on or disclosure is restricted by statute. for readers regarding entities likely to be before July 13, 2012. Addresses for mail Certain other material, such as affected by this action. Other types of and hand delivery of objections and copyrighted material, is not placed on entities not listed in this unit could also hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR the Internet and will be publicly be affected. The North American 178.25(b).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28271

In addition to filing an objection or 3. Deleting the proposed tolerance for observed in rats, mice, and dogs, with hearing request with the Hearing Clerk vegetable, root, subgroup 1A and rats as the most sensitive species for all as described in 40 CFR part 178, please proposing a tolerance for beet, sugar; durations of exposure. In rats, adaptive submit a copy of the filing that does not and effects of hepatocellular hypertrophy contain any CBI for inclusion in the 4. Proposing a tolerance for oilseeds, and increased liver weights and changes public docket. Information not marked group 20. in liver enzyme activities were first confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 The reasons for these changes are observed. As the dose or duration of may be disclosed publicly by EPA explained in Unit IV.C. exposure to fluxapyroxad increased, without prior notice. Submit a copy of III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and clinical chemistry changes related to your non-CBI objection or hearing Determination of Safety liver function also occurred, followed request, identified by docket ID number by hepatocellular necrosis, neoplastic EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0421, by one of Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA changes in the liver, and tumors. the following methods: allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the Thyroid effects were observed only in legal limit for a pesticide chemical • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// rats. These effects were secondary to residue in or on a food) only if EPA www.regulations.gov. Follow the online changes in liver enzyme regulation, determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ instructions for submitting comments. which increased metabolism of thyroid Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA • Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs hormone, resulting changes in thyroid defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), hormones, thyroid follicular reasonable certainty that no harm will Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 hypertrophy and hyperplasia, and result from aggregate exposure to the Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, thyroid tumor formation. Tumors were pesticide chemical residue, including DC 20460–0001. not observed in species other than rats • all anticipated dietary exposures and all or in organs other than the liver and Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public other exposures for which there is Docket (7502P), Environmental thyroid. reliable information.’’ This includes In accordance with the EPA’s Final Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One exposure through drinking water and in Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk residential settings, but does not include Assessment (March, 2005), Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries occupational exposure. Section are only accepted during the Docket fluxapyroxad is classified as ‘‘Not likely 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on Facility’s normal hours of operation give special consideration to exposure (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through convincing evidence that carcinogenic of infants and children to the pesticide effects are not likely below a defined Friday, excluding legal holidays). chemical residue in establishing a Special arrangements should be made dose range: tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a • No treatment-related tumors were for deliveries of boxed information. The reasonable certainty that no harm will seen in male or female mice when tested Docket Facility telephone number is result to infants and children from at doses that were adequate to assess (703) 305–5805. aggregate exposure to the pesticide carcinogenicity (including the Limit II. Summary of Petitioned-For chemical residue. * * *’’ Dose); Tolerance Consistent with FFDCA section • Treatment-related liver tumors were 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in seen in male rats at doses ≥250 parts per In the Federal Register of June 23, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has million (ppm) (11 milligrams/kilogram/ 2010 (75 FR 35803) (FRL–8831–3), EPA reviewed the available scientific data day (mg/kg/day)) and in female rats at issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA and other relevant information in doses ≥1,500 ppm (82 mg/kg/day); section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), support of this action. EPA has • Treatment-related thyroid follicular announcing the filing of a pesticide sufficient data to assess the hazards of cell tumors were seen in male rats only petition (PP 0F7709) by BASF and to make a determination on at doses ≥1,500 ppm (68 mg/kg/day); Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research aggregate exposure for fluxapyroxad • There is no mutagenicity concern Triangle Park, NC 27709–3528. The including exposure resulting from the from in vivo or in vitro assays; petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 tolerances established by this action. • The hypothesized mode of action be amended by establishing tolerances EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks (i.e., a non-genotoxic) for each tumor for residues of the fungicide associated with fluxapyroxad follows. type (i.e., the liver and thyroid) was fluxapyroxad, 3-(difluoromethyl)-1- supported by adequate studies that ′ ′ ′ ′ methyl-N-(3 ,4 ,5 -trifluoro[1,1 - A. Toxicological Profile clearly identified the sequence of key biphenyl]-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-4- EPA has evaluated the available events, dose-response concordance and carboxamide, in or on multiple toxicity data and considered its validity, temporal relationship to the tumor commodities. That notice referenced a completeness, and reliability as well as types. The mode of action met the summary of the petition prepared by the relationship of the results of the criteria established by the Agency. BASF Corporation, the registrant, which studies to human risk. EPA has also The Agency has determined that the is available in the docket, http:// considered available information chronic population adjusted dose www.regulations.gov. There were no concerning the variability of the (cPAD) will adequately account for all comments received in response to the sensitivities of major identifiable chronic effects, including notice of filing. Based on EPA’s review subgroups of consumers, including carcinogenicity, that could result from of the data supporting the petition, infants and children. exposure to fluxapyroxad. BASF Company revised their petition Fluxapyroxad is of low acute toxicity No evidence of neurotoxicity was (PP 0F7709) by: by the oral, dermal and inhalation observed in response to repeated 1. Proposing tolerances for corn, pop, routes, is not irritating to the eyes and administration of fluxapyroxad. An grain; corn, sweet kernels plus cobs skin, and is not a dermal sensitizer. The acute neurotoxicity study showed with husks removed; and wheat, grain; primary target organ for fluxapyroxad decreased rearing and motor activity. 2. Decreasing or increasing the exposure via the oral route is the liver This occurred on the day of dosing only proposed tolerances for various with secondary toxicity in the thyroid and in the absence of histopathological commodities; for rats only. Liver toxicity was effects or alterations in brain weights.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28272 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

This indicated that any neurotoxic the limit dose. Only M700F0048 toxicological points of departure (POD) effects of fluxapyroxad are likely to be exhibited developmental toxicity at and levels of concern to use in transient and reversible due to doses similar to those that caused evaluating the risk posed by human alterations in neuropharmacology and developmental effects in rabbits with exposure to the pesticide. For hazards not from neuronal damage. There were fluxapyroxad treatment. However, these that have a threshold below which there no neurotoxic effects observed in the effects (abortions and resorptions) were is no appreciable risk, the toxicological subchronic dietary toxicity study. No of a different nature than for POD is used as the basis for derivation evidence of reproductive toxicity was fluxapyroxad (paw hyperflexion) and of reference values for risk assessment. observed. Developmental effects are considered secondary to maternal PODs are developed based on a careful toxicity. The Agency considers these observed in both rats and mice (thyroid analysis of the doses in each follicular hypertrophy and hyperplasia studies sufficient for hazard toxicological study to determine the in rats and decreased defecation, food identification and characterization and dose at which no adverse effects are consumption, body weight/body weight concludes that these metabolites do not gain, and increased litter loss in rabbits) have hazards that exceed those of observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest occurred at the same doses as those that fluxapyroxad in nature, severity, or dose at which adverse effects of concern caused adverse effects in maternal potency. are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/ animals, indicating no quantitative Specific information on the studies safety factors are used in conjunction susceptibility. Since the maternal received and the nature of the adverse with the POD to calculate a safe toxicities of thyroid hormone effects caused by fluxapyroxad as well exposure level—generally referred to as perturbation in rats and systemic as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a toxicity in rabbits likely contributed to (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed- reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin the observed developmental effects adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold there is low concern for qualitative toxicity studies can be found at http:// risks, the Agency assumes that any susceptibility. An immunotoxicity study www.regulations.gov in document amount of exposure will lead to some in mice showed no evidence of ‘‘Fluxapyroxad: Human Health Risk degree of risk. Thus, the Agency immunotoxic effects from fluxapyroxad. Assessment for Use of New Active estimates risk in terms of the probability Subchronic oral toxicity studies in Ingredient on Cereal Grains, Legume of an occurrence of the adverse effect rats, developmental toxicity studies in Vegetables (Succulent and Dry), Oil expected in a lifetime. For more rabbits, and in vitro and in vivo Seed Crops (Canola and Sunflower), information on the general principles genotoxicity studies were performed for Peanuts, Pome Fruit, Stone Fruit, Root EPA uses in risk characterization and a fluxapyroxad metabolites F700F001, and Tuber Vegetables (Potatoes and complete description of the risk M700F002, and M700F048. Like Sugar Beets), Fruiting Vegetables, and assessment process, see http:// fluxapyroxad, no genotoxic effects were Cotton,’’ at page 39 in docket ID number www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/ observed for any of these metabolites. EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0421–0005. All three metabolites displayed lower riskassess.htm. subchronic toxicity via the oral route B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ A summary of the toxicological than fluxapyroxad, with evidence of Levels of Concern endpoints for fluxapyroxad used for non-specific toxicity (decreased body Once a pesticide’s toxicological human risk assessment is shown in the weight) observed only for M700F0048 at profile is determined, EPA identifies following Table.

TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FLUXAPYROXAD FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT

Point of departure Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects safety factors risk assessment

Acute dietary (General population in- NOAEL = 125 mg/ aRfD = 1.25 mg/kg/ Acute neurotoxicity study in rats. cluding infants and children, and Fe- kg/day. day. LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on decreased motor activ- males 13–49 years of age). UFA = 10x aPAD = 1.25 mg/ ity (both sexes) and decreased rearing (males only) UFH = 10x kg/day FQPA SF = 1x

Chronic dietary (All populations)...... NOAEL= 2.1 mg/ cRfD = 0.021 mg/ Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats. kg/day. kg/day.. LOAEL = 11 mg/kg/day based on non-neoplastic changes UFA = 10x cPAD = 0.021 mg/ in the liver (foci, masses) UFH = 10x kg/day FQPA SF = 1x

Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)...... Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses sufficient to induce liver and/or thyroid tumors. Quantification of risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD) will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).

C. Exposure Assessment exposure to fluxapyroxad, EPA dietary exposures from fluxapyroxad in 1. Dietary exposure from food and considered exposure under the food as follows: feed uses. In evaluating dietary petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28273

i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute For the chronic dietary assessment 4. Cumulative effects from substances dietary exposure and risk assessments tolerance level residues and 100 PCT with a common mechanism of toxicity. are performed for a food-use pesticide, information were assumed for livestock Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA if a toxicological study has indicated the commodities. HAFT residues for parent requires that, when considering whether possibility of an effect of concern plus metabolite were used for all plant to establish, modify, or revoke a occurring as a result of a 1-day or single commodities. tolerance, the Agency consider exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA ‘‘available information’’ concerning the Such effects were identified for authorizes EPA to use available data and cumulative effects of a particular fluxapyroxad. In estimating acute information on the anticipated residue pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other dietary exposure, EPA used food levels of pesticide residues in food and substances that have a common consumption information from the U.S. the actual levels of pesticide residues mechanism of toxicity.’’ Department of Agriculture (USDA) that have been measured in food. If EPA EPA has not found fluxapyroxad to 1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide relies on such information, EPA must share a common mechanism of toxicity Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by require pursuant to FFDCA section with any other substances, and Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years fluxapyroxad does not appear to in food, tolerance level residues after the tolerance is established, produce a toxic metabolite produced by adjusted to account for metabolites of modified, or left in effect, demonstrating other substances. For the purposes of concern, 100 percent crop treated (PCT) that the levels in food are not above the this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumptions, and Dietary Exposure levels anticipated. For the present assumed that fluxapyroxad does not Evaluation Model (DEEM) default and action, EPA will issue such data call-ins have a common mechanism of toxicity empirical processing factors were used. as are required by FFDCA section with other substances. For information ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under regarding EPA’s efforts to determine the chronic dietary exposure assessment FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be which chemicals have a common EPA used the food consumption data required to be submitted no later than mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998 5 years from the date of issuance of the cumulative effects of such CSFII. As to residue levels in food, a these tolerances. chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at moderately refined chronic dietary 2. Dietary exposure from drinking http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ exposure analysis was performed. An water. The Agency used screening level cumulative. assumption of 100 PCT, and DEEM water exposure models in the dietary default and empirical processing factors D. Safety Factor for Infants and exposure analysis and risk assessment were used for the chronic dietary Children for fluxapyroxad in drinking water. analysis. Highest average field trial 1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of (HAFT) residues for parent plus These simulation models take into FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply metabolite were used for all plant account data on the physical, chemical, an additional tenfold (10X) margin of commodities. For livestock and fate/transport characteristics of safety for infants and children in the commodities, tolerance level residues fluxapyroxad. Further information case of threshold effects to account for adjusted to account for metabolites of regarding EPA drinking water models prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the concern were used. used in pesticide exposure assessment completeness of the database on toxicity iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ and exposure unless EPA determines quantitative cancer exposure and risk oppefed1/models/water/index.htm. based on reliable data that a different assessments are appropriate for a food- Based on the First Index Reservoir margin of safety will be safe for infants use pesticide based on the weight of the Screening Tool (FIRST), and the and children. This additional margin of evidence from cancer studies and other Screening Concentration in Ground safety is commonly referred to as the relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified Water (SCI–GROW) models, the FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying using a linear or nonlinear approach. If estimated drinking water concentrations this provision, EPA either retains the sufficient information on the (EDWCs) of fluxapyroxad for acute default value of 10X, or uses a different carcinogenic mode of action is available, exposures are estimated to be 14.1 parts additional safety factor when reliable a threshold or nonlinear approach is per billion (ppb) for surface water and data available to EPA support the choice used and a cancer RfD is calculated 0.087 ppb for ground water. For chronic of a different factor. based on an earlier noncancer key event. exposures the EDWCs are estimated to 2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. If carcinogenic mode of action data are be 6.7 ppb for surface water and 0.087 No evidence of quantitative not available, or if the mode of action ppb for ground water. Modeled susceptibility was observed in a data determines a mutagenic mode of estimates of drinking water reproductive and developmental action, a default linear cancer slope concentrations were directly entered toxicity study in rats or in factor approach is utilized. Based on the into the dietary exposure model. The developmental toxicity studies in rats data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has EDWCs of 14.1 ppb for surface water and rabbits. Developmental toxicity data concluded that a nonlinear RfD and 0.087 ppb for ground water were in rats showed decreased body weight approach is appropriate for assessing used for the acute and the chronic and body weight gain in the offspring at cancer risk to fluxapyroxad. Cancer risk dietary assessments, respectively. the same dose levels that caused thyroid was assessed using the same exposure 3. From non-dietary exposure. The follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia in estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in parental animals. Effects in rabbits were chronic exposure. this document to refer to non- limited to paw hyperflexion, a iv. Anticipated residue and percent occupational, non-dietary exposure malformation that is not considered to crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, result from a single exposure and that not use anticipated residue or PCT indoor pest control, termiticides, and usually reverses as the animal matures. information in the acute dietary flea and tick control on pets). Developmental effects observed in both assessment for fluxapyroxad. Tolerance Fluxapyroxad is not registered for any rats and rabbits occurred at the same level residues and 100 PCT information specific use patterns that would result doses as those that caused adverse were assumed for all food commodities. in residential exposure. effects in maternal animals, indicating

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28274 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

no quantitative susceptibility. The to fluxapyroxad in drinking water. dose range. The Agency has determined Agency has low concern for These assessments will not that the quantification of risk using the developmental toxicity because the underestimate the exposure and risks cPAD for fluxapyroxad will adequately observed effects were of low severity, posed by fluxapyroxad. account for all chronic toxicity, were likely secondary to maternal E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of including carcinogenicity, that could toxicity, and demonstrated clear Safety result from exposure to fluxapyroxad. NOAELs. Further, the NOAELs for these As noted above, chronic exposure to effects were at dose levels higher than EPA determines whether acute and fluxapyroxad from food and water will the points of departure selected for risk chronic dietary pesticide exposures are utilize 48% of the cPAD for children 1– assessment for repeat-exposure safe by comparing aggregate exposure 2 years old, the population group scenarios. Therefore, based on the estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and receiving the greatest exposure. available data and the selection of risk chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer 6. Determination of safety. Based on assessment endpoints that are protective risks, EPA calculates the lifetime these risk assessments, EPA concludes of developmental effects, there are no probability of acquiring cancer given the that there is a reasonable certainty that residual uncertainties with regard to estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, no harm will result to the general prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity. intermediate-, and chronic-term risks 3. Conclusion. EPA has determined are evaluated by comparing the population, or to infants and children that reliable data show the safety of estimated aggregate food, water, and from aggregate exposure to fluxapyroxad infants and children would be residential exposure to the appropriate residues. adequately protected if the FQPA SF PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE IV. Other Considerations were reduced to 1X. That decision is exists. based on the following findings: 1. Acute risk. Using the exposure A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology i. The toxicity database for assumptions discussed in this unit for fluxapyroxad is complete. acute exposure, the acute dietary A Liquid Chromatography-Mass ii. There is no indication that exposure from food and water to Spectrometer/Mass Spectrometer (LC/ fluxapyroxad is a neurotoxic chemical fluxapyroxad will occupy 6% of the MS/MS) method is available as an and there is no need for a aPAD for children 1–2 years old, the enforcement method. This method uses developmental neurotoxicity study or population group receiving the greatest reversed-phase High Pressure Liquid additional UFs to account for exposure. Chromatography (HPLC) with gradient neurotoxicity. Neither the acute or the 2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure elution, and includes 2 ion transitions subchronic neurotoxicity studies assumptions described in this unit for to be monitored for the parent and the indicated specific neurotoxicity chronic exposure, EPA has concluded metabolites M700F008 and M700F048, responses to fluxapyroxad. Because that chronic exposure to fluxapyroxad so the method also serves as the fluxapyroxad can disrupt thyroid from food and water will utilize 48% of confirmatory method. hormone levels, the Agency considered the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the The method may be requested from: the potential for fluxapyroxad to cause population group receiving the greatest Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, developmental neurotoxicity as a result exposure. There are no residential uses Environmental Science Center, 701 of thyroid hormone disruption, which is for fluxapyroxad. Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350; more sensitive endpoint than the 3. Short-term risk. Short-term telephone number: (410) 305–2905; endpoints used in a developmental aggregate exposure takes into account email address: neurotoxicity study. Based on its short-term residential exposure plus [email protected]. evaluation of thyroid hormone data chronic exposure to food and water submitted for fluxapyroxad and the (considered to be a background B. International Residue Limits ontogeny of thyroid hormone exposure level). Fluxapyroxad is not In making its tolerance decisions, EPA metabolism, the Agency has determined registered for any use patterns that seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with that adverse thyroid hormone would result in short-term residential international standards whenever disruptions in the young are unlikely to exposure and chronic dietary exposure possible, consistent with U.S. food occur at dose levels as low as the points has already been assessed under the safety standards and agricultural of departure chosen for risk assessment. appropriately protective cPAD. practices. EPA considers the The Agency has low concern for 4. Intermediate-term risk. international maximum residue limits neurotoxic effects of fluxapyroxad at Intermediate-term aggregate exposure (MRLs) established by the Codex any life stage. takes into account intermediate-term iii. Based on the developmental and residential exposure plus chronic Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as reproductive toxicity studies discussed exposure to food and water (considered required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). in Unit III.D.2., there are no residual to be a background exposure level). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint uncertainties with regard to prenatal Fluxapyroxad is not registered for any United Nations Food and Agriculture and/or postnatal toxicity. use patterns that would result in Organization/World Health iv. There are no residual uncertainties intermediate-term residential exposure Organization food standards program, identified in the exposure databases. and chronic dietary exposure has and it is recognized as an international The dietary food exposure assessments already been assessed under the food safety standards-setting were performed based on 100 PCT and appropriately protective cPAD. organization in trade agreements to tolerance-level residues or field trial 5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. which the United States is a party. EPA residue data. The dietary risk population. In accordance with the may establish a tolerance that is assessment is based on reliable data, is EPA’s Final Guidelines for Carcinogen different from a Codex MRL; however, conservative and will not underestimate Risk Assessment (March 2005), EPA FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that dietary exposure to fluxapyroxad. EPA classified fluxapyroxad as ‘‘Not likely to EPA explain the reasons for departing made conservative (protective) be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on from the Codex level. assumptions in the ground and surface convincing evidence that carcinogenic The Codex has not established MRLs water modeling used to assess exposure effects are not likely below a defined for fluxapyroxad.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28275

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Regulations That Significantly Affect agency promulgating the rule must Tolerances Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 submit a rule report to each House of Based on EPA’s review, BASF FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive the Congress and to the Comptroller Company revised their petition (PP Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of General of the United States. EPA will 0F7709) by: Children from Environmental Health submit a report containing this rule and Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 1. Proposing tolerances for corn, pop, other required information to the U.S. April 23, 1997). This final rule does not grain; corn, sweet kernels plus cobs Senate, the U.S. House of contain any information collections with husks removed; and wheat, grain. Representatives, and the Comptroller subject to OMB approval under the Tolerances for these commodities were General of the United States prior to Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 originally proposed as part of the publication of this final rule in the U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require respective crop group tolerances, but the Federal Register. This final rule is not any special considerations under Agency determined that separate a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. Executive Order 12898, entitled tolerances are needed because of 804(2). ‘‘Federal Actions to Address differences between the needed Environmental Justice in Minority List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 tolerances and the proposed crop group Populations and Low-Income Environmental protection, tolerances. Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, Administrative practice and procedure, 2. Decreasing or increasing the 1994). Agricultural commodities, Pesticides proposed tolerances for various Since tolerances and exemptions that and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping commodities. are established on the basis of a petition requirements. 3. Deleting the proposed tolerance for under FFDCA section 408(d), such as Dated: May 2, 2012. vegetable, root, subgroup 1A and the tolerance in this final rule, do not proposing a tolerance for beet, sugar. require the issuance of a proposed rule, Steven Bradbury, The submitted data are not sufficient to the requirements of the Regulatory Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. support a tolerance for the proposed Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is subgroup 1A, but it supports a tolerance seq.) do not apply. amended as follows: for beet, sugar. This final rule directly regulates 4. Deleting tolerances that the Agency growers, food processors, food handlers, PART 180—[AMENDED] determined are not needed and/or are and food retailers, not States or tribes, ■ covered by other proposed tolerances. nor does this action alter the 1. The authority citation for part 180 5. Proposing a tolerance for oilseeds, relationships or distribution of power continues to read as follows: group 20. The registrant had proposed and responsibilities established by Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. tolerances for all the representative Congress in the preemption provisions ■ 2. Add § 180.666 to subpart C to read commodities for crop group 20 and the of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, as follows: submitted data supports establishment the Agency has determined that this of the group tolerance. action will not have a substantial direct § 180.666 Fluxapyroxad; tolerances for The Agency concluded that based on effect on States or tribal governments, residues. the residue data these changes are on the relationship between the national (a) General. Tolerances are required to support the proposed uses. government and the States or tribal established for residues of the fungicide The Agency analyzed the field trial data governments, or on the distribution of fluxapyroxad, including its metabolites for the respective commodities using the power and responsibilities among the and degradates, in or on the Organization for Economic Cooperation various levels of government or between commodities listed in the table below. and Development tolerance calculation the Federal Government and Indian Compliance with the tolerance levels procedures to determine the appropriate tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined specified below is to be determined by tolerances. that Executive Order 13132, entitled measuring only fluxapyroxad, 3- (difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-N-(3′,4′,5′- V. Conclusion ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, trifluoro[1,1′-biphenyl]-2-yl)-1H- Therefore, tolerances are established entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination pyrazole-4-carboxamide in or on the for residues of fluxapyroxad, 3- with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR commodity. (difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-N-(3′,4′,5′- 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply ′ trifluoro[1,1 -biphenyl]-2-yl)-1H- to this final rule. In addition, this final Commodity Parts per pyrazole-4-carboxamide, as requested in rule does not impose any enforceable million the revised petition. duty or contain any unfunded mandate Apple, wet pomace ...... 2 .0 VI. Statutory and Executive Order as described under Title II of the Beet, sugar ...... 0 .1 Reviews Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Beet, sugar, dried pulp ...... 0.1 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). Beet, sugar, tops ...... 7.0 This final rule establishes tolerances This action does not involve any Cattle, fat ...... 0.05 under FFDCA section 408(d) in technical standards that would require Cattle, meat ...... 0.01 response to a petition submitted to the Agency consideration of voluntary Cattle, meat byproducts ...... 0.03 Agency. The Office of Management and consensus standards pursuant to section Corn, field, grain ...... 0.01 Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 12(d) of the National Technology Corn, oil ...... 0.03 of actions from review under Executive Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 Corn, pop, grain ...... 0.01 Corn, sweet, kernels plus cobs Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, with husks removed ...... 0 .15 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Cotton, gin byproducts ...... 0.01 October 4, 1993). Because this final rule VII. Congressional Review Act Cotton, undelinted seed ...... 0 .01 has been exempted from review under Egg ...... 0 .002 Executive Order 12866, this final rule is The Congressional Review Act, 5 Fruit, pome, group 11 ...... 0.8 not subject to Executive Order 13211, U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides Fruit, stone, group 12 ...... 2.0 entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning that before a rule may take effect, the Goat, fat ...... 0.05

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28276 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Parts per DATES: This regulation is effective May Industrial Classification System Commodity million 14, 2012. Objections and requests for (NAICS) codes have been provided to hearings must be received on or before assist you and others in determining Goat, meat ...... 0 .01 July 13, 2012, and must be filed in whether this action might apply to Goat, meat byproducts ...... 0.03 accordance with the instructions certain entities. If you have any Grain, aspirated fractions ...... 20 .0 questions regarding the applicability of Grain, cereal, group 15, (except provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also corn, field, grain; except Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY this action to a particular entity, consult corn, pop, grain; except corn, INFORMATION). the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. kernels plus cobs with husks ADDRESSES: EPA has established a removed; except wheat) ...... 3 .0 docket for this action under docket B. How can I get electronic access to Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 ...... 20 identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– other related information? Horse, fat ...... 0.05 OPP–2010–0425. All documents in the You may access a frequently updated Horse, meat ...... 0.01 docket are listed in the docket index electronic version of EPA’s tolerance Horse, meat byproducts ...... 0.03 available at http://www.regulations.gov. regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through Milk ...... 0 .005 Although listed in the index, some the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR Oilseeds, group 20 ...... 0.9 information is not publicly available, site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/ Pea and bean, dried shelled e.g., Confidential Business Information except soybean, subgroup text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/ (CBI) or other information whose Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the 6C ...... 0 .4 disclosure is restricted by statute. Pea and bean, succulent OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this shelled, subgroup 6B ...... 0 .5 Certain other material, such as document electronically, please go Peanut ...... 0 .01 copyrighted material, is not placed on http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select Peanut, refined oil ...... 0.02 the Internet and will be publicly ‘‘Test Methods and Guidelines.’’ Plum, prune ...... 3.0 available only in hard copy form. Potato, wet peel ...... 0.1 Publicly available docket materials are C. How can I file an objection or hearing Rice, bran ...... 4 .5 available in the electronic docket at request? Rice, hulls ...... 8 .0 http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 Sheep, fat ...... 0 .05 available in hard copy, at the OPP U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an Sheep, meat ...... 0.01 Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– Sheep, meat byproducts ...... 0 .03 objection to any aspect of this regulation Soybean, hulls ...... 0 .3 4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), and may also request a hearing on those Soybean, seed ...... 0.15 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The objections. You must file your objection Vegetable, foliage of legume, Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. or request a hearing on this regulation group 7 ...... 30 to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, in accordance with the instructions Vegetables, fruiting, group 8 .... 0 .7 excluding legal holidays. The Docket provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure Vegetable, legume, edible pod- Facility telephone number is (703) 305– proper receipt by EPA, you must ded, subgroup 6A ...... 2.0 5805. identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– Vegetable, tuberous and corm, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OPP–2010–0425 in the subject line on subgroup 1C ...... 0 .02 Wheat, bran ...... 0 .6 Marianne Lewis, Registration Division the first page of your submission. All Wheat, grain ...... 0 .3 (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, objections and requests for a hearing Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 must be in writing, and must be (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, received by the Hearing Clerk on or [Reserved] DC 20460–0001; telephone number: before July 13, 2012. Addresses for mail (c) Tolerances with regional (703) 308–8043; email address: and hand delivery of objections and registrations. [Reserved] [email protected]. hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 178.25(b). [Reserved] In addition to filing an objection or [FR Doc. 2012–11602 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] I. General Information hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please BILLING CODE 6560–50–P A. Does this action apply to me? submit a copy of the filing that does not You may be potentially affected by contain any CBI for inclusion in the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION this action if you are an agricultural public docket. Information not marked AGENCY producer, food manufacturer, or confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 pesticide manufacturer. Potentially may be disclosed publicly by EPA 40 CFR Part 180 affected entities may include, but are without prior notice. Submit a copy of not limited to those engaged in the your non-CBI objection or hearing [EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0425; FRL–9341–8] following activities: request, identified by docket ID number • Crop production (NAICS code 111). Penflufen; Pesticide Tolerances EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0425, by one of • Animal production (NAICS code the following methods: AGENCY: Environmental Protection 112). • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Agency (EPA). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line ACTION: Final rule. 311). instructions for submitting comments. • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS • Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs SUMMARY: This regulation establishes code 32532). (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), tolerances for residues of penflufen in or This listing is not intended to be Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 on multiple commodities which are exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, identified and discussed later in this for readers regarding entities likely to be DC 20460–0001. document. Bayer CropScience requested affected by this action. Other types of • Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public these tolerances under the Federal Food, entities not listed in this unit could also Docket (7502P), Environmental Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). be affected. The North American Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28277

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. give special consideration to exposure rats. Delayed sexual maturation was Crystal Dr. Arlington, VA. Deliveries are of infants and children to the pesticide observed in females in both generations, only accepted during the Docket chemical residue in establishing a and magnitude of the associated decline Facility’s normal hours of operation tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a in body weight was not considered to be (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through reasonable certainty that no harm will a factor in the delay in sexual Friday, excluding legal holidays). result to infants and children from maturation. Developmental toxicity was Special arrangements should be made aggregate exposure to the pesticide not observed in the rat or rabbit, for deliveries of boxed information. The chemical residue * * *.’’ although the dose levels in both studies Docket Facility telephone number is Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) were not considered adequate to assess (703) 305–5805. of FFDCA, and the factors specified in developmental toxicity potential of section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has penflufen. However, there is little II. Summary of Petitioned-For reviewed the available scientific data Tolerance concern that new studies would identify and other relevant information in a developmental endpoint with a no- In the Federal Register of September support of this action. EPA has observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) 8, 2010 (75 FR 54631) (FRL–8843–3), sufficient data to assess the hazards of lower than the NOAEL selected for risk EPA issued a notice pursuant to section and to make a determination on assessment. 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. aggregate exposure for penflufen Decreased motor/locomotor activity 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a including exposure resulting from the was observed in both sexes of rats pesticide petition (PP 0F7711) by Bayer tolerances established by this action. following acute and in female rats CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks following subchronic oral exposure, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, associated with penflufen follows. although neuropathological lesions were NC 27709. The petition requested that not observed in either study. 40 CFR part 180 be amended by A. Toxicological Profile There are no mutagenicity concerns. establishing tolerances for residues of EPA has evaluated the available Carcinogenicity studies with penflufen the penflufen, N-[2-(1,3- toxicity data and considered its validity, dimethylbutyl)phenyl]-5-fluoro-1,3- completeness, and reliability as well as found a statistically significant increase dimethyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, the relationship of the results of the in histiocytic sarcomas in male rats; a in or on alfalfa, forage; alfalfa, hay; studies to human risk. EPA has also marginal increase in brain astrocytomas, vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup considered available information a fatal tumor, in male rats at the high 1C; vegetable, legume, group 6; concerning the variability of the dose; and ovarian adenomas in female vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7; sensitivities of major identifiable rats at the high dose. Although these grain, cereal, group 15, grain, cereal, subgroups of consumers, including three tumors were considered treatment- forage, fodder and straw, group 16; infants and children. Penflufen is an related, they provided weak evidence of oilseed, group 19; cotton, gin by- alkylamide fungicide belonging to the carcinogenicity due to the marginal products at 0.01 parts per million chemical class of carboxamides. The nature of the tumor responses. There (ppm). That notice referenced a reported pesticidal mode of action is as was no evidence of carcinogenicity in summary of the petition prepared by an inhibitor of mitochondrial male or female mice. Given the weak Bayer CropScience, the registrant, respiration by inhibiting succinate evidence indicating any potential for which is available in the docket, dehydrogenase, an enzyme in the carcinogenicity, EPA has determined http://www.regulations.gov. There were electron transport system. that quantification of risk using a non- no comments received in response to The liver and thyroid are target organs linear approach reference dose (i.e., the notice of filing. for penflufen. Increased liver weight, RfD) will adequately account for all Based upon review of the data alterations in clinical chemistry chronic toxicity, including supporting the petition, EPA has made parameters relevant to effects on the carcinogenicity, which could result some minor modifications to some liver, and an increase in the incidence from exposure to penflufen. The NOAEL commodity definitions for consistency of hepatocellular hypertrophy were (38 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/ with EPA naming-conventions for those consistent findings across species and day)) used for establishing the Chronic commodities. The reason for these duration of exposure (28-day, 90-day, RfD is approximately 10-fold lower than changes is explained in Unit IV.D. and 1- to 2-year exposure periods). The the dose (approximately 300 mg/kg/day) hepatic total cytochrome P–450 content, that induced a marginal tumor response. III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and and benzoxyresorufin (BROD) and The EPA has determined that the Determination of Safety pentoxyresorufin (PROD) enzyme chronic population adjusted dose is Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA activities, were shown to be increased in protective of all long-term effects, allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the rats of both sexes following subchronic including potential carcinogenicity. legal limit for a pesticide chemical oral exposure. Additionally, increased Specific information on the studies residue in or on a food) only if EPA incidence of thyroid follicular cell received and the nature of the adverse determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ hypertrophy/hyperplasia was observed effects caused by penflufen as well as Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA across studies and species (no data the NOAEL and the lowest-observed- defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a provided on thyroid hormone levels). adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the reasonable certainty that no harm will The liver and thyroid findings were toxicity studies can be found at http:// result from aggregate exposure to the mostly reversible after a 3-month www.regulations.gov in document pesticide chemical residue, including recovery period in the rat. In the rat and ‘‘Penflufen. Human Health Risk all anticipated dietary exposures and all mouse, following 104 week/78 week Assessment to Support New Uses on other exposures for which there is exposure periods at dose levels up to Potato (Crop Subgroup 1C), Legume reliable information.’’ This includes and/or greater than the limit dose, there Vegetables (Crop Group 6 and Crop exposure through drinking water and in was no increase in the incidence of liver Group 7), Cereal Grains (Crop Group 15 residential settings, but does not include or thyroid tumors. and Crop Group 16), Oilseeds (Crop occupational exposure. Section Reproductive toxicity was observed in Group 20), and Alfalfa’’ in docket ID 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to the 2-generation reproduction study in number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0425.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28278 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ analysis of the doses in each risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in Levels of Concern toxicological study to determine the terms of the probability of an occurrence Once a pesticide’s toxicological dose at which the NOAEL and the of the adverse effect expected in a profile is determined, EPA identifies lowest dose at which adverse effects of lifetime. For more information on the toxicological points of departure (POD) concern are identified (the LOAEL). general principles EPA uses in risk and levels of concern (LOC) to use in Uncertainty/safety factors are used in characterization and a complete evaluating the risk posed by human conjunction with the POD to calculate a description of the risk assessment exposure to the pesticide. For hazards safe exposure level—generally referred process, see http://www.epa.gov/ that have a threshold below which there to as a population-adjusted dose (PAD) pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm. is no appreciable risk, the toxicological or a RfD and a safe margin of exposure A summary of the toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the endpoints for penflufen used for human of reference values for risk assessment. Agency assumes that any amount of risk assessment is shown in the Table of PODs are developed based on a careful exposure will lead to some degree of this unit.

TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PENFLUFEN FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT

Point of departure Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects safety factors risk assessment

Acute dietary (all populations, including NOAEL = 50 mg/ Acute RfD = 0.5 Acute neurotoxicity study in rats. children and women 13–49 years of kg/day. mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day based on decreased motor and age). UFA = 10x aPAD = 0.5 mg/kg/ locomotor activity (39–81% on day of treatment) in fe- UFH = 10x day males. FQPA SF = 1x

Chronic dietary (All populations) ...... NOAEL= 38 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = 0.38 Chronic toxicity study in dogs. day. mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 357/425 mg/kg/day, based on decreased ter- UFA = 10x cPAD = 0.38 mg/ minal body weight and body weight gain (females), in- UFH = 10x kg/day creased prothrombin time (males), increased alkaline FQPA SF = 1x phosphate activity, decreased cholesterol, increased GGT levels, decreased albumin and albumin/globulin ratio, decreased calcium and phosphorus, increased liver weights, increased incidence of focal hepatocellular brown pigment and hepatocellular hypertrophy, and an increased incidence of thyroid follicular cell hypertrophy in both sexes, and in increased incidence of zona glo- merulosa vacuolation of the adrenal gland in females.

Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ...... Quantification of risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD) will adequately account for all chronic tox- icity, including carcinogenicity that could result from exposure to penflufen.

UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to ac- count for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. Mg/kg/day = milligrams/kilograms/day.

C. Exposure Assessment in food, EPA used tolerance-level potatoes and assumed 100 PCT for all 1. Dietary exposure from food and residues, default dietary exposure commodities. feed uses. In evaluating dietary evaluation model (DEEM) processing iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether exposure to penflufen, EPA considered factors for dried potatoes and assumed quantitative cancer exposure and risk exposure under the petitioned-for 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all assessments are appropriate for a food- tolerances. EPA assessed dietary commodities. use pesticide based on the weight of the exposures from penflufen in food as ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting evidence from cancer studies and other follows: the chronic dietary exposure assessment relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute EP used the food consumption data using a linear or non-linear approach. If dietary exposure and risk assessments from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998 sufficient information on the are performed for a food-use pesticide, CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA carcinogenic mode of action is available, if a toxicological study has indicated the used tolerance-level residues, default a threshold or non-linear approach is possibility of an effect of concern DEEM processing factors for dried used based on an earlier non-cancer key event. If carcinogenic mode of action occurring as a result of a 1-day or single potatoes and assumed 100 PCT for all exposure. data are not available, or if the mode of commodities. Such effects were identified for action data determines a mutagenic penflufen. In estimating acute dietary ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting mode of action, a default linear cancer exposure, EPA used food consumption the chronic dietary exposure assessment slope factor approach is utilized. Based information from the United States EPA used the food consumption data on the data summarized in Unit III.A., Department of Agriculture (USDA) from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998 EPA has concluded that a non-linear 1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA RfD approach is appropriate for Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by used tolerance-level residues, default assessing cancer risk to penflufen. Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels DEEM processing factors for dried Cancer risk was assessed using the same

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28279

exposure estimates as discussed in Unit does not appear to produce a toxic risk assessment for penflufen. There are III.C.1.ii. metabolite produced by other no residual uncertainties with regard to iv. Anticipated residue and PCT substances. For the purposes of this pre- and/or postnatal toxicity or information. EPA did not use tolerance action, therefore, EPA has neurotoxicity, and exposure; therefore, anticipated residue and/or PCT assumed that penflufen does not have a reduction of the 10X FQPA safety factor information in the dietary assessment common mechanism of toxicity with for penflufen to 1X is appropriate based for penflufen. Tolerance level residues other substances. For information on the following findings: and/or 100 PCT were assumed for all regarding EPA’s efforts to determine i. The toxicity database for penflufen food commodities. which chemicals have a common is complete for consideration of 2. Dietary exposure from drinking mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate estimated risks for all populations of water. The Agency used screening level the cumulative effects of such concern. water exposure models in the dietary chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at ii. Although decreased motor activity exposure analysis and risk assessment http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ was observed following acute oral for penflufen in drinking water. These cumulative. exposure, no neuropathological lesions simulation models take into account were observed and there is little concern data on the physical, chemical, and fate/ D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children for neurotoxicity. There is no need for transport characteristics of penflufen. a developmental neurotoxicity study or 1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of Further information regarding EPA additional UFs to account for FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply drinking water models used in pesticide neurotoxicity. exposure assessment can be found at an additional tenfold (10X) margin of iii. Although there is some evidence http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/ safety for infants and children in the of qualitative sensitivity of the young water/index.htm. case of threshold effects to account for Based on the First Index Reservoir prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the (delayed sexual maturation and Screening Tool (FIRST) and Screening completeness of the database on toxicity decreased litter size), the effects are well Concentration in Ground Water (SCI– and exposure unless EPA determines characterized, and there is a clear GROW) models, the estimated drinking based on reliable data that a different NOAEL. The dose level where offspring water concentrations (EDWCs) of margin of safety will be safe for infants effects were identified in the penflufen for acute exposures are and children. This additional margin of reproduction study is comparable to the estimated to be 11.4 parts per billion safety is commonly referred to as the high dose used in the rat developmental (ppb) for surface water and 16.6 ppb for FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying toxicity study where no effects were ground water. The EDWC of penflufen this provision, EPA either retains the identified in either the maternal or fetal for chronic exposures for non-cancer default value of 10X, or uses a different rat. Since minimal/no effects were assessments are estimated to be 1.8 ppb additional safety factor when reliable observed in the developmental toxicity for surface water and 16.6 ppb for data available to EPA support the choice studies following exposure of the ground water. of a different factor. maternal animals to dose levels equal to Modeled estimates of drinking water 2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. and greater than those tested in the concentrations were directly entered In the rat multi-generation reproduction studies used for risk assessment, there is into the dietary exposure model. For study there was slight decrease in litter little concern that new studies would acute dietary risk assessment, the water size, delayed sexual maturation, identify a developmental endpoint with concentration value of 16.6 ppb was decreased body weight/gain, decreased a NOAEL lower than the NOAELs used to assess the contribution to brain, spleen, and thymus weights were selected for risk assessment. drinking water. For chronic dietary risk noted in the offspring. At the same dose iv. There are no residual uncertainties assessment, the water concentration of level the adults exhibited decreased identified in the exposure databases. value 16.6 ppb was used to assess the body weight/gain, alteration in food The dietary food exposure assessments contribution to drinking water. consumption, decreased thymus weight, were performed based on 100 PCT and 3. From non-dietary exposure. The and decrease spleen weights. In the rat tolerance-level residues. EPA made term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in developmental toxicity study, the conservative (protective) assumptions in this document to refer to non- maternal findings (decreased body the ground and surface water modeling occupational, non-dietary exposure weight gain) at the highest dose tested used to assess exposure to penflufen in (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, (HDT) are considered minimal. No drinking water. These assessments will indoor pest control, termiticides, and adverse effects were observed on the not underestimate the exposure and flea and tick control on pets). foetuses. In the rabbit developmental risks posed by penflufen. toxicity study, the maternal findings Penflufen is not registered for any E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of (decreased body weight gain) at the HDT specific use patterns that would result Safety in residential exposure. are considered minimal. No adverse 4. Cumulative effects from substances effects were observed at the HDT. EPA determines whether acute and with a common mechanism of toxicity. 3. Conclusion. The Agency chronic dietary pesticide exposures are Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA recommends that the 10X FQPA safety safe by comparing aggregate exposure requires that, when considering whether factor for the protection of infants and estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and to establish, modify, or revoke a children, be reduced to 1X. The risk chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer tolerance, the Agency consider assessments conducted for penflufen risks, EPA calculates the lifetime ‘‘available information’’ concerning the were based on the most sensitive probability of acquiring cancer given the cumulative effects of a particular endpoints in the toxicity database, and estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other the NOAELs selected for risk assessment intermediate-, and chronic-term risks substances that have a common are considered protective of potential are evaluated by comparing the mechanism of toxicity.’’ developmental, neurotoxic, and estimated aggregate food, water, and EPA has not found penflufen to share immunotoxic effects for infants and residential exposure to the appropriate a common mechanism of toxicity with children. Highly conservative exposure PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE any other substances, and penflufen estimates were incorporated into the exists.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28280 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD) V. Conclusion assessment takes into account acute will adequately account for all chronic Therefore, tolerances are established exposure estimates from dietary toxicity, including carcinogenicity, for residues of penflufen, in or on consumption of food and drinking which could result from exposure to alfalfa, forage; alfalfa, hay; vegetable, water. A highly conservative acute penflufen. The NOAEL (38 mg/kg/day) tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C; dietary exposure assessment used for establishing the chronic RfD is vegetable, legume, group 6; vegetable, demonstrated that penflufen does not approximately 10-fold lower than the foliage of legume, group 7; grain, cereal, pose an unacceptable aggregate risk. dose (approximately 300 mg/kg/day) group 15, grain, cereal, forage, fodder 2. Chronic risk. There are no that induced a marginal tumor response. and straw, group 16; oilseed, group 19; residential uses for penflufen; therefore, The EPA has determined that the cotton, gin by-products at 0.01 ppm. the chronic aggregate risk assessment chronic population adjusted dose is includes exposures from dietary protective of all long-term effects, VI. Statutory and Executive Order consumption of food and water only. A including potential carcinogenicity. Reviews highly conservative chronic aggregate 6. Determination of safety. Based on This final rule establishes tolerances dietary exposure assessment under section 408(d) of FFDCA in demonstrated that penflufen does not these risk assessments, EPA concludes response to a petition submitted to the pose an unacceptable aggregate chronic that there is a reasonable certainty that Agency. The Office of Management and risk. no harm will result to the general 3. Short-term risk. There are no population, or to infants and children Budget (OMB) has exempted these types residential uses of penflufen; therefore a from aggregate exposure to penflufen of actions from review under Executive short-term aggregate risk assessment residues. Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, was not conducted for this chemical. IV. Other Considerations 4. Intermediate-term risk. There are October 4, 1993). Because this final rule no residential uses of penflufen; A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology has been exempted from review under therefore an intermediate-term aggregate Executive Order 12866, this final rule is risk assessment was not conducted for Adequate enforcement methodology not subject to Executive Order 13211, this chemical. is available to enforce the tolerance entitled Actions Concerning Regulations 5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. expression. The method involves That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, population. In a rat carcinogenicity extraction of samples with acetonitrile/ Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May study with penflufen a statistically water, cleanup using solid phase 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, significant increase in histiocytic extraction, and analysis of penflufen by entitled Protection of Children from sarcomas with a positive trend in male liquid chromatography/mass Environmental Health Risks and Safety rats only (but in the absence of a dose spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) (EL–002– Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). response and lack of pre-neoplastic P09–03). This final rule does not contain any lesions) were seen. A marginal increase information collections subject to OMB B. International Residue Limits in brain astrocytomas was also observed approval under the Paperwork in males at the high dose; however, this In making its tolerance decisions, EPA Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et effect was not dose-related, did not seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with seq., nor does it require any special reach statistical significance, and there international standards whenever considerations under Executive Order was no overall trend. In addition, there possible, consistent with U.S. food 12898, entitled Federal Actions to were no pre-neoplastic lesions, such as safety standards and agricultural Address Environmental Justice in glial proliferations, which are a good practices. EPA considers the Minority Populations and Low-Income indicator of chemical tumor induction international maximum residue limits Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, (i.e., there will be changes in the cells (MRLs) established by the Codex 1994). prior to transformation to a neoplasm). Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as Since tolerances and exemptions that The ovarian adenomas observed at the required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). are established on the basis of a petition high dose also showed no dose The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as response, no pair-wise significance, no Food and Agriculture Organization/ the tolerance in this final rule, do not decrease in latency, and there were no World Health Organization food require the issuance of a proposed rule, pre-neoplastic lesions such as standards program, and it is recognized the requirements of the Regulatory hyperplasia of the epithelial cells of the as an international food safety Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et endometrium. Additionally, there was standards-setting organization in trade seq.) do not apply. no evidence of carcinogenicity in male agreements to which the United States This final rule directly regulates or female mice (at doses that were is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance growers, food processors, food handlers, judged to be adequate to assess the that is different from a Codex MRL; and food retailers, not States or tribes, carcinogenic potential), no concern for however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) nor does this action alter the mutagenicity (in vivo or in vitro) for the requires that EPA explain the reasons relationships or distribution of power parent molecule or the two metabolites, for departing from the Codex level. and responsibilities established by and there were no other lines of Congress in the preemption provisions evidence (such as structure-activity The Codex has not established a MRL of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, relationship). Although these three for penflufen. the Agency has determined that this tumors were considered treatment- C. Revisions to Petitioned-For action will not have a substantial direct related, they provided weak evidence of Tolerances effect on States or tribal governments, carcinogenicity due to the marginal on the relationship between the national nature of the tumor responses and the Some minor modifications to government and the States or tribal other factors mentioned in this unit. commodity definitions initially governments, or on the distribution of Given the weak evidence indicating any submitted were made to be consistent power and responsibilities among the potential for carcinogenicity, EPA has with the updated EPA naming- various levels of government or between determined that quantification of risk conventions for commodities. the Federal Government and Indian

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28281

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined specified in the table is to be (CFR). Elsewhere in today’s Federal that Executive Order 13132, entitled determined by measuring only Register, EPA is publishing a proposed Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, penflufen N-[2-(1,3- rule revoking the same testing 1999) and Executive Order 13175, dimethylbutyl)phenyl]-5-fluoro-1,3- requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61 entitled Consultation and Coordination dimethyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, that were published in the March 16, with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR in or on the following commodities. 2012 direct final rule. 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply DATES: Parts per This final rule is effective May to this final rule. In addition, this final Commodity 15, 2012. rule does not impose any enforceable million FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For duty or contain any unfunded mandate Alfalfa, forage ...... 0.01 as described under Title II of the Alfalfa, hay ...... 0.01 technical information contact: Catherine Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Cotton, gin by-products ...... 0.01 Roman, Chemical Control Division (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). Grain cereal, forage, fodder and (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention This action does not involve any straw, group 16 ...... 0.01 and Toxics, Environmental Protection technical standards that would require Grain, cereal, group 15 ...... 0.01 Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Agency consideration of voluntary Oilseed, group 20 ...... 0.01 Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone consensus standards pursuant to section Vegetable, foliage of legume, number: (202) 564–8157; email address: 12(d) of the National Technology group 7 ...... 0.01 [email protected]. Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 Vegetable, legume, group 6 ...... 0.01 Vegetable, tuberous and corm For general information contact: The (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section subgroup 1C ...... 0.01 TSCA-Hotline, ABVI–Goodwill, 422 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY VII. Congressional Review Act (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– [Reserved] 1404; email address: TSCA- The Congressional Review Act, 5 (c) Tolerances with regional [email protected]. U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides registrations. [Reserved] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that before a rule may take effect, the (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. agency promulgating the rule must [Reserved] I. Does this action apply to me? submit a rule report to each House of [FR Doc. 2012–11629 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the Congress and to the Comptroller A list of potentially affected entities is General of the United States. EPA will BILLING CODE 6560–50–P provided in the Federal Register issue submit a report containing this rule and of March 16, 2012 (77 FR 15609) (FRL– other required information to the U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 9335–6). If you have questions regarding Senate, the U.S. House of AGENCY the applicability of this action to a Representatives, and the Comptroller particular entity, consult the technical General of the United States prior to 40 CFR Part 799 person listed under FOR FURTHER publication of this final rule in the INFORMATION CONTACT. Federal Register. This final rule is not [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033; FRL–9350–2] II. What rule is being withdrawn? a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. RIN 2070–AD16 804(2). In the March 16, 2012 Federal Withdrawal of Revocation of TSCA List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Register, EPA issued a revocation of Section 4 Testing Requirements for some or all of the TSCA section 4 testing Environmental protection, One High Production Volume Chemical requirements for 10 chemical substances Administrative practice and procedure, Substance by direct final rule. In accordance with Agricultural commodities, Pesticides the procedures described in the March and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 16, 2012 Federal Register document, requirements. EPA is withdrawing the revocation of ACTION: Final rule. Dated: May 3, 2012. certain testing requirements for C.I. Steven Bradbury, SUMMARY: In the Federal Register issue Pigment Blue 61 and also restoring the Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. of March 16, 2012, EPA published a original testing requirements found in the CFR, because the Agency received Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is direct final rule revoking certain testing an adverse comment concerning this amended as follows: requirements promulgated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) chemical substance. The final rule PART 180—[AMENDED] for 10 chemical substances, including revoking testing requirements for the benzenesulfonic acid, [[4-[[4- other 9 chemical substances described ■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 (phenylamino)phenyl][4-(phenylimino)- in the March 16, 2012 Federal Register continues to read as follows: 2,5-cyclohexadien-1- document is otherwise unaffected by the Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. ylidene]methyl]phenyl]amino]- (CAS withdrawal of the revocation for C.I. Pigment Blue 61. Elsewhere in today’s ■ No. 1324–76–1), also known as C.I. 2. Section 180.664 is added to subpart Federal Register, EPA is proposing a C to read as follows: Pigment Blue 61. EPA received an adverse comment regarding C.I. Pigment rule to revoke certain test rule § 180.664 Penflufen; tolerances for Blue 61. This document withdraws the requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61. residues. revocation of testing requirements for The docket identification (ID) number (a) General. Tolerances are C.I. Pigment Blue 61 as described in the for the test rule concerning this established for residues of the fungicide March 16, 2012 direct final rule. In chemical substance was established at penflufen, including its metabolites and withdrawing the revocation, this EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033. That degradates, in or on the following document also restores the original docket includes information considered commodities listed in the table. testing requirements as currently shown by the Agency in developing those rules Compliance with the tolerance levels in the Code of Federal Regulations and the adverse comment.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:07 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28282 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

III. How do I access the docket? List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 799 PART 799—[AMENDED] To access the docket, please go to Environmental protection, Chemicals, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 799 http://www.regulations.gov and follow Hazardous substances, Reporting and continues to read as follows: the online instructions using the docket recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2603, 2611, 2625. ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033. Dated: May 8, 2012. ■ Additional information about the 2. In § 799.5085, revise the entry James J. Jones, Docket Facility is also provided under ‘‘CAS No. 1324–76–1’’ in Table 2 of Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of paragraph (j) to read as follows: ADDRESSES in the March 16, 2012 Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Federal Register document. If you have § 799.5085 Chemical testing requirements questions, consult the technical person Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is for first group of high production volume listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION amended as follows: chemicals (HPV1). CONTACT. * * * * * (j) * * *

TABLE 2—CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS

Required tests CAS No. Chemical name Class (see table 3 of this section)

******* 1324–76–1 ...... Benzenesulfonic acid, [[4-[[4-(phenylamino)phenyl][4-(phenylimino)-2,5-cyclohexadien- 2 A, B, C1, D, E1, E2, F1. 1-ylidene]methyl]phenyl]amino]-.

*******

* * * * * listed in the third column of the will not be suspended and will continue [FR Doc. 2012–11493 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] following tables. to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If insurance. A notice withdrawing the you want to determine whether a suspension of such communities will be particular community was suspended published in the Federal Register. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND on the suspension date or for further In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood SECURITY information, contact David Stearrett, Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that Federal Insurance and Mitigation identifies the Special Flood Hazard Federal Emergency Management Administration, Federal Emergency Agency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2953. The date of the FIRM, if one has been 44 CFR Part 64 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP published, is indicated in the fourth [Docket ID FEMA–2012–0003; Internal enables property owners to purchase column of the table. No direct Federal Agency Docket No. FEMA–8229] Federal flood insurance that is not financial assistance (except assistance otherwise generally available from pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Suspension of Community Eligibility private insurers. In return, communities Disaster Relief and Emergency AGENCY: Federal Emergency agree to adopt and administer local Assistance Act not in connection with a Management Agency, DHS. floodplain management measures aimed flood) may be provided for construction ACTION: Final rule. at protecting lives and new construction or acquisition of buildings in identified from future flooding. Section 1315 of SFHAs for communities not SUMMARY: This rule identifies the National Flood Insurance Act of participating in the NFIP and identified communities where the sale of flood 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, for more than a year on FEMA’s initial insurance has been authorized under prohibits the sale of NFIP flood FIRM for the community as having the National Flood Insurance Program insurance unless an appropriate public flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the (NFIP) that are scheduled for body adopts adequate floodplain Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, suspension on the effective dates listed management measures with effective 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This within this rule because of enforcement measures. The prohibition against certain types of noncompliance with the floodplain communities listed in this document no Federal assistance becomes effective for management requirements of the longer meet that statutory requirement the communities listed on the date program. If the Federal Emergency for compliance with program shown in the last column. The Management Agency (FEMA) receives regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Administrator finds that notice and documentation that the community has Accordingly, the communities will be adopted the required floodplain suspended on the effective date in the public comment procedures under 5 management measures prior to the third column. As of that date, flood U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and effective suspension date given in this insurance will no longer be available in unnecessary because communities listed rule, the suspension will not occur and the community. We recognize that some in this final rule have been adequately a notice of this will be provided by of these communities may adopt and notified. publication in the Federal Register on a submit the required documentation of Each community receives 6-month, subsequent date. legally enforceable floodplain 90-day, and 30-day notification letters DATES: Effective Dates: The effective management measures after this rule is addressed to the Chief Executive Officer date of each community’s scheduled published but prior to the actual stating that the community will be suspension is the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) suspension date. These communities

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:07 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28283

suspended unless the required enforcement measures. The information for purposes of the floodplain management measures are communities listed no longer comply Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. met prior to the effective suspension with the statutory requirements, and 3501 et seq. date. Since these notifications were after the effective date, flood insurance List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64 made, this final rule may take effect will no longer be available in the within less than 30 days. communities unless remedial action Flood insurance, Floodplains. National Environmental Policy Act. takes place. Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is This rule is categorically excluded from Regulatory Classification. This final amended as follows: the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, rule is not a significant regulatory action Environmental Considerations. No under the criteria of section 3(f) of PART 64—[AMENDED] environmental impact assessment has Executive Order 12866 of September 30, been prepared. 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 64 Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 58 FR 51735. continues to read as follows: Administrator has determined that this Executive Order 13132, Federalism. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; rule is exempt from the requirements of This rule involves no policies that have Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, the Regulatory Flexibility Act because federalism implications under Executive 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, the National Flood Insurance Act of Order 13132. 3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376. 1968, as amended, Section 1315, 42 Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice § 64.6 [Amended] U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance Reform. This rule meets the applicable coverage unless an appropriate public standards of Executive Order 12988. ■ 2. The tables published under the body adopts adequate floodplain Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule authority of § 64.6 are amended as management measures with effective does not involve any collection of follows:

Date certain Federal assist- State and Location Community Effective date authorization/cancellation of Current effective ance no longer No. sale of flood insurance in community map date available in SFHAs

Region III Virginia: Prince George County, Unincor- 510204 May 17, 1974, Emerg; May 1, 1980, Reg; .. May 16, 2012 ... May 16, 2012. porated Areas. May 16, 2012, Susp ...... Region IV Florida: Collier County, Unincorporated Areas ... 120067 July 10, 1970, Emerg; September 14, 1979, ...... do* ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Everglades City, City of, Collier County 125104 July 14, 1970, Emerg; October 6, 1972, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Marco Island, City of, Collier County .... 120426 N/A, Emerg; October 27, 1998, Reg; May ...... do ...... Do. 16, 2012, Susp. Naples, City of, Collier County ...... 125130 May 8, 1970, Emerg; July 2, 1971, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. Seminole Tribe of Florida, Collier and 120685 N/A, Emerg; March 25, 2002, Reg; May 16, ...... do ...... Do. Broward Counties. 2012, Susp. Mississippi: Greenwood, City of, Leflore County...... 280102 June 7, 1973, Emerg; March 18, 1980, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Itta Bena, City of, Leflore County ...... 280103 January 17, 1974, Emerg; April 3, 1978, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Leflore County, Unincorporated Areas.. 280101 August 28, 1973, Emerg; November 1, ...... do ...... Do. 1979, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Morgan City, Town of, Leflore County .. 280104 March 1, 1974, Emerg; April 3, 1978, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. Schlater, Town of, Leflore County ...... 280105 May 3, 1976, Emerg; September 27, 1985, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Sidon, Town of, Leflore County ...... 280106 January 30, 1974, Emerg; March 15, 1978, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Region V Illinois: Catlin, Village of, Vermilion County...... 170661 August 21, 1975, Emerg; September 4, ...... do ...... Do. 1985, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Danville, City of, Vermilion County ...... 170662 June 16, 1975, Emerg; July 18, 1983, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. Georgetown, City of, Vermilion County 170665 July 10, 1975, Emerg; February 11, 1976, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Hoopeston, City of, Vermilion County ... 170667 November 11, 1976, Emerg; July 3, 1985, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Muncie, Village of, Vermilion County .... 170963 July 11, 1995, Emerg; N/A, Reg; May 16, ...... do ...... Do. 2012, Susp. Potomac, Village of, Vermilion County .. 170799 September 23, 1975, Emerg; September ...... do ...... Do. 18, 1985, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:07 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28284 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Date certain Federal assist- State and Location Community Effective date authorization/cancellation of Current effective ance no longer No. sale of flood insurance in community map date available in SFHAs

Rankin, Village of, Vermilion County..... 170668 August 1, 1975, Emerg; September 18, ...... do ...... Do. 1985, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Vermilion County, Unincorporated 170935 February 28, 1991, Emerg; June 1, 1995, ...... do ...... Do. Areas. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Westville, Village of, Vermilion County 170671 August 7, 1975, Emerg; August 19, 1985, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Ohio: Celina, City of, Mercer County ...... 390393 January 22, 1975, Emerg; March 18, 1986, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Coldwater, Village of, Mercer County ... 390394 July 1, 1975, Emerg; February 2, 1984, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Mendon, Village of, Mercer County ...... 390671 July 31, 1975, Emerg; November 15, 1985, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Montezuma, Village of, Mercer County 390396 June 11, 1997, Emerg; April 15, 2002, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. Rockford, Village of, Mercer County ..... 390397 July 21, 1975, Emerg; February 1, 1986, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Region VI Louisiana:. Mandeville, City of, Saint Tammany 220202 March 12, 1974, Emerg; September 28, ...... do ...... Do. Parish. 1979, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Texas: Brazos County, Unincorporated Areas.. 481195 January 13, 1986, Emerg; July 2, 1992, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Bryan, City of, Brazos County ...... 480082 May 2, 1974, Emerg; May 19, 1981, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. Wixon Valley, City of, Brazos County ... 481636 N/A, Emerg; September 4, 2001, Reg; May ...... do ...... Do. 16, 2012, Susp. Region VII Iowa: Cerro Gordo County, Unincorporated 190853 December 29, 1999, Emerg; December 1, ...... do ...... Do. Areas. 2001, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Clear Lake, City of, Cerro Gordo Coun- 190059 August 7, 1975, Emerg; August 4, 1987, ...... do ...... Do. ty. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Mason City, City of, Cerro Gordo Coun- 190060 March 21, 1975, Emerg; December 2, ...... do ...... Do. ty. 1980, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Plymouth, City of, Cerro Gordo County 190061 May 24, 1991, Emerg; January 1, 1992, ...... do ...... Do. Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Rock Falls, City of, Cerro Gordo County 190351 July 4, 1994, Emerg; July 1, 1997, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. Missouri: Brunswick, City of, Chariton County ..... 290074 November 12, 1975, Emerg; February 2, ...... do ...... Do. 1983, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Chariton County, Unincorporated Areas 290073 January 12, 1984, Emerg; December 3, 1987, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Dalton, Village of, Chariton County...... 290464 December 2, 1994, Emerg; October 10, ...... do ...... Do. 2003, Reg; May 16, 2012, Susp. Region IX Nevada: Eureka County, Unincorporated Areas 320028 March 9, 1984, Emerg; April 1, 1988, Reg; ...... do ...... Do. May 16, 2012, Susp. * do = Ditto. Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:07 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28285

Dated: May 1, 2012. 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 2. AAR David L. Miller, Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 IV. Section-by-Section Analysis Associate Administrator, Federal Insurance p.m. Monday through Friday, except V. Regulatory Impact and Notices and Mitigation Administration, Department Federal holidays. A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Instructions: All submissions must Management Agency. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive include the agency name and docket Order 13272 [FR Doc. 2012–11524 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] number or Regulatory Identification C. Paperwork Reduction Act BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note D. Federalism Implications that all petitions received will be posted E. Environmental Impact without change to www.regulations.gov F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION including any personal information. G. Energy Impact Please see the Privacy Act heading in H. Privacy Act Federal Railroad Administration the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section I. Executive Summary of this document for Privacy Act 49 CFR Part 236 information related to any submitted For years, FRA has supported the [Docket No. FRA–2011–0028, Notice No. 3] petitions, comments, or materials. implementation of positive train control Docket: For access to the docket to (PTC) systems, forecasting substantial RIN 2130–AC27 read background documents or benefits of advanced train control technology in supporting a variety of Positive Train Control Systems (RRR) comments received, go to www.regulations.gov or to Room W12– business and safety purposes. However, AGENCY: Federal Railroad 140 on the Ground level of the West FRA repetitively noted that an Administration (FRA), Department of Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., immediate regulatory mandate for PTC Transportation (DOT). Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 system implementation could not be ACTION: Final rule. p.m. Monday through Friday, except justified based upon normal cost-benefit Federal holidays. principals relying on direct safety SUMMARY: FRA amends the regulations benefits. In 2005, FRA promulgated FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: implementing a provision of the Rail regulations providing for the voluntary Thomas McFarlin, Office of Safety Safety Improvement Act of 2008 that implementation of processor-based Assurance and Compliance, Staff requires certain passenger and freight signal and train control systems. See 70 Director, Signal & Train Control railroads to install positive train control FR 11,052 (Mar. 7, 2005) (codified at 49 Division, Federal Railroad (PTC) systems. This final rule removes CFR part 236, subpart H). Administration, Mail Stop 25, West regulatory provisions that require As a consequence of the number and railroads to either conduct further Building 3rd Floor West, Room W35– 332, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., severity of certain very public accidents, analyses or meet certain risk-based coupled with a series of other less criteria in order to avoid PTC system Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202– 493–6203); or Jason Schlosberg, Trial publicized accidents, Congress passed implementation on track segments that RSIA mandating the implementation of do not transport poison- or toxic-by- Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, RCC– PTC systems on lines meeting certain inhalation hazardous (PIH) materials 10, Mail Stop 10, West Building 3rd thresholds. RSIA requires PTC system traffic and are not used for intercity or Floor, Room W31–207, 1200 New Jersey implementation on all Class I railroad commuter rail passenger transportation Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 lines that carry PIH materials and 5 as of December 31, 2015. (telephone: 202–493–6032). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FRA is million gross tons or more of annual DATES: This final rule is effective July traffic, and on any railroad’s main line 13, 2012. Petitions for reconsideration issuing this final rule to amend the regulatory requirements contained in 49 tracks over which intercity or commuter must be received on or before July 13, rail passenger train service is regularly 2012. Petitions for reconsideration will CFR part 236, subpart I, related to a railroad’s ability to remove track provided. In addition, RSIA provided be posted in the docket for this FRA with the authority to require PTC proceeding. Comments on any segments from the necessity of implementing PTC systems as mandated system implementation on any other submitted petition for reconsideration line. must be received on or before August by Section 104 of the Railroad Safety 27, 2012. Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law In accordance with its statutory authority, FRA’s subsequent final rule, ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration 110–432, 122 Stat. 4854 (Oct. 16, 2008) issued January 15, 2010, and amended and comments on petitions for (codified at 49 U.S.C. 20157) reconsideration: Any petitions for (hereinafter ‘‘RSIA’’) based on the track on September 27, 2010, potentially reconsideration or comments on segments not carrying PIH traffic as of required PTC system implementation on petitions for reconsideration related to December 31, 2015. certain track segments that carried PIH Docket No. FRA–2011–0028, may be traffic and 5 million gross tons or more Table of Contents for Supplementary of annual traffic in 2008 but that will submitted by any of the following Information methods: not, as of December 31, 2015, carry PIH • Web site: The Federal eRulemaking I. Executive Summary traffic, and will not be used for intercity Portal, www.regulations.gov. Follow the II. Background or commuter rail passenger Web site’s online instructions for A. Regulatory History transportation that otherwise requires B. Litigation and Congressional Hearings PTC installation under the rule. Per the submitting comments. III. Public Hearing, Comments, and FRA • Fax: 202–493–2251. regulation, the determination would be • Response based upon whether the subject track Mail: Docket Management Facility, A. Routing Concerns and Shipper U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 Participation segment would pass what has been New Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140, B. Common Carrier Obligations called the alternative route analysis and Washington, DC 20590. C. Passenger Rail Impact the residual risk analysis (the ‘‘two • Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on D. Cost-Benefit Analysis qualifying tests’’), which are described the Ground level of the West Building, 1. Trade Associations below.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28286 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Upon issuance of the PTC final rule, Settlement Agreement further provided For the first 20-years of this final rule, the Association of American Railroads that FRA would consider public the estimated quantified benefits to the (AAR) filed suit in the U.S. Court of comments on the NPRMs in rail industry due to the regulatory relief Appeals for the District of Columbia determining whether to amend the PTC total approximately $620 million Circuit challenging the two qualifying rule. The Settlement Agreement also discounted at 7 percent and $818 tests provisions of the final rule. After provides that upon conclusion of the million discounted at 3 percent. the parties filed their briefs, they current rulemaking, the parties will Substantial cost savings will accrue executed a settlement agreement determine whether to file a joint motion largely from not installing PTC system (Settlement Agreement). In the to dismiss with prejudice or advise the wayside components along Settlement Agreement, FRA agreed to Court that they are unable to resolve all approximately 10,000 miles of track. issue a notice of proposed rulemaking issues involved in the court suit. Although these rail lines would forego (NPRM) proposing to amend the PTC Consistent with the Settlement some risk reduction, the reductions will rule to eliminate the two qualifying tests Agreement, FRA issued an NPRM in likely be relatively small since these and to also issue a separate NPRM that this proceeding on August 24, 2011, lines pose a much lower risk of will address the issues of how to handle proposing to eliminate the two accidents because they generally do not en route failures of PTC-equipped qualifying tests. Having considered the carry passenger trains or PIH materials, trains, circumstances under which a public comments on the NPRM, FRA is and generally have lower accident signal system may be removed after PTC promulgating this final rule eliminating exposure. The analysis shows that if the system installation, and whether yard the two qualifying tests. FRA is in the assumptions are correct, the savings of movements and certain other train process of developing the second NPRM the proposed action far outweigh the movements should qualify for a de which will address other possible cost. The following table presents the minimis exception to the PTC rule. The amendments to the PTC rule. expected quantified benefits:

BENEFITS (20-YEAR, DISCOUNTED)

Costs avoided 7% Discount 3% Discount

Reduced Mitigation Costs, Including Maintenance ...... $91,793,822 $121,119,324 Reduced Wayside Costs, Including Maintenance ...... 515,695,631 680,445,643 Reduced Locomotive Costs, Including Maintenance ...... 12,479,834 16,466,785

Total Benefits ...... 619,969,287 818,031,752

For the same 20-year period, the PTC system. A substantial part of the significantly less risk because they estimated quantified cost totals $26.7 accident reduction that FRA expects generally do not carry passenger trains million discounted at 7 percent and from PTC systems required under prior or PIH materials and generally have $39.3 million discounted at 3 percent. rules comes from reducing high- lower accident exposure. The following The costs associated with the regulatory consequence accidents involving tables present the expected total costs of relief result from accidents that will not passenger trains or the release of PIH the final rule as well as the breakdown be prevented due to the affected track materials. FRA believes that the lines of the costs by element: segments not being equipped with a impacted by this final rule pose

COSTS (20-YEAR, DISCOUNTED)

Foregone reductions in 7% Discount 3% Discount

Fatality Prevention ...... $11,453,106 $16,860,327 Injury Prevention ...... 4,254,484 6,263,104 Train Delay ...... 117,793 173,406 Property Damage ...... 10,163,835 14,962,367 Equipment Cleanup ...... 143,273 210,915 Environmental Cleanup ...... 430,995 634,475 Evacuations ...... 138,780 204,301

Total Costs ...... 26,702,267 39,308,896

FRA has also performed a sensitivity expected case (10,000 miles), and low The net amounts for each case, analysis for a high case (14,000 miles), case (7,000 miles). subtracting the costs from the benefits, provide the following results:

Net societal benefits 7% Discount 3% Discount

Expected Case (10,000 miles) ...... $593,267,020 $778,722,856 High Case (14,000 miles) ...... 793,856,299 1,041,764,269 Low Case (7,000 miles) ...... 442,825,061 581,441,797

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28287

Further, the benefit-cost ratios under the scenarios analyzed range between 20:1 and 25:1.

Benefit-cost ratio 7% Discount 3% Discount

Expected Case ...... 23.22 20.81 High Case ...... 22.24 19.93 Low Case ...... 24.69 22.13

II. Background subpart I to 49 CFR part 236 (the ‘‘PTC the host railroad might avoid actual PTC rule’’). Subsequently, FRA received a system implementation by filing a A. Regulatory History number of petitions for reconsideration supported RFA for FRA approval. Each As a consequence of the number and to the final rule and a number of such RFA must be supported with the severity of certain widely publicized comments responding to the request for data defined under § 236.1005(b)(2) and accidents, coupled with a series of other further comments. In a letter dated July (b)(4)(i), and satisfy the two qualifying accidents receiving less media attention, 8, 2010, FRA denied all of the petitions tests that were promulgated under Congress passed RSIA, mandating for reconsideration. On September 27, FRA’s statutory authority to require PTC implementation of PTC systems by 2010, FRA issued a new final rule with system implementation to be installed December 31, 2015, on lines meeting clarifying amendments to the PTC rule. on lines in addition to those required to certain specified criteria, and giving Under the current regulations be equipped by RSIA. If a track segment FRA authority to require the PTC system applicable to the existing railroads, each fails either of these tests, FRA would implementation on other lines. 75 FR PTCIP must have included the sequence deny the request, thus requiring PTC 2598 (Jan. 15, 2010). Under RSIA, such and schedule in which track segments system implementation on the track PTC system implementation must be required to be equipped with a PTC segment. completed by each Class I railroad system will be so equipped and the The first test, proverbially known as carrier and each entity providing basis for those decisions. See 49 CFR the ‘‘alternative route analysis test,’’ was regularly scheduled intercity or 236.1011. This list of track segments initially codified at commuter rail passenger transportation must have included all track segments § 236.1005(b)(4)(i)(A) and subsequently on: that fit the statutory criteria in calendar moved to a new § 236.1020. See 75 FR (A) Its main line over which intercity rail year 2008. See 49 CFR 236.1005(b)(1) 59,108 (Sept. 27, 2010). Under this test, passenger transportation or commuter rail and (b)(2). the railroad must establish that current passenger transportation, as defined in While the statutory PTC system or prospective rerouting of PIH section 24102, is regularly provided; implementation deadline is December materials traffic to one or more (B) its main line over which PIH hazardous 31, 2015, FRA recognized a need for a alternative track segments is justified. If materials, as defined in parts 171.8, 173.115, starting point in time to determine a railroad reroutes all PIH materials off and 173.132 of title 49, Code of Federal where such implementation must occur. of a track segment requiring PTC system Regulations, are transported; and The final rule indicates that such a implementation under the 2008 (C) such other tracks as the Secretary may starting baseline should be based on the prescribe by regulation or order. baseline, and onto a new line, PTC facts and data known in calendar year system implementation on the initial 49 U.S.C. 20157(a)(1). The statute (CY) 2008 (the ‘‘2008 baseline’’). FRA line may not be required if the new line further defined ‘‘main line’’ to mean: determined, and continues to believe, would have substantially the same A segment or route of railroad tracks over that using CY 2009 data would have overall safety and security risk as the which 5,000,000 or more gross tons of been difficult given the proximity to the initial line, assuming PTC system railroad traffic is transported annually, PTCIP submission deadline and the implementation on both lines. If the except that— notably atypical traffic levels caused by initial track segment, despite the (A) the Secretary may, through regulations the down turn in the economy. elimination of all PIH materials traffic, under subsection (g), designate additional Although each railroad’s initial PTCIP is determined to pose higher overall tracks as main line as appropriate for this section; and includes a future PTC system safety and security risks under this (B) for intercity rail passenger implementation route map reflecting analysis, then a PTC system must still transportation or commuter rail passenger 2008 data, FRA recognized that PIH be installed on that initial track transportation routes or segments over which materials traffic levels and routings segment. PTC system implementation limited or no freight railroad operations could change in the period between the may also be required on the new line if occur, the Secretary shall define the term end of 2008 and the start of 2016. it meets the 5 million gross ton of ‘‘main line’’ by regulation. Accordingly, in the event of changed annual traffic threshold and does not 49 U.S.C. 20157(i)(2). To effectuate this circumstances, the PTC rule provides qualify under the de minimis exception goal, RSIA required the railroads to railroads with the option to file a of the rule. submit for FRA approval a PTC request for amendment (RFA) of its The second test that the railroad must Implementation Plan (PTCIP) within 18 PTCIP to not equip a track segment satisfy in order to avoid having to install months (i.e., by April 16, 2010). where the railroad was initially, but a PTC system on a track segment The Secretary has delegated his may no longer be, required to requiring implementation under the authority under § 20157 to the FRA implement a PTC system. If a particular 2008 baseline is the so-called ‘‘residual Administrator. See 49 CFR 1.49(oo). track segment included in a PTCIP no risk test.’’ Under this test, the railroad Consistent with the statutory mandate of longer carries PIH materials traffic and must show that, without a PTC system, § 20157, FRA published a final rule with applicable passenger traffic by the the remaining risk on the track a request for further comments on statutory implementation deadline, and segment—pertaining to events that can January 15, 2010, which established its PTC system implementation is be prevented or mitigated in severity by new regulations codified primarily in scheduled, but not yet effectuated, then a PTC system—is less than the national

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28288 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

average equivalent risk per route mile Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous would apply. Between the two on track segments required to be Materials, Committee on Transportation categories, FRA estimated that railroads equipped with PTC systems due to and Infrastructure, U.S. House of could exclude more than 3,500 miles. statutory reasons other than the Representatives. In addition to reporting Assuming that the 3,500 miles presence of passenger traffic. Even lines on the Settlement Agreement, FRA’s represents about 50% of those tracks that cease carrying PIH materials traffic testimony discussed PTC system where PIH materials traffic will have can still pose significant safety risks implementation planning and progress ceased, FRA was implicitly estimating associated with other traffic on the made thus far and highlighted the that there would be about 7,000 miles of lines. When FRA issued its PTC rule various ways that FRA has assisted the track where PIH materials traffic will amendments on September 27, 2010, industry in meeting the statutory and have ceased. The AAR and its members FRA indicated that it was delaying the regulatory goals. In particular, FRA has appear to have been more effective in effective date of 49 CFR supported PTC system implementation the future reduction of PIH materials 236.1005(b)(4)(i)(A)(2)(iii), as revised by developing and approving certain traffic than FRA had initially estimated under § 236.1020, pending the implementation exceptions, providing based on AAR’s congressional testimony completion of a separate rulemaking to technical assistance, and granting and subsequent submissions to FRA. In establish how residual risk is to be financial assistance. its RIA associated with the NPRM in determined. While FRA has attempted During its congressional testimony, this proceeding, FRA estimated that PIH to determine a suitable methodology to made jointly with Norfolk Southern materials traffic would cease on 10,000 determine such residual risk, no Railway (NS), AAR asserted that, ‘‘If miles of track on which the installation rulemaking proceeding on this test has unchanged, the 2008 base-year of PTC systems would have been yet occurred. provision means railroads would have required had the traffic not ceased. FRA to spend more than $500 million in the considered cases where 7,000 miles, B. Litigation and Congressional next few years to deploy PTC systems 10,000 miles and, for sensitivity, 14,000 Hearings on more than 10,000 miles of rail lines miles of track might be excluded from After FRA issued its PTC final rule on on which neither passenger nor TIH PTC requirements because of changes in January 15, 2010, and denied materials will be moving in 2015.’’ 1 PIH materials traffic. As FRA was reconsideration on July 8, 2010, AAR FRA continues to understand AAR to completing its analysis of the proposal, filed a petition for review of the rule assume that these 10,000 miles would AAR submitted data that indicated its with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the still require PTC system implementation member railroads believe that they can District of Columbia Circuit. Once FRA because they would not be able to pass cease PIH materials traffic on 11,128 issued its PTC final rule amendments, the alternative route analysis and miles of track prior to December 31, AAR filed another petition for review of residual risk analysis tests. However, 2015, of which 9,566 miles have no those amendments on October 5, 2010. upon its own analysis, FRA assumes passenger traffic. In analyzing the final The court consolidated those two that 50 percent of the 10,000 miles rule, FRA continues to use the cases petitions on October 22, 2010 would be able to pass both tests with the where 7,000 miles, 10,000 miles, and (collectively, ‘‘Petition for Review’’). In implementation of mitigation measures. 14,000 miles of track might be excluded its brief, AAR challenged FRA’s In the NPRM to this proceeding, FRA from PTC implementation requirements determination to use 2008 as the sought comment on this assumption. due to PIH traffic changes, because baseline year, arguing that it rests on a Under the regulatory impact analysis those values encompass the ranges fundamental legal error and was (RIA) that accompanied the original PTC submitted by AAR. Some of the arbitrary and capricious. final rule, FRA estimated that the passenger traffic miles identified by FRA and AAR entered into the railroads would need to implement PTC AAR may later qualify for a separate Settlement Agreement on March 2, systems on approximately 70,000 miles exclusion from the requirement to 2011. The terms and conditions of the of track. FRA estimated that PTC system install a PTC system. For more Settlement Agreement included the implementation could be avoided on discussion of those miles from which joint filing of a motion to hold the 3,204 miles of those 70,000 miles of PIH traffic is removed, but on which Petition for Review in abeyance pending track because PIH materials traffic will passenger traffic remains, see FRA’s the completion of this rulemaking. That have ceased by 2015 and the subject Regulatory Impact Assessment, in this motion was filed on March 2, 2011, and track segments would pass the rulemaking docket. was granted by the court on March 3, alternative route analysis and residual 2011. The Settlement Agreement risk analysis tests. During the earlier III. Public Hearing, Comments, and provides that FRA will issue two rulemakings, no entity, including AAR FRA Response NPRMs. The first NPRM, published in or NS, challenged or otherwise After publication of the NPRM to this the Federal Register on August 24, commented on these conclusions. proceeding on August 24, 2011, which 2011, and culminating with this final FRA also estimated that PTC system initially provided a 60-day comment rule, addresses the elimination of the implementation could be avoided on period to end on October 24, 2011, the two qualifying tests. The Settlement 304 miles of track because gross tonnage Chlorine Institute filed a request for a Agreement provides that upon the will fall below 5 million gross tons per hearing ‘‘to allow for a complete completion of this rulemaking year, or passenger service would end so discussion and understanding of the proceeding, the parties will determine that neither of the two tests above many issues and concerns that would whether to file a joint motion to dismiss result from adoption of the Proposed the lawsuit in its entirety. As previously 1 Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Railroads, Rule that would have the effect of noted, the Settlement Agreement also Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials of the reducing the rail routes available to Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, U.S. provides that FRA will issue a separate House of Representatives, 112th Cong. (2011) (Joint shippers and receivers of chlorine and NPRM that will address other possible statement of Edward R. Hamberger, President and the other Toxic-by-Inhalation products changes to the PTC rule; that NPRM is Chief Executive Officer of the AAR, and Mark D. that are so necessary to the health, Manion, Executive Vice President and Chief safety and economy of the Nation.’’ On under development. Operating Officer of the Norfolk Southern Railway, On March 17, 2011, FRA and AAR on behalf of the AAR’s member railroads) October 14, 2011, FRA published in the testified before the Subcommittee on [hereinafter AAR Congressional Testimony]. Federal Register a notice of public

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28289

hearing and extension of the comment representing shippers and receivers of attempting such rerouting; rather, period to November 25, 2011. See 76 FR PIH materials strongly support FRA’s consistent with the PHMSA regulations, 63,899 (Oct. 14, 2011). efforts to enhance rail safety, including the removal of PIH materials from In accordance with that notice, FRA the deployment of new technologies like certain routes is the result of Class I held a public hearing on November 10, PTC. railroads rerouting the traffic to other 2011, in Washington, DC. The following The remainder of this section will lines that they operate because those individuals representing the identified discuss the various commenters’ other lines pose the least overall safety entities testified at the hearing: Frank concerns with FRA’s proposal. and security risk for the movement of Chirumbole, President of Olin Chlor A. Routing Concerns and Shipper this traffic. Alkali Products, Olin Corporation In its filed comments, the Labor Participation (‘‘Olin’’); Frank Reiner, President, The Organizations also request clarification Chlorine Institute (CI); Thomas Schick, The Labor Organizations assert that by of some of FRA’s statements. For American Chemistry Council (ACC); Dr. removing the two qualifying tests from instance, in the NPRM, FRA states, Howard Kaplan, U.S. Magnesium, LLC the PTC rule, railroads may ‘‘AAR submitted data that indicates its (‘‘U.S. Magnesium’’); and Michael J. consequently be allowed to avoid PTC member railroads believe that they can Rush, AAR. By November 25, 2011, FRA system implementation, hampering cease PIH materials traffic on 11,128 received comments from AAR; ACC, CI, FRA’s ability to identify routes that miles of track of which 9,566 miles have and the Fertilizer Institute (TFI) could be of higher risk. If the alternative no passenger traffic. Some of the (collectively, the ‘‘Trade Associations’’); route analysis test is eliminated, the passenger traffic miles may later qualify the National Railroad Passenger Labor Organizations believe that PIH for exclusion from the system on which Corporation (Amtrak); the Brotherhood materials traffic may be rerouted to PTC is required.’’ 76 FR 52,922 (Aug. of Maintenance of Way Employees Class II railroad lines, which may have 24, 2011). The Labor Organizations Division (BMWED/IBT) and poorer track conditions, older rolling assume, but are not completely Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen stock, and a less robust or no signal confident, that the reference to (BRS) (collectively, the ‘‘Labor system, thus increasing the total public ‘‘exclusion from the system’’ relates to Organizations’’); E. I. du Pont de risk. The Labor Organizations believe the possibility that some of the Nemours and Company (‘‘DuPont’’); and that FRA should establish a mechanism passenger train operations over the PPG Industries, Inc. (‘‘PPG’’). to assess the risks related to the remaining 1,562 miles of track might be The Trade Associations’ testimony rerouting of PIH materials traffic onto eligible for a de minimis exception. The and comments rely primarily on reports lines that will not require PTC system Labor Organizations request that FRA developed by L.E. Peabody & implementation, and that such rerouting clarify whether passenger train Associates, Inc. (‘‘Peabody’’), a firm should be subject to FRA approval. operations exceeding the de minimis specializing in solving economic, The routes railroads use to provide exclusion will require PTC system financial, marketing and transportation PIH materials transportation is governed installation regardless of the absence of problems. Peabody developed its reports by the routing regulations of the PIH material on the line. (‘‘Peabody Reports’’) on behalf of CI, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety With respect to the Labor which also invited Peabody to testify at Administration (PHMSA) at 49 CFR Organizations’ request for clarification, the hearing regarding its own evaluation 172.820. Under the PHMSA regulations, the existing PTC rule provides for of the costs and benefits associated with a railroad carrier is required to: compile exceptions to the requirement to install PTC system implementation and on the annual data on shipments of PIH PTC systems for certain passenger train instant proposal’s potential economic materials and other security sensitive operations, as provided for in 49 CFR harm to the PIH materials shippers. materials; use the data to analyze safety 236.1019. In the NPRM, FRA explained At the hearing, the ACC supported and security risks along rail routes used that AAR member railroads believe they FRA’s effort to minimize unnecessary by the carrier to transport those can cease PIH materials traffic on 11,128 regulatory burdens and recognized that materials and practicable alternative miles of track, over which 9,566 miles certain operational factors may affect routes over which the carrier has have no passenger traffic. The statement some rail lines by no longer requiring authority to operate; seek information highlighted by the Labor Organizations PTC system installation. ACC asserts from state, local and tribal officials means only that, of the remaining 1,562 that these implementation changes must regarding security risks to high- miles of track that would now only not prevent chemical manufacturers consequence targets along or in require PTC systems as a result of from shipping their products. proximity to the routes; consider passenger traffic, some of those miles of CI—a 200 member trade association mitigation measures to reduce safety track might qualify for one of the comprised primarily of producers, and security risk; and select and use the passenger-specific exceptions and repackagers and users of chlorine, and practicable routes that pose the least therefore be excluded from the PTC suppliers to the chlor-alkali industry— overall safety and security risk. FRA requirement entirely. The de minimis testified at the hearing that, ‘‘Since enforces PHMSA’s regulation (49 CFR exception would not apply here, since many of the most significant rail part 209, subpart F). The routing of PIH there is passenger traffic on the line. accidents have been the result of materials is also impacted by the CI expressed concerns with the lack of operational errors,’’ it has long security regulations of the shipper participation in PTC system advocated the adoption of new Transportation Security Administration implementation and proposes that a technologies, including PTC, to improve at 49 CFR part 1580, which requires system such as the STB line rail operational safety. According to the chain of custody requirements to ensure abandonment process be implemented if CI’s testimony, ‘‘While the statute only a positive and secure exchange of PIH a line is proposed to be dropped from requires positive train control on TIH materials transported by rail. the coverage plan. The Trade and passenger mainlines, all traffic on FRA does not agree with the Labor Associations echoed this in their the equipped lines will derive the Organizations’ contention that PIH comments, indicating that they would benefits of safer operation and improved materials traffic will be rerouted from like shippers to be part of the process in operational efficiency.’’ In their jointly Class I railroads to Class II railroads. determining where PTC systems should filed comments, the Trade Associations FRA is not aware of Class I railroads be implemented. They note that there

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28290 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

are no express provisions allowing PIH verify a railroad’s traffic assertions or their fundamental common carrier materials shippers or receivers to file any appeals process by which a shipper obligations. PTCIP requests for amendments or can contest a railroad’s decision not to Accordingly, DuPont asserts that FRA requiring notification that a railroad install a PTC system on a particular rail should maintain the two qualifying seeks to add or remove lines from its line. PPG also states that if a PTC system tests, which allow each railroad to PTCIP. The Trade Associations believe is not installed on a particular line amend its PTCIP when the railroad is that, without shipper input, FRA may before 2016, then a railroad could able to meet certain analyses and risk inadvertently create PIH materials attempt to condition any future service assessments. DuPont also suggests that transport restrictions or infeasibility. for PIH commodities at very high rates, FRA expand the existing PTC rule by The Trade Associations suggest that stifling the shipper’s business and promulgating a self-implementation FRA should establish a process that impeding the national economy. regulation providing each shipper with would provide PIH materials shippers The Trade Associations are also the power to direct its rail carrier to and consignees an opportunity to concerned with the availability of transport its goods on lines where PTC petition the agency to require additional routes. According to CI, the lack of systems would otherwise be required PTC lines to accommodate new or shipper participation could either and which are not so equipped and expanded PIH materials-related restrict chlorine transportation by rail or providing each railroad the ability to business ventures. render it unfeasible between some self-certify a risk assessment for each RSIA requires that only certain origins and destinations, ultimately such line. railroads submit a PTCIP. Since each restricting chlorine commerce and Olin also provided hearing testimony railroad is legally responsible for availability. If FRA were to eliminate in favor of not eliminating the two implementing PTC systems on its own the two qualifying tests, Peabody qualifying tests. In particular, Olin is lines, FRA believes this makes sense. believes that FRA would allow the concerned that the proposed While FRA also requires a joint PTCIP railroads to determine which track amendments will allow railroads to filing where a tenant railroad would segments will be equipped with PTC significantly restrict PIH shipments without shipper input or adequate FRA have been required to install a PTC systems without regulatory oversight oversight. Olin states that the system if the host railroad had not regarding the determination of the level elimination of the two qualifying tests otherwise been required to do so, this of safety and security on the subject would effectively grant rail carriers exception exists primarily to ensure segment. Peabody also expresses carte blanche to determine PTC system PTC system interoperability. Otherwise, concerns that FRA, when making the implementation locations, which could FRA has not provided opportunities for proposal, considered the impact on the ultimately allow rail carriers to dictate parties other than the host railroad to railroads, but not the shippers or the and limit efficient PIH shipments and file a PTCIP. For the same reason, FRA public. will not provide opportunities for third would potentially result in increased The Trade Associations believe that parties to file requests for amendments. transit times, longer shipping distances, elimination of the two qualifying tests To do so would create confusion and limited customer access, and restriction potentially impose additional burdens would, produce an opportunity for the to overall commerce and additional on the railroad. In any event, third railroads to unilaterally, arbitrarily, and shipping costs. According to Olin, parties do have an opportunity to without regulatory oversight, determine ‘‘Allowing rail carriers to potentially express their views on the plans where PTC systems must be installed limit the shipment of TIH without the submitted pursuant to the PTC rule. 49 and reduce the transportation of PIH protections of the ‘alternative route CFR 236.1011(e) continues to provide materials by rail. According to the Trade analysis test’ and the ‘residual risk test,’ that, upon receipt of a PTCIP, NPI, Associations, ‘‘The opportunity cannot or another appropriate process, would PTCDP, or PTCSP, FRA will post on its be examined in a vacuum but must be not only pose risks to shippers, it would public Web site a notice of receipt and evaluated through the prism of the also likely contradict the federal reference to the public docket in which railroads’ other actions to greatly reduce common carrier obligation which has a copy of the filing has been placed. By the common carrier obligation.’’ been a keystone of U.S. rail policy for extension, FRA also considers this Although FRA will continue to approve more than a century’’ by opening ‘‘a paragraph applicable to any RFA that any requests to modify a railroad’s back door around the common carrier seeks to modify either of those plans PTCIP, the Trade Associations perceive obligations for rail carriers.’’ Olin also and has endeavored to ensure that all that such approval will be automatic expressed concerns that the overall cost plans and their RFAs are placed in their and based solely on the railroad’s own of PTC system implementation will be respective public dockets. FRA will traffic projections and without disproportionately placed on PIH consider any public comment on these consideration of the shippers’ PIH shippers and that there are no documents to the extent practicable market projections. provisions to examine shipper impact or within the time allowed by law and Dupont, a member of CI and ACC, address timely action for future PIH without delaying PTC system provided additional comments. DuPont required rail lines. implementation. is concerned that, by removing the two PPG also provided comments directly PPG—an international diversified qualifying tests, rail carriers would be relating to the purposes of the two chemical manufacturer that receives granted the unlimited right and an qualifying tests. According to PPG, FRA chlorine by rail in the U.S.—expressed incentive to refuse to provide service took a crucial and important step in the concern over the lack of transparency just by choosing routes without PTC original PTC rule when it required use regarding the rail lines that would be systems despite any STB action. of 2008 as the baseline traffic year to implicated by the proposed rule, According to DuPont, it has experienced determine which rail lines would denying it the opportunity to effectively rail carriers moving PIH materials traffic require PTC system implementation. evaluate the impact of the proposal on onto inefficient routes and shifting the PPG states that, ‘‘By using a historical its existing and future business plans. resulting costs elsewhere. DuPont states year as the baseline, FRA largely Moreover, PPG states that the existing that by allowing the railroads to eliminated the possibility for railroads PTC rule does not provide any audit or unilaterally deny the most direct route, to manipulate their traffic statistics in review process by which FRA may the railroads will be allowed to violate light of the looming PTC requirement.’’

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28291

By removing the two qualifying tests, 2. No matter what routing changes are carrier obligation, which we fully PPG is concerned that this possibility made, existing origin-destination pairs are understand is under the STB remains. More specifically, without the still accommodated and TIH traffic is not jurisdiction.’’ While the Trade two qualifying tests, PPG fears that eliminated; Associations recognize that it is not railroads could dissuade PIH materials 3. There is nothing in the rule that FRA’s responsibility to enforce the indicates that future needs for TIH traffic shipments by providing substandard would be limited or avoided. railroads’ common carrier obligation to service or by charging excessive Despite potential increases in shipment transport PIH materials, they assert that transportation rates. cost or time, the shippers’ need to transport PTC system implementation must not As an initial matter, questions relating TIH materials is essentially met.’’ erode that obligation. The Trade to the quality of service provided PIH Associations provide examples where AAR generally supports elimination shippers and rates charged by railroad FRA has considered the common carrier of the two qualifying tests, asserting that carriers for the movement of PIH obligation in the past. For instance, in the two tests would require PTC systems materials are outside the scope of FRA’s 2008, the Department testified before to be installed on an estimated 10,000 authority and properly lie with the STB. the STB, stating: Each of the arguments made by the miles more than that required by the [R]ailroads have a common carrier Trade Associations and the other RSIA, at costs which substantially outweigh the safety benefits. The AAR obligation to transport hazardous materials railroad shippers rest on the premise and cannot refuse to provide service merely that, by rerouting PIH materials traffic to did, however, suggest that FRA adopt because to do so would be inconvenient or avoid the installation of PTC systems, slightly different regulatory language unprofitable. While the railroads have railroad carriers will somehow be able than that proposed in the NPRM; these expressed concern over this obligation, to ‘‘lock in’’ certain routes as the only suggested changes are discussed in the particularly with respect to their potential routes available to carry PIH materials section-by-section analysis. The AAR liability exposure arising from train accidents after the 2015 deadline. Ultimately, responded to the shippers’ concerns by involving the release of poisonous by inhalation hazard or toxic inhalation hazard however, this premise is incorrect. As noting that the routing of PIH materials is governed by the PHMSA rail routing (referred to as PIH or TIH) materials, DOT discussed in more detail below, FRA believes that there is no reason to change this does not view the PTC mandate as rule, and that nothing in FRA’s common carrier obligation.’’ proposed rule changes, prevents, or in limiting the common carrier obligation Testimony of Clifford Eby, Deputy of railroad carriers as enforced by STB, any manner affects, the transportation by rail of PIH materials from origin to Federal Railroad Administrator, and consequently does not view a Common Carrier Obligation of smaller map of PTC-equipped line destination. FRA agrees with AAR that the Railroads, STB Ex Parte No. 677 (Sub- segments as restricting the availability No. 1) (July 22, 2008). of rail transportation for PIH materials rerouting of PIH materials traffic is properly constrained by the PHMSA rail The Trade Associations also state that in the future. FRA recognizes that the Department is on record as saying equipping fewer line segments with PTC routing rule. FRA also agrees with AAR that PIH materials traffic will continue that railroads would be violating the systems before 2016 will increase the common carrier obligation if they to move on rail lines that do not have probability that a future PIH materials attempted, through their interchange PTC systems consistent with the shipment would eventually require rules, to prevent the movement of requirements of 49 CFR 236.1005(b)(3), access to an unequipped line in order to hazardous materials through the and that the elimination of the two reach its destination; however, such application of tank car specifications qualifying tests does not affect the concerns will exist with any different from those duly considered railroads’ common carrier obligation requirement to install a PTC system that and approved by the Department.2 does not cover all line segments. The with respect to the transportation of PIH Moreover, the Trade Associations arguments of the Trade Associations materials. Finally, removal of the two request that FRA confirm its and other railroad shippers are over- qualifying tests will not preclude FRA’s interpretation of 49 CFR inclusive, insofar as they lead to the ability or discretion under 49 U.S.C. 236.1005(b)(3)(ii), which states: ‘‘If PIH conclusion that FRA should simply 20502 to require PTC system traffic is carried on a track segment as require PTC systems to be installed on implementation on additional lines in a result of a request for rail service or as many line segments as possible. the future based on risk or other rerouting warranted under part 172 of However, reducing the probability of relevant factors. this title, and if the line carries in excess future controversies over future B. Common Carrier Obligations of 5 million gross tons of rail traffic as installation of PTC systems is determined under this paragraph, a insufficient justification for potentially According to the Trade Associations, PTCIP or its amendment is required.’’ using the two qualifying tests as a although FRA has made it clear in the The Trade Associations believe that this means to require additional PTC past that it does not intend for matters language, consistent with the common systems implementation prior to the within its jurisdiction to trump the carrier obligation, implies that a rail 2015 deadline. railroads’ common carrier obligation, carrier may not deny a shipper’s request FRA also rejects the premise that FRA’s determinations affect the location to transport PIH materials solely on the railroads will have an uninhibited of PTC system implementation and, means of rerouting PIH material traffic thus, where, when, how, and if PIH 2 But see 73 FR 17818, 17824–25 (April 1, 2008). without meaningful oversight. As materials are to be moved. In its comments, the Trade Associations previously discussed, the rail routing of Accordingly, the Trade Associations misunderstand FRA’s statements. In this and the PIH materials is governed by the are concerned that the railroads will use referenced proceeding, FRA has not asserted any PHMSA routing rule. In their comments, authority to determine a railroad’s common carrier PTC system implementation as a means obligation. In the rulemaking cited by the Trade the Trade Associations view the rail to limit their common carrier Associations, FRA discussed the test used by STB routing rule as satisfying the needs from obligations with respect to PIH to determine the reasonableness of interchange a shipper perspective in three ways: materials. More specifically, at the requirements in assessing if those requirements violate the common carrier obligation before ‘‘1. Routing changes are to be based on 27 hearing, CI expressed that, ‘‘We’re ultimately concluding that FRA did not view the different risk-based factors and not solely on concerned that FRA’s [PTC] rule will be particular interchange requirement at issue as any one factor, such as cost, distance or time; used to attempt to alter that common reasonable.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28292 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

grounds that a PTC system is not commenters suggest that the PTC rule establishing and modifying rules installed on any line segment necessary might be construed by FRA or STB to governing PTC system implementation, to complete the requested limit what line segments PIH materials FRA does not regulate what route over transportation. The Trade Associations may travel over. The structure of 49 CFR which PIH materials must move, as believe that this regulation requires the part 236, subpart I, requires that PTC responsibility for such regulations lies railroad to accept the PIH materials systems be installed on many line with PHMSA. See 73 FR 72182 (Nov. traffic for transportation consistent with segments over which PIH materials are 26, 2008). FRA’s PTC regulations its common carrier obligation, amend its transported; it does not in any way expressly allow for new PIH material PTCIP, and equip the necessary track govern the movements of PIH materials. traffic over a line segment that with a PTC system within 24 months, While both FRA and STB are vested previously lacked such traffic, and as pursuant to 49 CFR 236.1005(b)(3)(iii). with authority to ensure safety in the such does not preempt the oversight and PPG also believes that FRA must be railroad industry, each agency regulatory functions of either PHMSA or mindful of the interplay between the recognizes the other agency’s expertise STB. PTC regulations and the railroads’ in regulating the industry.3 FRA has FRA is aware that the impact of the common carrier obligation, which expertise in the safety of all facets of present rulemaking will be to reduce the requires the carriers to provide service railroad operations, and is authorized to number of line segments included on reasonable request. PPG expresses promote safety in every area of railroad within the overall map of PTC system similar concerns with the regulatory operations and reduce railroad-related installations. The Trade Associations provision cited by the Trade Association accidents and injuries. 49 U.S.C. 20101 argue that the result of this reduction and complains that seeking STB and 20102. Concurrently, the STB has will be an ability of railroad carriers to enforcement of the railroads’ common expertise in economic regulation and unilaterally restrict PIH materials carrier obligation could take months, if assessment of environmental impacts in shipments by reducing the number of not longer, to resolve. Accordingly, PPG the railroad industry, as an economic PTC-equipped line segments and urges FRA to clarify that 49 CFR regulatory agency charged by Congress subsequently refusing to carry PIH 236.1005(b)(3)(ii) does not permit a with resolving railroad rate and service materials that would require straying railroad to refuse PIH materials service disputes and reviewing proposed from these line segments. However, because a rail line does not have a PTC railroad mergers and acquisitions. See because neither the prior or instant PTC system installed, and that rail 49 U.S.C. 10701(a), 10702. Further, rulemakings limit or restrict the movement of PIH commodities may be there is no limitation over the STB’s common carrier obligation, enforced by provided over a non-PTC-equipped line authority to address the reasonableness STB, FRA does not view a reduction in pending approval of FRA and the actual of a railroad’s practices. See STB Ex PTC-equipped line segments as causing construction to add a PTC system to Parte No. 661, Rail Fuel Surcharges a reduction in available service for such line. (Aug. 3, 2006). Together, the agencies future PIH materials shipments. US Magnesium also testified at the appreciate that their unique experience Additionally, there are substantial hearing. While extracting magnesium and oversight of railroads complement checks on a railroad’s ability to modify from the Great Salt Lake brines, US each other’s interest in promoting a safe its routes in such a manner. Oversight Magnesium produces chlorine as a co- and viable industry. by the STB and FRA (in enforcing the product. Since chlorine cannot be Accordingly, FRA recognizes that PHMSA rail routing regulation) may vented or stored, US Magnesium must conflicts between railroad carriers and preclude or even require certain routing ship or sell it. However, according to US railroad shippers relating to common and rerouting decisions. Furthermore, Magnesium, the chlorine market is carrier obligations are best resolved by because railroads will likely seek to seasonable and dynamic, with STB. The STB has previously ruled on maximize the return on their investment customers and demand levels always railroad obligations to quote common in PTC system installation, railroads can changing, requiring the company to carrier rates and provide service for the be reasonably expected to maximize the change chlorine shipping routes to meet transportation of PIH materials such as connectivity of PTC-equipped segments market conditions. US Magnesium chlorine. Union Pacific Railroad to limit where additional PTC systems believes that PTC technology will Company, STB Finance Docket No. may ultimately be required. As contribute greatly to continuing incident 35219 (2009); see also Akron, Canton & discussed above, even where a railroad free performance and it claims that it Youngstown Railroad Company v. is able to reroute its PIH materials traffic has been affected by the railroads’ Interstate Commerce Commission, 611 in accordance with the PHMSA interest in limiting or ceasing PIH P.2d 1162 (6th Cir. 1979). FRA does not regulations, resulting in future PIH shipments. While it recognizes the seek to interfere with STB’s role in materials traffic needing to traverse a STB’s resistance to railroad attempts to providing economic oversight of the line segment that does not have a PTC unilaterally restrict PIH routings, US railroad industry. Rather, just as the system in order to travel from its source Magnesium believes that removal of the STB has previously declined to to its destination, FRA does not view two qualifying tests would allow substitute its safety and security such rerouting as a barrier to future PIH elimination of lines from a PTCIP, thus judgments for those of FRA, FRA materials traffic. While STB is the facilitating the railroads’ efforts to limit presently declines to substitute its agency ultimately responsible for the their common carrier obligation. US economic judgments for those of STB. In enforcement of the common carrier Magnesium expects the railroads to obligation, and FRA recognizes that PTC argue to the STB that they should not 3 The rail transportation policy, 49 U.S.C. 10101, system implementation may affect be ordered to provide PIH service over establishes the basic policy directive against which STB’s review of rates, FRA does not all of the statutory provisions the Board administers routes where they have informed FRA must be evaluated. The RTP provides, in relevant view the requirement to install PTC that no PTC system will be installed. part, that ‘‘[i]n regulating the railroad industry, it systems on certain rail lines as affecting These comments indicate some is the policy of the United States Government * * * the common carrier obligation in any confusion over the jurisdiction of the to promote a safe and efficient rail transportation’’ way. by allowing rail carriers to ‘‘operate transportation various federal agencies governing the facilities and equipment without detriment to the With respect to the application of 49 rail transportation of hazardous public health and safety.’’ See, e.g., 49 CFR part CFR 236.1005(b)(3), FRA views the materials. Specifically, these 244; 67 FR 11582 (Mar. 15, 2002). provision as neutral with respect to the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28293

common carrier obligation. Where new route segments that have passenger rail between the required PTC system PIH materials traffic exists on a line that service. Amtrak asserts that additional implementation’s costs and benefits. meets the tonnage threshold, whether by federal funding is limited. These parties discuss a 2004 report the railroad’s acceptance of the PIH FRA understands that, upon cessation produced by Zeta-Tech Associates, material for transportation or by STB of PIH materials traffic, a line segment commissioned by FRA, quantifying the action to require such transportation, may still require PTC system business benefits of positive train the rule requires the railroad carrier to implementation due to the existence of control, with direct and indirect file a PTCIP or RFA as soon as possible passenger traffic. In some situations not business benefits ranging between $2.2 and to implement a PTC system on that under the control of FRA, this may and $3.8 billion annually, in 2001 line segment within 24 months. FRA result in the distribution of costs dollars.4 According to the Trade expects that PTCIP or RFA to include between the freight and passenger Associations, these benefits include risk mitigation and other measures railroads. However, as was the case with increased line capacity; fuel savings; necessary to effectively and efficiently respect to similar concerns expressed by improved rail dispatching operations; implement the new PTC system so that the Trade Associations and shippers, and societal benefits from reduced PIH materials may safely traverse the this distributional concern alone does highway crashes and reduced pollution line segment during those intervening not provide adequate justification for emissions. Using these findings, in two years. If the filings do not maintaining the two qualifying tests. conjunction with other sources, FRA in sufficiently address these issues, FRA Moreover, it is within the jurisdiction of 2004 submitted a report to Congress may approve the PTCIP or grant the the STB to settle disputes and determine offering differing opinions as to whether RFA with conditions intended to ensure appropriate rate structures between or not PTC technologies could generate as much. freight railroads, shippers, and business benefits. One point of view was that PTC technologies could create C. Passenger Rail Impact passenger operators in these circumstances. In response to Amtrak’s net societal benefits that ranged from In its filed comments, Amtrak concerns relating to insufficient $2.1 to $3.9 billion annually, including reiterates its support of PTC system funding, the availability of funds to significant accident-avoidance benefits implementation and expects that it will support passenger railroads in the as a result of modal diversion from complete installation on its lines in installation of PTC systems is outside highway to rail transportation. advance of the statutory deadline. the scope of this rulemaking. In regards Peabody posits that Congress passed Amtrak’s comments are otherwise to Amtrak’s concerns regarding RSIA in 2008 based in part on FRA’s limited to concerns relating to the insufficient data to determine the report. Peabody also indicates that as impact of this rulemaking on passenger affected route segments, it is FRA’s part of the rulemaking developing the railroads, and on federal and state understanding that the host and tenant 2010 PTC rule, FRA updated each funding requirements for passenger rail railroads, through their discussions, element of the 2004 report, but did not service. Amtrak states that if the would be able to communicate this include them in the RIA for that rule, proposed rule is adopted, railroads will information. To provide that which considered only direct railroad not be required to install PTC systems information in this proceeding risks safety benefits and total direct on rail lines that were used to transport exposing certain sensitive security implementation costs in its cost-benefit PIH shipments in 2008, but are no information. analysis. If FRA had included the longer being utilized for PIH materials business benefits as part of its economic traffic as of December 31, 2015. Amtrak D. Cost-Benefit Analysis analysis associated with the initial PTC expresses concern that passenger rail 1. Trade Associations rulemaking published on January 15, operators—whose presence may now be 2010, Peabody contends that the cost- the sole reason for mandatory PTC The Trade Associations also take benefit ratio would have been restated system implementation on those lines— issue with FRA’s cost-benefit analysis, as 1.1:1.0. Peabody’s own May 2010 may be asked to bear some or all of the asserting that it is flawed. The Trade report asserts that a 0.86:1.00 cost- costs of PTC system installation that Associations support the Peabody benefit ratio is more realistic. However, would have been borne by freight Reports’ assertion that FRA relied upon by not including those benefits, FRA’s railroads under the original rule. a cost-benefit analysis that substantially RIA reflected a cost-benefit ratio of Amtrak believes that this rule may pose and erroneously excluded business 21.7:1.0. a risk to the continued operation of benefits accruing to railroads, shippers In its report, Peabody asserts that affected passenger rail services since and the public. According to the Trade FRA’s cost-benefit analysis in this they do not generate profits, rely on Associations, this exclusion of business rulemaking should be based on the ‘‘no constrained taxpayer funding, and benefits violates Office of Management action scenario’’ (i.e., where PTC Amtrak is already burdened by the need and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) Circular A–4, systems are not required), which would to fund PTC system installations on which governs cost-benefit analyses result in a much lower cost-benefit ratio lines it owns. conducted by federal agencies and than the 1:20 ratio contemplated by this Amtrak states that the impact of the resulted in an erroneous cost-benefit rulemaking. In other words, Peabody proposed rule on passenger railroads ratio of 20:1 in the PTC final rule believes that FRA should determine the cannot be determined from the record in published on January 15, 2010. The change in costs and benefits where PTC this proceeding. While the RIA invited Trade Associations assert that the flaws comments on the accuracy of the data in the January 2010 cost-benefit analysis 4 Zeta-Tech Associates, Quantification of the submitted by AAR—indicating that its accompanying the original final rule are Business Benefits of Positive Train Control (Mar. 15, 2004) at 10–11. The Zeta-Tech analysis’ estimate of member railroads have 1,562 route continued and more extensive in the benefits ranged as low as $0.9 billion annually, miles used for passenger rail service on instant rulemaking. including $0.4 billion in benefits accruing to which PIH materials traffic was handled Ultimately, the Trade Associations shippers. See also Federal Railroad Administration, in 2008, but on which PIH materials and Peabody contend that FRA’s cost- Benefits and Costs of Positive Train Control (Aug. 2004) (noting the numerous assumptions made by traffic is expected to cease by 2015— benefit analysis should have considered the Zeta-Tech analysis and also noting that some of Amtrak argues that the data is business benefits that they contend these benefits may already be realized or may be insufficient to determine the affected would significantly reduce the gap realized without PTC system implementation).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28294 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

systems have not yet been installed, not removing these benefits are accounted technological integrations that will where PTC systems will be installed in for in this final rule. create large business benefits. the future. According to Peabody, FRA’s In analyzing the PTC rule, FRA According to Peabody, FRA relies on cost-benefit analyses support a included a sensitivity analysis with several unsupported assumptions and perceived effort by the railroads to limit business benefits when it appeared estimates to derive its cost and benefit routes, forcing more PIH onto the roads there was a possibility that a railroad calculations. This appears to be a or increasing shipper costs. would adopt a PTC system capable of criticism of two assumptions that FRA FRA disagrees with Peabody. The ‘‘no generating business benefits. According relied upon in order to estimate this action scenario’’ would leave the final to the railroads’ PTCIPs submitted to rule’s impact: that 50 percent of rule in place and PTC system FRA, there are no PTC systems that segments submitted for exclusion from implementation would be required would generate business benefits, other the system would have passed the ‘‘two without the relief of this rulemaking. than from train pacing, in the 20-year tests’’ and that, under the prior rule Peabody misstates what result occurs in analysis period. The only business mitigation costs, the costs of risk a ‘‘no action scenario’’ for this benefit that FRA had included in its mitigating technologies currently rulemaking. Contrary to Peabody’s base analysis of the PTC final rule was referenced under § 236.1020, would assumptions, if FRA were not to publish fuel savings that would result from train have averaged $10,000 per mile. While this final rule, the result would be a pacing. Only one railroad has adopted AAR also questioned the assumption continuation of the requirement to train pacing systems integrated with its that 50 percent of segments would pass install PTC systems on certain line PTC system, and that railroad is not the two tests, AAR did not comment on segments. In Circular A–4, Regulatory likely to change the number of the estimate for mitigation costs. Analysis, the Office of Management and locomotives equipped for train pacing, To perform a cost-benefit analysis in Budget, says ‘‘[i]t may be reasonable to and thus is not likely to see any change this proceeding, FRA required an forecast that the world absent the in its business benefits. In other words, estimated number of miles in the PTC regulation will resemble the present. If issuance of this final rule is not network that would be affected by the this is the case, however, your baseline expected to impact fuel saving benefit final rule, and therefore estimated the should reflect the future effect of current levels. To the extent that PTC systems number of miles in the PTC network government programs and policies.’’ planned for implementation would not that would fail one or both of the two The future effect of the prior final rules include aspects to facilitate business qualifying tests and would have been is that PTC systems will be installed on benefit realization, there is no impact on required to be PTC-equipped. The two a number of line segments. Accordingly, business benefits from reducing the qualifying tests were intended to ensure the no-action alternative includes the mileage over which wayside that PTC systems were installed on cost of PTC systems on those line components will be installed. FRA does certain risk-sensitive line segments. The segments and the commensurate costs not anticipate the other forms of tests would have no impact had all and benefits. Peabody, as well as the business benefits identified in the Zeta- segments or no segments met the Trade Associations generally, also relies Tech Report—improved work order requirements of both tests. In order to on the Zeta-Tech Report to claim that reporting and precision dispatch estimate the affected mileage, FRA FRA has failed to account for some systems—to be present in the PTC needed an estimate of how many miles business benefits that result from PTC systems implemented by railroads. No the railroads could justify and likely system implementation. However, as such systems have been described in the remove from their systems—a figure FRA stated in its contemporaneous PTCIP of any railroad; furthermore, provided by AAR (estimated at 10,000 report to Congress, many of these while some railroads are implementing miles in the base case)—and an benefits were speculative or achievable work order reporting and precision estimated probability of how likely through other means. The intervening dispatch systems, these railroads are not those segments meet the minimum years have validated FRA’s concerns integrating the systems into their PTC requirements of the two qualifying tests with the report. The PTC systems that system due to technological had the prior final rule remained presently exist lack some of the features infeasibility. unchanged. that Zeta-Tech used to justify its benefit FRA does not have any evidence that As noted, the two qualifying tests assumptions, and railroads have already railroads installing PTC systems have were never fully implemented and achieved some of the operational found a way to make a profit by applied to track segments, so it is benefits without PTC system integrating additional equipment that impossible to make inferences about the implementation. Accordingly, FRA would generate the kinds of business test results. Since the residual risk test cannot treat these benefits as benefits described in the Peabody was not developed, FRA cannot make attributable to PTC system analysis. The railroads have long argued an informed estimate of the proportion implementation. that there was no way for them to make of segments likely to fail one or both of Peabody asserts that FRA does not a profit from PTC systems, and their the two qualifying tests. FRA chose 50 consider the costs or benefits to behavior is consistent with that percent as an estimate of the proportion shippers or the public in its analysis. assertion. In FRA’s 2004 letter report to of segments the railroads want to Peabody comes to this conclusion based Congress, the suggested business remove from PIH materials service that on the exclusion of business and other benefits would have been relatively would pass both tests, because it societal benefits. Peabody also claims large, but very little of that business provides the lowest expected difference that FRA includes only railroad safety benefit would have accrued to railroads. from a percentage chosen at random in benefits in its economic analyses and The business benefits would have gone the possible range of 0 percent to 100 continues to exclude business and other in large measure (roughly 80 percent) to percent. No party has offered an societal benefits that FRA had itself shippers, who in turn would have alternative estimate, and no party has identified, quantified, and championed created even larger societal benefits. provided a means of deriving an for much of the previous decade. FRA There is no market mechanism for alternative estimate, despite FRA’s specifically did account for safety railroads to share in most of those request for comments and information benefits accruing to society at large, benefits. FRA therefore has no reason to on this issue. See 76 FR 52,918, 52,921, such as evacuations. The costs of believe that railroads will perform 52,924. If FRA were to conduct a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28295

sensitivity analysis on this range, it require mitigation that would be more benefits suggested in the sensitivity would be difficult to choose a range of costly than the estimates provided and analysis of the prior final rule. passing percentages for the undeveloped where less costly solutions are available. Peabody asserts that in many cases test. For the purposes of argument, FRA To estimate these mitigation costs, FRA FRA accepts, without question, AAR’s uses a range of 25 percent to 75 percent, made the reasonable assumption that estimates and assumptions. Peabody representing a broad range of possible mitigation costs could only rise to a also claims that FRA improperly focuses percentages covering half of the possible certain percentage of the total wayside on the net costs and benefits associated range from 0 percent to 100 percent. costs of implementing PTC with PTC system implementation based Given this reasonable range, an technologies; as the cost of mitigations on the AAR’s estimated 10,000 track additional sensitivity analysis is rises, the likelihood rises of a railroad miles that would be PTC-equipped but unnecessary, as such an analysis would deciding to install a PTC system rather for the proposed rules changes. Peabody yield similar results as the analysis than incur the mitigation costs. The says that, in doing so, FRA fails to already present. In the sensitivity mitigation cost estimate also includes account for 3,500 track miles it had analysis of the NPRM, which estimated originally determined would not be resources that might have been the range of miles of line segments over equipped with PTC systems. expended to pass the tests. Despite which PIH materials would be removed, FRA did not accept or adopt any of FRA’s request for comments on its FRA calculated benefits with the AAR’s estimates without first analyzing number of miles equaling 7,000 miles, calculation of costs, no commenter them. Peabody refers to estimates of 10,000 miles, and 14,000 miles. As provided alternative estimates or how many miles of PTC system wayside discussed above, some of these miles methodologies for the agency to use in equipment would be affected by this would have no longer been required to lieu of the present estimates. rule. FRA includes AAR’s estimate as have an implemented PTC system under Peabody also states that FRA ought to the base case, because railroads are the the prior rules; FRA estimated that only include business benefits because FRA parties most likely to know how much half of these miles would be required to included some uncertain figures wayside would be affected. The install PTC systems under the prior without including other uncertain railroads’ actions will determine how rules. As such, FRA calculated the figures. More specifically, according to much of their systems may be benefits of removing PTC systems from Peabody, FRA is uncertain about the excludable under the final rule, and 3,500, 5,000, and 7,000 miles—50 correct values of the two figures it they do not seem to have an incentive percent respectively of 7,000, 10,000, included in its business economic to misstate that amount. and 14,000 miles. Were FRA to perform estimates (i.e., the proportion passing As previously noted, FRA assumes a new sensitivity analysis on the both qualifying tests and the cost per that 50 percent of the segments that the percentage of miles that would have no mile for mitigations) and FRA was also railroads plan to remove from the PTC longer been required to have a PTC uncertain (in analyzing the PTC rule) network could pass both tests. When system implemented, the estimates of 25 about whether business benefits would analyzing the PTC rule published in percent, 50 percent, and 75 percent of be generated, which FRA did not January 2010, FRA had estimated that miles passing the two qualifying tests include. FRA is certain that a percentage the railroads could exclude roughly 3,500 miles due to the cessation of PIH and not requiring PTC systems would of track segments would have passed materials traffic. If those segments result in 7,500, 5,000, and 2,500 miles— the two qualifying tests, and is using the represent the 50 percent of those track 75 percent, 50 percent, and 25 percent best estimate available to calculate the segments that would have passed the of 10,000, respectively—that would impacts. FRA is also certain that some have nonetheless required PTC systems. two tests, this would imply that the segments would have required railroads would have been interested in Accordingly, FRA would calculate the mitigation, and is using the best benefits of removing PTC systems from removing roughly 7,000 miles from their information available regarding the PTC networks, a figure that has become 2,500, 5,000, and 7,500 miles. The expected cost of the mitigations. FRA analysis of mileage estimates so similar the low benefit case. was required to estimate these values, to those used by FRA in its existing In its analysis for the NPRM in the and FRA has pointed out that within sensitivity analysis would not yield instant proceeding, FRA assumed that reasonable ranges the exact value of meaningful new data, and therefore the 3,500 miles are a subset of those these estimates will not affect FRA’s additional sensitivity analysis on the 10,000 miles that would not be percentage of segments passing both conclusions. The final rule still provides equipped with PTC systems, and are tests would be redundant. net societal benefits regardless of the therefore accounted for. When analyzing Peabody also objects to the estimates range of impact. In other words, since the PTC rule published in January 2010, of mitigation costs avoided. Under the the costs exceed the benefits for any FRA needed to estimate the number of PTC final rule issued in January 2010, given mile of PTC system miles that might have been eligible to in order to remove some segments from implementation, removing the avoid PTC system implementation in the PTC system network, and to requirement to install a PTC system for the event that PIH materials traffic compensate for the resulting safety any number of miles in the scope would be removed. FRA reviewed traffic reductions, the railroads would have proposed will result in a net benefit. At patterns for segments from which FRA had to propose mitigations of the this time, FRA is less uncertain about believed the railroads could remove PIH additional risk created by that removal. whether the PTC systems being adopted materials traffic with little or no FRA purposefully avoided defining under the PTC rule will create business difficulty. For that rulemaking, this such mitigations, providing the benefits of the type and magnitude information supported the conservative railroads the flexibility to propose their explored in the sensitivity analysis of estimate used in the analysis of the own solutions, which would then be the prior final rule, for the reasons NPRM. FRA did not receive any subject to FRA approval. Even if FRA described above. It is clear that with dissenting comments. had fully developed the methodologies minor exceptions, unaffected by this In analyzing the NPRM issued in the for the two qualifying tests, FRA still final rule, the railroads have adopted instant proceeding, FRA attempted to would not have prescribed particular PTC systems that will not likely create remain consistent with the mitigations, and therefore would not the kinds of business and societal aforementioned prior analysis, as it had

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28296 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

subsequently become the subject of implementation plan submissions to the analysis, that benefits far exceed much discussion. From the railroads’ arrive at total PTC system mileage, costs. submissions, it does not appear that the though total mileage has relatively little Peabody also argues that FRA 10,000 miles are in addition to the 3,500 impact on the analysis, and on AAR improperly shifted the analysis period miles; rather, the 3,500 miles are a representations as to the affected from 2009–2028 to 2012–2031. subset of the 10,000 miles. In its mileage. Peabody also uses its mileage However, as was the case in several of comments, AAR did not challenge or estimates to argue that fewer Peabody’s other arguments, here correct FRA’s impression that the locomotives than FRA estimates will no Peabody fails to take heed of the fact 10,000 miles included the 3,500 miles. longer need to be equipped with PTC that the instant rulemaking is a new FRA therefore continues to assume that onboard apparatuses. In making this proceeding. Accordingly, FRA has the 3,500 miles are a subset of the comment, Peabody appears to rely on its adopted a current starting point and 20 mileage AAR intends to remove from mileage estimates that differ with FRA’s. year time period for analysis. Decisions PIH service. In reviewing AAR’s data, FRA’s estimates are based on actual made prior to this rulemaking were not FRA found that the 10,000 miles railroad PTC implementation plans, and impacted by this rulemaking, and this included many track segments that FRA, on its estimates of affected mileage. The analysis is appropriately forward- primary use of this calculation is for in previously arriving at the 3,500 mile looking only. figure, did not think it would have been FRA to estimate the impact on practical to select for removal of PIH locomotive costs on small entities. In Peabody claims that the exclusion of materials traffic when compared to the doing so, FRA also estimated impact of so-called headline accidents is 3,500 miles for which there appeared to this final rule on Class II railroads. unverified. FRA pointed out in its be several logical mitigation treatments. Reduced locomotive costs account for analysis that all of the headline FRA was presented with several options roughly 2 percent of the benefits. Even accidents involved either passenger for estimating the impact of this rule in if FRA were to reduce that by 30 trains or release of chlorine, a PIH light of the new data provided by AAR. percent, as Peabody requests, the total material. Relief under this rulemaking While FRA could have analyzed a low societal benefits accruing from this will only apply to segments from which case that consisted of removing the two rulemaking would be decreased by 0.6 PIH is removed (except for de minimis tests from the 3,500 miles, yielding an percent. Use of the Peabody estimate quantities) and do not have passenger estimate where the savings were the would not impact the RIA’s conclusion. traffic except on other than main lines avoided costs of undergoing the two Peabody also asserts that FRA erred in as defined in the regulation. The tests and undertaking mitigations, this assuming an annual PTC system conditions under which the headline does not seem to be a reasonable maintenance cost of 15 percent of the accidents generally occur would not alternative to analyze as the railroads total installation costs, substituting a allow for line segments to get relief from are already claiming that they intend to 12.5 percent factor. However, FRA PTC requirements. Thus, headline remove many more segments from PIH continues to believe maintenance costs accidents are not relevant to the costs or service. Alternatively, FRA could have will be relatively high compared to benefits of this rule, as there is not a treated the 3,500 miles as the only electronic equipment that does not need substantial risk of such accidents subset of the 10,000 miles that would to pass strict qualification procedures. occurring on the line segments no pass the two tests. As a result, the Railroads and their suppliers will use longer required to be equipped with percentage passing both tests would be components developed for the general PTC systems as a result of this rule. 35 percent with a base mileage of 10,000 market, including microprocessors. The Peabody also objects to applying a miles. As noted in the sensitivity railroad segment is not sufficiently large percentage to the risk of other PTC- analysis, the 14,000 mile case with 50 to provide an incentive for chipmakers preventable accidents on the segments. percent proportion passing both tests to develop or manufacture FRA reviewed data submitted by provides very similar results as microprocessors exclusively for railroad railroads for segments likely to be those considering a 10,000 mile case with use. Thus, when microprocessors from which PIH materials traffic would only 30 percent passing both tests. A become obsolete, the railroads and their be removed, and made two case using 35 percent is not very suppliers will have to buy different observations. First, FRA observed that different from a case using 30 percent, microprocessors, and re-qualify their the railroads claimed that only 21 PTC- and presenting it would not add any PTC systems using the newer preventable accidents had occurred over value to a decision maker. Finally, FRA microprocessors. This will increase the a 7 year period, an average of 3 per year. could continue to use the 3,500 mile maintenance costs relative to the value This contrasts with the PTC-preventable figure as representative of what would of the installed base. FRA will continue accident data on which FRA based the happen in a low case, with 7,000 miles to use its estimate that maintenance PTC final rule, which showed an and 50 percent of segments passing both costs will be 15%, and will adjust only average of 52 PTC-preventable accidents tests. This adds value as a low case in if future empirical evidence indicates per year, excluding headline accidents. sensitivity analysis. FRA has adopted otherwise. Maintenance cost savings FRA also observed that in general the this latter approach, and continues to were 59 percent of the total benefit segments appeared to have below- believe the approach is sound. using a 7 percent discount factor and 65 average tonnage volumes, although FRA Peabody also claims that, if FRA were percent of the total benefit using a 3 does not have directly comparable to reconduct its economic analysis of percent discount factor. Reducing volume data for the entire PTC network. the prior final rules, the outcome would maintenance costs by one-sixth (12.5 It seemed improbable to FRA that be a reduced estimate of the total cost percent instead of 15 percent) would roughly 16 percent of the PTC network of PTC wayside implementation. reduce the total benefit estimate by 10– had only 5.8 percent of the PTC- However, FRA is not updating its 11 percent. Even assuming the lower preventable accidents, but clearly the analysis of the prior final rule; the number of locomotives estimated by average risk per mile would be lower. agency is only estimating the impacts of Peabody and the lower maintenance The calculated probability of an the changes induced by this final rule. savings estimated by Peabody would not accident on the miles to be removed was This estimate relies upon PTC system have any impact on the conclusions of 36.2 percent of the likelihood on the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28297

entire PTC network.5 It also seemed AAR believes that removal of the two account for track miles potentially unlikely that the risk per mile was qualifying tests could result in avoiding affected by the currently undeveloped identical between the entire PTC PTC system implementation on 10,000 residual risk analysis. Thus, AAR states network and the miles to be removed track miles. AAR determined this that it does not know the basis for FRA’s from PIH materials service. As a amount based upon the difference assumption that 50 percent of the lines conservative estimate, FRA used a value between PIH materials route maps as in question would have qualified under of 60% to estimate the accident benefits they looked in 2008 and what they that criterion. FRA agrees that it is that would no longer occur on segments expect them to look like by the end of difficult to estimate the percentage of removed from the PTC network, a value 2015. AAR expects a reduction in track segments that would have met both that leads to a higher estimate of costs miles upon which PIH materials will be tests, because both tests were not fully than a value of 36% would have. In transported due to a change of customer developed. As noted in its response to other words, 60% constitutes a risk demands, regulatory compliance, and the Peabody study, FRA’s sensitivity pro rata changes to become more estimate within a range of 36% and analysis provides a view of what the efficient. AAR estimates PTC system 100% of the risk for the segments not outcome might have been under the subject to this rule, and the 60% installation-related savings of $50,000 per mile, totaling $500 million. AAR base case had the percentage passing the estimate falls toward the lower end as two tests been higher or lower. a result of adjustments for density and expects further savings from avoiding Ultimately, regardless of the exact regulatory changes implemented since the associated maintenance costs. number of miles no longer requiring the publication of the previous final With the removal of the two PTC system implementation, the rule. Peabody argues that the removal of qualifying tests, AAR believes that a the headline accidents was a sufficient railroad should still be able to file an societal benefits of the final rule are reduction in estimated risk. FRA RFA to remove a track segment from the much greater than the societal costs. disagrees. In addition to the reduction of PTCIP’s implementation schedule if AAR also contests statements made at risk from the absence of PIH and there is passenger service on the line the hearing by those representing some passenger traffic, the available evidence that qualifies for a main line track of the shippers, taking issue with the indicates that the segments eligible for exclusion under 49 CFR § 236.1019. shippers’ reliance on the Peabody and exclusion are less likely to have non- According to AAR, the statement in the Zeta-Tech studies, which AAR asserts headline PTC-preventable accidents, first sentence of proposed was already refuted by the Oliver and FRA has estimated the costs and § 236.1005(b)(4)(i)—that a line qualifies Wyman study sent to FRA on April 27, only if there is a ‘‘cessation of passenger benefits of excluding such segments 2010. In particular, while the Peabody service’’—could be interpreted as stating accordingly. and Zeta-Tech studies each provide a Finally, Peabody objects to FRA’s that a PTC system will be required for a line over which no PIH materials will cost-benefit analysis that included approach to annualization of costs. This business benefits, Oliver Wyman approach is based on OMB guidance be transported after 2015 if there is any passenger service, even if the passenger contends that with the advancements and used by DOT for all significant service qualifies for a main line track made since the writing of the Zeta-Tech regulations.6 Accordingly, FRA will exclusion. While FRA viewed the prior report, this benefit would be ‘‘minimal.’’ retain the annualized estimates. language as sufficient to allow for the AAR believes that the shippers’ 2. AAR exclusion of such lines, the rule text has reference to the Zeta-Tech analysis is nonetheless been further clarified to AAR recognizes the RSIA mandate misplaced, because it analyzed explicitly reference main line track that PTC systems must be implemented hypothetical PTC systems and exclusions. by December 31, 2015, on main lines hypothetical business benefits. AAR In the preamble to the proposed asserts that some of those business used to transport passengers or PIH amendments, FRA asks about the materials and that FRA maintains the benefits have already been achieved accuracy of its cost-benefit analysis. through implementation of other statutory discretion to require additional While there are some differences PTC system implementation. However, systems and that the PTC systems being between AAR’s and FRA’s assessment of installed will not enhance the capability AAR asserts that FRA’s discretion must costs, the differences would not be exercised reasonably. With a cost- to achieve those business benefits. materially affect FRA’s conclusion that Moreover, according to AAR, the PTC benefit ratio of 20:1, AAR believes that the costs to the industry that would be systems currently being installed will it is patently unreasonable for FRA to avoided far outweigh any benefits that lack those business benefits and will exercise any discretion beyond the would be lost. In general FRA assumes likely face many operational statute’s minimum implementation the base cost of $50,000 per mile has not requirements. For the same reason, AAR changed as a result of technological inefficiencies, particularly as they relate states that the two qualifying tests are advancements. Further, FRA assumes to braking algorithm changes and the inconsistent with RSIA, because, ‘‘No this $50,000 per mile estimate resultant effect on network velocity and additional prerequisites are appropriate represents a variable cost estimate that capacity constraints. FRA did not unless FRA can justify additional PTC is relatively constant across different include those business benefits in either requirements beyond the statutory segments of track. the analysis of the NPRM or this mandate. There is no justification for While AAR indicated that removal of analysis, and agrees with AAR that it going beyond the statutory mandate in the two qualifying tests could would not have been proper to include any event, but especially with such a potentially avoid PTC system those hypothetical benefits in either disparate cost-benefit ratio.’’ implementation on 10,000 track miles, analysis, as described in more detail FRA also performed a sensitivity above. In addition, AAR contends that 5 Calculation: ((3 accidents per year)/(52 analysis in its proposed RIA, using any discussions on pricing or common accidents per year))/((11,248.43 miles)/(70,000 7,000 miles as a conservative low- carrier obligations are not appropriate miles)) = 36.2 percent. for this forum. FRA described these 6 OMB Circular A–4 at 45 (‘‘You should present number threshold. AAR believes that annualized benefits and costs using real discount FRA underestimates the route miles at issues in more detail in Sections III.A rates of 3 and 7 percent.’’). stake, because it presumably does not and III.B, above.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28298 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis million gross tons over a 2-year period. the testimony, if the PTC rule remains Unless otherwise noted, all section AAR states that, ‘‘The first issue with unchanged, railroads may be required to references below refer to sections in title proposed (b)(4)(ii) is a repetition of the spend more than $500 million in the 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations problem presented by the first sentence next few years to deploy PTC systems (CFR). of (b)(4)(i), a reference to a cessation of on more than 10,000 miles of rail lines passenger service rather than a on which neither passengers nor PIH Proposed Amendments to 49 CFR Part reduction to an amount qualifying for a materials will be transported as of 236 main track exclusion. The second issue December 31, 2015. Section 236.1003 Definitions with proposed (b)(4)(ii) is the use of ‘or.’ FRA recognizes that the railroads Under a strict reading of the proposed have much work to do to have FRA currently defines PIH materials language, a line with over 5 million interoperable PTC systems implemented within the rule text at gross tons of freight traffic used for TIH in accordance with the congressional § 236.1005(b)(1)(i), which some may and passenger service, for example, mandate by the December 31, 2015, find difficult to locate. Accordingly, for would qualify for an exclusion from the statutory deadline. FRA also recognizes the purposes of clarity, FRA is adding PTC mandate if passenger service that the alternative route analysis and the definition for PIH materials to the ceased even if there were no changes in residual risk tests could potentially definitions section of subpart I. The the freight volume and TIH traffic require PTC system implementation at a inclusion of this definition in continued.’’ great cost to the railroads on lines that § 236.1003 does not change the meaning In response to these concerns, FRA will not carry PIH materials traffic as of of the term as understood under has clarified the language of paragraph December 31, 2015. Lines that no longer § 236.1005(b)(1)(i) or its cross-reference (b)(4) without changing its intended carry PIH materials traffic can still pose to §§ 171.8, 173.115, and 173.132. meaning. Paragraph (b)(4)(i) now significant safety risks associated with Section 236.1005 Requirements for specifically mentions the approval of an other hazardous material traffic on the Positive Train Control Systems MTEA as one cause for a routing change lines and these safety risks may justify to allow for approval of an exclusion. In this final rule, FRA is eliminating a requirement that the lines be equipped Paragraph (b)(4)(ii) now more precisely with PTC systems. However, as FRA the alternative route analysis and the states the set of conditions necessary to residual risk analysis tests. When noted when it last amended the PTC approve an exclusion. Specifically, an rule (75 FR 59111–59113 (Sept. 27, initially published in the PTC rule on exclusion may only be granted where January 15, 2010, these provisions were 2010)), FRA will need to develop an both of the following conditions are appropriate risk methodology through a included in § 236.1005(b). On established by the railroad to be true as September 27, 2010, FRA issued separate rulemaking proceeding before of December 31, 2015: first, that there is it can require PTC systems to be amendments to the PTC rule, moving no passenger service, or any passenger the text to a new § 236.1020, and installed on any line that no longer service that exists is subject to an carries PIH materials. FRA has had providing more clarifying language. MTEA; second, that there is no PIH However, to ensure continuity and discussion with members of the railroad materials traffic or less than 5 million industry regarding an appropriate risk understanding, § 236.1005 contained gross tons of freight traffic. various cross-references to § 236.1020. methodology but has yet to come up As indicated below, FRA is eliminating Section 236.1020 Exclusion of track with a reasonable and satisfactory § 236.1020. Accordingly, FRA is also segments for implementation due to methodology that could form the basis removing the relevant cross-references cessation of PIH materials traffic of this further rulemaking. FRA is, in § 236.1005. As previously noted, the current PTC therefore, eliminating the two qualifying AAR has concerns regarding the text rule requires that, for each RFA seeking tests that would potentially require PTC of proposed (b)(4). AAR believes that a to exclude a track segment from PTC system implementation on lines not railroad should still be able to file an system implementation due to the specifically mandated by Congress, RFA to remove a track segment from the cessation of PIH materials traffic, a consistent with Executive Order 13563. PTCIP’s implementation schedule if railroad must satisfy both an alternative To achieve this end, FRA is eliminating there is passenger service on the line route analysis, and eventually a residual § 236.1020. While FRA has removed that qualifies the railroad to submit a risk analysis test, in order to secure these analyses from the PTC rule, FRA main line track exclusion addendum FRA’s approval. FRA’s cost-benefit reserves its statutory and regulatory (MTEA) under 49 CFR 236.1019. analysis of the PTC rule indicates that authority to require PTC system According to AAR, the statement in the the railroads will incur approximately implementation on additional track first sentence of proposed $20 in PTC costs for each $1 in PTC segments in the future based on risk § 236.1005(b)(4)(i)—that explicitly safety benefits. In its congressional levels or other rational bases. references the ‘‘cessation of passenger testimony, AAR testified that 2010 was V. Regulatory Impact and Notices service’’ but does not discuss MTEAs— the safest year for America’s railroads, could be interpreted as stating that a that railroads have lower employee A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 PTC system will be required for a line injury rates than most other major and DOT Regulatory Policies and over which no PIH will be transported industries, that only around 4 percent of Procedures after 2015 if there is any passenger all train accidents on Class I main lines This final rule has been evaluated in service, even if the passenger service are likely to be prevented by PTC accordance with existing policies and qualifies for an MTEA. AAR also argues systems, and that there are many far less procedures, and determined to be that this paragraph, if literally read, costly ways to provide greater significant under Executive Order provides that FRA will approve a improvements in rail safety than 12866, Executive Order 13563 and DOT request for excluding a line segment through the implementation of PTC policies and procedures. 44 FR 11,034 from the PTC mandate if there is a systems on lines not required by (Feb. 26, 1979). We have prepared and cessation of passenger service or PIH Congress to be equipped.7 According to placed in the docket a regulatory impact materials service by December 31, 2015, analysis (RIA) addressing the economic or a decline in freight traffic below 5 7 See AAR Congressional Testimony, at 8–9. impact of this final rule. FRA is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28299

removing regulatory provisions that materials and generally have lower railroads that must be equipped with require railroads to meet two tests in accident frequency and severity, PTC systems, because they run on Class order to avoid PTC system because the lines have relatively lower I railroads’ track that will no longer implementation on track segments that traffic volumes than the average need to be equipped with PTC systems. were used to transport PIH materials segment on which PTC systems will be Although these benefits will be small traffic in 2008 and carried 5 million required, based on FRA’s review of the relative to the wayside equipment gross tons of traffic, but that, as of data submitted by AAR. The analysis savings, they would be large relative to December 31, 2015, do not transport PIH shows that if the assumptions are the size of the railroads being impacted. materials traffic and are not used for correct, the savings to the industry in The tables below present the total intercity or commuter rail passenger the form of regulatory relief as proposed estimated cost savings benefits of the transportation that otherwise require far outweigh the cost associated with final rule, assuming installation or PTC system installation under the rule. increased accident exposure. additional mitigation measures would Substantial cost savings will accrue The largest part of the cost savings no longer be required along 10,000 largely from not installing PTC system benefit comes from reducing the extent miles of track. The analysis assumes wayside components or other of wayside that must be equipped with that 5,000 miles of track would have mitigations along approximately 10,000 PTC systems. Some of these lines would passed both tests with some mitigation miles of track. Although these rail lines have qualified for exemption by passing measures being taken, and the will forgo some risk reduction, the the two tests contained in the 2010 PTC remaining 5,000 miles would not have reductions in risk will likely be small final rule, while others may not have. In passed both tests and would have since these lines pose a much lower risk addition, benefits will come from required PTC system implementation of accidents because they generally do reducing the number of locomotives under the rules in effect before this not carry passenger trains or PIH belonging to Class II and Class III (small) rulemaking.

BENEFITS (20-YEAR, DISCOUNTED)

Costs avoided 7% Discount 3% Discount

Reduced Mitigation Costs, Including Maintenance ...... $91,793,822 $121,119,324 Reduced Wayside Costs, Including Maintenance ...... 515,695,631 680,445,643 Reduced Locomotive Costs, Including Maintenance ...... 12,479,834 16,466,785

Total Benefits ...... 619,969,287 818,031,752

Total costs may also be broken down and replacement of components. response to comments FRA explains its into initial investment and maintenance Replacement components can be very rationale for rejecting the lower estimate costs. Although railroads may already expensive in processor-based systems of maintenance costs. have spent money to install and with relatively small installed bases, Costs associated with the proposed maintain PTC systems, FRA assumes such as PTC. PTC systems are not regulatory relief will come from here that those funds have not been installed in great enough numbers to reducing the potential for accident spent on the lines considered here, as justify a processor manufacturer making reduction. A substantial part of the they tend to be lower volume, lower a processor just for PTC. PTC systems accident reduction that FRA expects priority lines, and FRA assumes that the developers must use standard from PTC systems comes from reducing railroads would not install PTC systems processors, and over time those high-consequence accidents involving on those lines until 2014, at the earliest, processors usually become obsolete and passenger trains or the release of PIH in the absence of this rulemaking. FRA are no longer supported or materials. FRA believes that the track estimates that avoiding installation on manufactured. Then the PTC system segments impacted by this final rule 10,000 miles would let railroads avoid developer must redesign and re-test the pose significantly less risk because they $300.5 million in initial installation PTC system to ensure it will continue to generally do not carry passenger trains costs (not discounted). Maintenance operate safely and reliably with the new or PIH materials and generally have cost savings would total $366.0 million processor. The Trade Associations lower accident frequency and severity, (discounted at 7%) or $538.9 million commented that they believe the as discussed above, because the lines (discounted at 3%). Maintenance estimated savings from reduced have relatively lower traffic volumes includes all of the activities and maintenance costs are too high, and and track speeds than the average subsequent purchases needed to operate should have been based on 12.5 percent segment on which PTC systems are the PTC system over its life-cycle, and of the value of installed PTC systems, required, based on FRA’s review of the to maintain its proper functioning, rather than the 15 percent of the value data submitted by AAR. The following reliability, and availability. of installed PTC systems used in tables present the total costs of the final Maintenance includes training, system analyzing both the NPRM and this final rule as well as the breakdown of the inspection, testing, adjustments, repair, rule. For reasons described above, in its costs by element.

COSTS (20-YEAR, DISCOUNTED)

Foregone reductions in 7% Discount 3% Discount

Fatality Prevention ...... $11,453,106 $16,860,327 Injury Prevention ...... 4,254,484 6,263,104 Train Delay ...... 117,793 173,406 Property Damage ...... 10,163,835 14,962,367 Equipment Cleanup ...... 143,273 210,915

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28300 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

COSTS (20-YEAR, DISCOUNTED)—Continued

Foregone reductions in 7% Discount 3% Discount

Environmental Cleanup ...... 430,995 634,475 Evacuations ...... 138,780 204,301

Total Costs ...... 26,702,267 39,308,896

The 20-year discounted net benefits while the benefit of avoided many as 14,000 miles of track. Each of (subtracting the costs from the benefits) maintenance and the disbenefit (costs) these assumes that 50% of the track are expected to be $590 million over 20 of accidents not avoided would be miles would have passed both tests with years, discounted at 7 percent per year; realized annually in later years. FRA some mitigation measures being taken, and $780 million over 20 years, also assessed the sensitivity of the and that the remaining 50% of the track discounted at 3 percent per year. The analysis with respect to scenarios in miles would not have passed both tests timing of benefits and costs are such which railroads may only be able to get and would have required PTC system that a large benefit in terms of capital relief for 7,000 miles of track and in implementation under the current rules. investment is avoided in early years, which railroads may get relief on as Such scenarios also show net benefits.

Net societal benefits 7% Discount 3% Discount

Expected Case (10,000 miles) ...... $593,267,020 $778,722,856 High Case (14,000 miles) ...... 793,856,299 1,041,764,269 Low Case (7,000 miles) ...... 442,825,061 581,441,797

Further, the benefit-cost ratios under the scenarios analyzed range between 20:1 and 25:1.

Benefit-cost ratio 7% Discount 3% Discount

Expected Case ...... 23.22 20.81 High Case ...... 22.24 19.93 Low Case ...... 24.69 22.13

FRA also received comments from the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 1. Description of Regulated Entities and Trade Associations saying that FRA et seq.). Impacts understated the costs of the proposed The Regulatory Flexibility Act rule, especially by not accounting for requires an agency to review regulations The ‘‘universe’’ of the entities under business benefits of PTC that would be to assess their impact on small entities. consideration includes only those small lost on the affected segments. FRA has An agency must conduct a regulatory entities that can reasonably be expected reviewed PTCIPs, and at present the flexibility analysis unless it determines to be directly affected by the provisions only business benefits the railroads are and certifies that a rule is not expected of this rule. In this case, the ‘‘universe’’ seemingly likely to realize from PTC to have a significant economic impact would be Class III freight railroads that would result from train pacing. Train on a substantial number of small operate on rail lines that are currently pacing benefits are derived from entities. required to have PTC systems installed. locomotive onboard equipment, and As discussed in earlier sections of this Such lines are owned by railroads not would not be affected by the reduction preamble, FRA is amending the considered to be small. in wayside component installations. regulations implementing a provision of The U.S. Small Business Train pacing is likely to result in fuel RSIA that requires certain passenger and Administration (SBA) stipulates in its savings, but since train pacing will not freight railroads to install PTC systems. ‘‘Size Standards’’ that the largest a be affected by this rule, fuel savings will Specifically, FRA is removing two railroad business firm that is ‘‘for- remain unchanged. This is discussed in regulatory requirements that require profit’’ may be, and still be classified as more detail in the response to comments railroads to either conduct further a ‘‘small entity,’’ is 1,500 employees for above. analyses or meet certain risk-based ‘‘Line Haul Operating Railroads’’ and B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and criteria in order to avoid PTC system 500 employees for ‘‘Switching and Executive Order 13272 implementation on track segments that Terminal Establishments.’’ ‘‘Small carried PIH traffic and 5 million or more entity’’ is defined in the Act as a small To ensure that the impact of this gross tons of traffic in 2008 but that will business that is independently owned rulemaking on small entities is properly not carry PIH hazardous materials traffic and operated, and is not dominant in its considered, FRA developed this final as of December 31, 2015. field of operation. Additionally, section rule in accordance with Executive Order FRA is certifying that this final rule 601(5) defines ‘‘small entities’’ as 13272 (‘‘Proper Consideration of Small will result in ‘‘no significant economic governments of cities, counties, towns, Entities in Agency Rulemaking’’) and impact on a substantial number of small townships, villages, school districts, or DOT’s policies and procedures to entities.’’ The following section explains special districts with populations less promote compliance with the the reasons for this certification. than 50,000.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28301

Federal agencies may adopt their own for the larger railroads. In the RSAC PTC with having to reduce operating speeds size standards for small entities in Working Group discussions leading up to cross over two railroad-to-railroad consultation with SBA and in to the PTC final rule published in the crossings at an annual cost of $43,800. conjunction with public comment. Federal Register on January 15, 2010, The unit costs presented above for Pursuant to that authority, FRA has the American Short Line & Regional installing PTC systems on locomotives, published a final policy that formally Railroad Association (ASLRRA) and at railroad-to-railroad crossings, and establishes ‘‘small entities’’ as railroads representatives asserted that some short the operational costs of operating over a which meet the line haulage revenue lines are operating locomotives with a crossing at reduced speed are the values requirements of a Class III railroad.8 The market value of no more than $75,000, used in the Regulatory Flexibility revenue requirements are currently $20 and that it would be very difficult for Analysis of the PTC final rule issued million or less in annual operating those railroads to equip their January 15, 2010, and can be found in revenue. The $20 million limit (which locomotives at a unit cost of $55,000 the docket for that rulemaking. The is adjusted by applying the railroad each. Further, even if the average cost to changes FRA is adopting will benefit the revenue deflator adjustment) 9 is based equip a locomotive is $55,000, it may be small entities impacted. FRA requested on the Surface Transportation Board’s more expensive to equip an older comment on whether the impacts on (STB) threshold for a Class III railroad locomotive. These railroads will have to them would be significant and whether carrier. FRA is using the STB’s develop a new and unique installation the number of small railroads affected is threshold in its definition of ‘‘small for a small number of locomotives that substantial. The Trade Associations entities’’ for this rule. may also have space limitations and that commented that they believe the The final rule impacts Class III may not be equipped with the more mileage affected on Class I railroads railroads that operate on lines of other modern mechanisms and design that would be less, and the impact on Class railroads currently required to have PTC make it easier to install PTC systems. II and Class III railroads also systems installed. To the extent that One or more of the seven affected small correspondingly less. FRA does not such host railroads receive relief from railroads may be using such older concur with the comments and the such a requirement along certain lines, locomotives. For such a railroad, the information provided by commenters Class III railroads that operate over cost of equipping a locomotive with an does not provide any rationale against those lines would not have to equip onboard PTC apparatus may be a certification that the rule is not expected their locomotives with PTC system significant burden. Thus, the relief of to impact a substantial number of small components. FRA believes that that burden provided by the final rule entities significantly. The Trade elimination of the two tests for relief may be a significant benefit for such Associations comments actually support from the requirement to install PTC small entities. the certification by suggesting that the systems will result in PTC systems not The avoided installation cost will also impact on the affected small entities being installed on track segments have a significant beneficial effect on would be less than FRA had estimated. totaling over 10,000 miles in length. small railroads’ annual net income. For The seven railroads affected by this rule Approximately five small railroads instance, if a short line railroad avoids do not represent a substantial number of operate locomotives on lines currently onboard PTC apparatus installation on railroads out of more than required to be equipped with PTC six locomotives, then the savings would approximately 600 Class III railroads. systems, but that would receive relief be $330,000. When such a railroad may 2. Certification under the final rule. In addition, two have annual revenues of $10 million to Class III railroads operate over railroad $20 million, with the profit of that Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility crossings (diamonds) that intersect amount ranging between $1 million and Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FRA tracks required to be equipped with PTC $2 million, the avoided installation cost Administrator certifies that this final systems in the absence of changes could be between 16.5 percent and 33 rule will not have a significant adopted in this final rule. The total of percent of that railroad’s annual income. economic impact on a substantial seven affected Class III railroads is not This savings could be a significant number of small entities. a substantial number of small entities, benefit for an affected small railroad. C. Paperwork Reduction Act given that there are 674 small railroads. However, even if all seven of the Under the final rule Class III railroads affected Class III railroads were to The information collection will avoid equipping 28 locomotives receive a significant benefit, seven requirements in this final rule are being with PTC onboard apparatuses at a cost railroads is not a substantial number of submitted for approval to the Office of savings of $55,000 per locomotive small railroads. Management and Budget (OMB) under initially plus maintenance of the PTC In addition, a Class III railroad will the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, equipment. avoid paying for PTC system installation 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The sections that As a business model, most small at one railroad-to-railroad crossing, at an contain the current information railroads purchase old locomotives initial cost of $80,000 plus annual collection requirements and the being sold by larger railroads, because maintenance. Finally, Class III railroads estimated time to fulfill each they have become functionally obsolete will avoid operational costs associated requirement are as follows:

Total annual CFR Section Respondent universe Total annual responses Average time per response burden hours

234.275—Processor-Based Systems—Deviations from 20 Railroads ...... 25 letters ...... 4 hours ...... 100 Product Safety Plan (PSP)—Letters. 236.18—Software Mgmt Control Plan ...... 184 Railroads ...... 184 plans ...... 2,150 hours ...... 395,600 —Updates to Software Mgmt. Control Plan ...... 90 Railroads ...... 20 updates ...... 1.50 hours ...... 30 236.905—Updates to RSPP ...... 78 Railroads ...... 6 plans ...... 135 hours ...... 810 —Response to Request For Additional Info ...... 78 Railroads ...... 1 updated doc ...... 400 hours ...... 400

8 See 68 FR 24891 (May 9, 2003); 49 CFR part 209, 9 For further information on the calculation of the app. C. specific dollar limit, please see 49 CFR part 1201.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28302 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Total annual CFR Section Respondent universe Total annual responses Average time per response burden hours

—Request for FRA Approval of RSPP Modification .. 78 Railroads ...... 1 request/modified RSPP ... 400 hours ...... 400 236.907—Product Safety Plan (PSP)—Dev ...... 5 Railroads ...... 5 plans ...... 6,400 hours ...... 32,000 236.909—Minimum Performance Standard—Petitions 5 Railroads ...... 2 petitions/PSP ...... 19,200 hours ...... 38,400 For Review and Approval. —Supporting Sensitivity Analysis ...... 5 Railroads ...... 5 analyses ...... 160 hours ...... 800 236.913—Notification/Submission to FRA of Joint Prod- 6 Railroads ...... 1 joint plan ...... 25,600 hours ...... 25,600 uct Safety Plan (PSP). —Petitions For Approval/Informational Filings ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 petitions ...... 1,928 hours ...... 11,568 —Responses to FRA Request For Further Info. After 6 Railroads ...... 2 documents ...... 800 hours ...... 1,600 Informational Filing. —Responses to FRA Request For Further Info. After 6 Railroads ...... 6 documents ...... 16 hours ...... 96 Agency Receipt of Notice of Product Development. —Consultations ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 consults ...... 120 hours ...... 720 —Petitions for Final Approval ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 petitions ...... 16 hours ...... 96 —Comments to FRA by Interested Parties ...... Public/RRs ...... 7 comments ...... 240 hours ...... 1,680 —Third Party Assessments of PSP ...... 6 Railroads ...... 1 assessment ...... 104,000 hours ...... 104,000 —Amendments to PSP ...... 6 Railroads ...... 15 amendments ...... 160 hours ...... 2,400 —Field Testing of Product—Info. Filings ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 documents ...... 3,200 hours ...... 19,200 236.917—Retention of Records ...... 160,000 hrs...... —Results of tests/inspections specified in PSP ...... 6 Railroads ...... 3 documents/records ...... 160,000 hrs.; 40,000 hrs .... 360,000 —Report to FRA of Inconsistencies with frequency 6 Railroads ...... 1 report ...... 104 hours ...... 104 of safety-relevant hazards in PSP. 236.919—Operations & Maintenance Man —Updates to O & M Manual ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 updated docs ...... 40 hours ...... 240 —Plans For Proper Maintenance, Repair, Inspection 6 Railroads ...... 6 plans ...... 53,335 hours ...... 320,010 of Safety-Critical Products. —Hardware/Software/Firmware Revisions ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 revisions ...... 6,440 hours ...... 38,640 236.921—Training Programs: Development ...... 6 Railroads ...... 6 Tr. Programs ...... 400 hours ...... 2,400 —Training of Signalmen & Dispatchers ...... 6 Railroads ...... 300 signalmen; 20 dis- 40 hours; 20 hours ...... 12,400 patchers. 236.923—Task Analysis/Basic Requirements: Necessary 6 Railroads ...... 6 documents ...... 720 hours ...... 4,320 Documents. —Records ...... 6 Railroads ...... 350 records ...... 10 minutes ...... 58 SUBPART I—NEW REQUIREMENTS 236.1001—RR Development of More Stringent Rules 46 Railroads ...... 3 rules ...... 80 hours ...... 240 Re: PTC Performance Stds. 236.1005—Requirements for PTC Systems —Temporary Rerouting: Emergency Requests ...... 46 Railroads ...... 50 requests ...... 8 hours ...... 400 —Written/Telephonic Notification to FRA Regional 46 Railroads ...... 50 notifications ...... 2 hours ...... 100 Administrator. —Temporary Rerouting Requests Due to Track 46 Railroads ...... 760 requests ...... 8 hours ...... 6,080 Maintenance. —Temporary Rerouting Requests That Exceed 30 46 Railroads ...... 380 requests ...... 8 hours ...... 3,040 Days. 236.1006—Requirements for Equipping Locomotives Op- erating in PTC Territory —Reports of Movements in Excess of 20 Miles/RR 46 Railroads ...... 45 reports + 45 reports ...... 8 hours + 170 ...... 8,010 Progress on PTC Locomotives. —PTC Progress Reports ...... 46 Railroads ...... 35 reports ...... 16 hours ...... 560 236.1007—Additional Requirements for High Speed Service —Required HSR–125 Documents with approved 46 Railroads ...... 2 documents ...... 3,200 hours ...... 6,400 PTCSP. —Requests to Use Foreign Service Data ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 request ...... 8,000 hours ...... 8,000 —PTC Railroads Conducting Operations at More 46 Railroads ...... 2 documents ...... 3,200 hours ...... 6,400 than 150 MPH with HSR–125 Documents. —Requests for PTC Waiver ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 request ...... 1,000 hours ...... 1,000 236.1009–Procedural Requirements —Host Railroads Filing PTCIP or Request for 46 Railroads ...... 1 PCTIP; 20 RFAs ...... 535 hours; 320 hours ...... 6,935 Amendment (RFAs). —Jointly Submitted PTCIPs ...... 46 Railroads ...... 7 PTCIPs ...... 267 hours ...... 1,869 —Notification of Failure to File Joint PTCIP ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 notification ...... 32 hours ...... 32 —Comprehensive List of Issues Causing Non- 46 Railroads ...... 1 list ...... 80 hours ...... 80 Agreement. —Conferences to Develop Mutually Acceptable 46 Railroads ...... 2 conf. calls ...... 60 minutes ...... 2 PCTIP. —Type Approval ...... 46 Railroads ...... 2 Type Appr...... 8 hours ...... 16 —PTC Development Plans Requesting Type Ap- 46 Railroads ...... 20 Ltr. + 20 App; 2 Plans ... 8 hrs/1600 hrs; 6,400 hours 44,960 proval. —Notice of Product Intent w/PTCIPs (IPs) ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 NPI; 1 IP ...... 1,070 + 535 hrs ...... 1,605 —PTCDPs with PTCIPs (DPs + IPs) ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 DP ...... 2,135 hours ...... 2,135 —Updated PTCIPs w/PTCDPs (IPs + DPs) ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 IP; 1 DP ...... 535 + 2,135 hrs ...... 2,670 —Disapproved/Resubmitted PTCIPs/NPIs ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 IP + 1 NPI ...... 135 + 270 hrs ...... 405 —Revoked Approvals—Provisional IPs/DP ...... 46 Railroads ...... IP + 1 DP ...... 135 + 535 hrs ...... 670 —PTC IPs/PTCDPs Still Needing Rework ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 IP + 1 DP ...... 135 + 535 hrs ...... 670 —PTCIP/PTCDP/PTCSP Plan Contents—Docu- 46 Railroads ...... 1 document ...... 8,000 hours ...... 8,000 ments Translated into English. —Requests for Confidentiality ...... 46 Railroads ...... 46 ltrs; 46 docs ...... 8hrs.; 800 hrs ...... 37,168 —Field Test Plans/Independent Assessments—Req. 46 Railroads ...... 460 field tests; 2 assess- 800 hours ...... 369,600 by FRA. ments. —FRA Access: Interviews with PTC Wrkrs...... 46 Railroads ...... 92 interviews ...... 30 minutes ...... 46 —FRA Requests for Further Information ...... 46 Railroads ...... 8 documents ...... 400 hours ...... 3,200

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28303

Total annual CFR Section Respondent universe Total annual responses Average time per response burden hours

236.1011–PTCIP Requirements—Comment ...... 7 Interested Groups ...... 1 rev.; 40 com ...... 143 + 8 hrs...... 463 236.1015—PTCSP Content Requirements & PTC Sys- tem Certification —Non-Vital Overlay ...... 46 Railroads ...... 3 PTCSPs ...... 16,000 hours ...... 48,000 —Vital Overlay ...... 46 Railroads ...... 40 PTCSPs ...... 22,400 hours ...... 896,000 —Stand Alone ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 PTCSP ...... 32,000 hours ...... 32,000 —Mixed Systems—Conference with FRA regarding 46 Railroads ...... 3 conferences ...... 32 hours ...... 96 Case/Analysis. —Mixed Sys. PTCSPs (incl. safety case) ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1 PTCSP ...... 28,800 hours ...... 28,800 —FRA Request for Additional PTCSP Data ...... 46 Railroads ...... 23 documents ...... 3,200 hours ...... 73,600 —PTCSPs Applying to Replace Existing Certified 46 Railroads ...... 40 PTCSPs ...... 3,200 hours ...... 128,000 PTC Systems. —Non-Quantitative Risk Assessments Supplied to 46 Railroads ...... 40 assessments ...... 3,200 hours ...... 128,000 FRA. 236.1017—PTCSP Supported by Independent Third 46 Railroads ...... 1 assessment ...... 8,000 hours ...... 8,000 Party Assessment. —Written Requests to FRA to Confirm Entity Inde- 46 Railroads ...... 1 request ...... 8 hours ...... 8 pendence. —Provision of Additional Information After FRA Re- 46 Railroads ...... 1 document ...... 160 hours ...... 160 quest. —Independent Third Party Assessment: Waiver Re- 46 Railroads ...... 1 request ...... 160 hours ...... 160 quests. —RR Request for FRA to Accept Foreign Railroad 46 Railroads ...... 1 request ...... 32 hours ...... 32 Regulator Certified Info. 236.1019—Main Line Track Exceptions —Submission of Main Line Track Exclusion 46 Railroads ...... 138 MTEAs ...... 160 hours ...... 22,080 Addendums (MTEAs). —Passenger Terminal Exception—MTEAs ...... 46 Railroads ...... 23 MTEAs ...... 160 hours ...... 3,680 —Limited Operation Exception—Risk Mit ...... 46 Railroads ...... 46 plans ...... 160 hours ...... 7,360 —Ltd. Exception—Collision Hazard Anal ...... 46 Railroads ...... 23 analyses ...... 1,600 hours ...... 36,800 —Temporal Separation Procedures ...... 46 Railroads ...... 11 procedures ...... 160 hours ...... 1,760 236.1021—Discontinuances, Material Modifications, 46 Railroads ...... 23 RFAs ...... 160 hours ...... 3,680 Amendments—Requests to Amend (RFA) PTCIP, PTCDP or PTCSP. — Review and Public Comment on RFA ...... 7 Interested Groups ...... 7 reviews + 20 comments .. 3 hours; 16 hours ...... 341 236.1023—PTC Product Vendor Lists ...... 46 Railroads ...... 46 lists ...... 8 hours ...... 368 —RR Procedures Upon Notification of PTC System 46 Railroads ...... 46 procedures ...... 16 hours ...... 736 Safety-Critical Upgrades, Rev., Etc. —RR Notifications of PTC Safety Hazards ...... 46 Railroads ...... 150 notifications ...... 16 hours ...... 2,400 —RR Notification Updates ...... 46 Railroads ...... 150 updates ...... 16 hours ...... 2,400 —Manufacturer’s Report of Investigation of PTC De- 5 System Suppliers ...... 5 reports ...... 400 hours ...... 2,000 fect. —PTC Supplier Reports of Safety Relevant Failures 5 System Suppliers ...... 150 reports + 150 rpt. cop- 16 hours + 8 hours ...... 3,600 or Defective Conditions. ies. 236.1029—Report of On-Board Lead Locomotive PTC 46 Railroads ...... 1,012 reports ...... 96 hours ...... 97,152 Device Failure. 236.1031—Previously Approved PTC Systems —Request for Expedited Certification (REC) for PTC 46 Railroads ...... 3 REC Letters ...... 160 hours ...... 480 System. —Requests for Grandfathering on PTCSPs ...... 46 Railroads ...... 3 requests ...... 1,600 hours ...... 4,800 236.1035—Field Testing Requirements ...... 46 Railroads ...... 230 field test plans ...... 800 hours ...... 184,000 —Relief Requests from Regulations Necessary to 46 Railroads ...... 46 requests ...... 320 hours ...... 14,720 Support Field Testing. 236.1037—Records Retention —Results of Tests in PTCSP and PTCDP ...... 46 Railroads ...... 1,012 records ...... 4 hours ...... 4,048 —PTC Service Contractors Training Records ...... 46 Railroads ...... 22,080 records ...... 30 minutes ...... 11,040 —Reports of Safety Relevant Hazards Exceeding 46 Railroads ...... 4 reports ...... 8 hours ...... 32 Those in PTCSP and PTCDP. —Final Report of Resolution of Inconsistency ...... 46 Railroads ...... 4 final reports ...... 160 hours ...... 640 236.1039—Operations & Maintenance Manual (OMM): 46 Railroads ...... 46 manuals ...... 250 hours ...... 11,500 Development. —Positive Identification of Safety-critical compo- 46 Railroads ...... 120,000 i.d. components .... 1 hour ...... 120,000 nents. —Designated RR Officers in OMM. regarding PTC 46 Railroads ...... 92 designations ...... 2 hours ...... 184 issues. 236.1041—PTC Training Programs ...... 46 Railroads ...... 46 programs ...... 400 hours ...... 18,400 236.1043—Task Analysis/Basic Requirements: Training 46 Railroads ...... 46 evaluations ...... 720 hours ...... 33,120 Evaluations. —Training Records ...... 46 Railroads ...... 8,560 records ...... 10 minutes ...... 1,427 236.1045—Training Specific to Office Control Personnel 46 Railroads ...... 64 trained employees ...... 20 hours ...... 1,280 236.1047—Training Specific to Loc. Engineers & Other Operating Personnel —PTC Conductor Training ...... 30 Railroads ...... 8,000 trained conductors .... 3 hours ...... 24,000

All estimates include the time for information or a copy of the paperwork [email protected]; reviewing instructions; searching package submitted to OMB, contact Mr. [email protected]. existing data sources; gathering or Robert Brogan at 202–493–6292 or Ms. Organizations and individuals maintaining the needed data; and Kimberly Toone at 202–493–6132 or via desiring to submit comments on the reviewing the information. For email at the following addresses: collection of information requirements

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28304 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

should direct them to the Office of regulation has federalism implications FRA’s Procedures, the agency has Management and Budget, Office of and preempts state law, the agency further concluded that no extraordinary Information and Regulatory Affairs, seeks to consult with State and local circumstances exist with respect to this Washington, DC 20503, Attention: FRA officials in the process of developing the regulation that might trigger the need for Desk Officer. Comments may also be regulation. a more detailed environmental review. sent via email to the Office of FRA has determined that this final As a result, FRA finds that this final rule Management and Budget at the rule would not have substantial direct is not a major Federal action following address: effects on the States, on the relationship significantly affecting the quality of the [email protected] between the national government and human environment. mailto:[email protected]. the States, nor on the distribution of OMB is required to make a decision power and responsibilities among the F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of concerning the collection of information various levels of government. In 1995 requirements contained in this direct addition, FRA has determined that this The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act final rule between 30 and 60 days after final rule would not impose any direct of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4, 2 U.S.C. 1531) publication of this document in the compliance costs on State and local (UMRA) requires agencies to prepare a Federal Register. Therefore, a comment governments. Therefore, the written assessment of the costs, benefits, to OMB is best assured of having its full consultation and funding requirements and other effects of proposed or final effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of Executive Order 13132 do not apply. rules that include a federal mandate of publication. However, this final rule will have likely to result in the expenditures by FRA cannot impose a penalty on preemptive effect. Section 20106 of Title state, local or tribal governments, in the persons for violating information 49 of the United States Code provides aggregate, or by the private sector, of collection requirements which do not that States may not adopt or continue in $100 million (adjusted annually for display a current OMB control number, effect any law, regulation, or order inflation with base year of 1995) or more if required. FRA intends to obtain related to railroad safety or security that in any one year. The value equivalent of current OMB control numbers for any covers the subject matter of a regulation $100 million in CY 1995, adjusted new information collection prescribed or order issued by the annual for inflation to CY 2008 levels by requirements resulting from this Secretary of Transportation (with the Consumer Price Index for All Urban rulemaking action prior to the effective respect to railroad safety matters) or the Consumers (CPI–U) is $141.3 million. date of this final rule. The OMB control Secretary of Homeland Security (with The assessment may be included in number, when assigned, will be respect to railroad security matters), conjunction with other assessments, as announced by separate notice in the except when the State law, regulation, it is in this rulemaking. Federal Register. or order qualifies under the local safety FRA is publishing this final rule to or security exception to § 20106. provide additional flexibility in D. Federalism Implications Furthermore, the Locomotive Boiler standards for the development, testing, This final rule has been analyzed in Inspection Act (49 U.S.C. 20701–20703) implementation, and use of PTC accordance with the principles and has been held by the U.S. Supreme systems for railroads mandated by RSIA criteria contained in Executive Order Court to preempt the entire field of to implement PTC systems. The RIA 13132, ‘‘Federalism.’’ See 64 FR 43,255 locomotive safety. provides a detailed analysis of the costs (Aug. 4, 1999). As discussed earlier in In sum, FRA has analyzed this final and benefits of the final rule. This the preamble, this final rule would rule in accordance with the principles analysis is the basis for determining that provide regulatory relief from the and criteria contained in Executive this rule will not result in total mandated implementation of PTC Order 13132. As explained above, FRA expenditures by State, local or tribal systems. has determined that this final rule has governments, in the aggregate, or by the Executive Order 13132 requires FRA no federalism implications, other than private sector of $141.3 million or more to develop a process to ensure the possible preemption of State laws. in any one year. The costs associated ‘‘meaningful and timely input by state Accordingly, FRA has determined that with this final rule are reduced accident and local officials in the development of preparation of a federalism summary reduction from an existing rule. regulatory policies that have federalism impact statement for this final rule is G. Energy Impact implications.’’ Policies that have not required. ‘‘federalism implications’’ are defined in Executive Order 13211 requires the Executive Order to include E. Environmental Impact federal agencies to prepare a Statement regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct FRA has evaluated this final rule in of Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant effects on the States, on the relationship accordance with its ‘‘Procedures for energy action.’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, between the national government and Considering Environmental Impacts’’ 2001). Under the Executive Order, a the States, or on the distribution of (‘‘FRA’s Procedures’’) (64 FR 28545, ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as power and responsibilities among the May 26, 1999) as required by the any action by an agency (normally various levels of government.’’ Under National Environmental Policy Act (42 published in the Federal Register) that Executive Order 13132, the agency may U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other promulgates or is expected to lead to the not issue a regulation with federalism environmental statutes, Executive promulgation of a final rule or implications that imposes substantial Orders, and related regulatory regulation, including notices of inquiry, direct compliance costs and that is not requirements. FRA has determined that advance notices of proposed required by statute, unless the federal this final rule is not a major FRA action rulemaking, and notices of proposed government provides the funds (requiring the preparation of an rulemaking: (1)(i) That is a significant necessary to pay the direct compliance environmental impact statement or regulatory action under Executive Order costs incurred by State and local environmental assessment) because it is 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is governments, or the agency consults categorically excluded from detailed likely to have a significant adverse effect with State and local government environmental review pursuant to on the supply, distribution, or use of officials early in the process of section 4(c)(20) of FRA’s Procedures. In energy; or (2) that is designated by the developing the regulation. Where a accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of Administrator of the Office of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28305

Information and Regulatory Affairs as a (b) * * * 2013 fishing season for the commercial significant energy action. FRA has (4) * * * black sea bass sector of the snapper- evaluated this final rule in accordance (i) Routing changes. In a PTCIP or an grouper fishery from June 1, 2012 to July with Executive Order 13211. FRA has RFA, a railroad may request review of 1, 2012 to allow for the implementation determined that this final rule is not the requirement to install PTC on a track of the final rule for Amendment 18A to likely to have a significant adverse effect segment where a PTC system is the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for on the supply, distribution, or use of otherwise required by this section, but the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the energy. Consequently, FRA has has not yet been installed, based upon South Atlantic Region (Amendment determined that this regulatory action is changes in rail traffic such as reductions 18A). The final rule for Amendment not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ in total traffic volume to a level below 18A modifies black sea bass within the meaning of Executive Order 5 million gross tons annually, cessation accountability measures, establishes an 13211. of passenger service or the approval of endorsement program for black sea bass an MTEA, or the cessation of PIH pot fishermen, modifies size limits for H. Privacy Act materials traffic. Any such request shall commercial and recreational black sea FRA wishes to inform all interested be accompanied by estimated traffic bass, and improves fisheries data parties that anyone is able to search the projections for the next 5 years (e.g., as collection in the for-hire sector of the electronic form of any written a result of planned rerouting, snapper-grouper fishery. Amendment communications and comments coordinations, or location of new 18A also updates the black sea bass received into any of our dockets by the business on the line). rebuilding plan and modifies the name of the individual submitting the (ii) FRA will approve the exclusion acceptable biological catch (ABC) for document (or signing the document), if requested pursuant to paragraph (b)(4)(i) black sea bass. The intent of submitted on behalf of an association, of this section if the railroad establishes Amendment 18A is to reduce business, labor union, etc.). Interested that, as of December 31, 2015: overcapacity in the black sea bass parties may also review DOT’s complete (A) No passenger service will be segment of the snapper-grouper fishery. Privacy Act Statement in the Federal present on the involved track segment The final rule implementing Register published on April 11, 2000 or the passenger service will be subject management measures in Amendment (65 FR 19477) or visit to an MTEA approved in accordance 18A is not expected to be effective until www.regulations.gov. with 49 CFR 236.1019; and after June 1, the start of the black sea List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 236 (B) No PIH traffic will be present on bass fishing season. Therefore, this the involved track segment or the gross temporary rule is necessary to delay the Penalties, Positive train control, tonnage on the involved track segment start of the commercial black sea bass Railroad safety, Reporting and will decline to below 5 million gross season to allow NMFS to finalize recordkeeping requirements. tons annually as computed over a 2-year rulemaking for Amendment 18A. The The Final Rule period. intent of this temporary rule is to reduce the rate of black sea bass harvest and In consideration of the foregoing, FRA * * * * * help ensure black sea bass landings hereby amends chapter II, subtitle B of § 236.1020 [Removed and reserved] remain below the annual catch limit title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as ■ 4. Remove and reserve § 236.1020. (ACL). follows: Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2012. DATES: This temporary rule is effective PART 236—[AMENDED] Joseph C. Szabo, May 14, 2012, through December 31, Administrator. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 236 2012. [FR Doc. 2012–11706 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] continues to read as follows: ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of BILLING CODE 4910–06–P Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102–20103, 20107, Amendment 18A and the documents in 20133, 20141, 20157, 20301–20303, 20306, support of this temporary rule, which 21301–21302, 21304; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; include a supplemental environmental and 49 CFR 1.49. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE assessment, may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site at ■ 2. Amend § 236.1003 by adding the National Oceanic and Atmospheric http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sf/ definition ‘‘PIH Materials’’ to paragraph Administration (b) to read as follows: SASnapperGrouperHomepage.htm. § 236.1003 Definitions. 50 CFR Part 622 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Michie, Southeast Regional Office, * * * * * [Docket No. 120501426–2426–01] (b) * * * NMFS, telephone: 727–824–5305, email: PIH Materials means materials RIN 0648–BB98 [email protected]. poisonous by inhalation, as defined in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Temporary Rule To Delay Start Date of NMFS and §§ 171.8, 173.115, and 173.132 of this 2012–2013 South Atlantic Black Sea the Council manage the snapper-grouper title. Bass Commercial Fishing Season fishery of the South Atlantic under the * * * * * FMP. The Council prepared the FMP ■ 3. Amend § 236.1005 by redesignating AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries and NMFS implements the FMP paragraph (b)(4)(ii) as paragraph Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 (b)(4)(iii); revise paragraph (b)(4)(i) and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), under the authority of the Magnuson- add a new paragraph (b)(4)(ii) to read as Commerce. Stevens Fishery Conservation and follows: ACTION: Temporary rule; emergency Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens action. Act). The Magnuson-Stevens Act § 236.1005 Requirements for Positive Train provides the legal authority for the Control systems. SUMMARY: NMFS issues this temporary promulgation of emergency regulations * * * * * rule to delay the start date of the 2012– under section 305(c) (16 U.S.C. 1855(c)).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28306 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Background snapper-grouper fishery, the Council Amendment 18A contains several The final rule for Amendment 17B to voted to approve Amendment 18A at its management measures intended to slow the FMP (75 FR 82280, December 30, December 2011 meeting. the rate of harvest of black sea bass and 2010), effective on January 31, 2011, The Council submitted Amendment help ensure black sea bass landings implemented ACLs and accountability 18A for Secretarial Review on January 5, remain below the ACL to allow the 2012. Amendment 18A was partially measures (AMs) to end overfishing of biomass to increase. The management approved on May 2, 2012. The Secretary black sea bass and prevent future measures also address the derby-style of Commerce (Secretary) disapproved overfishing from occurring, as required fishery (the race to fish) that has one management measure in by National Standard 1 of the developed in the commercial sector. Amendment 18A regarding the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The ACLS and Commercial management measures transferability of black sea bass pot AMs implemented through Amendment contained in Amendment 18A include: endorsements. The Council and NMFS 17B for black sea bass resulted in in- A black sea bass pot endorsement will address this action in a separate season closures for the commercial and program; a limit on the number of black amendment. recreational sectors as well as a sea bass pot tags issued to each Amendment 18A contains a new ABC endorsement holder each permit year; a reduction in the recreational ACL for for black sea bass, which takes into the 2011–2012 fishing year. requirement to return black sea bass account the degree to which the 2011 pots to shore at the end of each fishing A new stock assessment for black sea stock assessment report indicates bass was completed in October 2011, trip; a 1,000–lb (454–kg), gutted weight, overfishing was occurring in 2009 and commercial trip limit for black sea bass; and indicates the stock is no longer 2010, as well as the magnitude of overfished, but is not yet fully rebuilt. and an increase in the minimum landings during the 2011–2012 fishing commercial size limit for black sea bass. According to 2009 and 2010 data, black year. The Council’s Scientific and sea bass were undergoing overfishing Statistical Committee (SSC) was Need for This Temporary Rule ‘‘to a minor degree.’’ Although the black provided with data from the NMFS At its March 2012 meeting, the sea bass stock is increasing in Southeast Fisheries Science Center magnitude, too many black sea bass Council requested that, if Amendment (SEFSC), in November 2011, from the 18A is approved, NMFS promulgate were being removed from the 2011–2012 fishing year (June–August population too quickly in 2009 and emergency regulations to delay the start data), which indicated the commercial date of the commercial black sea bass 2010. As overfishing ends for black sea ACL of 309,000 lb (140,160 kg), gutted bass, and its biomass increases, the fishing season until after Amendment weight, had been exceeded by at least 5 18A is implemented, but no later than commercial ACL is likely to be met percent, and the recreational ACL of earlier each fishing season as a result of July 1, 2012. The Secretary partially 409,000 lb (185,519 kg), gutted weight, approved Amendment 18A on May 2, the increased amount of the stock had been exceeded by at least 10 2012, and implementation of available for harvest. This result could percent. Since recreational data received Amendment 18A will occur after June 1, increase the likelihood of derby-style by the SSC at that time was still 2012. harvesting, which is undesirable from incomplete (the recreational quota was economic, vessel safety, and social reached in October, and September and Delaying the start of the commercial perspectives. Derby-style harvesting, October data were not yet available), the sector until the actions in Amendment also termed ‘‘the race for fish,’’ consists SSC supported a new ABC for black sea 18A become effective would reduce the of a short duration of increased effort bass which assumes the commercial and rate of harvest and help to ensure the where harvest is maximized prior to recreational combined ACL was commercial black sea bass sector closes reaching an ACL. Additionally, in 2009 exceeded by 50 percent in the 2011– in a timely manner. Delaying the start of and 2010, vessels increased their fishing 2012 fishing year. Furthermore, the SSC the 2012–2013 fishing season to allow effort into the black sea bass segment of stated the ABC should be specified for Amendment 18A to become effective the commercial snapper-grouper sector only the 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 will also reduce the risk of potential as other snapper-grouper species fishing seasons, and indicated an safety-at-sea issues presented when became subject to more stringent assessment update should be conducted fishermen under pressure to harvest a restrictions. This increase in effort before any adjustments are made to the profitable portion of the quota fish in resulted in the commercial ACL being ACL after the 2013–2014 fishing season. foul weather or other unsafe conditions. reached relatively early in the fishing Currently, commercial black sea bass Therefore, delaying the start of the season. During the June 2009 to May fishermen harvest black sea bass with fishing season to allow for the 2010 fishing year, the commercial quota great efficiency as biomass has implementation of the measures in was met in December 2009. During the increased under rebuilding efforts, and Amendment 18A will ease derby fishing June 2010 to May 2011 fishing year, the effort in the black sea bass pot segment conditions and relieve some of the commercial quota was met in October of the snapper-grouper fishery has pressure on fishermen to make unsafe 2010, and during the June 2011 to May grown. These factors lead to the fishery trips, preserve a significant economic 2012 fishing year, the commercial quota reaching the commercial ACL very opportunity that otherwise might be was met in July 2011. quickly once the season opens. When foregone, and prevent further Currently, the black sea bass fish are landed quickly, there is a greater overfishing of black sea bass from rebuilding plan specifies a constant chance the fishery will exceed its ACL, occurring that would result from the catch rebuilding strategy as the stock and overfishing can occur. Because delay in implementation of Amendment rebuilds, which also contributes to black sea bass are undergoing 18A. increased rates of harvest and early in- overfishing and are currently subject to NMFS’ Policy Guidelines for the Use season closures as more fish become a rebuilding plan, maintaining landings of Emergency Rules (62 FR 44421, available through rebuilding efforts. In below the ACL is imperative to allow August 21, 1997) list three criteria for an effort to extend fishing opportunities biomass to increase to target levels determining whether an emergency for black sea bass further into the fishing within the rebuilding timeframe. Under exists. This emergency rule is year, and to improve fisheries data the rebuilding plan, the black sea bass promulgated under these criteria. reporting in the for-hire sector of the stock must be rebuilt by 2016. Specifically, to promulgate an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28307

emergency rule, NMFS’ policy same quota and the number of pots used review, would implement management guidelines require that an emergency: to harvest black sea bass will be measures for black sea bass that would (1) Result from recent, unforeseen restricted. Also, the 1,000-lb (454-kg), reduce the rate of harvest and help to events or recently discovered gutted weight, commercial trip limit ensure the commercial black sea bass circumstances; and will restrict the amount of fish sector closes in a timely manner. Not (2) Present serious conservation or harvested per trip. Therefore, the implementing this temporary rule management problems in the fishery; management measures contained in would likely lead to negative biological and Amendment 18A, intended to end and economic impacts for the snapper- (3) Can be addressed through derby-style fishing, will reduce the risk grouper fishery due to the delay in emergency regulations for which the of black sea bass overfishing and implementing the management immediate benefits outweigh the value eliminate the associated safety-at-sea measures contained in Amendment of advance notice, public comment, and issues, consistent with National 18A. As stated above, if the commercial deliberative consideration of the Standards 1 and 10 of the Magnuson- sector were to open before the effort- impacts on participants to the same Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(1) and limiting provisions contained in extent as would be expected under the (10)). Amendment 18A are implemented, the normal rulemaking process. During the past three fishing seasons, commercial ACL would likely be The unforeseen circumstance is that derby fishing resulted in commercial reached very quickly and the NMFS did not foresee the 2011 stock sector closures on December 20, 2009; commercial sector could close even assessment report would indicate October 7, 2010; and July 15, 2011. earlier than last year. Too many black overfishing was occurring in 2009 and These short derby commercial fishing sea bass flooding the market 2010, and that the magnitude of seasons caused negative social and simultaneously creates market gluts landings during the 2011–2012 fishing economic impacts as too many black sea which can affect overall profitability for year would be so high. To compound bass entered the market at one time. snapper-grouper fishermen and create these circumstances, the Council Market glut can drive the price of the unstable market conditions for dealers. submitted Amendment 18A for fish down and compromise the quality Management measures contained in Secretarial Review on January 5, 2012, of the fish. If the commercial sector Amendment 18A should help lengthen which provides little time for the opens on June 1, 2012, without the the commercial fishing season for black Amendment 18A rulemaking to be provisions in Amendment 18A, NMFS sea bass, stabilize the market, and implemented prior to the June 1 start of expects that the 2012–2013 fishing preserve a significant economic the commercial fishing season. The season will be shorter than the 45-day opportunity for snapper-grouper notice of availability for Amendment 2011–2012 fishing season. Delaying the fishermen. 18A published on January 31, 2012 (77 start of the commercial fishing season to Industry representatives have FR 4754), with a 60-day comment allow for the implementation of the expressed support for this temporary period ending April 2, 2012. The Amendment 18A endorsement program rule for emergency action. Many black proposed rule for Amendment 18A did will allow the commercial fishing sea bass commercial fishermen also fish not publish until March 23, 2012 (77 FR season to remain open longer, because for vermilion snapper, which opens on 16991), with a 30-day comment period there will be fewer fishermen harvesting July 1, 2012. Opening black sea bass and ending April 23, 2012, due to confusion black sea bass with pots, the number of vermilion snapper on the same day over one action in the amendment pots that can be fished will be reduced, would allow fishery participants to (transferability of black sea bass and the catch per trip will be restricted maximize fishery opportunities for both endorsements). This action was to 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight. A species concurrently. ultimately not included in the proposed longer fishing season will also allow for rule and was disapproved by the better monitoring of landings data and Measures Contained in this Temporary Secretary. The Council is developing a a better estimate of the date for an Rule separate amendment to address this inseason commercial closure. This temporary rule delays the start disapproved action. Additionally, delaying the start of the date of the 2012–2013 commercial If the start of the commercial fishing commercial fishing season is necessary fishing season for black sea bass from season is not delayed to allow time for to ensure the black sea bass rebuilding June 1, 2012 to July 1, 2012. Opening the implementation of provisions in plan remains on track. A short the commercial fishing season July 1 Amendment 18A, the snapper-grouper commercial fishing season caused by instead of June 1 could allow the fishery will be faced with serious derby conditions can increase the risk of commercial fishing season to stay open conservation and management exceeding the ACL and overfishing until sometime between August and problems. Under current management could occur. National Standard 1 of the October, instead of sometime between practices, the commercial black sea bass Magnuson-Stevens Act states that July and September. The recreational sector experiences derby-style ‘‘Conservation and Management fishing season is not changed and will harvesting, also termed ‘‘the race for measures shall prevent overfishing start on June 1, 2012. fish.’’ Derby fishing has led to the ACL while achieving, on a continuing basis, being reached and exceeded in a short the optimum yield (OY) from each Classification amount of time, contributing to the fishery for the United States fishing This action is issued pursuant to overfishing of black sea bass. Derby industry’’ (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(1)). Black section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens fishing also produces safety-at-sea sea bass landings must stay below the Act, 16 U.S.C. 1855(c). The Assistant issues due to the short periods of ACL to allow biomass to increase to Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA increased effort where vessels compete target levels within the rebuilding (AA), has determined that this to maximize harvest prior to the ACL timeframe. temporary rule is necessary to reduce being reached. Amendment 18A will Finally, the immediate benefit of the rate of South Atlantic black sea bass implement an endorsement program for implementing this emergency action harvest and help ensure black sea bass black sea bass pot fishermen, which will outweighs the value of advance notice landings remain below the ACL and is reduce the race to fish, because fewer and public comment. The final rule for consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens permit holders will be fishing for the Amendment 18A, currently under Act and other applicable laws.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28308 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

This temporary rule has been 1, 2012, rather than on June 1, 2012. The DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE determined to be not significant for earlier start to the black sea bass purposes of Executive Order 12866. commercial season could result in a race National Oceanic and Atmospheric The AA finds good cause under 5 to fish, which in turn could result in Administration U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice safety-at-sea issues, as well as glut the and the opportunity for public comment market for black sea bass by flooding it 50 CFR Part 622 because they are impracticable and with product and depressing prices. [Docket No. 120417412–2412–01] contrary to the public interest. This Finally, delaying this rule’s temporary rule delays the start date of RIN 0648–BB90 effectiveness may increase the risk that the 2012–2013 commercial fishing black sea bass will continue to be season for black sea bass from June 1, Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 2012 to July 1, 2012, to allow NMFS to harvested at a fast pace and could result Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish finalize and implement the final rule for in black sea bass exceeding its ACL. Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Gray Amendment 18A. Amendment 18A Accordingly, delaying the rule’s Triggerfish Management Measures effectiveness is contrary to the public contains several management measures AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries interest, and the 30-day delay in intended to slow the black sea bass Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and effectiveness is hereby waived. harvest rate and help ensure black sea Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), bass landings remain below the ACL to Because prior notice and opportunity Commerce. allow the biomass to increase. The for public comment are not required for ACTION: Final temporary rule; request for management measures also address the this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other comments. derby-style fishery (i.e., the race to fish) law, the analytical requirements of the that has developed in the commercial Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 SUMMARY: This final temporary rule, sector. et seq. are inapplicable. issued pursuant to NMFS’ authority to If the start date to the snapper-grouper issue interim rules under the Magnuson- fishery is not delayed, then the fishery List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622 Stevens Fishery Conservation and will likely experience negative Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, biological and economic impacts. As Act), implements interim measures to stated above, if the commercial sector Reporting and recordkeeping reduce overfishing of gray triggerfish in opens before the effort-limiting requirements, Virgin Islands. the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf). This rule provisions contained in Amendment Dated: May 9, 2012. reduces the gray triggerfish commercial 18A are implemented, the commercial Samuel D. Rauch III, quota (commercial annual catch target ACL will likely be reached very quickly, (ACT)), commercial and recreational and the commercial sector could close Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. annual catch limits (ACLs), and even earlier than last year. Too many recreational ACT. Additionally, this black sea bass flooding the market For the reasons set out in the final temporary rule revises the simultaneously gluts markets, which preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended recreational accountability measures can affect the overall profitability for as follows: (AMs) for gray triggerfish. At its April snapper-grouper fishermen and create meeting, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery unstable market conditions for dealers. PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE Management Council (Council) NMFS expects management measures CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH requested NMFS promulgate interim contained in Amendment 18A will help ATLANTIC measures to reduce overfishing of gray lengthen the commercial fishing season triggerfish. The rule will be effective for for black sea bass, which should help to ■ 1. The authority citation for part 622 180 days, unless superseded by stabilize the market and preserve a subsequent rulemaking, although NMFS significant economic opportunity for continues to read as follows: may extend the rule’s effectiveness for snapper-grouper fishermen. Moreover, if Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. an additional 186 days pursuant to the the start date is not delayed, the derby Magnuson-Stevens Act. The intended fishing conditions would continue to ■ 2. In § 622.30, paragraph (e) is effect of this final temporary rule is to exist until NMFS is able to implement suspended and paragraph (f) is added to reduce overfishing of the gray triggerfish the provisions of Amendment 18A. As read as follows: resource in the Gulf while the Council mentioned above, this style of fishing develops permanent management may lead to safety-at-sea issues due to § 622.30 Fishing years. measures. the short periods of increased effort * * * * * where vessels compete to maximize DATES: This final temporary rule is (f) South Atlantic black sea bass—(1) harvest prior to the ACL being reached. effective May 14, 2012, through Therefore, NMFS needs to implement The fishing year for the black sea bass November 10, 2012. Comments may be this temporary rule as soon as possible bag limit specified in § 622.39(d)(1)(vii) submitted through June 13, 2012. to provide notice to commercial black is June 1 through May 31. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments sea bass pot fishermen that the (2) The fishing year for the black sea on the final temporary rule identified by commercial fishing season will be bass quota specified in § 622.42(e)(5) is ‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2012–0085’’ by any of delayed until July 1, 2012, and to allow July 1 through May 31. the following methods: • them time to revise their business [FR Doc. 2012–11661 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Electronic submissions: Submit strategies. electronic comments via the Federal e- BILLING CODE 3510–22–P For similar reasons, the AA also finds Rulemaking Portal: http:// good cause to waive the 30-day delay in www.regulations.gov. Follow the effectiveness of the action under 5 ‘‘Instructions’’ for submitting comments. U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Delaying this rules • Mail: Peter Hood, Southeast effectiveness will allow the black sea Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th bass commercial sector to open on July Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28309

Instructions: All comments received councils to prevent overfishing and this recommendation, the commercial are a part of the public record and will achieve, on a continuing basis, the and recreational ACLs and ACTs for the generally be posted to http:// optimum yield (OY) from federally gray triggerfish need to be updated. www.regulations.gov without change. managed fish stocks. These mandates According to the National Standard 1 All Personal Identifying Information (for are intended to ensure that fishery guidelines (74 FR 3178, January 16, example, name, address, etc.) resources are managed for the greatest 2009), ACLs are defined as the highest voluntarily submitted by the commenter overall benefit to the nation, particularly level of landings for either a stock or may be publicly accessible. Do not with respect to providing food fishing sector that is acceptable to submit Confidential Business production and recreational maintain an adequate stock size and to Information or otherwise sensitive or opportunities, and protecting marine prevent overfishing. ACTs are targets protected information. NMFS will ecosystems. To further this goal, the that provide a buffer, less than the ACL, accept anonymous comments (enter N/ Magnuson-Stevens Act requires fishery to account for management uncertainty. A in the required field if you wish to managers to end overfishing of stocks ACLs and ACTs may both be remain anonymous). and to minimize bycatch and bycatch implemented as triggers for AMs. AMs To submit comments through the mortality to the extent practicable. are management measures implemented to ensure ACLS are not exceeded or Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// Status of the Gray Triggerfish Stock www.regulations.gov, enter ‘‘NOAA– mitigate if ACLs are exceeded. AMs may NMFS–2012–0085’’ in the search field The last Southeast Data, Assessment, be implemented to reduce overfishing or and click on ‘‘search.’’ After you locate and Review (SEDAR) benchmark stock prevent overfishing from occurring. the document ‘‘Fisheries of the assessment for gray triggerfish was In Amendment 30A to the FMP, the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South completed in 2006 (SEDAR 9). SEDAR Council established a 21 percent Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf 9 indicated that the gray triggerfish commercial and 79 percent recreational of Mexico; Gray Triggerfish stock was both overfished and possibly allocation of the gray triggerfish ABC. Management Measures,’’ click the undergoing overfishing. Subsequently, These allocations are used to set the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ link in that row. Amendment 30A to the FMP established commercial and recreational sector- This will display the comment web a gray triggerfish rebuilding plan specific ACLs. The ABC recommended form. You can then enter your submitter beginning in the 2008 fishing year (73 by the SSC is 305,300 lb (138,482 kg), information (unless you prefer to remain FR 38139, July 3, 2008). In 2011, a whole weight. Based on the allocations anonymous), and type your comment on SEDAR update stock assessment for gray established in Amendment 30A to the the web form. You can also attach triggerfish determined that the gray FMP, this rule sets, on a temporary additional files (up to 10 MB) in triggerfish stock was still overfished and basis, a reduced commercial ACL of was additionally undergoing Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 64,100 lb (29,075 kg), whole weight, and overfishing. The 2011 update Adobe PDF file formats only. a reduced recreational ACL of 241,200 assessment indicated the 2008 gray Comments received through means lb (109,406 kg), whole weight. triggerfish rebuilding plan had not made NMFS applied the ACL/ACT control not specified in this rule will not be adequate progress toward ending rule to the sector ACLs to set the sector- considered. overfishing and rebuilding the stock as specific ACTs. This control rule was For further assistance with submitting described in the rebuilding plan in developed and utilized in the final rule a comment, see the ‘‘Commenting’’ Amendment 30A to the FMP. NMFS implementing the Generic Annual Catch section at http://www.regulations.gov/ informed the Council of this Limit Amendment (76 FR 82044, #!faqs or the Help section at http:// determination in a letter dated March December 29, 2011) so that the Council www.regulations.gov. 13, 2012. NMFS also requested that the and NMFS could take into account Electronic copies of documents management uncertainty when supporting this proposed rule, which Council work to end overfishing of gray triggerfish immediately and to revise the assigning ACLs and ACTs. The control include a draft environmental impact rule specified a buffer between the statement and a regulatory flexibility gray triggerfish stock rebuilding plan. The Council has begun developing commercial ACL and commercial ACT analysis, may be obtained from the more permanent measures to end of 5 percent, and between the Southeast Regional Office Web site at overfishing and rebuild the gray recreational ACL and recreational ACT http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov. triggerfish stock in Amendment 37 to of 10 percent. Therefore, this rule sets, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the FMP. However, these measures will on a temporary basis, the commercial Peter Hood, telephone: 727–824–5305 or not likely be implemented until the end ACT (commercial quota) at 60,900 lb email: [email protected]. of the 2012 fishing year or at the (27,624 kg), whole weight, and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef beginning of the 2013 fishing year. recreational ACT at 217,100 lb (98,475 fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico is Therefore, on April 19, 2012, the kg), whole weight. Currently, there is a managed under the Fishery Council requested that NMFS commercial gray triggerfish quota in Management Plan for the Reef Fish implement a temporary rule to reduce place, which functions as the Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). overfishing of gray triggerfish on an commercial ACT. The FMP was prepared by the Council interim basis. To reduce the risk of overfishing, and is implemented through regulations Amendment 30A to the FMP established at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority Management Measures Contained in gray triggerfish AMs. For the of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The This Final Temporary Rule commercial sector, there are currently Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the The Council’s Scientific and both in-season and post-season AMs. legal authority for the promulgation of Statistical Committee (SSC) reviewed The in-season AM closes the interim regulations under section 305(c) the gray triggerfish 2011 SEDAR update commercial sector after the commercial (16 U.S.C. 1855(c)). assessment. The SSC recommended that quota (commercial ACT) is reached or the gray triggerfish 2012 and 2013 projected to be reached. Additionally, if Background fishing years acceptable biological the commercial ACL is exceeded despite The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires catches (ABC) be set at 305,300 lb the quota closure, the post-season AM NMFS and regional fishery management (138,346 kg), whole weight. Based on would reduce the following year’s

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28310 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

commercial quota (commercial ACT) by consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE the amount of the prior-year’s Act and other applicable laws. CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH commercial ACL overage. This final temporary rule has been ATLANTIC For the recreational sector, there is determined to be not significant for currently no in-season AM, but a post- ■ 1. The authority citation for part 622 purposes of Executive Order 12866. season AM is in effect. For the continues to read as follows: recreational sector, if the recreational The AA finds good cause under 5 Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. ACL is exceeded, NMFS will reduce the U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice length of the following year’s fishing and the opportunity for public ■ 2. In § 622.42, paragraph (a)(1)(vi) is season by the amount necessary to comment. Providing prior notice and suspended and paragraph (a)(1)(vii) is ensure that recreational landings do not the opportunity for public comment added to read as follows: exceed the recreational ACT during the would be contrary to the public interest § 622.42 Quotas. following year. because delaying the implementation of In 2008, recreational landings * * * * * this rule is likely to allow overfishing of (a) * * * exceeded both the recreational ACT and gray triggerfish to continue. Gray ACL. In 2009, the recreational ACT was (1) * * * triggerfish are currently undergoing (vii) Gray triggerfish—60,900 lb exceeded. However, in 2010, overfishing and are overfished, so any (27,624 kg), round weight. recreational landings did not exceed the delay would undermine the intent of the * * * * * ACT or ACL. Reduced 2010 recreational rule. If this rule is not implemented landings may be attributable to fishery ■ 3. In § 622.49, paragraph (a)(2) is immediately, NMFS will likely be suspended and paragraph (a)(17) is closures that were implemented that required to implement more severe year as a result of the Deepwater added to read as follows: reductions in gray triggerfish catch Horizon MC252 oil spill. Based on limits, which could have higher § 622.49 Annual catch limits (ACLs) and recent trends in recreational landings socioeconomic impacts on Gulf reef fish accountability measures (AMs). and anticipated future recreational (a) * * * effort, the Council and NMFS have fishermen. NMFS was not able to (17) Gray triggerfish—(i) Commercial determined that there is a reasonable implement this rulemaking any sooner sector. If commercial landings, as probability that the recreational sector because the scientific review of the most estimated by the SRD, reach or are will exceed its ACL in future years. The recent gray triggerfish stock assessment, projected to reach the commercial ACT implementation of an in-season AM upon which this rule is based on, was (commercial quota) specified in would reduce this risk. This temporary only recently completed. Any delay in § 622.42(a)(1)(vii), the AA will file a rule establishes an in-season AM for the the implementation of these revised notification with the Office of the recreational sector to prohibit the catch limits would allow harvest to Federal Register to close the commercial recreational harvest of gray triggerfish (a continue at a level that is not consistent sector for the remainder of the fishing recreational sector closure) after the with National Standard 1 of the year. In addition, if despite such recreational ACT is reached or projected Magnuson-Stevens Act. Comments closure, commercial landings exceed the to be reached. This in-season AM would submitted on this final temporary rule commercial ACL, the AA will file a provide an additional level of protection through the Federal e-Rulemaking notification with the Office of the to ensure that the recreational ACL is Portal: http://www.regulations.gov and Federal Register, at or near the not exceeded and that the risk of received by NMFS no later than June 13, beginning of the following fishing year overfishing will be reduced. 2012, will be considered during any possible subsequent rulemaking relative to reduce the commercial ACT Future Action to this final temporary rule, such as an (commercial quota) for that following year by the amount the prior-year ACL NMFS has determined that this extension of this rule. was exceeded. The commercial ACL is temporary final rule is necessary to For the aforementioned reasons, the reduce overfishing of gray triggerfish in 64,100 lb (29,075 kg), round weight. AA also finds good cause to waive the the Gulf. This rule will be effective for (ii) Recreational sector. If recreational 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this not more than 180 days after landings, as estimated by the SRD, reach action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). publication, as authorized by section or are projected to reach the recreational 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Because prior notice and opportunity ACT, the AA will file a notification with This temporary final rule could be for public comment are not required for the Office of the Federal Register to extended for an additional 186 days, this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other close the recreational sector for the provided that the public has had an law, the analytical requirements of the remainder of the fishing year. In opportunity to comment on the rule. Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 addition, if despite such closure, NMFS and the Council will continue to et seq. are inapplicable. recreational landings exceed the develop more permanent measures to recreational ACL, the AA will file a List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622 reduce overfishing of gray triggerfish notification with the Office of the through Amendment 37 to the FMP. Federal Register to reduce the length of Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, the following recreational fishing season Classification Reporting and recordkeeping by the amount necessary to ensure requirements, Virgin Islands. This action is issued pursuant to recreational landings do not exceed the section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Dated: May 9, 2012. recreational ACT for that following Act, 16 U.S.C. 1855(c). The Assistant Samuel D. Rauch III, fishing year. The recreational ACT is Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 217,100 lb (98,475 kg), round weight. (AA), has determined that this final National Marine Fisheries Service. The recreational ACL is 241,200 lb temporary rule is necessary to reduce (109,406 kg), round weight. overfishing and to achieve OY for the For the reasons set out in the * * * * * gray triggerfish component of the reef preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended [FR Doc. 2012–11663 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] fish fishery in the Gulf EEZ and is as follows: BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28311

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Electronic Submission: Submit all the scallop fishery and expanded electronic public comments via the through 2004. The rotational area National Oceanic and Atmospheric Federal e-Rulemaking Portal management program was formally Administration www.regulations.gov. To submit established in 2004 in the Scallop FMP. comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, Under rotational management, areas that 50 CFR Part 648 first click the ‘‘submit a comment’’ icon, contain large concentrations of small [Docket No. 120330235–2014–01] then enter NOAA–NMFS–2012–0071 in scallops are closed before the scallops the keyword search. Locate the are harvested or disturbed, then the RIN 0648–BC04 document you wish to comment on areas re-open when scallops are larger, from the resulting list and click on the producing more yield-per-recruit. These Fisheries of the Northeastern United ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ icon on the right areas are known as scallop ‘‘access States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery; of that line. areas.’’ Closure of the Delmarva Access Area • Mail: Submit written comments to There are currently five scallop access AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Daniel S. Morris, Acting Regional areas: Closed Area I (CAI), Closed Area Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Administrator, NMFS, Northeast II, Nantucket Lightship, Delmarva, and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Regional Office, 55 Great Republic Hudson Canyon. When an area is re- Commerce. Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the opened, scallop vessels are allocated a certain number of trips into the area, ACTION: Temporary rule; emergency outside of the envelope, ‘‘Comments on based on their permit type. The limited action. Emergency Rule to Close the Delmarva Access Area.’’ access fleet, the larger ‘‘trip boat’’ fleet, SUMMARY: NMFS issues this temporary • Fax: (978) 281–9135; Attn: Emily consists of full-time (FT), part-time, and rule under its authority to implement Gilbert. occasional vessels. Each vessel is emergency measures under the Instructions: Comments must be allocated a certain number of trips, with Magnuson-Stevens Fishery submitted by one of the above methods FT vessels receiving area-specific trips Conservation and Management Act to ensure that the comments are and the other two types of limited (Magnuson-Stevens Act). This received, documented, and considered access vessels receiving a fewer number emergency rule closes the Delmarva by NMFS. Comments sent by any other of trips that are not specific to a certain Scallop Access Area (Delmarva) to all method, to any other address or access area. The smaller ‘‘day boat’’ scallop vessels for the remainder of the individual, or received after the end of fleet, known as the limited access 2012 scallop fishing year and reallocates the comment period, may not be general category individual fishing unused 2012 limited access full-time considered. All comments received are quota (IFQ) fleet, receive a fleet-wide vessel (FT) scallop Delmarva trips to the a part of the public record and will allocation into most access areas. Once Closed Area I Access Area (CAI). generally be posted for public viewing the fleet-wide trip allocation in a given Closing Delmarva will prevent high on www.regulations.gov without change. access area is harvested, the area closes levels of fishing effort in this area, All personal identifying information to IFQ vessels and the vessels can which could have reduced long-term (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted continue to fish their IFQ in other scallop biomass and yield from voluntarily by the sender will be access areas or locations within the Delmarva, and could have compromised publicly accessible. Do not submit scallop management unit. In order to manage the access areas’ the overall success of the scallop area confidential business information, or schedules, and to identify new potential rotational management program. This otherwise sensitive or protected access areas, the Council develops emergency action reallocates 2012 information. NMFS will accept biennial framework adjustments, which Delmarva trips to CAI to ensure equity anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in also set the overall scallop allocations in trip allocations and to minimize the required fields if you wish to remain and expected fishing effort for economic impacts of closing the anonymous). Attachments to electronic upcoming fishing years (FYs). The Delmarva. The New England Fishery comments will be accepted in Microsoft specifications contained in these Management Council (Council) Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe framework adjustments use the most PDF file formats only recommended that NMFS take this recent scallop survey information action quickly in order to minimize any FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: available at the time of development to fishing effort in the Delmarva, and Emily Gilbert, Fishery Policy Analyst, project scallop biomass levels in various ensure the industry is aware of any 978–281–9244; fax 978–281–9135. access areas for future years (e.g., allocation adjustments as soon as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: estimates from 2010 surveys are used to possible before CAI opens on June 15, determine the specifications for FYs Background 2012. 2011 and 2012). As a result, projections DATES: Effective June 13, 2012, through The management unit of the Atlantic of scallop biomass for the second year November 10, 2012. Comments must be sea scallop fishery ranges from the of a framework are often outdated for received by June 13, 2012. shorelines of Maine through North some areas: Updated surveys may show ADDRESSES: The Environmental Carolina to the outer boundary of the more or less harvestable scallop biomass Assessment (EA) is available by request Exclusive Economic Zone. The Atlantic in a given area than originally from: Daniel S. Morris, Acting Regional Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan anticipated. Administrator, National Marine (Scallop FMP) was first established in The scallop FY begins on March 1 of Fisheries Service, Northeast Region, 55 1982 and now includes a number of each year and the FY 2012 scallop Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA amendments and framework specifications are the second-year 01930–2276, or via the Internet at adjustments that have revised and specifications developed by the Council http://www.nero.noaa.gov. refined the fishery’s management. One through Framework Adjustment 22 to You may submit comments on this of the foundations of the Scallop FMP’s the Scallop FMP (Framework 22) (76 FR document, identified by NOAA–NMFS– success is the rotational area 43774, July 21, 2011). Framework 22 set 2012–0071, by any of the following management program. Area-based the access area schedules for FYs 2011 methods: management was developed in 1998 in and 2012 based on 2010 survey results.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28312 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

In an attempt to account for unexpected about 2,000 lb (907 kg) per day in the Continued fishing in Delmarva during changes in biomass levels, as well as start of FY 2011 to less than 1,000 lb FY 2012 would result in longer fishing optimize yield, Framework 22 included (454 kg) per day later in the FY. The trips that damage scallop resources and a new way to allocate access area trip new survey results indicate that the increase the risk of overharvesting the for FT vessels: Although all FT vessels scallop biomass in Delmarva is not high available resource. received a total of 4 access area trips in enough to support the FY 2012 Based on FY 2011 catch rates, if FY 2011 and in FY 2012, not all trips allocations set through Framework 22. Delmarva did not close in FY 2012, were allocated to the same access areas. catch rates could continue to be around New Information Regarding Current Instead, Framework 22 included ‘‘split 1,000 lb (454 kg) per day, compared to Scallop Recruitment Levels in Delmarva trip’’ allocations for FT vessels, where about 2,200 lb (998 kg) per day or higher half the fleet is allocated a trip in one In addition to identifying lower-than- in CAI, which would result in longer access area and half the fleet is allocated expected scallop biomass in Delmarva, fishing trips that damage scallop a trip in another access area. This split the 2011 results also indicated that this resources and increase the risk of trip allocation scheme was successful in access area is one of the few areas in the overharvesting the available resource. FY 2011. However, as explained in Mid-Atlantic where there is relatively Although some vessels received greater detail below, results from recent strong recruitment, meaning an Delmarva allocations at the start of FY 2011 surveys show that the ‘‘split trip’’ abundance of small scallops (1.57 to 2012, which began March 1, 2012, very access area allocations based on these 2.95 in (40 to 75 mm)) that have reached few limited access vessels have fished older surveys should be adjusted for FY maturity (i.e., are able to reproduce). their FY 2012 trips in the area to date 2012 for the Delmarva and CAI access These small scallops will benefit from due to the poor conditions. However, if areas. additional protection through closure of Delmarva remained open for the the area—a closure will allow them to remainder of FY 2012, FT vessels with New Information Regarding Current grow larger (to the 3.5-in (89-mm) Delmarva ‘‘split trip’’ allocations would Scallop Biomass Levels in Delmarva minimum size for harvest) and produce eventually take their trips or risk losing At the Council’s Scallop Plan more scallops before they are harvested. a full access area trip. As previously Development Team (PDT) meeting on Recruitment helps define the health of mentioned, unlike other scallop vessels January 5, 2012, staff from the Northeast the resource in terms of reproduction that have non-specific allocations that Fisheries Science Center, the Virginia and growth, and helps predict future can be fished in Delmarva or elsewhere, Institute of Marine Science (VIMS), and abundance levels of harvestable FT limited access vessels must fish their the University of Massachusetts School scallops. Recruitment levels also help trips in specific areas, or trade their for Marine and Atmospheric Science shape the area rotation program for trips with other FT vessels to fish in presented results from their 2011 future years. other areas. If this area remained open Delmarva scallop resource surveys. All New Information Regarding Current with these low catch rates, the 156 FT three surveys, which represent the best Scallop Biomass Levels in CAI vessels with Delmarva allocations available scientific information would not likely be able to trade their regarding the status of the scallop The 2011 surveys estimated scallop Delmarva trips for other more resource, indicated that the scallop biomass in CAI between 28–40 M lb productive areas. Without any other biomass in Delmarva is substantially (12,700–18,144 mt), depending on the alternatives, these vessel operators lower than expected for FY 2012. survey results used and what time of would have continued to fish in The Delmarva estimates ranged from year the surveys took place. These levels Delmarva until they reached the 18,000- 5.1 M lb (2,313 mt) to 13.0 M lb (5,897 are higher than Framework 22’s 2011 lb (8,165 kg) limit, which would have mt), depending on the type of survey projections based on the 2010 survey required much longer trips to catch their used (i.e., dredge or video) and when results, which estimated CAI biomass to full possession limit. This would have the survey was conducted. For example, be closer to 26 M lb (11,793 mt) in 2011, increased the amount of time and area the VIMS dredge survey that estimated and indicate that more fishing effort that the scallop fishing gear is in contact biomass of 5.1 M lb (2,313 mt) was the could be allocated to CAI in FY 2012. with the sea floor (i.e., increased area last survey of the area; it was conducted In FY 2011, the scallop fishery swept), which in turn would have in October 2011, when nearly all vessels harvested about 8.8 M lb (3,992 mt) of resulted in negative impacts on the had fully fished their Delmarva trips, scallops from this area and Framework scallop resource due to increased and also when scallop meat weights are 22 allocated 157 FT vessels one trip fishing pressure. at their lowest. For comparison, based each (18,000 lb/trip; 8,165 kg/trip) into In addition, if Delmarva remained on the 2010 survey estimates, CAI for FY 2012. open in FY 2012, vessel operators Framework 22 allocated the FT vessel Based on the most recent information would have taken longer fishing trips fleet 5.6 M lb (2,540 mt) and 2.8 M lb on the status of the scallop resource due to lower scallop biomass levels, (1,270 mt) of scallops from this area in described above, NMFS takes this which would negatively impact scallop FYs 2011 and 2012, respectively. In emergency action to close Delmarva for recruitment in the short and medium 2011, all 313 FT vessels with permits in the remainder of FY 2012, and term, and could reduce the long-term the Atlantic sea scallop fishery were reallocates any unused FT trips from biomass and yield from Delmarva and each allocated one trip (18,000 lb/trip; Delmarva to CAI in FY 2012. By closing the Mid-Atlantic overall. Vessel 8,165 kg/trip) into Delmarva; in FY Delmarva, this action will prevent operators would have continued to fish 2012, only 156 FT vessels were localized overfishing of the scallop in Delmarva until they reached the allocated one trip each into Delmarva. resource, protect scallop recruitment, 18,000-lb (8,165 kg) limit, which will The recent survey information is and improve future scallop yield in the which negatively impact scallop supported by what was observed during Mid Atlantic. By reallocating FT vessel recruitment due to the potential harvest FY 2011 fishing activity in Delmarva, trips into a more productive scallop and disturbance of the small-sized and where catch rates were much lower in access area, this action ensures equity less mature scallops. The success of the the area than anticipated, and much across the scallop fleet for FY 2012 and entire scallop access area rotational lower than catch rates in other areas. supports overall scallop harvest levels management program depends on Catch rates in Delmarva declined from that are consistent with Framework 22. timely openings and closing of access

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28313

areas in order to protect scallop benefits outweigh the value of advance estimated for that vessel to take a recruitment and optimize yield. This is notice, public comment, and Delmarva trip. Total fleet net revenue particularly true in the Mid-Atlantic, deliberative consideration of the for those 156 vessels, assuming no used where recruitment has been well below impacts on participants to the same trips, which would each be reallocated average for several years. By closing extent as would be expected under the a CAI trip instead of a Delmarva trip is Delmarva for the remainder of FY 2012, normal rulemaking process. NMFS’s estimated to be $25.5 million, $2.6 this action avoids the potential for policy guidelines further provide that million more than if Delmarva had localized overfishing of the area and emergency action is justified for certain remained open and those vessels were promotes future yield from the area by situations where emergency action required to fish their trips in that area. protecting the small scallops located in would prevent significant direct These potentially serious the area. economic loss, or to preserve a conservation and management Reallocating unused FY 2012 significant economic opportunity that consequences of high fishing effort in Delmarva trips to CAI would ensure otherwise might be foregone. NMFS has Delmarva in FY 2012 justify the equity across the scallop fleet, while not determined that the issue of closing emergency closure of this area. compromising the scallop resource. Delmarva meets the three criteria for NMFS also finds that this emergency The reallocation to CAI of unused FT emergency action for the reasons can be addressed through emergency vessel trips from Delmarva is not outlined below. regulations for which the immediate expected to result in excessive fishing in The emergency results from recent, benefits to both the scallop resource and CAI for FY 2012, based on the most unforeseen events or recently those who depend on it outweigh the recent survey results. By reallocating to discovered circumstance. Although the value of advance notice, public CAI any unused FT vessel trips (up to last survey in Delmarva was completed comment, and deliberative 156) currently assigned to Delmarva, in October 2011, the results of the three consideration of the impacts on this action increases the total number of 2011 Delmarva scallop resource surveys participants to the same extent as would CAI trips from 157 to up to 313. The were not available until the January 5, be expected under the normal increase in CAI trips results in an FY 2012, Scallop PDT meeting. There is rulemaking process. Although the 2012 CAI allocation of 5.6 M lb (2,540 now evidence that there is significantly Council has the authority to develop a mt) of scallops, an area with an less biomass in Delmarva than projected management action to modify the estimated scallop biomass of between through Framework 22. In addition, the scallop access area trip allocations, an 28–40 M lb (12,700–18,144 mt). This surveys show that small scallops, or emergency action can be developed and increase doubles the amount of fishing recruitment, are present within implemented by NMFS more swiftly effort that was initially allocated to CAI Delmarva and that there is not than a Council action that is subject to at the start of FY 2012, but the recent substantial recruitment elsewhere in the procedural and other requirements not surveys show that the scallop biomass Mid-Atlantic. applicable to the Secretary. If the in this area can support this level of The emergency also presents serious normal regulatory process is used to fishing. conservation and management problems revise the trip allocations (e.g., The FT Delmarva trips that will be in the fishery. Allowing fishing effort in considering ‘‘pay back’’ measures for converted to CAI once this action is Delmarva in FY 2012 with the current vessels with unused FY 2012 Delmarva effective include any undeclared FY low biomass levels could result in trips during the development of 2012 trips and all FY 2012 Delmarva negative impacts on recruitment and Framework 24, which would set the compensation trips. If a vessel began an could reduce the long-term biomass and specifications for FYs 2013–2014) it FY 2012 Delmarva scallop trip, ended economic yield from this area. Since would take substantially longer for the the trip prior to landing its full there has been well below average revised trip allocations to be possession limit, and has received a recruitment in the Mid-Atlantic for implemented, could result in subsequent FY 2012 Delmarva several years, protecting scallop unintended impacts to future FY annual compensation trip in order to harvest recruitment in this area is essential for catch limits (ACLs), and could result in the remainder of the possession limit, the future success of area rotation to triggering economically harmful that compensation trip will also be maximize yield and economic benefits management actions that otherwise may converted to CAI upon the effective date to the scallop fishery. have been avoided. By implementing of this action. Any vessel that has Additionally, catch rates are much these measures through emergency gained a Delmarva trip through a trip lower for Delmarva than Framework 22 action, it is possible to maintain overall exchange will also have that trip originally projected, and lower than catch allocations for scallops for the converted to a CAI trip. In addition, this other access areas that are currently remainder of FY 2012 and avoid action reallocates the unused Delmarva open to vessels for FY 2012. When catch unnecessary adverse biological and FY 2012 observer set-aside (up to 36,000 rates fall, vessels must fish longer to get economic impacts. lb; 16.3 mt) to CAI to account for the the same total catch, increasing area This emergency action closes increase in FT trips. swept, or time that fishing gear is in the Delmarva in FY 2012 for 150 days (after NMFS’s policy guidelines for the use water. Increased area swept has greater a 30-day delay in effectiveness), and of emergency rules (62 FR 44421; impacts on bycatch, habitat, and NMFS anticipates extending this action August 21, 1997) specify the following protected resources, as well as increased for an additional 186 days, which would three criteria that define what an costs for fishing vessels due to longer carry these measures into May 2013. emergency situation is, and justification trips. This emergency action is expected to be for final rulemaking: (1) The emergency The increase in fishing costs would replaced by Framework Adjustment 24 results from recent, unforeseen events or also have negative impacts on the to the Scallop FMP (Framework 24), recently discovered circumstances; (2) producer surplus and net economic which sets the specifications for FYs the emergency presents serious benefits from the fishery. Assuming 2013 and 2014. The Council is currently conservation or management problems catch rates in FY 2012 are similar on developing Framework 24 management in the fishery; and (3) the emergency average to catch rates in FY 2011, CAI measures but it is likely Delmarva can be addressed through emergency trips would cost about $16,500 per FT would continue to be closed for FY regulations for which the immediate vessel, about half as much as trip costs 2013. NMFS expects that Framework 24

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28314 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

measures will be implemented in May constraints associated with the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 2013, if approved, which would Council’s rulemaking process to adjust ■ 2. In § 648.58, paragraph (f) is added coincide with the expiration of this FY 2012 allocations already specified to read as follows: emergency action. through Framework 22. The results of the three 2011 Delmarva scallop § 648.58 Rotational Closed Areas. Classification resource surveys were not available (f) Delmarva Closed Area. No vessel The Assistant Administrator for until the January 5, 2012, Scallop PDT may fish for scallops in, or possess or Fisheries, NOAA, has determined that meeting, and thus there was not enough land scallops from, the area known as this rule is necessary to respond to an time for NMFS to complete a the Delmarva Closed Area. No vessel emergency situation and is consistent rulemaking through the Council’s may possess scallops in the Delmarva with the national standards and other process under the Magnuson-Stevens Closed Area, unless such vessel is only provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act Act before the Delmarva area opened to transiting the area as provided in and other applicable laws. The rule may fishing on March 1, 2012. This action is paragraph (c) of this section. The be extended for a period of not more undertaken at the request of the Council Delmarva Closed Area is defined by than 186 days as described under and is supported by the Fisheries straight lines connecting the following section 305(c)(3)(B) of the Magnuson- Survival Fund, an organization that points in the order stated (copies of a Stevens Act. represents a large portion of the scallop chart depicting this area are available The Assistant Administrator for industry, and that is an active from the Regional Administrator upon Fisheries, NOAA, finds good cause participant in the development of request): under section 553(b)(B) of the scallop fishery management measures. Administrative Procedure Act (APA) The Council urged that NMFS Point Latitude Longitude that it is contrary to the public interest implement this action quickly in order and impracticable to provide for prior ° ′ ° ′ to minimize any fishing effort in the DMV1 ...... 38 10 N 74 50 W notice and opportunity for the public to DMV2 ...... 38°10′ N 74°00′ W Delmarva, and ensure the industry is comment. As more fully explained DMV3 ...... 37°15′ N 74°00′ W aware of any allocation adjustments above, the reasons justifying DMV4 ...... 37°15′ N 74°50′ W before CAI opens on June 15, 2012. Had ° ′ ° ′ promulgation of this rule on an DMV1 ...... 38 10 N 74 50 W this action been further delayed past the emergency basis make solicitation of start of FY 2012 to account for public ■ public comment contrary to the public 3. In § 648.59, paragraphs (a) and comment, it is possible that FT vessels, interest. (b)(5)(i) are suspended, and paragraph This action provides benefits to both uncertain whether or not they would (b)(5)(iii) is added to read as follows: receive CAI trips instead of their the scallop resource and the scallop § 648.59 Sea Scallop Access Areas. fishery by not jeopardizing the success Delmarva trips, would have fished in of the access area program in future the Delmarva when the meat weights * * * * * (b) * * * years, not compromising future scallop would be highest (i.e., during the first (5) * * * biomass levels and subsequent scallop few months of the fishing year), which would have negative implications on (iii) Limited access vessels. Based on harvest, and ensuring that some its permit category, a vessel issued a members of the limited access scallop the recruitment in the area. In the interest of receiving public limited access scallop permit may fish fleet will not be inequitably subjected to no more than the maximum number of fewer economic benefits than others. input on this action, the EA analyzing this action will be made available to the trips in the Closed Area I Access Area, Specifically, by closing the Delmarva for unless the vessel owner has made an the remainder of FY 2012, this action public and this temporary final rule exchange with another vessel owner avoids jeopardizing the success of the solicits public comment. whereby the vessel gains a Closed Area access area program in future years by This rule has been determined to be I Access Area trip and gives up a trip protecting scallop recruitment in the not significant for purposes of Executive into another Sea Scallop Access Area, as Mid-Atlantic and avoiding localized Order 12866. specified in § 648.60(a)(3)(ii), or unless overfishing. In addition, by reallocating This rule is exempt from the the vessel is taking a compensation trip unused FT Delmarva trips (up to 156 procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility for a prior Closed Area I Access Area trips) into CAI in FY 2012, this action Act to prepare a regulatory flexibility trip that was terminated early, as avoids potential inequity in FY 2012 analysis because the rule is issued specified in § 648.60(c). allocations and ensures that the limited without opportunity for prior public access scallop fleet would not risk comment. * * * * * ■ exceeding its sub-ACL in FY 2013, if List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648 4. In § 648.60: vessels allocated Delmarva trips were ■ a. Paragraphs (a)(3)(i)(B)(2), compensated in FY 2013, rather than FY Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and (a)(3)(i)(C)(2), (a)(3)(i)(D)(2), (d)(1)(ii), 2012. This also avoids the potential for recordkeeping requirements. (d)(1)(iv), and (e)(1)(ii) are suspended; the limited access fleet to be subjected Dated: May 9, 2012. and ■ to potential days-at-sea deductions in Samuel D. Rauch III, b. Paragraphs (a)(3)(i)(B)(5), FY 2014 to account for any overage of Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, (a)(3)(i)(C)(5), (a)(3)(i)(D)(4), (d)(1)(vi), their FY 2013 ACL. In addition, this National Marine Fisheries Service. and (e)(1)(iv) are added to read as follows: action minimizes the likelihood of sea For the reasons set out in the turtle interactions in the Mid-Atlantic, preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is amended § 648.60 Sea scallop access area program which are known to begin in June, due as follows: requirements. to longer Delmarva fishing trips. This (a) * * * action did not allow for prior public PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE (3) * * * comment because the review process NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES (i) * * * and determination could not have been (B) * * * completed before Delmarva opened on ■ 1. The authority citation for part 648 (5) In fishing year 2012, each full-time March 1, 2012, due to the inherent time continues to read as follows: vessel shall have a total of four access

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28315

area trips and is subject to the following Adjustment 22 management measures, Access Area. Part-time vessels are seasonal trip restrictions specified in prior to the Delmarva Access Area subject to the seasonal trip restrictions paragraph (a)(3)(i)(B)(4) of this section. closure implemented under emergency specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i)(C)(4) of All full-time vessels shall receive one action authority, it will not receive a this section. trip into the Closed Area II Access Area 2012 fishing year Closed Area I Access (D) * * * and one trip into the Hudson Canyon Area trip once the Delmarva Access (4) For the 2012 fishing year, an Access Area. Each vessel shall also Area closes under emergency action. If occasional scallop vessel may take one receive an additional two access area the vessel terminated a 2012 fishing trip in the Hudson Canyon Access Area, trips that must be allocated in one of the year Delmarva Access Area trip early or one trip in the Closed Area I Access following combinations: Two trips in and received a Delmarva Access Area Area, or one trip in the Closed Area II the Closed Area I Access Area; one trip compensation trip fish the remainder of Access Area, or one trip in the in the Closed Area I Access Area and its allowed possession limit, as Nantucket Lightship Access Area. one trip in the Nantucket Lightship specified in § 648.60(c), the Access Area; one trip in the Closed Area compensation trip will reallocated to * * * * * I Access Area and one additional trip in Closed Area I Access Area trip once the (d) * * * the Hudson Canyon Access Area; or one Delmarva Access Area closes under (1) * * * trip in the Nantucket Lightship Access emergency action. (vi) Closed Area I Access Area. For Area and an additional trip in the (ii) [Reserved] the 2011 and 2012 fishing years, the Hudson Canyon Access Area. These (C) * * * observer set-asides for the Closed Area allocations shall be determined by the (5) For the 2012 fishing year, a part- I Access Area are 111,540 lb (51 mt) and Regional Administrator through a time scallop vessel is allocated two trips 72,000 lb (33 mt), respectively. random assignment and shall be made that may be distributed between access * * * * * areas as follows: Two trips in the publically available prior to the start of (e) * * * the 2012 fishing year. A full description Hudson Canyon Access Area; two trips of the random assignment process for in the Closed Area I Access Area; one (1) * * * FY 2012 is outlined in Section 2.4.2 of trip in the Closed Area I Access Area (iv) 2012: Hudson Canyon Access Framework 22 to the Scallop Fishery and one trip in the Nantucket Lightship Area, Closed Area I Access Area, Closed Management Plan. Access Area; one trip in the Closed Area Area II Access Area, and Nantucket (i) If a full-time vessel was allocated, I Access Area and one trip in the Lightship Access Area. declared, and fully harvested a 2012 Hudson Canyon Access Area; or one trip * * * * * fishing year Delmarva Access Area trip, in the Nantucket Lightship Access Area [FR Doc. 2012–11670 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] as originally allocated under Framework and one trip in the Hudson Canyon BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYR1.SGM 14MYR1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES 28316

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 93

Monday, May 14, 2012

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER available documents online in the NRC and completeness of LRAs, public contains notices to the public of the proposed Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- participation, changing environmental issuance of rules and regulations. The rm/adams.html. To begin the search, considerations, aging analysis and purpose of these notices is to give interested select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and management, regulatory follow-through, persons an opportunity to participate in the then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS National Environmental Policy Act rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, (NEPA) compliance, and changing please contact the NRC’s Public regulations. The petitioners stated that Document Room (PDR) reference staff at they seek to restore some margin of NUCLEAR REGULATORY 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by conservatism by halving the lead time COMMISSION email to [email protected]. The on LRAs from 20 to 10 years. ADAMS accession number for each The petitioners raised the following 10 CFR Part 54 document referenced in this notice (if seven issues in support of their request [Docket No. PRM–54–6; NRC–2010–0291] that document is available in ADAMS) that the NRC revise 10 CFR 54.17(c): is provided the first time that a 1. The NRC conducted the rulemaking Filing a Renewed License Application document is referenced. In addition, for for 10 CFR 54.17, ‘‘Filing of the convenience of the reader, the Application,’’ more than 15 years ago, AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory ADAMS accession numbers are and it could not have foreseen changes Commission. provided in a table in Section VI of this with respect to economic and regulatory ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; denial. document, Availability of Documents. shifts that have led to an industry-wide • The NRC’s PDR: You may examine shift of focus from decommissioning to SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory and purchase copies of public power uprates and license renewals. Commission (NRC or the Commission) documents at the NRC’s PDR, O1–F21, Such changes have affected the is denying a petition for rulemaking One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville dynamics of license renewal aging (PRM) submitted by Raymond Shadis Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. analysis and management. and Mary Lampert on behalf of Earth FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2. The rulemaking for 10 CFR 54.17(c) Day Commitment/Friends of the Coast, Margaret Stambaugh, Office of Nuclear proceeded without sufficient Beyond Nuclear, Seacoast Anti- Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear consideration of the hearing rights of Pollution League, C–10 Research and Regulatory Commission, Washington, affected persons. Education Foundation, Pilgrim Watch, DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–415– 3. Under 10 CFR 54.17(c), licensees New England Coalition, and joined in 7069; email: and the NRC can press to untenable by New Hampshire State Representative [email protected]. lengths of time the ability to predict the Robin Reed (the petitioners). The following: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: petitioners requested that the NRC a. Aging deterioration of systems; amend its regulations to accept a license I. Background b. Alternative energy sources that may renewal application (LRA) no sooner II. Modifying the 20-Year Application be more available in the future; and than 10 years before the expiration of Timeframe c. Various other factors related to the current license and to apply the III. Ongoing and Future License Renewal Actions plant security and the environment. revised rule to all LRAs for which the 4. Failure rates for systems, structures, NRC has not issued a final safety A. Suspending All Ongoing and Future License Renewal Application Reviews and components (SSCs) are nonlinear, evaluation report. The petitioners also B. Applying a 10-Year Timeframe to All so licensees are unable to accurately requested a suspension of all new Ongoing and Future License Renewal predict aging-related failures. license renewal activity until the Application Reviews 5. A 20-year timeframe exacerbates rulemaking is decided. After reviewing C. Petition Statements and Comments the NRC staff’s and licensees’ difficulty the petition, the NRC is denying the Referencing the Seabrook Nuclear in tracking license renewal petition. Generating Station, Unit 1 (Seabrook commitments. Unit 1), License Renewal Application ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID IV. Public Comments on the Petition 6. Regulatory changes over a 20-year NRC–2010–0291 when contacting the V. Determination of Petition period, from application to onset of the NRC about the availability of VI. Availability of Documents period of extended operation, will result information for this petition. You may in grandfathered non-compliance issues. access information related to this I. Background 7. The 20-year timeframe allowed by petition, which the NRC possesses and The NRC received the petition on 10 CFR 54.17(c) conflicts with NEPA. is publicly available, by any of the August 17, 2010, and assigned it Docket This conflict results in environmental following methods: No. PRM–54–6. The NRC published a reviews of unduly limited scope and • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to notice of receipt of the petition and unreasonably limits potential http://www.regulations.gov and search request for public comment in the alternatives. on Docket ID NRC–2010–0291. Address Federal Register (FR) on September 27, Section II, ‘‘Modifying the 20-Year questions about NRC dockets to Carol 2010 (75 FR 59158). Application Timeframe,’’ of this Gallagher, telephone: 301–492–3668; The petitioners stated that the NRC’s document describes in detail each of the email: [email protected]. current regulation in Title 10 of the seven issues. Section II also documents • The NRC’s Agencywide Documents Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) the NRC’s responses to these issues. Access and Management System 54.17(c) is unduly non-conservative The petitioners also requested that the (ADAMS): You may access publicly with respect to its effect on the accuracy NRC suspend all ongoing reviews of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28317

LRAs and that it apply the 10-year petitioners provided no evidence or Therefore, the arguments provided by timeframe requirement to all ongoing analysis demonstrating that regulatory the petitioners for this issue do not and future LRA reviews. In addition, the changes or corporate restructuring have provide sufficient justification for the petitioners and some public comment negatively affected the NRC staff’s NRC to revise the rule. In particular, the letters provide statements related to the ability to review LRAs or the industry’s petitioners did not present any new license renewal application for ability to manage aging-related information that would contradict the Seabrook, Unit 1. Section III, ‘‘Ongoing degradation at nuclear power plants. Commission’s previous considerations and Future License Renewal Actions,’’ Furthermore, the petitioners presented when it established the license renewal of this document contains the NRC’s no evidence or analysis for the assertion rule or demonstrate that sufficient responses to these requests and that LRAs submitted more than 10 years reason exists to modify the current statements. before expiration have resulted in regulations. negative consequences. II. Modifying the 20-Year Application In its 1991 Statements of Issue 2 Timeframe Consideration for 10 CFR 54.17(c), the The petitioners asserted that, by Issue 1 Commission considered the appropriate renewing the license of a nuclear power period for applicants to submit station 20 years in advance of the The petitioners stated that the NRC applications for license renewal (Power licensed extended period of operation, last updated 10 CFR 54.17 in 1995, Plant License Renewal, Final Rule, 56 the NRC removes, to the distance of a before sweeping changes in NRC FR 64963; December 13, 1991). The NRC full generation, the opportunity for an oversight and before economic and established the 20-year timeframe to adjudicatory hearing. They contend that regulatory shifts that enabled balance the need to collect sufficient a future generation of affected residents, unprecedented changes in ownership operating history data to support an visitors, and commercial interests and an industry-wide shift of focus from LRA with the needs of a utility to plan would be unable or unprepared to speak anticipated plant decommissioning to for the replacement of retired nuclear for themselves. The petitioners further power uprates and license renewals. power plants in the event of an stated that ‘‘10 CFR 54.17(c) introduces The petitioners stated that the unsuccessful LRA. The Statements of the question of whether the action rulemaking cannot have contemplated Consideration also discussed the NRC’s proposed is obtaining the license or how these changes have affected the finding that the lead time for building entering into an extended period of dynamics of license renewal aging new electric generation facilities operation 20 years hence.’’ They argue analysis and aging management (alternatives to the proposed action) is that ‘‘the safety and environmental planning over a period of 40 years (20 10–14 years, depending on the ramifications; the physical impact on years of the current license, plus 20 technology. In addition, the affected persons begins 20 years away.’’ years of the extended period of Commission considered that the NRC They contended that this renders the operation). The petitioners claimed that staff review would add time to the permission so far removed in time from the rule is antiquated and obsolete and process. Thus, the NRC found that a 20- the implementation as to provide an must be reconsidered. year application timeframe provided a intellectual disconnect or, in effect, void The petitioners stated that, of 32 reasonable and flexible timeframe for legal notice. license renewals granted, none were licensees to perform informed business NRC Response to Issue 2 filed 20 years in advance of license planning. The petitioners did not expiration and that there is only one provide any reasoning to dispute this The petitioners pointed out that exception among the 14 LRAs under previous consideration by the renewing an application up to 20 years consideration and filed in the last few Commission but instead introduced and in advance means that some future years—Seabrook Unit 1. The petitioners relied on the assumption that a rule residents, visitors, and commercial stated that NextEra Seabrook Nuclear must be reconsidered because it is over interests that relocate near the plant LLC (NextEra) has provided no credible 15 years old. during the period of extended operation justification for its very early filing of an The petitioners cited Seabrook Unit 1 would not have had the opportunity to LRA. The petitioners stated that the as the only case out of 32 license participate in the hearing process great majority of licensees have filed renewals where an applicant filed 20 associated with the LRA review. applications for license renewal within years in advance of its license However, the interests of those future 10 years of the original license expiration. This statement is incorrect affected persons would be sufficiently expiration without any apparent because, as of the date of the petition, represented by those currently located negative consequences. The petitioners nine reactor units were granted in the area. Any impacts from plant believe that this experience is a clear exemptions from 10 CFR 54.17(c), operation on persons currently in the demonstration that a lead time of more enabling the licensees to submit area of the plant are expected to be the than 10 years is unnecessary and of applications more than 20 years in same or representative of those impacts little benefit. The petitioners argued that advance of their license expiration. on persons who will be located near the filing, reviewing, and granting LRAs Similarly, the NRC disagrees with the plant in the future. It is also an more than 10 years in advance of the petitioners’ assertion that ‘‘the great untenable legal standard to provide a original license expiration can have majority of licensees have filed hearing opportunity for unknown future negative consequences. applications for license renewal within residents, visitors, and commercial 10 years of the original license interests, as it would delay the hearing NRC Response to Issue 1 expiration,’’ as most (43 of the 61) units process or deprive persons currently The NRC recognizes that it last with renewed licenses at the date of the affected of a timely hearing opportunity. revised 10 CFR part 54, ‘‘Requirements petition, filed their applications earlier Further, the future residents, visitors, for renewal of operating licenses for than 10 years before the original license and commercial interests located near nuclear power plants,’’ in 1995 but expiration. Nevertheless, neither the plant may avail themselves of the disagrees that the age of the rule statement contradicted the NRC’s petition process set forth in 10 CFR negatively affects regulatory original basis for its consideration in the 2.206, ‘‘Request for action under this effectiveness or plant safety. The rule. subpart,’’ which allows for a request

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28318 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

that an existing license be modified, While security of the nuclear facilities emerging at a late date in a way that suspended, or revoked. Future the NRC regulates has always been a affected license renewal. residents, visitors, and commercial priority, the terrorist attack of Additionally, the petitioners included interests can also raise generic issues by September 11, 2001, brought heightened the example that Vermont Yankee requesting modification of the NRC’s scrutiny and spurred more stringent Nuclear Power Station also provides a regulations under 10 CFR 2.802, physical security requirements. The series of later-life structural failures. ‘‘Petition for rulemaking.’’ NRC staff regularly inspects and The petitioners stated that it is The petition statements in Issue 2 do enforces against these security appropriate, from a regulatory audit not provide sufficient justification for requirements as part of its oversight standpoint, to wait until data on the the NRC to revise the rule. role, regardless of a plant’s status with applicable failure rate and observed aging phenomena are in hand before Issue 3 respect to license renewal. Moreover, acts of terrorism are not aging-related attempting time-limited aging analysis The petitioners stated that 10 CFR issues and are, therefore, outside the or aging management planning; less 54.17(c) allows licensees and the NRC scope of license renewal hearings. than 10; not less than 20 years in staff to press to untenable lengths of Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. advance of operating license expiration. time the unproven ability to predict the (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units NRC Response to Issue 4 aging and deterioration of SSCs. The 2 and 3), CLI–04–36, 60 NRC 631, 638– petitioners also claimed that 10 CFR 40 (2004). Therefore, where the The petitioners asserted that a plant 54.17(c) promotes failure of the LRA to petitioners raised questions regarding with only 20 years of operating history encompass the potential effects of an the license renewal review’s ability to will not have gathered sufficient plant- environment that is arguably changing encompass uncertainties associated specific aging data to make an informed decision about license renewal. The at an unprecedented and unpredictable with future threats and developments rate. As a result, the petitioners Commission considered this issue in the related to acts of terrorism, such questioned whether a rise in ocean 1991 rulemaking promulgating the concerns are addressed by separate NRC temperatures in the future would license renewal rule. In the Statements requirements for physical security (10 eventually lead to additional impacts, of Consideration from 1991, the CFR Part 73) and are not related to the such as an increase in species affected Commission stated that a minimum of rules and regulations pertaining to by the thermal discharge plume or 20 years provides a licensee with license renewal under 10 CFR part 54. cooling intake. The petitioners also substantial amounts of information and pointed out that ‘‘more environmentally The petitioners did not present new would disclose any plant-specific benevolent alternative energy sources’’ information in Issue 3 that would concerns with regard to age-related may be more available in the future demonstrate that sufficient reason exists degradation (56 FR 64963; December 13, (e.g., photovoltaic solar and wind to modify the current regulations. 1991). power) but cannot be credibly projected Issue 4 With respect to the petitioners’ claim over 20 years. In addition, the that the licensees and the NRC cannot petitioners raised the future uncertainty The petitioners stated that submitting prove the ability to predict the aging of the global threat of terrorism and its an application for license renewal at and deterioration of SSCs in the future, impact on security and the availability midterm of the current license finds the the Commission recognized this in its of offsite storage for spent fuel and low- licensee at a time in SSC service life 1991 Statements of Consideration and level radioactive waste. The petitioners when, in industry experience, few acknowledged that the ongoing noted that the predicted failure rates for failures are observed and, generally, regulatory processes at the time did not complex systems tend to increase those that are observed are episodic or fully address the safety issues of exponentially with respect to the length anomalous and cannot be readily extended operation beyond the initial of time until the prediction matures. plotted as a trend for predictive 40-year license term (56 FR 64965; purposes. The period of increased December 13, 1991). Therefore, the NRC Response to Issue 3 failure rates due to design, Commission concluded that a formal Under Issue 3, the petitioners argued manufacturing, and construction defects review of the adverse effects of aging on that the LRA fails to encompass the has passed and is irrelevant to aging a SSC’s ability to perform its intended potential effects of a changing management in the proposed extended function would be needed at license environment, and then raised several period of operation. The petitioners renewal to ensure that operation during issues of concern stemming from the stated that the anticipated end-of-design the period of the extended license length of time allowed by 10 CFR life and aging issues have barely begun would not be inimical to public health 54.17(c). The examples range from aging to emerge. Therefore, little or no plant- and safety. As such, the resulting degradation to environmental concerns specific information on how a given licensing basis for a nuclear power plant to terrorism and security. The plant will age is available to be trended, during the renewal term consists of the petitioners’ issues related to aging provide lessons, or otherwise illuminate current licensing basis (CLB), as well as management are similar to those raised the path forward. The petitioners any additional obligations to monitor, under Issue 4; therefore, the NRC will continued that it is generally observed manage, and correct the adverse effects address this aspect of the petitioners’ that for many SSCs the information flow of aging. In other words, the intent of concern in its response to that issue. rates increase rapidly in the fourth license renewal is to actively manage Likewise, the petitioners’ environmental quarter and toward the end of a license. aging effects with aging management concerns as well as the broader concern They argued that this SSC reliability programs rather than just predicting of a changing environment are similar to progression is well known and often future deterioration. the NEPA issues raised under Issue 7; illustrated in the so-called ‘‘Bath Tub The bathtub curve analogy made by the NRC will address the environmental Curve,’’ and corrosion risk is a function the petitioners would only apply to a questions in its response to that issue. of time. As an example, the petitioners scenario where component failures This response to Issue 3 addresses the contended that the Beaver Valley Power could occur if no aging management remaining questions related to future Station containment issue provides an programs were used. The petitioners do uncertainty related to acts of terrorism. example of operating experience not provide convincing evidence or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28319

analysis to show that the bathtub curve license condition. Following the license to address the effects of age- phenomenon actually exists at nuclear issuance of a renewed license, the NRC related degradation as well as any other power plants. Where the petitioners performs inspections, under License operational concern that arises. The cited Beaver Valley and Vermont Renewal Inspection Procedure (IP) licensee must continue to ensure that Yankee as two examples, neither 71003, ‘‘Post-Approval Site Inspection the plant is being operated safely and in example conclusively demonstrated for License Renewal,’’ as part of its conformance with its licensing basis. As how component failures were linked to oversight process. One objective of the regulations change over time, the the presence of a bath-tub trend, other IP 71003 inspection is to review the current licensing basis is updated to the than the fact that both plants happened licensee’s implementation of aging extent that the regulation is applicable to be in the later segments of their management programs, license to the plant. Thus, a regulatory change respective licenses. Nuclear power plant conditions, and commitments does not result in grandfathering non- licensees are required to maintain aging associated with the license renewal compliance with applicable regulations. management programs as part of their review under 10 CFR part 54. Generally, The NRC’s regulatory oversight CLB following the license renewal these inspections are coordinated by the activities will also assess any new review, to ensure that the effects of NRC regional staff and take place just information on age-related degradation aging are adequately managed such that before plants enter the period of or plant operation issues and take SSC’s are able to perform their intended extended operation. Findings are whatever regulatory action is functions over time. The aging documented in Inspection Reports appropriate for ensuring the protection management programs, which are following each inspection. In addition of the public health and safety.’’ In evaluated by the NRC, provide to IP 71003 inspections, regulatory addition, the petitioners do not further reasonable assurance that the effects of commitments that have not been made develop their case in explaining how aging will be managed under the legal obligations are subject to triennial the examples of underground, buried, or renewed license. audits by the NRC staff. Where the inaccessible piping and cables The petition statements in Issue 4 do petitioners claimed that the current rule demonstrate their claim of non- not provide new information that would for license renewal complicates the compliance issues being grandfathered. contradict positions taken by the conduct of these inspections or other In fact, the aging management for these Commission when it established the processes to verify license renewal SSCs are some examples of how ongoing license renewal rule, nor do they commitments, they do not provide any operating experience informs the demonstrate that sufficient reason exists evidence to demonstrate their claim. licensees’ aging management programs to modify the current regulations. Therefore, the petitioners’ statements over time in order to ensure compliance in Issue 5 do not provide a sufficient with 10 CFR 54.21(a)(3). Such programs Issue 5 justification for the Commission to grant are expected to evolve as necessary to The petitioners stated that the current the petition for rulemaking. address new operating experience. In rule exacerbates the difficulty the NRC Issue 6 addition, regulatory oversight activities staff and licensees have in following such as IP 71003 inspections also license renewal commitments. They The petitioners stated that the 20 provide the means for the NRC staff to argued that LRAs are often approved years that pass from an application to verify and assess the ongoing with the proviso that certain the onset of the extended operation will, effectiveness of licensees’ aging commitments be made and fulfilled, based on regulatory history, certainly management efforts. generally before the period of extended see an inordinate amount of applicable The petitioners did not present new operation begins. These commitments regulatory change, resulting in information in Issue 6 that would often include inspections, tests, and grandfathered non-compliance issues. contradict positions taken by the analyses, as well as the development of The petitioners stated that current Commission when it established the programs vital to safety and issues under consideration for treatment license renewal rule or demonstrate that environmental protection. in the license renewal process include sufficient reason exists to modify the The petitioners stated that regulatory aging management for underground, current regulations. experience shows NRC staff turnover, as buried, or inaccessible pipes that carry well as changes in oversight and radionuclides and aging management Issue 7 licensee staff and ownership, will for safety-related, low-voltage cables The petitioners argued that the complicate and place increased that are below-grade and not qualified regulation conflicts with, circumvents, emphasis on the proper handoff of for a wet environment. and frustrates the letter, spirit, object, unfulfilled licensee commitments. and goals of NEPA. The petitioners NRC Response to Issue 6 stated that ‘‘NEPA provides at Section NRC Response to Issue 5 The Commission addressed 1500.2, that the Federal agencies, ‘shall The NRC agrees that it is important compliance with future regulatory to the fullest extent possible: (e) Use the for licensees to fulfill commitments changes during the period of license NEPA process to identify and assess the made in LRAs and for the NRC to verify renewal in promulgating the initial rule reasonable alternatives to proposed that those commitments are met. (56 FR 64963; December 13, 1991). The actions that will avoid or minimize Commitments are one part of the LRA Commission previously responded to a adverse effects of these actions upon the review and approval process. A license similar comment, stating that comments quality of the human environment.’’’ renewal review can result in new to the rule ‘‘incorrectly suggest that new The petitioners stated that the ‘‘Act license conditions and updates to final information about plant systems and provides at Section 1501(b) that ‘NEPA safety analysis reports (FSARs), as well components as well as age-related procedures must insure [sic] that as commitments. In those instances degradation concerns discovered after environmental information is available where the NRC staff makes a finding of the renewed license is issued would not to public officials and citizens before reasonable assurance based on a be considered by the NRC or would not decisions are made and before actions commitment proposed by a licensee, the be factored into a plant’s programs. The are taken. The information must be of NRC staff elevates the commitment to a CLB of a plant will continue to evolve high quality. Accurate scientific legal obligation, which is enforced in a throughout the term of the renewed analysis, expert agency comments, and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28320 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

public scrutiny are essential to the Council on Environmental Quality petitioners in Issue 3 related to the implementing NEPA. Most important, (CEQ) regulations in support of their changing environment (e.g., rise in NEPA documents must concentrate on arguments rather than NEPA, but ocean temperatures on species affected the issues that are truly significant to neither the statute nor the CEQ by a thermal discharge plume or cooling the action in question, rather than regulations support their petition. The intake), in addressing environmental amassing needless detail.’ ’’ extent of the environmental review is impacts and alternatives that are The petitioners also presented not directly limited by the timing of the reasonably foreseeable for each site. arguments under Issue 3 related to application submittal, nor does the NRC Furthermore, the petitioners did not environmental considerations that will staff limit its analysis to the information provide new information to demonstrate be addressed here. These arguments provided in the environmental report. that the changing environment would include the potential availability of However, the NRC does apply the rule have a significant impact to affect the energy sources that may be more of reason in conducting its NRC’s environmental analysis. available in the future (e.g., photovoltaic environmental analysis under NEPA, The petitioners also raised a concern solar and wind power) but cannot be which may limit the extent of the in Issue 3 related to the potential change credibly projected over 20 years, the environmental analysis to only those in status of threatened or endangered failure of the LRA to encompass effects environmental impacts and alternatives species over the renewed license period; of a changing environment, the effect of that are reasonably foreseeable. This such changes are accounted for in the a rise in ocean temperatures on species means that, while the environmental NRC’s ongoing consultations with other affected by a thermal discharge plume review considers various impacts and Federal agencies under the Endangered or cooling intake, the availability of alternatives, the NRC is not required to Species Act, which may result in offsite storage for spent fuel and low- analyze every possible future or imposing incidental take limits or level radioactive waste, and the status of speculative development, particularly monitoring for certain species, threatened or endangered species. those that cannot be reasonably assessed depending on the facility and its environment. To the extent that future NRC Response to Issue 7 to inform its decision-making process. For example, the NRC analyzes developments or events may occur that The NRC disagrees that the regulation alternative energy sources, but is not require reinitiation of consultations, the conflicts with, circumvents, or frustrates required under NEPA to consider NRC staff must consult with the relevant the intent of NEPA. Rather, the twin speculative technological advances in agency or agencies, regardless of aims of NEPA do not conflict with the alternative energy sources, which may whether the power plant has a renewed licensing authority granted under the or may not be available at the time of license. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended extended operation. The NRC must Therefore, the change to license (AEA). Section 103(c) of the AEA states renewal regulations proposed by the complete its NEPA review before it that ‘‘each [operating] license shall be petitioners would not affect the NRC’s issues a renewed license in order to issued for a specified period, as response to events related to the inform the agency’s decision on license determined by the Commission, Endangered Species Act. depending on the type of activity to be renewal, and the agency meets the twin In Issue 7, the petitioners stated that licensed, but not exceeding forty years, aims of NEPA by analyzing those the rule ‘‘sets the [license renewal] and may be renewed upon the alternatives that are reasonably application’s environmental review at a expiration of such period.’’ Consistent foreseeable at the time that the renewed maximum of 20 years in advance of the with the AEA, the NRC’s license license is issued. The petitioners did not impacts from the Federal action.’’ Other renewal regulation allows for a renewed provide information showing that the parts of the petition made similar license providing up to 40 years of rule precludes the NRC from statements to imply that the actual operation (up to 20 years of the existing considering reasonable alternatives ‘‘action’’ taken by the NRC is not going license plus 20 years of extended within the licensing action timeframe. to occur until up to 20 years into the operation). As previously discussed in With respect to assessing the potential future. For clarification, the ‘‘proposed response to Issue 1, the Commission future environmental impacts associated action’’ before the NRC for license found that a 20-year application with the issuance of a renewed license, renewal is the ‘‘issuance’’ of a new and timeframe provided a reasonable and the NRC complies with the statutory superseding license that allows flexible period for licensees to perform requirements of NEPA through its operations for up to 40 years (any informed business planning. The NRC consideration of impacts in the generic remaining time on the initial license fulfills its NEPA obligations and meets and supplemental environmental plus up to 20 years of extended NEPA’s twin aims by examining the impact statements (SEISs) for license operation), which is discussed further in reasonably foreseeable impacts and renewal prepared in accordance with 10 response to Issue 2. Therefore, NEPA alternatives to issuing a renewed license CFR part 51, ‘‘Environmental protection requires the NRC to perform and for a period of up to 40 years. The regulations for domestic licensing and complete an environmental review to petitioners did not provide any related regulatory functions.’’ As part of support the agency’s decision-making reasoning to dispute that the renewed this environmental review process, the process with respect to issuance of the license period of up to 40 years was NRC evaluates the environmental renewed license. As previously stated, a consistent with the AEA, nor did the impacts associated with operating a 40-year license is consistent with the petition provide information to show plant for an additional 20 years. This AEA, and the NRC performs its NEPA that if the NRC, consistent with the evaluation includes generic analysis as part of the LRA review AEA, issues a renewed license for up to determination in its Generic process. The petitioners did not provide 40 years, that the agency is, therefore, Environmental Impact Statement for new information that demonstrates that unable to meet NEPA’s twin aims. License Renewal (GEIS) of issues such the NRC ought to perform its NEPA The petitioners also argued that the as the future storage of spent fuel for the analysis at some time other than before timing of LRAs affects the period of extended operation (see 10 it issues a renewed license. implementation of NEPA with regard to CFR part 51, subpart A, Table B–1). The Finally, in their arguments supporting the consideration of alternatives. The environmental review also addresses Issue 7, the petitioners discussed the NRC notes that the petitioners quoted concerns such as those cited by the LRA submitted for Seabrook Unit 1. The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28321

NRC considers these issues as intended Licensing Board Panel admitted as supporting information for the by the petitioners and commenter to be contentions in that proceeding statement. Two commenters stated that examples of a specific case for which (including contentions related to all applicants for license renewal must the petitioners believe the rule is alternatives the applicant considered in comply with 10 CFR part 50 and 10 CFR deficient. Section III.C, ‘‘Petition its environmental report). part 54, regardless of their corporate Statements and Comments Referencing To the extent that the petitioners’ structure, and both commented that the the Seabrook Nuclear Generating concerns relate specifically to Seabrook petition did not include an analysis of Station, Unit 1 (Seabrook Unit 1), and the ongoing license renewal how deregulation has affected aging License Renewal Application,’’ of this proceeding for that facility, the management. One commenter added document contains a detailed response petitioners must pursue those issues that the petitioners’ attempts to provide to the Seabrook example. through the adjudicatory process. new information that the NRC allegedly Therefore, the petitioners’ arguments Furthermore, to the extent that the did not consider in its rulemaking fails in Issue 7 do not demonstrate that petitioners or commenter raised issues to explain what that new information is sufficient reason exists to modify the about a specific licensing proceeding, and thus fails to demonstrate that current regulations. the issues and comments are considered sufficient reason exists to modify the only as examples of specific cases where current regulations. The commenter also III. Ongoing and Future License the petitioners believe the current rule stated that the petition fails to identify Renewal Actions is unduly burdensome, deficient, or which changes in NRC oversight have A. Suspending All Ongoing and Future needs to be strengthened, in support of affected aging management. Lastly, a License Renewal Application Reviews the petition to amend 10 CFR 54.17(c). commenter noted that 10 CFR part 54 Any other comments regarding a considers the present context for a plant The petitioners requested that, specific licensing proceeding are by requiring that each plant maintain its pending promulgation of a rule to revise beyond the scope of a petition for CLB. 10 CFR 54.17(c), the NRC suspend all rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802 and are ongoing and future reviews of LRAs. not considered further in the NRC’s NRC Response The review of LRAs is not a rulemaking responses. The NRC recognizes that it last issue and thus will not be addressed in revised 10 CFR part 54 in 1995 but this response to a petition submitted IV. Public Comments on the Petition disagrees that the age of the rule under 10 CFR 2.802. The FR notice of The NRC received six letters negatively affects regulatory receipt for the petition stated that the containing comments on the proposed effectiveness or plant safety. The NRC NRC will address the request to suspend rulemaking from Mark Strauch, Marie agrees with the commenter that the ongoing and future LRA reviews in a Mackowoliez, NextEra Energy, the petitioners provided no evidence or separate action. Subsequently, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), Beyond analysis to demonstrate that changes in Commission denied the petitioners’ Nuclear, and Strategic Teaming and regulatory structure or corporate request to suspend licensing actions; the Resource Sharing. The comments are structure of licensees have negatively Commission’s denial can be found in grouped into eight comment categories. affected aging analysis practices, aging ADAMS under Accession No. Individual comments and their grouping management programs at plants, or the ML110250087. can be found in the Public Comment review of LRAs. This comment does not B. Applying a 10-Year Timeframe to All Matrix in ADAMS under Accession provide new information that would Ongoing and Future License Renewal Number ML113540177. The NRC also justify revising the rule. received a letter from New Hampshire Application Reviews Comment 1.2 State Representative Robin Reed asking Under the presumption that the NRC to be added as a petitioner. The NRC A commenter stated that Seabrook would revise 10 CFR 54.17(c) to 10 accepted the request from State Unit 1 is the only plant to file for license years, the petitioners requested that the Representative Reed and considers her renewal 20 years in advance of the NRC apply the 10-year requirement to to be a petitioner for the purposes of this expiration of its operating license. The the review of all ongoing and future response. commenter also stated that, given the LRAs. In this case, since the NRC is Comment Category 1: The NRC wrote preponderance of license renewal denying the petition, a 10-year 10 CFR 54.17 before economic and review times for submittals and the requirement will not be applied to regulatory changes took place that agency approvals to date, no more than ongoing or future LRA reviews. would affect license renewal. 10 years in advance is warranted for an application, which will significantly C. Petition Statements and Comments Comment 1.1 improve the quality and reliability of Referencing the Seabrook Nuclear The petitioners stated that the NRC the agency’s environmental impact Generating Station, Unit 1 (Seabrook last updated the rulemaking for 10 CFR statements (EISs) and the environmental Unit 1), License Renewal Application 54.17 in 1995, before changes in NRC reports upon which they rely, as The petitioners made multiple claims oversight and economic and regulatory required by NEPA. Finally, the about license renewal that refer shifts that enabled unprecedented commenter stated that the specifically to Seabrook Unit 1. One changes in oversight and an industry- preponderance of the license renewal commenter raised similar claims. The wide shift of focus from anticipated reviews and approvals conducted to NRC considers these issues as intended decommissioning to uprate and license date do not come close to requiring 10 by the petitioners and commenter to be renewal. The petitioners further stated to 20 years to complete and, therefore, examples of a specific case for which that the rulemaking did not consider the basis of the 20-year advance the petitioners or commenter believe the how such changes would affect aging application date is invalid. rule is deficient. The petition and analysis in LRA reviews or aging Two other commenters stated that comment claims are similar to the management planning. One commenter Seabrook Unit 1 is not the first LRA claims the petitioners have submitted in stated that the petition does not filed 20 years in advance of the a Seabrook adjudicatory proceeding, demonstrate that the rule is out of date operating license expiration, and the some of which the Atomic Safety and and that the petitioners provided no plant is not an outlier in that respect.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28322 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Both commenters also noted that the year application timeframe provided a to speak for themselves. The commenter NRC has granted several LRAs at or near reasonable and flexible period for also raised the point that the 20-year the 20-year timeframe, and the NRC also licensees to perform informed business renewal application period provides a has granted exemptions to the 20-year planning. Therefore, the comment does greater ability for people to decide not requirement for special circumstances. not present new information that to relocate to the area near the plant. One commenter further stated that the contradicts positions taken by the A commenter provided the following need for sufficient lead time for Commission when it established the statements related to the hearings on corporate decision-making, which license renewal rule. LRAs. Parties in NRC contested underlies 10 CFR 54.17(c), applies The NRC response to comments under licensing hearings have the opportunity whether companies opt for license Comment Category 7 discusses the to raise issues after the LRA is renewal of their nuclear facilities or issues raised in the above comments submitted and during the months development of alternative sources of related to environmental reviews and immediately following the NRC staff’s generating capacity. Completion of the EISs. completion of its licensing review and business planning process requires the issuance of the safety and decisions about future generating Comment 1.3 environmental licensing documents. capacity to be made many years in The petition noted that Seabrook Unit Because the licensing hearing focuses advance. 1 provided no credible justification for on the LRA itself, and not future its very early filing of an LRA. A generations, hearing issues are most NRC Response commenter stated that, to the extent effectively addressed while the LRA is The comment that Seabrook Unit 1 is petitioners argued that the LRA is before the agency. Contrary to the the only plant to submit an application deficient, their claims are inappropriate petitioners’ assertion, there is no 20 years before expiration of its license in a rulemaking petition and should be statutory, regulatory, or other rationale is incorrect. As discussed in response to raised in the ongoing adjudicatory for delaying the hearing until the Issue 1, at the time of the petition, nine proceeding, in which several of the renewed license goes into effect. The reactor units were granted exemptions petitioners are currently participating NRC will address any safety issues from 10 CFR 54.17(c), enabling the and have already raised similar claims. relating to plant operation that arise licensees to submit applications more after license renewal using the array of than 20 years in advance of their license NRC Response processes available from the expiration. As is discussed further in Section III.C Commission’s regulations. The data does not support the of this document, the petition and Two commenters noted that there is commenter’s corresponding conclusion commenter statements that raised issues no fundamental right to participate in that no more than 10 years is warranted about a specific licensing proceeding are administrative adjudications. See in which to submit an LRA. Thus, the beyond the scope of a petition for Citizens Awareness Network, Inc. v. NRC agrees with the other comments rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802 and are NRC, 391 F.3d 338, 354 (1st. Cir. 2004). that the Seabrook Unit 1 LRA is not an not considered in the NRC’s responses One commenter also stated that the NRC outlier with respect to the timeframe in in this document. However, it should be issues initial operating licenses for 40- which the application was submitted. noted that the rule language in 10 CFR year periods. The combination of a 20- A commenter also concluded that, part 54 contains no requirement for an year license renewal period with the 18 since the NRC does not need 20 years applicant to justify the year in which it years (at most) that would remain on an to review an LRA, the basis for the 20- applies to renew a license. initial license following the NRC’s year application timeframe is invalid. The comments related to Comment review of an LRA is less than the 40- The NRC acknowledges that 20 years is Category 1 do not present new year period for operating licenses that not necessary to perform its review of an information that would contradict the NRC grants under 10 CFR part 50 or LRA, as noted by a commenter. The positions taken by the Commission 10 CFR part 52, ‘‘Licenses, NRC typically reviews an application in when it established the license renewal certifications, and approvals for nuclear about 2 years, when no hearings are rule or demonstrate that sufficient power plants.’’ The petitioners’ requested and when the review is reason exists to modify the current argument would mean that the NRC is appropriately supported by the regulations. incapable of providing a meaningful applicant. Applications for which Comment Category 2: The rulemaking hearing opportunity on an initial hearings are requested would take for 10 CFR 54.17 proceeded without operating license and that the AEA’s longer than 2 years. Rather, the NRC sufficient consideration of the hearing provisions requiring both an established the 20-year timeframe to rights of affected persons. opportunity for hearing and a 40-year balance the need to collect sufficient term are fundamentally incompatible. operating history data to support an Comment 2.1 LRA with a utility’s need to plan for the The petitioners stated that, by NRC Response replacement of retired nuclear power renewing the license of a nuclear power The NRC agrees that a longer renewal plants in the case of an unsuccessful station 20 years in advance of the application period may increase the LRA. In promulgating the 1991 license licensed extended period of operation, ability of people to choose not to renewal rule, the Commission the NRC removes, to the distance of a relocate to the area near the plant but considered the appropriate length of full generation, the opportunity for an recognizes that this may not be true for time for applicants to submit adjudicatory hearing. They contended some people. Regardless of the renewal applications for license renewal (56 FR that a coming generation of affected application time period, it is impossible 64963; December 13, 1991). The residents, visitors, and commercial to identify all people who may relocate Statements of Consideration discuss the interests would be unable or unprepared to the area during the entire term of the NRC finding that the lead time for to speak for themselves. license renewal period. However, as building new electric generation A commenter noted that, according to discussed in Section II of this document facilities (alternatives to the proposed the petitioners’ logic, with even a 5-year in response to Issue 2 of the petition, action) is 10–14 years, depending on the renewal application period, some current residents would sufficiently technology. The NRC found that a 20- people might be unable or unprepared represent potential future area residents,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28323

visitors, and commercial interests. residents of a fundamental hearing right. generically addresses the eventual Further, potential future residents, Specifically, the petition does not onsite or offsite storage of spent fuel visitors, and commercial interests have provide any support to show why the following the permanent cessation of other regulatory mechanisms to protect AEA authorization for an initial 40-year operations. their interests, including a petition for operating license does not deprive NRC Response enforcement action under 10 CFR 2.206. potential future residents of a hearing Those future residents, visitors, and right, but a license renewal period of up The commenter’s statements generally commercial interests can also raise to 40 years does deprive potential future align with the responses to Issues 3 and generic issues by requesting residents of a hearing right. 7. As the commenter pointed out, a modification of the NRC’s regulations The comments related to Comment nuclear power plant’s environment, under 10 CFR 2.802. Category 2 do not provide a sufficient including applicable regulations, may The comments related to hearings are justification for the Commission to grant change over time for a variety of generally correct. The NRC’s regulations the petition for rulemaking. reasons. Not all of those potential in 10 CFR part 2, ‘‘Rules of practice for Comment Category 3: The rule changes are within the scope of a domestic licensing proceedings and currently enables applications to avoid license renewal application review. issuance of orders,’’ and 10 CFR part 54 addressing changing environmental The comments related to Comment provide the opportunity for a hearing considerations. Category 3 do not provide a sufficient and establish the requirements for Comment 3.1 justification for the NRC to revise the intervention in a license renewal rule. proceeding. Petitioners who meet the The petitioners stated that 10 CFR Comment Category 4: The NRC and requirements of 10 CFR part 2 may 54.17(c) promotes failure of the LRA to the licensees are unable to accurately intervene in a hearing, subject to the encompass the potential effects of an predict aging-related failures. NRC’s regulations. environment that is arguably changing Comment 4.1 The NRC agrees with the commenter at an unprecedented rate. In addition, who stated that the opportunity for a the petition raised issues about acts of The petition stated that 10 CFR hearing focuses on the adequacy of the terrorism, spent fuel storage, and the 54.17(c) allows licensees and the NRC LRA itself, and those issues would be potential for failures in complex staff to press to untenable lengths of most effectively heard at the same time systems. A commenter questioned the time the unproven ability to predict the as the licensing decision, as provided by impact that a potential rise in ocean aging and deterioration of SSCs. A the NRC’s regulations. The topic of temperatures could have on aquatic commenter noted that the petitioners hearing rights is discussed in response species affected by a reactor’s thermal would have one believe that the NRC is to Issue 2. As the commenter stated, the discharge plume or the cooling intake powerless, once a renewal is docketed, petitioners do not provide a rationale in structure. Assuming such changes to address any of the potential safety or support of their petition for why a occur, the U.S. Environmental aging-related issues enumerated in the hearing on the licensing issues would be Protection Agency or designated State petition. more effective after license issuance but agency that permits operations under A commenter stated that, to the extent before the beginning of the extended Sections 316(a) and (b) of the Clean these matters (the prediction of SSC operating period. Water Act could modify those permits aging) were not properly within the The commenter provided an example to account for the change in conditions. scope of license renewal, they were in which a plant may receive a 38-year Regardless of whether these permitting addressed as part of the licensees’ renewed license. The commenter authorities amend the National ongoing operation (e.g., the corrective calculated 38 years by adding the 20- Pollutant Discharge Elimination System action and operating experience year renewal application period to the (NPDES) permits, Section 511(c)(2) of programs) and the NRC’s continuing 20-year extended operation period and the Clean Water Act precludes the NRC regulatory oversight process. The subtracting 2 years for NRC staff review from either second-guessing the commenter further noted that the of the renewal application. The conclusions in NPDES permits or petitioners’ argument is also belied by commenter argued that the initial imposing its own effluent limitations. the stringency of the NRC’s license licensing period of 40 years and the The commenter further observed that renewal process. approximately 38-year period for the Commission repeatedly stated that A commenter noted that, in drafting renewal both represent an NRC security issues are not among the aging- 10 CFR part 54, the NRC did not expect licensing decision for which the effects related questions that are relevant in a licensees to predict all possible age- of operation would be realized over license renewal review. Moreover, the related failures before issuance of a approximately a 40-year period. The NRC’s environmental review need not renewed license. Instead, it requires period of the renewed license may be up address acts of terrorism. The storage licensees to have inspection and testing to 40 years, as provided in 10 CFR and disposal of low-level waste and the programs that would detect aging effects 54.31, ‘‘Issuance of a renewed license.’’ onsite storage of spent fuel generated such that they could adequately manage The commenter is correct that the during the additional 20 years of those effects. A licensee’s license petitioners do not recognize the operation are Category 1 issues renewal programs are detection and not similarity of the licensing periods of the previously considered in the GEIS for prediction programs. The commenter two licensing actions and that the which the NRC has already codified concludes that this argument does not petition for rulemaking does not explain environmental impact findings in 10 provide any grounds to reconsider the why the initial 40-year licensing period CFR part 51, subpart A, appendix B, Commission’s current regulations. is appropriate while the renewal ‘‘Environmental effect of renewing the licensing period of up to 40 years would operating license of a nuclear power NRC Response be inappropriate. The NRC agrees with plant.’’ In 10 CFR 51.23, ‘‘Temporary As part of the license renewal review, the commenter’s point that, similar to storage of spent fuel after cessation of the NRC evaluates a licensee’s aging the AEA authorization to grant an initial reactor operation—generic management programs to ensure that license for 40 years, a 40-year renewal determination of no significant each provides reasonable assurance that licensing period does not deprive future environmental impact,’’ the NRC the licensee will adequately manage the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28324 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

effects of aging. The petitioners have presented themselves before filing a licensee with substantial amounts of provided no support for the claim that an LRA. information and would disclose any aging management technology is plant-specific concerns with regard to NRC Response inadequate. The NRC agrees that the age-related degradation. A nuclear comments made by two commenters are These comments relate to whether or power plant will undergo a significant a correct description of the process of not aging management programs can number of fuel cycles over 20 years, and aging management and continuing address the potential for failure rates at plant and utility personnel will have a regulatory oversight. Those SSCs within a nuclear power plant to exhibit a substantial number of hours of the scope of license renewal and that bathtub curve trend. The NRC agrees operational experience with every SSC require aging management review have with the comment that a licensee (56 FR 64963; December 13, 1991). The specific aging management programs benefits from industry-wide operating petitioners have not provided any new designed to manage the effects of aging. experience with respect to aging-related insights or analyses that would cause Any SSCs outside the scope of license degradation. However, the NRC the Commission to change the rule. renewal but subject to 10 CFR part 50 disagrees with the comment that it is The comments related to Comment are subject to regulatory oversight. appropriate to wait until the Category 4 do not provide a sufficient Licensees are required to maintain their presentation of rapidly increasing aging justification for the NRC to revise the aging management programs until the effects at a plant before accepting an rule. end of their license. As previously LRA. In the 1991 final rule, the Comment Category 5: The current rule stated, the NRC evaluates the aging Commission did ‘‘not agree that it is exacerbates the NRC staff’s and management programs to determine if adequate to wait to address aging licensee’s difficulty in following license they provide reasonable assurance that concerns when they become apparent in renewal commitments. plant operations.’’ The Commission the licensee will manage the effects of Comment 5.1 aging. found that waiting to take corrective action after a failure occurs does not The petition stated that regulatory Comment 4.2 adequately control risk (56 FR 64974; experience shows that NRC staff The petitioners stated that filing for December 13, 1991). Furthermore, the turnover, as well as changes in oversight license renewal at midterm of the NRC stated that ‘‘the licensee must and licensee staff and ownership, will at current license finds the licensee at a continue to ensure that the plant is once complicate and place increased time in SSC service life when, in being operated safely and in emphasis on the proper handoff of industry experience, few failures are conformance with its licensing basis.’’ unfulfilled licensee commitments. A observed and, generally, those that are As such, the NRC expects that the commenter stated that the petition does observed are episodic or anomalous in licensees’ aging management programs not account for the fact that 10 CFR part nature and thus cannot be readily would continue to be informed over 54 requires license renewal plotted as a trend for prediction time by ongoing operating experience to commitments to be reflected in the purposes. The petition argued that the address new issues. In its 1991 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report time of an elevated rate of failures Statements of Consideration, the (UFSAR). Also, the commitments are caused by design, manufacturing, and Commission also noted that the NRC’s publicly available on the facility’s NRC construction defects has passed and is ‘‘regulatory oversight activities will also docket. The commenter noted that the largely irrelevant to aging management assess any new information on age- petition failed to acknowledge that the in the proposed extended period of related degradation or plant operation NRC’s established regulatory oversight operation. issues and take whatever regulatory process for nuclear power plants (and A commenter stated that the ‘‘bathtub action is appropriate for ensuring the other NRC licensees) has been curve’’ for component reliability trends protection of the public health and functioning effectively for decades, does not apply to components that are safety’’ (56 FR 64963; December 13, despite NRC staff turnover and changes subject to aging management programs. 1991). in oversight and licensee staff and Rather, this curve applies when facility ownership. The commenter components have little or no Comment 4.3 continued that certain NRC regulations maintenance or aging management The petitioners stated that it is and guidance provide various processes activities applied. The commenter appropriate, from a regulatory audit for ensuring that the licensee satisfies further stated that renewal applicants standpoint, to wait until applicable such commitments. Such processes should be encouraged to perform the failure rate and observed aging include, but are not limited to, program required aging management and phenomena data are in hand before development, testing, formalized environmental reviews as early as attempting time-limited aging analysis commitment processes, and NRC possible, since that would allow more or aging management planning: Less inspections, all of which require time to evaluate and implement aging than 10, not less than 20, years in significant recordkeeping of management programs for long-term advance of operating license expiration. commitment status. The commenter also operation. Rather than discourage early A commenter stated that, to the extent stated that, during the term of the applications, it would make more sense the petition claimed that 20 years of renewed license, the licensee continues to encourage such proactive efforts. plant operating experience is to be subject to all NRC regulations in Another commenter stated that license insufficient to provide a valid basis for 10 CFR parts 2, 19, 20, 21, 26, 30, 40, renewal applicants benefit not only renewal applications, the Commission 50, 51, 52, 54, 55, 70, 72, 73, and 100, from their own operating experience but has previously addressed and dismissed and their appendices, as applicable to from that of the entire industry. that argument in its 1991 final rule. holders of operating licenses under 10 Another commenter stated that CFR part 50 or combined license petitioners argue that most aging effects NRC Response holders under 10 CFR part 52. increase rapidly in the fourth quarter The NRC addressed this argument in Another commenter cited the and toward the end of the license and the Statements of Consideration for the petitioners’ question about the NRC’s that licensees should be required to wait 1991 final rule. As the Commission ability to keep track of license renewal until these later-life structural failures stated, a minimum of 20 years provides commitments that are more than 10

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28325

years old, blaming NRC staff turnover, those issues may be obviated by future previously stated in relation to the changes in oversight, and potential new changes in circumstances or regulatory promulgation of the initial rule. The facility ownership. The commenter requirements. As the Commission has NRC generally agrees with the comment observed that the license renewal held, it is not appropriate for the NRC that it considered the issue in the prior commitments are in the docketed and or parties to spend valuable resources rulemaking for this regulation. The NRC searchable UFSAR. The commenter litigating allegations of current also agrees with the comment regarding continued that the petitioners do not deficiencies in a proceeding that is expectations that licensee’s aging explain why the NRC staff would directed to future-oriented issues. management programs should be encounter any difficulty keeping track Additionally, the NRC’s license renewal informed, and enhanced when of documented commitments in a process includes a ‘‘safety valve’’ necessary, based on the ongoing review licensee’s UFSAR. allowing consideration of additional of both plant-specific and industry issues if appropriate (see 10 CFR 2.335, operating experience. NRC Response ‘‘Consideration of Commission rules The comments related to Comment The topic of license renewal and regulations in adjudicatory Category 6 do not provide a justification commitments is discussed in the proceedings’’). for the NRC to revise the rule. response to Issue 5. The NRC Finally, the commenter argued that Comment Category 7: The 20-year acknowledges that it is important for the NRC’s license renewal rules timeframe allowed by 10 CFR 54.17(c) licensees to fulfill commitments and represent an informed, reasoned, and conflicts with NEPA. obligations made in LRAs. The NRC also permissible exercise of the statutory Comment 7.1 agrees that existing regulatory processes authority under the AEA. The are in place to verify license renewal Commission established its renewal The petitioners argued that an LRA commitments, and that the petition does regulations after extensive deliberations, for a nuclear power plant submitted 20 not explain why the NRC staff would based on its determination that existing years in advance of the expiration of its encounter complications in doing so. regulatory processes are adequate to current operating license cannot, to the The comments related to Comment ensure that the licensing bases of fullest extent possible, accurately and Category 5 do not provide a sufficient currently operating nuclear power reliably evaluate nor reasonably foresee justification for the NRC to revise the plants provide and maintain an the alternatives to the proposed action, rule. adequate level of safety. The license as required by the CEQ regulations. Comment Category 6: A 20-year renewal rules further reflect the NRC’s They contended that the premature timeframe will result in grandfathered considered policy judgments that (1) information constitutes nothing more non-compliance issues. issues relevant to both current operation than amassing needless detail that, in the case of a nuclear power plant Comment 6.1 and extended operation during the license renewal period should be relicensing action, establishes a bias The petition stated that the 20 years addressed when they arise, not towards a premature relicensing that pass from application to onset of postponed until a license renewal decision. the extended period of operation will, decision (56 FR 64946; December 13, A commenter stated that, by allowing based on regulatory history, certainly 1991); and (2) duplicating the applications 20 years in advance of the see an inordinate amount of applicable Commission’s ongoing regulatory licensing action, the NRC is rigging the regulatory change, resulting in reviews in a license renewal proceeding purpose and need in violation of NEPA, grandfathered non-compliance issues. A would waste NRC resources, which are citing circuit court comments. The commenter stated that the Commission better focused on aging management commenter asserted that NEPA is to be considered and dismissed this very concerns. interpreted to guard against and prevent concern (regarding non-compliance Another commenter stated that the such misinformed and misleading with future changes in regulations) in Commission has explained that it actions. The commenter also argued that promulgating the original license expects licensees and license renewal the existence of a viable but renewal rules. The commenter further applicants to adjust their aging unexamined alternative renders an EIS stated that, from the outset, the license management programs to reflect lessons inadequate, and therefore agencies must renewal process has emphasized that, learned in the future through individual study significant alternatives suggested for renewal licensees (as well for reactor and industry-wide experiences. The by other agencies or the public. The licensees that do not seek a renewed Commission has described the license commenter stated that there is simply license), the NRC will consider new renewal program as a living program no showing of any attempt by the NRC information and impose new that continues to evolve. If new insights to avoid the consideration of the requirements as appropriate, and more or changes emerge over time, the NRC environmental impacts associated with recent Commission pronouncements staff will require, as appropriate, any license renewal projects or to deprive confirm that this position has not modifications to SSCs that are necessary the public of information related to changed. to ensure adequate protection of public those impacts by dividing a larger The commenter concluded that, as a health and safety or to bring the facility project into smaller units. matter of policy, the Commission was into compliance with a license or the NRC Response clearly correct in determining that rules and orders of the Commission. The licensees must address existing issues at commenter further stated that the NRC The NRC disagrees with one an operating nuclear facility under the will act to ensure adequate protection, commenter’s statement that the 20-year current license instead of postponing regardless of when an LRA is submitted. timeframe constitutes a rigging of the the matter until the license renewal The Commission also considered this purpose or need with regard to NEPA. period. Obviously, the resolution of any same argument nearly 20 years ago in its Rather, the 20-year time frame, which is current safety concerns should not be 1991 final rule. part of the 40-year renewed license deferred. By the same token, the term, is consistent with the AEA. resolution of current issues may have NRC Response Section 103(c) of the AEA states that little or no relevance to safety during the The prior comments largely ‘‘each [operating] license shall be issued period of extended operation, because summarize the Commission’s position for a specified period, as determined by

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28326 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

the Commission, depending on the type regulation, as currently written, The NRC must complete the NEPA of activity to be licensed, but not effectively limits the scope and content review before it issues a renewed exceeding forty years, and may be of an environmental review, rendering it license to inform the agency’s decision renewed upon the expiration of such a speculative venture and a snapshot on on license renewal. The commenter did period.’’ Since the license renewal the recent past rather than a rigorous not provide information showing that period consists of the period of and objective assessment of what is the rule precludes the NRC from extended operation (20 years) and any reasonably foreseeable. considering reasonable alternatives time remaining on the original license A commenter stated that it is well within the licensing action timeframe. (up to 20 years per 10 CFR 54.17(c)), the established that the scope of the Comment 7.3 license renewal period is consistent environmental review required in with the 40-year license period allowed connection with license renewal is The petition stated that an application under the AEA. Furthermore, the appropriately limited and that the for relicensing submitted 20 years in Commission considered the timing of an limited scope of review has been advance of the current license LRA in the promulgation of the license consistently upheld. The NRC’s expiration date cannot reasonably be renewal rule. As is discussed in more regulations do require a discussion of determined to be sufficiently complete detail in response to Issue 1, the alternatives by both the applicant (in the nor reasonably be represented to Commission found that a 20-year environmental report) and the NRC staff rigorously explore and objectively application timeframe provided a (in the SEIS) in connection with evaluate all reasonable alternatives. reasonable and flexible period for renewal applications. The commenter A commenter argued that it is not licensees to perform informed business argued that issuance of a renewed reasonable to consider that an planning. The commenter provided no license and initiation of the period of environmental report based on data that information demonstrating that the NRC extended operation under the renewed is 20 years old or older can solely established the 20-year application license are part of the same Federal constitute the foundation for an timeframe to rig the purpose or need of action; there is no additional connected adequately studied EIS prepared by the NEPA. action. Therefore, the potential NRC. As discussed in Issue 7, the environmental impacts of the proposed This in fact constitutes a violation of commenter argued that the timing of license renewal are considered together, NEPA principles, as the harm that LRAs affects the implementation of not piecemeal. Another commenter NEPA seeks to prevent is complete NEPA with regard to the consideration stated that, with regard to Vermont when the agency makes a decision of alternatives. The extent of the Yankee, the Supreme Court made clear without sufficiently considering environmental review is not directly that the concept of alternatives under information that NEPA requires be limited by the timing of the application NEPA must be bounded by some notion placed before the decision-maker and submittal, nor does the NRC staff limit of feasibility. As a result, agencies are the public. An application that is filed its analysis to the information provided not required to consider alternatives 20 years in advance of a 2030 expiration in the environmental report. The NRC that are remote and speculative. Instead, date relies on conclusions made 34 applies the rule of reason in conducting agencies may deal with circumstances years before the requested action and its environmental review under NEPA, as they exist and are likely to exist. stretches the veracity and validity of the which may limit the extent of an While there will always be more data environmental report to an amassing of environmental review to only those that could be gathered, agencies must outdated and meaningless details for the environmental impacts that are have some discretion to draw the line agency’s preparation of an EIS. For reasonably foreseeable. This means that, and move forward with decision- example, in the Seabrook Unit 1 while the environmental review making. The Commission’s decision to relicense application, filed in 2010, the considers various impacts and allow licensees to file LRAs in preponderance of expert documentation alternatives, the NRC is not required to accordance with 10 CFR 54.17(c) and about renewable alternatives is gathered analyze every possible future perform its environmental review from 2008, effectively freezing the speculative development. The NRC within that timeframe is a valid exercise environmental evaluation for the region must complete its NEPA review before of this discretion. of interest 22 years from the requested the issuance of a renewed license to Federal action. It is disingenuous to NRC Response inform the agency’s decision on license characterize that data 22 to 34 years out renewal. The commenter did not As discussed in response to Issue 7, from the requested action as sufficiently provide information showing that the the extent of the environmental review complete, as NEPA is established to rule precludes the NRC from is not directly limited by the timing of require. NextEra relies upon the 20-year considering reasonable alternatives the application submittal, nor does the advance provision in 10 CFR 54.17(c) to within the licensing action timeframe. NRC staff limit its analysis to the truncate its alternative evaluation and information provided in the justify the omission of more recent Comment 7.2 environmental report. However, the documents from experts and expert A commenter stated that setting the NRC does apply the rule of reason in agencies from 2009 and 2010. maximum advance date for the conducting its environmental review One commenter stated that, as a submission of a relicensing application under NEPA, which may limit the matter of administrative law, agencies at 20 years in effect needlessly restricts extent of an environmental review to have broad discretion to formulate their the substance of the environmental only those environmental impacts that own procedures, and the NRC’s review by fixing its analysis are reasonably foreseeable. This means authority in this respect has been unreasonably and prematurely from an that, while the environmental review termed particularly great. Similarly, application’s expiration date and the considers various impacts and although an agency may alter its rules beginning of impact from the proposed alternatives, the NRC is not required to in light of its accumulated experience in Federal action. By setting the analyze every possible future or administering them, an agency must application’s environmental review at a speculative development, particularly offer a reasoned explanation for the maximum of 20 years in advance of the those that cannot be reasonably assessed change. The petitioners’ request for impacts from the Federal action, the to inform its decision-making process. relief provides no such reasonable basis

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28327

for overturning the NRC’s current environmental report along with the its analysis to the information provided license renewal framework. Moreover, application. The environmental report, in the environmental report. The NRC in the context of environmental therefore, does not need to rely on data staff undertakes an independent regulations, the Supreme Court has that is 20 years old. consideration of environmental impacts made clear that NEPA does not require The comment that an environmental and documents that consideration in its agencies to adopt any particular internal report forms the sole basis for a license EIS. Furthermore, there is no guarantee decision-making structure and that the renewal EIS, or that alternatives that a shorter application timeframe only procedural requirements imposed proffered by the applicant in its would increase the number of by NEPA are those stated in the plain environmental report are the only alternatives analyzed in an language of the Act. Therefore, the Court alternatives the NRC staff considers, is environmental report. Some alternatives found that NEPA cannot serve as the also incorrect. The NRC staff undertakes may need more than 10 years of lead basis for a substantial revision of the an independent consideration of time for design and construction. carefully constructed procedural environmental impacts and documents Therefore, allowing applicants to apply specifications of the Administrative its consideration in the EIS. for license renewal more than 10 years Procedure Act. These comments do not provide in advance of a license’s expiration date Another commenter stated that NEPA sufficient justification for the NRC to does not unreasonably foreclose does not require agencies to adopt any revise the rule. alternatives, as suggested by the particular internal decision-making Comment 7.4 petitioners and one commenter. structure. In fact, the Commission has The comments related to Comment broad discretion to structure its NEPA A commenter provided, as an example, that on June 1, 2010, NextEra Category 7 do not provide a justification inquiries. As the Supreme Court made for the NRC to revise the rule. clear in Vermont Yankee over 30 years submitted its application for relicensing Comment Category 8: General ago, NEPA does not provide any basis the Seabrook nuclear power plants on comments. for adding procedural requirements the New Hampshire seacoast 20 years in beyond the carefully constructed advance of its current 40-year operating Comment 8.1 procedural specifications imposed by license expiration date, identified as A commenter argued that, to amend the Administrative Procedure Act. In March 15, 2030. Given that the the regulations to a 10-year advance Vermont Yankee, the Court also proposed relicensing period for which time period would lead the way to a explained that the only procedural the proposed Federal action is being safer means of producing energy. Two requirements imposed by NEPA are taken is for the period 2030–2050, commenters argued that the petitioners those stated in the plain language of the Chapter 7 of the Seabrook License have presented no new information that Act. The Commission has decided that Renewal Environmental Report provides contradicts the agency positions its safety review of LRAs under the AEA a dated, incomplete, and meaningless reflected in the existing license renewal can be initiated with 20 years remaining assessment of energy alternatives and is on the current license, and NEPA biased towards the requested relicensing rule or provides sufficient cause to cannot compel a different procedural action. modify those positions. timetable. Accordingly, the petitioners’ Another commenter stated that, One of the commenters further stated claim that NEPA requires the NRC to although the petitioners would have one that the petition fails to provide amend 10 CFR 54.17(c) to allow for a believe that a 20-year renewal window adequate legal, factual, or policy-based later analysis of alternatives finds no somehow circumvents or frustrates support for the assertions it makes or support in law. NEPA, it does no such thing. The the relief it seeks. By raising issues the commenter stated that this assertion is Commission has already considered in NRC Response predicated on the misguided belief that promulgating its license renewal rules, The NRC disagrees that the somehow there will be dramatic the petition ignores the carefully crafted environmental reports submitted in changes in how solar, wind, or other regulatory framework, including 10 CFR support of LRAs must rely on data that renewables penetrate the grid. The 54.17(c), that supports license renewal. are 20 years old or older, and the NRC commenter watched the California Other aspects of the petition address disagrees that environmental report data Altamont wind farm in dismay every topics that are managed by the forms the sole foundation for EISs. As day. Consumers and energy regulators Commission’s ongoing regulatory discussed in response to Issue 2, the need certainty in the near-, mid-, and oversight processes and regulations, ‘‘proposed action’’ before the NRC for long-term horizon. Early nuclear power which should not be addressed through license renewal is the ‘‘issuance’’ of a plant license renewal injects more changes to the license renewal rules. new and superseding license that allows certainty, not less, in that process. The NRC Response operations for up to 40 years (any commenter concluded that the remaining time on the initial license petitioners convey no demonstrable These particular comments express plus up to 20 years of extended safety, security, or environmental general support or opposition to the operation), which is also discussed in concerns about Seabrook. petition requests. The comments do not response to Issue 2. Therefore, NEPA provide additional analysis or data that requires the NRC to perform and NRC Response would justify revising the rule. complete an environmental review to Section III.C of this document Comment 8.2 support the agency’s decision-making contains the NRC’s responses to issues process with respect to issuance of the related to the Seabrook LRA. One A commenter concluded that the NRC renewed license. Furthermore, as commenter raised several concerns and the industry would significantly described in response to Issue 7, the about alternatives in the environmental benefit by avoiding subsequent license renewal regulation is consistent report or the NRC staff’s EIS. As stated adjudicatory challenges if licensees with the 40-year license term allowed in response to Issue 7, the extent of the were required to wait to apply for under the AEA. The environmental environmental review is not directly license renewal no more than 10 years report is submitted to support an LRA, limited by the timing of the application in advance of the license expiration, and the NRC reviews that submittal, nor does the NRC staff limit when trends, studies, agreements, and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28328 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

commercial ventures were more appreciates the concerns raised. For the support LRAs to be in conflict with distinctly and discretely developed. reasons described in Sections II and III NEPA. The license renewal of this document, the NRC is denying NRC Response environmental review and SEIS the petition under 10 CFR 2.803. The consider reasonably foreseeable The Commission established the 20- petitioners did not present any new environmental impacts and alternatives year timeframe to balance the need to information that would contradict in accordance with the provisions of 10 collect sufficient operating history data positions taken by the Commission CFR part 51. The rule change requested to support an LRA with the needs of a when it established the license renewal by the petitioners would not affect the utility to plan for the replacement of rule, nor did the petitioners provide process the NRC uses to implement retired nuclear plants in the case of an new, significant information to NEPA. The petitioners do not provide unsuccessful LRA. demonstrate that sufficient reason exists new information or analysis to The rule, allowing a license period of to modify the current regulations. 40 years, is in accordance with the AEA, demonstrate that the regulations in 10 The Commission previously which provides for a license period of CFR part 51 are insufficient for the NRC established the earliest date for up to 40 years (see Section 103(c) of the to comply with the requirements of submission of LRAs after soliciting and AEA). The rule is not intended to limit NEPA. considering extensive comments during the number of adjudicatory challenges. the 1991 rulemaking for 10 CFR For these reasons, the NRC denies the Rather, the NRC regulations are 54.17(c). In its 1991 Statements of petitioners’ requests for the NRC to designed to provide appropriate Consideration, the Commission modify its requirements related to the opportunities for hearings to affected determined that a 20-year timeframe LRA period, to suspend license renewal parties. Reducing the number of reviews, and to apply a 10-year potential adjudicatory challenges is not was reasonable for licensees to collect sufficient operating history and also application timeframe to ongoing and sufficient justification to revise the future LRAs. regulation. sufficient for a utility to plan for The comments related to Comment replacement of retired nuclear plants in VI. Availability of Documents Category 8 do not provide a sufficient the case of an unsuccessful LRA. The justification for the Commission to petition did not provide new The following table provides revise the rule. information to challenge this basis. information on how to access the Finally, the renewed license period of documents referenced in this document. V. Determination of Petition 40 years is consistent with the AEA, and For more information on accessing The NRC has reviewed the petition 10 CFR 54.17(c) does not cause ADAMS, see the ADDRESSES section of and the public comments and environmental reviews submitted to this document.

ADAMS acces- sion No./Federal Date Document Register Citation

December 13, 1991 ...... Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal ...... 56 FR 64943 September 27, 2010 ...... Earth Day Commitment/Friends of the Coast, Beyond Nuclear, Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, 75 FR 59158 C–10 Research and Education Foundation, Pilgrim Watch, and New England Coalition; No- tice of Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking. January 24, 2011 ...... Commission Memorandum and Order (CLI–11–01), In the Matter of Petition for Rulemaking to ML110250087 Amend 10 CFR § 54.17(c). January 31, 2012 ...... Public Comment Matrix for Petition for Rulemaking 54–6, License Renewal ...... ML113540177

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking components, and subsequent loss of of May 2012. (NPRM). control of the helicopter. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. DATES: We must receive comments on Annette L. Vietti-Cook, SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new this proposed AD by July 13, 2012. Secretary of the Commission. airworthiness directive (AD) for ADDRESSES: You may send comments by [FR Doc. 2012–11418 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) any of the following methods: BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Model S–92A helicopters, which • Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to requires inspecting the tail rotor (T/R) http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the pylon for a loose or missing fastener, a online instructions for sending your DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION crack, damage, or corrosion and adding comments electronically. an internal doubler to the aft shear deck • Fax: 202–493–2251. Federal Aviation Administration tunnel assembly. This proposed AD is • Mail: Send comments to the U.S. prompted by the discovery of cracks in Department of Transportation, Docket 14 CFR Part 39 T/R pylons. The proposed actions are Operations, M–30, West Building [Docket No. FAA–2012–0216; Directorate intended to detect a loose or missing Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 Identifier 2010–SW–025–AD] fastener, a crack, damage, or corrosion New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, on the T/R pylon and, if present, to DC 20590–0001. RIN 2120–AA64 repair the T/R Pylon and install a • Hand Delivery: Deliver to the Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky doubler on the aft shear deck tunnel ‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and Aircraft Corporation Helicopters assembly or to replace the T/R pylon 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except and install the doubler on the aft shear Federal holidays. AGENCY: Federal Aviation deck tunnel assembly to prevent failure Examining the AD Docket: You may Administration (FAA), DOT. of the T/R pylon or other T/R examine the AD docket on the Internet

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28329

at http://www.regulations.gov or in Discussion aft shear deck tunnel assembly; or person at the Docket Operations Office We propose to adopt a new AD for replacing the T/R pylon, P/N 92000– between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday Sikorsky Model S–92A helicopters with 06102–041, with an airworthy T/R through Friday, except Federal holidays. a T/R pylon, part number (P/N) 92000– pylon, P/N 92070–20058–042, and The AD docket contains this proposed 06102–041. This proposal is prompted installing a doubler, P/N 92070–20087– AD, the economic evaluation, any by the discovery of cracks in the 101, on the aft shear deck tunnel comments received, and other forward lower spar region of T/R pylons assembly. If there is no crack in the information. The street address for the installed on Sikorsky T/R pylon, this proposed AD would Docket Operations Office (telephone Model S–92A helicopters. The T/R require replacing the T/R pylon, P/N 800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES pylon supports the T/R and the 92000–06102–041, with an airworthy section. Comments will be available in horizontal stabilizer, and a crack in a T/R pylon, P/N 92070–20058–042, and the AD docket shortly after receipt. T/R pylon could alter vibration adding a doubler, P/N 92070–20087– For service information identified in characteristics of the T/R pylon, which 101, on the aft shear deck tunnel this proposed AD, contact Sikorsky could adversely affect fatigue lives of assembly, according to the following compliance schedule: Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, T/R components. This condition, if not • For a T/R pylon with 3,750 or more Commercial Technical Support, corrected, could result in failure of the T/R pylon or other T/R components and hours TIS, within 12 months; mailstop s581a, 6900 Main Street, • For a T/R pylon with 1,500 through Stratford, CT 06614; telephone (800) subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. 3,749 hours TIS, within 24 months; and 562–4409; email • For a T/R pylon with 1,499 or less [email protected]; or at http:// FAA’s Determination hours TIS, within 36 months. www.sikorsky.com. You may review the We are proposing this AD because we Replacing the T/R pylon, P/N 92000– referenced service information at the evaluated all known relevant 06102–041, with an airworthy T/R FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, information and determined that an pylon, P/N 92070–20058–042, and Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham unsafe condition exists and is likely to installing doubler, P/N 92070–20087– Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, TX 76137. exist or develop on other products of the 101, on the aft shear deck tunnel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: same type design. assembly, would constitute terminating action for the requirements of this AD. Nicholas Faust, Aviation Safety Related Service Information Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Costs of Compliance We have reviewed Sikorsky Alert Office, Engine & Propeller Directorate, We estimate that this proposed AD 12 New England Executive Park, Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 92–53–001, dated June 23, 2008 (ASB No. 92–53– would affect 20 helicopters of U.S. Burlington, MA 01803; telephone (781) 001), and ASB No. 92–53–004B, Registry. We estimate that operators 238–7763; email [email protected]. Revision B, dated June 21, 2011 (ASB may incur the following costs in order SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: No. 92–53–004B). ASB No. 92–53–001 to comply with this AD. It would take specifies for a T/R pylon with more than approximately 1 work-hour per Comments Invited 500 flight-hours a one-time inspection helicopter to inspect and 120 work- We invite you to participate in this of the T/R pylon ‘‘components and hours per helicopter to replace the T/R rulemaking by submitting written structure for obvious damage, cracks, pylon and install the doubler. The comments, data, or views. We also corrosion, and security.’’ ASB No. 92– average labor rate is $85 per work-hour invite comments relating to the 53–004B specifies a one-time and required parts would cost economic, environmental, energy, or replacement of the T/R pylon, P/N approximately $339,080 per helicopter. federalism impacts that might result 92000–06102–041, with T/R pylon, P/N Based on these figures, we estimate the from adopting the proposals in this 92070–20058–042, and installation of a total cost impact of the proposed AD per document. The most helpful comments doubler on the aft shear deck tunnel helicopter to be $356,505, and the total reference a specific portion of the assembly. The ASB specifies a cost on U.S. operators to be $7,130,100, proposal, explain the reason for any replacement schedule based on the T/R assuming 85 inspections per year are recommended change, and include pylon’s hours for specified serial performed on each helicopter and supporting data. To ensure the docket numbered helicopters. assuming replacement of the T/R pylon does not contain duplicate comments, Proposed AD Requirements and installing the doubler on each commenters should send only one copy helicopter. This proposed AD would require According to the Sikorsky service of written comments, or if comments are compliance with specified portions of information, some of the costs of this filed electronically, commenters should the manufacturer’s alert service proposed AD may be covered under submit only one time. bulletins. This proposal would require, warranty thereby reducing the cost We will file in the docket all for helicopters with 500 or more hours impact on affected individuals. We do comments that we receive, as well as a time-in-service (TIS), within 25 hours not control warranty coverage. report summarizing each substantive TIS and thereafter at intervals not to Accordingly, we have included all costs public contact with FAA personnel exceed 10 hours TIS, inspecting the in our cost estimate. concerning this proposed rulemaking. T/R pylon for a crack, damage, Before acting on this proposal, we will corrosion, or loose or missing fasteners. Authority for This Rulemaking consider all comments we receive on or If a crack or an area of damage or Title 49 of the United States Code before the closing date for comments. corrosion is found or if there is a loose specifies the FAA’s authority to issue We will consider comments filed after or missing fastener, before further flight, rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, the comment period has closed if it is this proposed AD would require section 106, describes the authority of possible to do so without incurring repairing the crack, damage, or the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: expense or delay. We may change this corrosion, and replacing any loose or Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more proposal in light of the comments we missing fastener and installing a detail the scope of the Agency’s receive. doubler, P/N 92070–20087–101, on the authority.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28330 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

We are issuing this rulemaking under Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. (2)(ii)(B) of this AD, according to the the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, FAA–2012–0216; Directorate Identifier following: Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 2010–SW–025–AD. (i) For a T/R pylon with 3,750 or more General requirements.’’ Under that (a) Applicability hours TIS, replace and install doubler within 12 months. section, Congress charges the FAA with This AD applies to Sikorsky Aircraft promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S–92A (ii) For a T/R pylon with 1,500 through air commerce by prescribing regulations helicopters, with a tail rotor (T/R) pylon, part 3,749 hours TIS, replace and install doubler for practices, methods, and procedures number (P/N) 92000–06102–041, certificated within 24 months. the Administrator finds necessary for in any category. (iii) For a T/R pylon with 1,499 or less hours TIS, replace and install doubler within safety in air commerce. This regulation (b) Unsafe Condition 36 months. is within the scope of that authority This AD defines the unsafe condition as a because it addresses an unsafe condition (4) Replacing T/R pylon, P/N 92000– loose or missing fastener, a crack, damage, or 06102–041, with T/R pylon, P/N 92070– that is likely to exist or develop on corrosion on the T/R pylon that could result 20058–042, and installing internal tail cone products identified in this rulemaking in failure of the T/R pylon or other T/R action. components, and subsequent loss of control doubler, P/N 92070–20087–101, on the aft of the helicopter. shear deck tunnel assembly, constitutes Regulatory Findings terminating action for the requirements of (c) Compliance We determined that this proposed AD this AD. You are responsible for performing each would not have federalism implications action required by this AD within the (e) Alternative Methods of Compliance under Executive Order 13132. This specified compliance time unless it has (AMOC) proposed AD would not have a already been accomplished prior to that time. (1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft substantial direct effect on the States, on (d) Required Actions Certification Office, FAA, may approve the relationship between the national AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Government and the States, or on the (1) For helicopters with 500 or more hours time-in-service (TIS), within 25 hours TIS Nicholas Faust, Aviation Safety Engineer, distribution of power and Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & responsibilities among the various and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10 hours TIS, inspect each T/R pylon for a Propeller Directorate, 12 New England levels of government. crack, damage, corrosion, or a loose or Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; For the reasons discussed, I certify missing fastener in accordance with the telephone (781) 238–7763; email this proposed regulation: Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph [email protected]. 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 3.A.(4)(a) through paragraph 3.A.(4)(f), and (2) For operations conducted under a Part action’’ under Executive Order 12866; referring to Figure 1 of Sikorsky Alert Service 119 operating certificate or under Part 91, 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the Bulletin (ASB) No. 92–53–001, dated June 23, Subpart K, we suggest that you notify your 2008, except you are not required to contact DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures principal inspector, or lacking a principal (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); Sikorsky Customer Service Engineering per paragraph 3.A.(4)(c)1 of ASB 92–53–001, inspector, the manager of the local flight 3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in dated June 23, 2008. standards district office or certificate holding Alaska to the extent that it justifies (2) If there is a crack, damage, corrosion, district office before operating any aircraft making a regulatory distinction; and or a loose or missing fastener, before further complying with this AD through an AMOC. 4. Will not have a significant flight, either: (f) Additional Information economic impact, positive or negative, (i) If within allowable tolerances, repair on a substantial number of small entities each crack and each area of damage or For service information identified in this under the criteria of the Regulatory corrosion and replace any loose or missing AD, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Flexibility Act. fastener; or Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical (ii) Replace the T/R pylon, (P/N) 92000– We prepared an economic evaluation Support, mailstop s581a, 6900 Main Street, 06102–041, with T/R pylon, P/N 92070– Stratford, CT 06614; telephone (800) 562– of the estimated costs to comply with 20058–042, as follows: 4409; email [email protected]; or at this proposed AD and placed it in the (A) Conduct the Total Indicated Run-out AD docket. procedure on the No. 4 and No. 5 T/R drive http://www.sikorsky.com. You may review shafts and remove the T/R pylon; and this service information at the FAA, Office of List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (B) Install the doubler, P/N 92070–20087– the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 101, as follows: 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, safety, Incorporation by Reference, (1) For helicopters, serial numbers (S/Ns) TX 76137. Safety. 920006 through 920082, on the aft shear deck tunnel assembly, P/N 92204–05103–041 or (g) Subject The Proposed Amendment –045, in accordance with the Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph Code: 5340, Fuselage Main, Attach Fittings. Accordingly, under the authority 3.B.(1) through 3.B.(30) and while referring to delegated to me by the Administrator, Figures 1, 2, and 4 of Sikorsky ASB No. 92– Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 2, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 53–004B, Revision B, dated June 21, 2011 2012. 39 as follows: (92–53–004B). Carlton N. Cochran, (2) For helicopters, S/Ns 920083 through Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 920124, on the aft shear deck tunnel PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS Aircraft Certification Service. DIRECTIVES assembly, P/N 92204–05103–043, in accordance with the Accomplishment [FR Doc. 2012–11475 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 1. The authority citation for part 39 Instructions, paragraph 3.C.(1) through BILLING CODE 4910–13–P continues to read as follows: 3.C.(21) and referring to Figures 3 and 4 of ASB 92–53–004B. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. (3) If there is no crack in the T/R pylon, § 39.13 [Amended] replace T/R pylon, P/N 92000–06102–041, with T/R pylon, P/N 92070–20058–042, and 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding install doubler, P/N 92070–20087–101, on the following new airworthiness the aft shear deck tunnel assembly as directive (AD): specified in paragraphs (2)(ii)(A) through

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28331

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Commission, 888 First Street NE., Federal Energy Regulatory Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– United States Patent and Trademark Commission 6444, Email: Office [email protected]. 18 CFR Part 284 Tony Dobbins (technical issues), Office 37 CFR Parts 1 and 41 [Docket No. RM96–1–037] of Energy Policy and Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory [PTO–C–2011–0007] Standards for Business Practices for Commission, 888 First Street NE., RIN 0651–AC55 Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 6630, Email: [email protected]. CPI Adjustment of Patent Fees for AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Gary D. Cohen (Legal Information), Fiscal Year 2013 Commission, DOE. Office of the General Counsel, Federal ACTION: Request for additional comment. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 AGENCY: United States Patent and First Street NE., Washington, DC Trademark Office, Commerce. SUMMARY: On February 22, 2012, the 20426, Telephone: (202) 502–8321, ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Commission published in the Federal Email: [email protected]. SUMMARY: Register a Notice of Proposed SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Patent and Rulemaking (77 FR 10415) (NOPR) Trademark Office (Office) is proposing proposing to amend its regulations to Request for Additional Comments to adjust certain patent fee amounts for incorporate by reference the latest May 8, 2012 fiscal year 2013 to reflect fluctuations in version (Version 2.0) of business the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The practice standards adopted by the On February 16, 2012, the patent statute provides for the annual Wholesale Gas Quadrant of the North Commission issued a Notice of CPI adjustment of patent fees set by American Energy Standards Board Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) 1 statute to recover the higher costs (NAESB) applicable to natural gas proposing to amend its regulations at 18 associated with doing business as pipelines. The Commission, however, CFR 284.12 to incorporate by reference reflected by the CPI. the latest version (Version 2.0) of did not propose to adopt two standards DATES: Written comments must be business practice standards adopted by it found inconsistent with its received on or before June 13, 2012. No the Wholesale Gas Quadrant of the regulations. Among the comments filed public hearing will be held. with the Commission were comments North American Energy Standards ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, from NAESB explaining that its Board (NAESB) applicable to natural gas pipelines. The Commission, however, identified by RIN number RIN 0651– Wholesale Gas Quadrant Executive AC55, by any of the following methods: Committee was in the process of voting did not propose to adopt two standards • it found inconsistent with its Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// on two standards to rectify the www.regulations.gov. Follow the inconsistency noted in the NOPR by the regulations. Among the comments filed with the instructions for submitting comments. Commission. On May 4, 2012, NAESB • Commission in this proceeding were Email: [email protected]. filed a status report informing the Include RIN number RIN 0651–AC55 in Commission that it had finalized the comments from NAESB explaining that NAESB’s Wholesale Gas Quadrant the subject line of the message. two corrections. • Fax: (571) 273–8698, marked to the The Commission is providing Executive Committee was in the process attention of Gilda Lee. interested parties an opportunity to file of voting on minor corrections to • Mail: Director of the United States comments with respect to the two NAESB WGQ Standard Nos. 0.3.19 and Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box corrected standards adopted by NAESB 0.3.21 to rectify the inconsistency noted 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450, and whether the Commission should in the NOPR by the Commission. On marked to the attention of Gilda Lee. incorporate these revised standards into May 4, 2012, NAESB filed a status Instructions: All submissions received its regulations. report informing the Commission that it had finalized the two corrections. must include the agency name and DATES: Comments are due June 4, 2012. The Commission is providing Regulatory Information Number (RIN) ADDRESSES: You may submit reply interested parties an opportunity to file for this proposed rulemaking. comments, identified by Docket No. comments with respect to the two The comments will be available for RM96–1–037, by any of the following corrected standards adopted by NAESB public inspection at the Office of the methods: Chief Financial Officer, currently • and whether the Commission should Agency Web Site: http:// incorporate the version of the standards located in Madison West, Tenth Floor, www.ferc.gov. Documents created that reflects these corrections into its 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. electronically using word processing regulations. Comments also will be available for software should be filed in native By this notice, additional comments viewing via the Office’s Internet Web applications or print-to-PDF format and should be filed on or before June 4, site (http://www.uspto.gov). Because not in a scanned format. 2012. comments will be made available for • Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters public inspection, information that the Dated: May 8, 2012. unable to file comments electronically submitter does not desire to make must mail or hand deliver an original of Kimberly D. Bose, public, such as an address or phone their comments to: Federal Energy Secretary. number, should not be included in the Regulatory Commission, Office of the [FR Doc. 2012–11569 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] comments. Secretary, 888 First Street NE., BILLING CODE 6717–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Washington, DC 20426. Gilda Lee by email at FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, notice of proposed [email protected], by telephone at Adam Bednarczyk (technical issues), rulemaking, 77 FR 10415 (Feb. 22, 2012), FERC (571) 272–8698, or by fax at (571) 273– Office of Energy Market Regulation, Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,686 (Feb. 16, 2012). 8698.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:33 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28332 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Public Law 111–317, 124 Stat. 3454 adequately funded USPTO will 41(f) of Title 35 of the United States (2010); Public Law 111–290, 124 Stat. optimize the administration of the U.S. Code provides the USPTO with the 3063 (2010); Public Law 111–242, 124 intellectual property system, and authority to adjust certain statutory Stat. 2607 (2010); Public Law 111–224, thereby move innovation to the patent fees to reflect fluctuations during 124 Stat. 2385 (2010); Public Law 111– marketplace more quickly, creating and the preceding twelve months in the 117, 123 Stat. 3034 (2009); Public Law sustaining U.S. jobs and enhancing the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The 111–8, 123 Stat. 524 (2009); Public Law health and living standards of purpose of this provision is to allow the 111–6, 123 Stat. 522 (2009); Public Law Americans. USPTO to recover higher costs of 111–5, 123 Stat. 115 (2009); Public Law Fee Adjustment Level: The USPTO providing services as reflected by the 110–329, 122 Stat. 3574 (2008); Public proposes that the patent statutory fees CPI. The USPTO proposes to adjust Law 110–161, 121 Stat. 1844 (2007); established by 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) be certain patent fees in accordance with Public Law 110–149, 121 Stat. 1819 adjusted to reflect the most recent 35 U.S.C. 41(f), as amended by the (2007); Public Law 110–137, 121 Stat. fluctuations occurring during the Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub. 1454 (2007); Public Law 110–116, 121 twelve-month period prior to L. 108–447, 118 Stat. 2809 (2004)) and Stat. 1295 (2007); Public Law 110–92, publication of the final rule the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act 121 Stat. 989 (2007); Public Law 110–5, implementing this CPI adjustment, as (Pub. L. 112–29). The fee increase helps 121 Stat. 8 (2007); Public Law 109–383, measured by the Consumer Price Index the USPTO to meet its strategic goals 120 Stat. 2678 (2006); Public Law 109– for All Urban Consumers (CPI–U). The and maintain effective and efficient 369, 120 Stat. 2642 (2006); and Public Office of Management and Budget operation of the patent system. This Law 109–289, 120 Stat. 1257 (2006). The (OMB) has advised that in calculating notice sets forth which fees will be Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, these fluctuations, the USPTO should adjusted and how the adjustment will enacted September 16, 2011, codified use CPI–U data as determined by the be calculated based on the current the patent and trademark fee provisions Secretary of Labor, which is found at fluctuation in the CPI over the twelve of the fiscal year 2005 Consolidated http://www.bls.gov/cpi/. months preceding this notice. The Appropriations Act. In accordance with the above actual adjustment will be calculated Section 11 of the Leahy-Smith description of the statutory fee based on the fluctuation in the CPI over America Invents Act provides for a adjustment, the USPTO proposes to the twelve months preceding the date surcharge of fifteen percent, rounded by adjust patent statutory fee amounts on which the final rule is published. standard arithmetic rules, on all fees based on the most recent annual charged or authorized by 35 U.S.C. increase in the CPI–U, as reported by Background 41(a), (b), and (d)(1), as well as by 35 the Secretary of Labor, at the time the Statutory Provisions: As background U.S.C. 132(b). Section 11 of the Act final rule implementing this CPI concerning the patent fee structure, provides that this fifteen percent adjustment is published. Proposed patent fees are set by or under the surcharge is effective ten days after the adjusted fee amounts are not included authority provided in 35 U.S.C. 41, 119, date of enactment (i.e., September 26, in this proposed rule in order to avoid 120, 132(b), 156, 157(a), 255, 302, 311, 2011). Section 11 also provides that this confusion that could arise from using 376, section 532(a)(2) of the Uruguay fifteen percent surcharge shall projected increases in the proposed rule Round Agreements Act (URAA) (Pub. L. terminate, with respect to a fee to which that may not end up matching actual 103–465, § 532(a)(2), 108 Stat. 4809, the surcharge applies, on the effective increases at the time of the final rule. 4985 (1994)), and section 4506 of the date of the setting or adjustment of that Annual increases to the CPI–U are American Inventors Protection Act of fee pursuant to the exercise of the published monthly, and before the final 1999 (AIPA) (Pub. L. 106–113, 113 Stat. authority under section 10 of the Act for fee amounts are published, the fee 1501, 1501A–565 (1999)). For fees paid the first time with respect to that fee. amounts may be adjusted based on under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) and Section 10 fee-setting will be actual fluctuations in the CPI–U. 132(b), independent inventors, small implemented in a future separate Adjusted patent statutory fee amounts business concerns, and nonprofit rulemaking. based on the most recent annual organizations who meet the As for this rulemaking, Section 41(f) increase in the CPI–U, as reported by requirements of 35 U.S.C. 41(h)(1) are of title 35, United States Code, provides the Secretary of Labor, will be published entitled to a fifty-percent reduction. that fees established under 35 U.S.C. in a final rules notice. The fiscal year 2005 Consolidated 41(a) and (b) may be adjusted on The fee amounts will be rounded by Appropriations Act (section 801 of October 1, 1992, and every year applying standard arithmetic rules so Division B) provided that 35 U.S.C. thereafter, to reflect fluctuations in the that the amounts rounded will be 41(a), (b), and (d) shall be administered Consumer Price Index over the previous convenient to the user. Fees for other in a manner that revises patent twelve months. If the annual change in than a small entity of $100 or more will application fees (35 U.S.C. 41(a)) and CPI is one percent or less, no fee be rounded to the nearest $10. Fees of patent maintenance fees (35 U.S.C. adjustment for CPI fluctuations will be less than $100 will be rounded to an 41(b)), and provides for a separate filing pursued. even number so that any comparable fee (35 U.S.C. 41(a)), search fee (35 The USPTO proposes that this CPI small entity fee will be a whole number. U.S.C. 41(d)(1)), and examination fee increase be implemented on October 1, General Procedures: Any fee amount (35 U.S.C. 41(a)(3)) during fiscal years 2012. This interim increase in fees is adjusted by the final rule that is paid on 2005 and 2006. See Pub. L. 108–447, necessary to allow the USPTO to meet or after the effective date of the fee 118 Stat. 2809, 2924–30 (2004). The its strategic goals within the time frame adjustment enacted by the final rule Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, outlined in the FY 2013 President’s would be subject to the new fees then extended the patent and trademark fee Budget. The interim fee increase is a in effect. The amount of the fee to be provisions of the fiscal year 2005 bridge to provide resources until the paid for a given item will be determined Consolidated Appropriations Act USPTO exercises its fee-setting by the time of filing of that item with through September 30, 2011. See Public authority and develops a new fee the Office. The time of filing will be Law 112–4, 125 Stat. 6 (2011); Public structure that will provide sufficient determined either according to the date Law 111–322, 124 Stat. 3518 (2010); financial resources in the long term. An of receipt in the Office (37 CFR 1.6) or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28333

the date reflected on a proper Certificate fees, a discussion of specific sections is proposed, would adjust fees established of Mailing or Transmission, where such set forth below. therein to reflect fluctuations in the a certificate is authorized under 37 CFR Discussion of Specific Rules CPI–U. See Table 1. 1.8. Use of a Certificate of Mailing or 37 CFR 1.492 National stage fees: Transmission is not authorized for items 37 CFR 1.16 National application Section 1.492, paragraphs (a), (c)(2), (d) that are specifically excluded from the filing, and examination fees: Section through (f) and (j), if revised as provisions of 37 CFR 1.8. Items for 1.16, paragraphs (a) through (e), (h) which a Certificate of Mailing or through (j) and (o) through (s), if revised proposed, would adjust fees established Transmission under 37 CFR 1.8 is not as proposed, would adjust fees therein to reflect fluctuations in the authorized include, for example, filing established therein to reflect CPI–U. See Table 1. of national and international fluctuations in the CPI–U. See Table 1. 37 CFR 41.20 Fees: Section 41.20, applications for patents. See 37 CFR 37 CFR 1.17 Patent application and paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3), if 1.8(a)(2). reexamination processing fees: Section revised as proposed, would adjust fees Patent-related correspondence 1.17, paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5), (l), established therein to reflect delivered by the ‘‘Express Mail Post and (m), if revised as proposed, would fluctuations in the CPI–U. See Table 1. Office to Addressee’’ service of the adjust fees established therein to reflect United States Postal Service (USPS) is fluctuations in the CPI–U. See Table 1. Example of Fee Amount Adjustments: considered filed or received in the 37 CFR 1.18 Patent post allowance Adjusted patent statutory fee amounts USPTO on the date of deposit with the (including issue) fees: Section 1.18, based on the most recent annual USPS. See 37 CFR 1.10(a)(1). The date paragraphs (a) through (c), if revised as increase in the CPI–U, as reported by of deposit with the USPS is shown by proposed, would adjust fees established the Secretary of Labor, will be published the ‘‘date-in’’ on the ‘‘Express Mail’’ therein to reflect fluctuations in the in the final rule implementing this CPI mailing label or other official USPS CPI–U. See Table 1. adjustment. Table 1 provides examples notation. 37 CFR 1.20 Post issuance fees: of possible fee adjustments based on the To ensure clarity in the Section 1.20, paragraphs (c)(3)–(c)(4), February 2011 to February 2012 annual implementation of the proposed new and (d) through (g), if revised as CPI–U increase of 2.9%.

TABLE 1—HYPOTHETICAL FEE ADJUSTMENT CALCULATIONS BASED ON CPI–U ADJUSTMENT OF 2.9%

Hypothetical fee 37 CFR Fee title Current fee amount Hypothetical fee amount (2.9% increase) adjustment

1.16(a)(1) ...... Filing of Utility Patent Application (on or after 12/8/2004) $380 ...... $390 ...... $10. Small Entity (SE) SE $195 ...... SE $5. $190. 1.16(a)(1) ...... Filing of Utility Patent Application (electronic filing for $95 ...... $98 ...... $3. small entities) (on or after 12/8/2004). 1.16(b)(1) ...... Filing of Design Patent Application (on or after 12/8/ $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. 2004). SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(b)(1) ...... Filing of Design Patent Application (Continued Prosecu- $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. tion Application) (on or after 12/8/2004). SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(c)(1) ...... Filing of Plant Patent Application (on or after 12/8/2004) $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(d) ...... Provisional Application Filing ...... $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(e)(1) ...... Filing of Reissue Patent Application (on or after 12/8/ $380 ...... $390 ...... $10. 2004). SE $190 ...... SE $195 ...... SE $5. 1.16(e)(1) ...... Filing of Reissue Patent Application (CPA) (on or after $380 ...... $390 ...... $10. 12/8/2004). SE $190 ...... SE $195 ...... SE $5. 1.16(h) ...... Independent Claims in Excess of Three ...... $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(h) ...... Reissue Independent Claims in Excess of Three ...... $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(i) ...... Claims in Excess of Twenty ...... $60 ...... $62 ...... $2. SE $30 ...... SE $31 ...... SE $1. 1.16(i) ...... Reissue Total Claims in Excess of Twenty ...... $60 ...... $62 ...... $2. SE $30 ...... SE $31 ...... SE $1. 1.16(j) ...... Multiple Dependent Claims ...... $450 ...... $460 ...... $10. SE $225 ...... SE $230 ...... SE $5. 1.16(o) ...... Utility Patent Examination ...... $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.16(p) ...... Design Patent Examination ...... $160 ...... $160 ...... $0. SE $80 ...... SE $80 ...... SE $0. 1.16(q) ...... Plant Patent Examination ...... $200 ...... $210 ...... $10. SE $100 ...... SE $105 ...... SE $5. 1.16(r) ...... Reissue Patent Examination ...... $750 ...... $770 ...... $20. SE $375 ...... SE $385 ...... SE $10. 1.16(s) ...... Utility Application Size Fee—For each additional 50 $310 ...... $320 ...... $10. sheets that exceeds 100 sheets. SE $155 ...... SE $160 ...... SE $5. 1.16(s) ...... Design Application Size Fee—For each additional 50 $310 ...... $320 ...... $10. sheets that exceeds 100 sheets. SE $155 ...... SE $160 ...... SE $5.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28334 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—HYPOTHETICAL FEE ADJUSTMENT CALCULATIONS BASED ON CPI–U ADJUSTMENT OF 2.9%—Continued

Hypothetical fee 37 CFR Fee title Current fee amount Hypothetical fee amount (2.9% increase) adjustment

1.16(s) ...... Plant Application Size Fee—For each additional 50 $310 ...... $320 ...... $10. sheets that exceeds 100 sheets. SE $155 ...... SE $160 ...... SE $5. 1.16(s) ...... Reissue Application Size Fee—For each additional 50 $310 ...... $320 ...... $10. sheets that exceeds 100 sheets. SE $155 ...... SE $160 ...... SE $5. 1.16(s) ...... Provisional Application Size Fee—For each additional 50 $310 ...... $320 ...... $10. sheets that exceeds 100 sheets. SE $155 ...... SE $160 ...... SE $5. 1.17(a)(1) ...... Extension for Response within First Month ...... $150 ...... $150 ...... $0. SE $75 ...... SE $75 ...... SE $0. 1.17(a)(2) ...... Extension for Response within Second Month ...... $560 ...... $580 ...... $20. SE $280 ...... SE $290 ...... SE $10. 1.17(a)(3) ...... Extension for Response within Third Month ...... $1,270 ...... $1,310 ...... $40. SE $635 ...... SE $655 ...... SE $20. 1.17(a)(4) ...... Extension for Response within Fourth Month ...... $1,980 ...... $2,040 ...... $60. SE $990 ...... SE $1,020 ...... SE $30. 1.17(a)(5) ...... Extension for Response within Fifth Month ...... $2,690 ...... $2,770 ...... $80. SE $1,345 ...... SE $1,385 ...... SE $40. 1.17(l) ...... Petition to Revive Unavoidably Abandoned Application ... $620 ...... $640 ...... $20. SE $310 ...... SE $320 ...... SE $10. 1.17(m) ...... Petition to Revive Unintentionally Abandoned Application $1,860 ...... $1,910 ...... $50. SE $930 ...... SE $955 ...... SE $25. 1.18(a) ...... Utility Issue ...... $1,740 ...... $1,790 ...... $50. SE $870 ...... SE $895 ...... SE $25. 1.18(a) ...... Reissue Issue ...... $1,740 ...... $1,790 ...... $50. SE $870 ...... SE $895 ...... SE $25. 1.18(b) ...... Design Issue ...... $990 ...... $1,020 ...... $30. SE $495 ...... SE $510 ...... SE $15. 1.18(c) ...... Plant Issue ...... $1,370 ...... $1,410 ...... $40. SE $685 ...... SE $705 ...... SE $20. 1.20(c)(3) ...... Reexamination Independent Claims in Excess of Three .. $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.20(c)(4) ...... Reexamination Total Claims in Excess of Twenty ...... $60 ...... $62 ...... $2. SE $30 ...... SE $31 ...... SE $1. 1.20(d) ...... Statutory Disclaimer ...... $160 ...... $160 ...... $0. SE $80 ...... SE $80 ...... SE $0. 1.20(e) ...... First Stage Maintenance ...... $1,130 ...... $1,160 ...... $30. SE $565 ...... SE $580 ...... SE $15. 1.20(f) ...... Second Stage Maintenance ...... $2,850 ...... $2,930 ...... $80. SE $1,425 ...... SE $1,465 ...... SE $40. 1.20(g) ...... Third Stage Maintenance ...... $4,730 ...... $4,870 ...... $140. SE $2,365 ...... SE $2,435 ...... SE $70. 1.492(a) ...... Filing of PCT National Stage Application ...... $380 ...... $390 ...... $10. SE $190 ...... SE $195 ...... SE $5. 1.492(c)(2) ...... PCT National Stage Examination—All Other Situations ... $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.492(d) ...... Independent Claims in Excess of Three ...... $250 ...... $260 ...... $10. SE $125 ...... SE $130 ...... SE $5. 1.492(e) ...... Total Claims in Excess of Twenty ...... $60 ...... $62 ...... $2. SE $30 ...... SE $31 ...... SE $1. 1.492(f) ...... Multiple Dependent Claims ...... $450 ...... $460 ...... $10. SE $225 ...... SE $230 ...... SE $5. 1.492(j) ...... PCT National Stage Application Size Fee ...... $310 ...... $320 ...... $10. SE $155 ...... SE $160 ...... SE $5. 41.20(b)(1) ...... Notice of Appeal ...... $620 ...... $640 ...... $20. SE $310 ...... SE $320 ...... SE $10. 41.20(b)(2) ...... Filing a Brief in Support of an Appeal ...... $620 ...... $640 ...... $20. SE $310 ...... SE $320 ...... SE $10. 41.20(b)(3) ...... Request for Oral Hearing ...... $1,240 ...... $1,280 ...... $40. SE $620 ...... SE $640 ...... SE $20.

Rulemaking Considerations funding for effective operations. The 2. Succinct statement of the objectives patent fee CPI adjustment under 35 of, and legal basis for, the proposed A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis U.S.C. 41(f) is a routine adjustment that rules: Patent fees are set by or under the 1. Description of the reasons that has generally occurred on an annual authority provided in 35 U.S.C. 41, 119, action by the agency is being basis when necessary to recover the 120, 132(b), 156, 157(a), 255, 302, 311, considered: The USPTO is proposing to higher costs of USPTO operations that 376, section 532(a)(2) of the URAA, and adjust the patent fees set under 35 occur due to the increase in the price of 4506 of the AIPA. The objective of the U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) to ensure proper products and services. proposed change is to adjust patent fees

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28335

set under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) as an which would not qualify as a non-profit due to increases in the price of products annual, routine step in order to recover organization or a small business concern and services. This CPI adjustment helps the higher costs of USPTO operations as under this definition. See Business Size the Office maintain effective operations reflected by the CPI. 35 U.S.C. 41(f) Standard for Purposes of United States and decrease patent pendency levels. provides that fees established under 35 Patent and Trademark Office Regulatory 6. Identification, to the extent U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) may be adjusted Flexibility Analysis for Patent-Related practicable, of all relevant Federal rules every year to reflect fluctuations in the Regulations, 71 FR at 67112 (November which may duplicate, overlap or conflict CPI over the previous twelve months. 20, 2006), 1313 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office at with the proposed rules: The USPTO is 3. Description and estimate of the 63 (December 12, 2006). the sole agency of the United States number of affected small entities: The The changes in this proposed rule Government responsible for Small Business Administration (SBA) will apply to any small entity that files administering the provisions of title 35, small business size standards applicable a patent application, or has a pending United States Code, pertaining to to most analyses conducted to comply patent application or unexpired patent. examination and granting patents. with the Regulatory Flexibility Act are The changes in this proposed rule will Therefore, no other Federal, state, or set forth in 13 CFR 121.201. These specifically apply when an applicant or local entity shares jurisdiction over the regulations generally define small patentee pays an application filing or examination and granting of patents. businesses as those with fewer than a national stage entry fee, search fee, Other countries, however, have their maximum number of employees or less examination fee, extension of time fee, own patent laws, and an entity desiring than a specified level of annual receipts notice of appeal fee, appeal brief fee, a patent in a particular country must for the entity’s industrial sector or North request for an oral hearing fee, petition make an application for patent in that American Industry Classification to revive fee, issue fee, or patent country, in accordance with the System (NAICS) code. The USPTO, maintenance fee. applicable law. Although the potential however, has formally adopted, with The USPTO has been advised that a for overlap exists internationally, this SBA approval, an alternate size standard number of small entity applicants and cannot be avoided except by treaty as the size standard for the purpose of patentees do not claim small entity (such as the Paris Convention for the conducting an analysis or making a status for various reasons. See Business Protection of Industrial Property, or the certification under the Regulatory Size Standard for Purposes of United Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)). Flexibility Act for patent-related States Patent and Trademark Office Nevertheless, the USPTO believes that regulations. See Business Size Standard Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for there are no other duplicative or for Purposes of United States Patent and Patent-Related Regulations, 71 FR at overlapping rules. Trademark Office Regulatory Flexibility 67110 (November 20, 2006), 1313 Off. Analysis for Patent-Related Regulations, Gaz. Pat. Office at 61 (December 12, B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 71 FR 67109 (Nov. 20, 2006), 1313 Off. 2006). Therefore, the USPTO is also This rulemaking does not contain Gaz. Pat. Office 60 (Dec. 12, 2006). This considering all other entities paying policies with federalism implications alternate small business size standard is patent fees as well in an effort to capture sufficient to warrant preparation of a the previously established size standard the impact on all small entity applicants Federalism Assessment under Executive that identifies the criteria entities must whether they claim that status or not. Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 1999). meet to be entitled to pay reduced 4. Description of the projected C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory patent fees. See 13 CFR 121.802. If reporting, recordkeeping and other Planning and Review) patent applicants identify themselves on compliance requirements of the the patent application as qualifying for proposed rules, including an estimate of This rulemaking has been determined reduced patent fees, the USPTO the classes of small entities which will to be significant for purposes of captures this data in the Patent be subject to the requirement and the Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993), Application Location and Monitoring type of professional skills necessary for as amended by Executive Order 13258 (PALM) database system, which tracks preparation of the report or record: This (Feb. 26, 2002), and Executive Order information on each patent application notice does not propose any reporting, 13422 (Jan. 18, 2007). recordkeeping and other compliance submitted to the USPTO. D. Executive Order 13563 (Improving Unlike the general SBA small requirements. This notice proposes only Regulation and Regulatory Review) business size standards set forth in 13 to adjust patent fees (as discussed CFR 121.201, USPTO’s approved previously) to reflect changes in the CPI. The Office has complied with alternative size standard is not industry- 5. Description of any significant Executive Order 13563 (Jan. 8, 2011). specific. Specifically, the USPTO alternatives to the proposed rules which Specifically, the Office has: (1) Used the definition of small business concern for accomplish the stated objectives of best available techniques to quantify Regulatory Flexibility Act purposes is a applicable statutes and which minimize costs and benefits, and has considered business or other concern that: (1) Meets any significant economic impact of the values such as equity, fairness and the SBA’s definition of a ‘‘business proposed rules on small entities: The distributive impacts; (2) provided the concern or concern’’ set forth in 13 CFR alternative of not adjusting patent fees public with a meaningful opportunity to 121.105; and (2) meets the size would have a lesser economic impact on participate in the regulatory process, standards set forth in 13 CFR 121.802 small entities, but would not including soliciting the views of those for the purpose of paying reduced accomplish the stated objectives of likely affected, by issuing this notice of patent fees, namely an entity: (a) Whose applicable statutes. The USPTO is proposed rulemaking and providing on- number of employees, including proposing a small adjustment to patent line access to the rulemaking docket; (3) affiliates, does not exceed 500 persons; fees, under 35 U.S.C. 41(f), to ensure attempted to promote coordination, and (b) which has not assigned, granted, proper funding for effective operations simplification and harmonization across conveyed, or licensed (and is under no in light of changes in the CPI. The government agencies and identified obligation to do so) any rights in the patent fee CPI adjustment is a routine goals designed to promote innovation; invention to any person who made it adjustment that has generally occurred (4) considered approaches that reduce and could not be classified as an on an annual basis to recover the higher burdens and maintain flexibility and independent inventor, or to any concern costs of USPTO operations that occur freedom of choice for the public; and (5)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28336 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

ensured the objectivity of scientific and of United States-based enterprises to 0651–0064 if the changes proposed in technological information and compete with foreign-based enterprises this notice are adopted. processes, to the extent applicable. in domestic and export markets. An agency may not conduct or Therefore, this rulemaking is not likely sponsor, and a person is not required to E. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal to result in a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined in respond to, a collection of information Consultation) 5 U.S.C. 804(2). unless it displays a currently valid OMB This rulemaking will not: (1) Have control number. substantial direct effects on one or more K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of List of Subjects Indian tribes; (2) impose substantial 1995 direct compliance costs on Indian tribal The changes proposed in this notice 37 CFR Part 1 governments; or (3) preempt tribal law. do not involve a Federal Administrative practice and Therefore, a tribal summary impact intergovernmental mandate that will procedure, Courts, Freedom of statement is not required under result in the expenditure by State, local, information, Inventions and patents, Executive Order 13175 (Nov. 6, 2000). and tribal governments, in the aggregate, Reporting and recordkeeping F. Executive Order 13211 (Energy of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or requirements, Small businesses. Effects) more in any one year, or a Federal private sector mandate that will result 37 CFR Part 41 This rulemaking is not a significant in the expenditure by the private sector Administrative practice and energy action under Executive Order of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or procedure, Inventions and patents, 13211 because this rulemaking is not more in any one year, and will not Lawyers. likely to have a significant adverse effect significantly or uniquely affect small Dated: May 8, 2012. on the supply, distribution, or use of governments. Therefore, no actions are David J. Kappos, energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy necessary under the provisions of the Effects is not required under Executive Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Order 13211 (May 18, 2001). Property and Director of the United States 1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. Patent and Trademark Office. G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice L. National Environmental Policy Act [FR Doc. 2012–11649 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Reform) This rulemaking will not have any BILLING CODE P This rulemaking meets applicable effect on the quality of environment and standards to minimize litigation, is thus categorically excluded from eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden review under the National ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION as set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) Environmental Policy Act of 1969. See AGENCY of Executive Order 12988 (Feb. 5, 1996). 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 40 CFR Part 52 H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of M. National Technology Transfer and [EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0042; FRL–9672–1] Children) Advancement Act This rulemaking is not an The requirements of section 12(d) of Approval and Promulgation of Air economically significant rule and does Quality Implementation Plans; not concern an environmental risk to the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Maryland; Offset Lithographic Printing health or safety that may and Letterpress Printing Regulations disproportionately affect children under 272 note) are inapplicable because this Executive Order 13045 (Apr. 21, 1997). rulemaking does not contain provisions AGENCY: Environmental Protection which involve the use of technical Agency (EPA). I. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of standards. ACTION: Proposed rule. Private Property) N. Paperwork Reduction Act This rulemaking will not affect a SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve taking of private property or otherwise This proposed rule involves a State Implementation Plan (SIP) have taking implications under information collection requirements revision submitted by the State of Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 1988). which are subject to review by the Maryland (Maryland). This revision Office of Management and Budget pertains to amendments to the Code of J. Congressional Review Act (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Maryland (COMAR) 26.11.19.11, Under the Congressional Review Act Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Lithographic and Letterpress Printing. provisions of the Small Business The collections of information Maryland’s SIP revision meets the Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of involved in this proposed rule have requirement to adopt Reasonably 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to been reviewed and approved by OMB. Available Control Technology (RACT) issuing any final rule, the USPTO will The Office is not resubmitting for sources covered by EPA’s Control submit a report containing the final rule information collection requests to OMB Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for offset and other required information to the for its review and approval at this time lithographic printing and letterpress U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of because the changes proposed in this printing. This will help Maryland attain Representatives and the Comptroller notice revise the fees for existing and maintain the National Ambient Air General of the Government information collection requirements Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Accountability Office. The changes under OMB control numbers 0651– This action is being taken under the proposed in this notice are not expected 0016, 0651–0021, 0651–0024, 0651– Clean Air Act (CAA). to result in an annual effect on the 0031, 0651–0032, 0651–0033, 0651– DATES: Written comments must be economy of 100 million dollars or more, 0063, and 0651–0064. The USPTO will received on or before June 13, 2012. a major increase in costs or prices, or submit to OMB fee revision changes for ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, significant adverse effects on OMB control numbers 0651–0016, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– competition, employment, investment, 0651–0021, 0651–0024, 0651–0031, R03–OAR–2012–0042 by one of the productivity, innovation, or the ability 0651–0032, 0651–0033, 0651–0063, and following methods:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28337

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the electronically in www.regulations.gov or existing state and local VOC emission on-line instructions for submitting in hard copy during normal business reduction approaches for this industry, comments. hours at the Air Protection Division, reviewing the 1993 draft CTG and the B. Email: [email protected]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994 ACT, and taking into account the C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0042, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, information that has become available Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. since then, EPA developed a new CTG Office of Air Program Planning, Copies of the State submittal are for offset lithographic printers and Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental available at the Maryland Department of letterpress printers, entitled Control Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 the Environment, 1800 Washington Techniques Guidelines for Offset Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Lithographic Printing and Letterpress 19103. Maryland 21230. Printing (see EPA 453/R–06–002). The D. Hand Delivery: At the previously- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CTG for offset lithographic printing and listed EPA Region III address. Such Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by letterpress printing provides VOC deliveries are only accepted during the email at [email protected]. control recommendations for the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and following components involved in offset SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: special arrangements should be made lithographic and letterpress printing: Throughout this document, whenever for deliveries of boxed information. Heatset inks, fountain solutions and ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean Instructions: Direct your comments to cleaning materials. A detailed EPA. On December 15, 2011, the Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012– description of this CTG may be found in 0042. EPA’s policy is that all comments Maryland Department of the the technical support document (TSD). received will be included in the public Environment (MDE) submitted a docket without change, and may be revision to its SIP for the adoption of II. Summary of SIP Revision made available online at EPA’s CTG for offset lithographic On December 15, 2011, the MDE www.regulations.gov, including any printing and letterpress printing into the submitted to EPA a SIP revision (#11– personal information provided, unless Code of Maryland. 09) concerning the adoption of EPA’s the comment includes information I. Background CTG for offset lithographic printing and claimed to be Confidential Business letterpress printing. EPA develops CTGs Information (CBI) or other information Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides as guidance on control requirements for whose disclosure is restricted by statute. that SIPs for nonattainment areas must source categories. States can follow the Do not submit information that you include reasonably available control CTGs or adopt more restrictive consider to be CBI or otherwise measures (RACM), including RACT for standards. Maryland has adopted EPA’s protected through www.regulations.gov sources of emissions. Section CTG standards for offset lithographic or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain printing and letterpress printing. These site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, nonattainment areas, states must revise regulations are in COMAR 26.11.19, which means EPA will not know your their SIPs to include RACT for sources Volatile Organic Compounds from identity or contact information unless of volatile organic compound (VOC) Specific Processes. Specifically, this you provide it in the body of your emissions covered by a CTG document revision amends the existing regulation comment. If you send an email issued after November 15, 1990 and in Section 26.11.19.11 to include the comment directly to EPA without going prior to the area’s date of attainment. recommendations from the through www.regulations.gov, your CTGs are intended to provide state aforementioned CTG. A detailed email address will be automatically and local air pollution control summary of EPA’s review of and captured and included as part of the authorities information that should rationale for proposing to approve this comment that is placed in the public assist them in determining RACT for SIP revision may be found in the TSD docket and made available on the VOCs from various sources, which for this action which is available on line Internet. If you submit an electronic include offset lithographic and at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket comment, EPA recommends that you letterpress printers. In developing these number EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0042. include your name and other contact CTGs, EPA, among other things, information in the body of your evaluated the sources of VOC emissions III. Proposed Action comment and with any disk or CD–ROM from this industry and the available EPA’s review of this material you submit. If EPA cannot read your control approaches for addressing these indicates that the proposed SIP revision comment due to technical difficulties emissions, including the costs of such will reduce VOC emissions which will and cannot contact you for clarification, approaches. Based on available help maintain environmental protection EPA may not be able to consider your information and data, EPA provided and public health. EPA is proposing to comment. Electronic files should avoid recommendations for RACT for offset approve the Maryland SIP revision for the use of special characters, any form lithographic printers and letterpress adoption of the CTG standards for offset of encryption, and be free of any defects printers. lithographic printing and letterpress or viruses. In November 1993, EPA published a printing into the Code of Maryland. EPA Docket: All documents in the draft CTG for offset lithographic is soliciting public comments on the electronic docket are listed in the printing. This CTG discusses the nature issues discussed in this document. www.regulations.gov index. Although of VOC emissions from this industry, These comments will be considered listed in the index, some information is available control technologies for before taking final action. not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other addressing such emissions, the costs of information whose disclosure is available control options, and other IV. Statutory and Executive Order restricted by statute. Certain other items. In June 1994, EPA published an Reviews material, such as copyrighted material, alternative control techniques (ACT) Under the CAA, the Administrator is is not placed on the Internet and will be document for states to use in developing required to approve a SIP submission publicly available only in hard copy rules based on RACT for offset that complies with the provisions of the form. Publicly available docket lithographic printing. In 2006, after CAA and applicable Federal regulations. materials are available either conducting a review of currently 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28338 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. deliveries are only accepted during the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Dated: May 2, 2012. Docket’s normal hours of operation, and provided that they meet the criteria of W.C. Early, special arrangements should be made the CAA. Accordingly, this action Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. for deliveries of boxed information. merely proposes to approve state law as [FR Doc. 2012–11650 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Instructions: Direct your comments to meeting Federal requirements and does BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012– not impose additional requirements 0208. EPA’s policy is that all comments beyond those imposed by state law. For received will be included in the public that reason, this proposed action: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION docket without change, and may be • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory AGENCY made available online at action’’ subject to review by the Office www.regulations.gov, including any of Management and Budget under 40 CFR Part 52 personal information provided, unless Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, the comment includes information October 4, 1993); [EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0208; FRL–9672–2] • Does not impose an information claimed to be Confidential Business Approval and Promulgation of Air Information (CBI) or other information collection burden under the provisions Quality Implementation Plans; of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Maryland; Reasonably Available Do not submit information that you U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Control Technology for the 1997 • Is certified as not having a consider to be CBI or otherwise 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air protected through www.regulations.gov significant economic impact on a Quality Standard substantial number of small entities or email. The www.regulations.gov Web under the Regulatory Flexibility Act AGENCY: Environmental Protection site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Agency (EPA). which means EPA will not know your • Does not contain any unfunded ACTION: Proposed rule. identity or contact information unless mandate or significantly or uniquely you provide it in the body of your affect small governments, as described SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve comment. If you send an email in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act a State Implementation Plan (SIP) comment directly to EPA without going of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); revision submitted by the State of through www.regulations.gov, your • Does not have Federalism Maryland. This revision pertains to the email address will be automatically implications as specified in Executive requirements for meeting reasonably captured and included as part of the Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, available control technology (RACT) for comment that is placed in the public 1999); the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient docket and made available on the • Is not an economically significant air quality standard (NAAQS). These Internet. If you submit an electronic regulatory action based on health or requirements are based on: A comment, EPA recommends that you safety risks subject to Executive Order certification that previously adopted include your name and other contact 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); RACT controls in Maryland’s SIP, that information in the body of your • Is not a significant regulatory action were approved by EPA under the 1-hour comment and with any disk or CD–ROM subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR ozone NAAQS, are based on the you submit. If EPA cannot read your 28355, May 22, 2001); currently available technically and comment due to technical difficulties • Is not subject to requirements of economically feasible controls, and that and cannot contact you for clarification, Section 12(d) of the National they continue to represent RACT for the EPA may not be able to consider your Technology Transfer and Advancement 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS comment. Electronic files should avoid Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because implementation purposes; a negative the use of special characters, any form application of those requirements would declaration demonstrating that no of encryption, and be free of any defects be inconsistent with the CAA; and facilities exist in the State for the or viruses. • Does not provide EPA with the applicable control technique guideline discretionary authority to address, as (CTG) categories; and adoption of new Docket: All documents in the appropriate, disproportionate human or more stringent RACT determinations. electronic docket are listed in the health or environmental effects, using This action is being taken in accordance www.regulations.gov index. Although practicable and legally permissible with the requirements of the Clean Air listed in the index, some information is methods, under Executive Order 12898 Act (CAA). not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). DATES: Written comments must be information whose disclosure is In addition, this proposed rule received on or before June 13, 2012. restricted by statute. Certain other concerning Maryland’s adoption of the ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, material, such as copyrighted material, CTG for offset lithographic printing and identified by Docket ID Number EPA– is not placed on the Internet and will be letterpress printing does not have tribal R03–OAR–2012–0208 by one of the publicly available only in hard copy implications as specified by Executive following methods: form. Publicly available docket Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the materials are available either 2000), because the SIP is not approved on-line instructions for submitting electronically in www.regulations.gov or to apply in Indian country located in the comments. in hard copy during normal business state, and EPA notes that it will not B. Email: [email protected]. hours at the Air Protection Division, impose substantial direct costs on tribal C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0208, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, governments or preempt tribal law. Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Office of Program Planning, Mailcode Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Copies of the State submittal are Environmental protection, Air Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, available at Maryland Department of the pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Environment, 1800 Washington recordkeeping requirements, Volatile D. Hand Delivery: At the previously- Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, organic compounds. listed EPA Region III address. Such Maryland 21230.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28339

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: many final rulemaking notices RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone Jacqueline Lewis, (215) 814–2037, or by approving the State of Maryland’s SIP standard based on the current email at [email protected]. revision as meeting the CTG RACT availability of technically and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: provisions of the CAA. See 60 FR 2018, economically feasible controls. Throughout this document, whenever January 6, 1995. Adoption of new RACT regulations will ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean All Maryland counties were subject to occur when states have new stationary EPA. On October 17, 2011, the RACT requirements under the 1-hour sources not covered by existing RACT Maryland Department of the ozone standard. The Baltimore, regulations, or when new data or Environment submitted a revision to its Washington, DC, and Cecil County, technical information indicates that a SIP that addresses requirements of Maryland nonattainment areas were previously adopted RACT measure does RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone designated as severe 1-hour ozone not represent a newly available RACT NAAQS set forth by the CAA. nonattainment areas. Kent and Queen control level. Another 1997 8-hour Anne’s counties were designated as a ozone NAAQS requirement for RACT is I. Background marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment to submit a negative declaration that Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by area. All remaining Maryland counties there are no CTG major sources of VOC photochemical reactions between were identified as part of the OTR. As and NOX emissions within Maryland. volatile organic compounds (VOC), part of the planning process, section II. Summary of SIP Revision oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and carbon 182(b)(2) of the CAA required the State monoxide (CO) in the presence of of Maryland to adopt all RACT Maryland’s SIP revision contains the sunlight. In order to reduce ozone regulations for all CTG sources and all requirements of RACT set forth by the concentrations in the ambient air, the major non-CTG VOC sources (VOC CAA under the 1997 8-hour ozone CAA requires all nonattainment areas to sources with the potential to emit NAAQS. Maryland’s SIP revision apply control on VOC and NOX greater than or equal to 25 tons per year satisfies the 1997 8-hour ozone standard emission sources to achieve emission (TPY) in Baltimore, Washington, DC, RACT requirements through (1) reductions. Among effective control and Cecil County, Maryland certification that previously adopted measures, RACT controls are a major nonattainment areas and greater than or RACT controls in Maryland’s SIP that group for reducing VOC and NOX equal to 50 TPY in the remainder of the were approved by EPA under the 1-hour emissions from stationary sources. State) throughout the State. ozone NAAQS are based on the Since the 1970’s, EPA has On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated currently available technically and consistently interpreted RACT to mean an 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. See 62 FR economically feasible controls and that the lowest emission limit that a 38856, July 18, 1997. Under the 1997 they continue to represent RACT for the particular source is capable of meeting 8-hour ozone NAAQS, four areas were 8-hour implementation purpose; (2) a by the application of the control designated nonattainment for the 1997 negative declaration demonstrating that technology that is reasonably available 8-hour ozone standard in Maryland. no facilities exist in Maryland for the considering technological and economic Three areas were classified as moderate applicable CTG categories; and (3) feasibility. See 44 FR 53761, September and one as marginal. Maryland also had adoption of new or more stringent 17, 1979. Section 182 of the CAA sets an Early Action Compact area. All other RACT determinations. A detailed forth two separate RACT requirements remaining counties are part of the OTR. summary of EPA’s review and rationale for ozone nonattainment areas. The first The three moderate 1997 8-hour ozone for proposing to approve this SIP requirement, contained in section standard nonattainment areas are revision may be found in the Technical 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA and referred to Baltimore, Washington, DC, and Cecil Support Document (TSD) for this action as RACT fix-up, requires the correction County (part of the Philadelphia which is available on line at of RACT rules for which EPA identified nonattainment area). The one marginal www.regulations.gov. Docket number deficiencies before the CAA was 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0208. amended in 1990. EPA published final nonattainment area consists of Kent and rulemaking notices approving the State Queen Anne’s Counties. Washington III. Proposed Action of Maryland’s SIP revisions in order to County was part of the Early Action EPA’s review of this material correct their VOC RACT regulations and Compact program. indicates that Maryland has met the establish and require the EPA requires under the 1997 8-hour requirements of RACT for NOX and implementation for revised SIP ozone NAAQS that states meet the CAA VOCs set forth by the CAA with respect regulations to control VOCs. See 58 FR RACT requirements, either through a to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. EPA 63085, November 30, 1993; 59 FR certification that previously adopted is proposing to approve the Maryland 46180, September 7, 1994; 59 FR 60908, RACT controls in their SIP revisions be SIP revision for the requirements of November 29, 1994; and 60 FR 2018, approved by EPA under the 1-hour RACT set forth by the CAA under the January 6, 1995. ozone NAAQS represent adequate 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which was The second requirement, set forth in RACT control levels for 1997 8-hour submitted on October 17, 2011. EPA is section 182(b)(2) of the CAA and ozone NAAQS attainment purposes, or soliciting public comments on the referred to as RACT catch-up, applies to through the adoption of new or more issues discussed in this document. moderate (or worse) ozone stringent regulations that represent These comments will be considered nonattainment areas as well as to RACT control levels. A certification before taking final action. marginal and attainment areas in the must be accompanied by appropriate ozone transport region (OTR) supporting information such as IV. Statutory and Executive Order established pursuant to section 184 of consideration of information received Reviews the CAA, and requires these areas to during the public comment period and Under the CAA, the Administrator is implement RACT controls on all major consideration of new data. This required to approve a SIP submission VOC and NOX emission sources and on information may supplement existing that complies with the provisions of the all sources and source categories RACT guidance documents that were CAA and applicable Federal regulations. covered by a CTG issued by EPA. On developed for the 1-hour standard, such 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). January 6, 1995, EPA published one of that the state’s SIP accurately reflects Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28340 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 2005–0033. EPA’s policy is that all provided that they meet the criteria of Dated: May 2, 2012. comments received will be included in the CAA. Accordingly, this action W.C. Early, the docket without change and may be merely proposes to approve state law as Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. made available online at http:// meeting Federal requirements and does www.regulations.gov, including any not impose additional requirements [FR Doc. 2012–11639 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] personal information provided, unless beyond those imposed by state law. For BILLING CODE 6560–50–P the comment includes information that reason, this proposed action: claimed to be Confidential Business • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Information (CBI) or other information action’’ subject to review by the Office AGENCY whose disclosure is restricted by statute. of Management and Budget under Do not submit information that you Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 40 CFR Part 799 consider to be CBI or otherwise October 4, 1993); protected through regulations.gov or • Does not impose an information [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033; FRL–9350–1] email. The regulations.gov Web site is collection burden under the provisions RIN 2070–AD16 an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 means EPA will not know your identity U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Revocation of TSCA Section 4 Testing or contact information unless you • Is certified as not having a Requirements for One High Production provide it in the body of your comment. significant economic impact on a Volume Chemical Substance If you send an email comment directly substantial number of small entities to EPA without going through under the Regulatory Flexibility Act AGENCY: Environmental Protection regulations.gov, your email address will (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Agency (EPA). be automatically captured and included • Does not contain any unfunded ACTION: Proposed rule. as part of the comment that is placed in mandate or significantly or uniquely the docket and made available on the affect small governments, as described SUMMARY: EPA is proposing the Internet. If you submit an electronic in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act revocation of certain testing comment, EPA recommends that you of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); requirements promulgated under the • include your name and other contact Does not have Federalism Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) information in the body of your implications as specified in Executive for benzenesulfonic acid, [[4-[[4- comment and with any disk or CD–ROM Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, (phenylamino)phenyl][4-(phenylimino)- you submit. If EPA cannot read your 1999); 2,5-cyclohexadien-1- • comment due to technical difficulties Is not an economically significant ylidene]methyl]phenyl]amino]- (CAS and cannot contact you for clarification, regulatory action based on health or No. 1324–76–1), also known as C.I. EPA may not be able to consider your safety risks subject to Executive Order Pigment Blue 61. EPA is basing its comment. Electronic files should avoid 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); decision to take this action on the use of special characters, any form • Is not a significant regulatory action information received since publication of encryption, and be free of any defects subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR of the final rule that established testing or viruses. 28355, May 22, 2001); requirements for this chemical • Is not subject to requirements of substance. Docket: All documents in the docket Section 12(d) of the National are listed in the docket index available DATES: Comments must be received on Technology Transfer and Advancement at http://www.regulations.gov. Although or before June 13, 2012. Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because listed in the index, some information is application of those requirements would ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other be inconsistent with the CAA; and identified by docket identification (ID) information whose disclosure is • Does not provide EPA with the number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033, by restricted by statute. Certain other discretionary authority to address, as one of the following methods: material, such as copyrighted material, appropriate, disproportionate human • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// is not placed on the Internet and will be health or environmental effects, using www.regulations.gov. Follow the online publicly available only in hard copy practicable and legally permissible instructions for submitting comments. form. Publicly available docket methods, under Executive Order 12898 • Mail: Document Control Office materials are available in the electronic (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention docket at http://www.regulations.gov, In addition, this proposed rule and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental or, if only available in hard copy, at the pertaining to Maryland RACT for the Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, does not Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. located in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/ have tribal implications as specified by • Hand Delivery: OPPT Document DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg., Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW., DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room not approved to apply in Indian country Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 located in the state, and EPA notes that number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033. p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding it will not impose substantial direct The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., legal holidays. The telephone number of costs on tribal governments or preempt Monday through Friday, excluding legal the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is tribal law. holidays. The telephone number for the (202) 566–1744, and the telephone DCO is (202) 564–8930. Such deliveries number for the OPPT Docket is (202) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 are only accepted during the DCO’s 566–0280. Docket visitors are required Environmental protection, Air normal hours of operation, and special to show photographic identification, pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, arrangements should be made for pass through a metal detector, and sign Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping deliveries of boxed information. the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are requirements, Volatile organic Instructions: Direct your comments to processed through an X-ray machine compounds. docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT– and subject to search. Visitors will be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28341

provided an EPA/DC badge that must be information (subject heading, Federal distribution, processing, use, or disposal visible at all times in the building and Register date and page number). of a chemical substance on health or the returned upon departure. ii. Follow directions. The Agency may environment can reasonably be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For ask you to respond to specific questions determined or predicted. technical information contact: Catherine or organize comments by referencing a 3. Testing of the chemical substance Roman, Chemical Control Division Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part with respect to such effects is necessary (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention or section number. to develop such data. (See TSCA section and Toxics, Environmental Protection iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 4(a)(1)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii); see also Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., suggest alternatives and substitute Ref. 1). Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone language for your requested changes. EPA is amending the testing number: (202) 564–8157; email address: iv. Describe any assumptions and requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61 [email protected]. provide any technical information and/ because some of the findings that EPA For general information contact: The or data that you used. made for this chemical substance are no TSCA–Hotline, ABVI–Goodwill, 422 v. If you estimate potential costs or longer supported. South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to III. Amendment to Chemical Testing 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– Requirements 1404; email address: TSCA– allow for it to be reproduced. [email protected]. vi. Provide specific examples to On July 17, 2006, the Color Pigments illustrate your concerns and suggest Manufacturers Association (CPMA) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: alternatives. submitted a test plan for C.I. Pigment I. General Information vii. Explain your views as clearly as Blue 61. CPMA also submitted robust possible, avoiding the use of profanity summaries of existing data which A. Does this action apply to me? or personal threats. CPMA asked EPA to accept as satisfying This action is directed to the public viii. Make sure to submit your some of the Agency’s data needs for C.I. in general and may be of particular comments by the comment period Pigment Blue 61. Some of the existing interest to those persons who deadline identified. data described in the summaries manufacture (defined by statute to II. Background addressed C.I. Pigment Blue 56, a close include import), process, or export the analog of C.I. Pigment Blue 61, which chemical substance identified in this A. What action is the Agency taking? CPMA requested EPA to accept as document. Because other persons may EPA is proposing to amend the TSCA satisfying the Agency’s data needs for also be interested, the Agency has not section 4(a) chemical testing C.I. Pigment Blue 61, providing a attempted to describe all the specific requirements for one high production structure-activity relationship (SAR) persons that may be affected by this volume (HPV) chemical included in 40 argument in the test plan to justify that action. If you have any questions CFR 799.5085. Specifically, this request (Refs. 2 and 3). CPMA also regarding the applicability of this action amendment revokes some of the testing asked EPA to accept results for water to a particular entity, consult the requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61. solubility and octanol/water partition technical person listed under FOR EPA is basing its decision to take this coefficient that were obtained by using FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. action on information (discussed in Unit an alternative method, due to the extremely low predicted solubility of B. What should I consider as I prepare III.) received since publication of the C.I. Pigment Blue 61, instead of the my comments for EPA? final rule (Ref. 1) that established testing requirements for this chemical methods specified by the test rule (Ref. 1. Submitting CBI. substance. 2). Finally, CPMA asked EPA to accept Do not submit this information to EPA In the Federal Register of March 16, that determining a melting point for C.I. through regulations.gov or email. 2012 (77 FR 15609) (FRL–9335–6), EPA Pigment Blue 61 was not relevant Clearly mark the part or all of the issued a revocation of some or all of the because the pigment thermally information that you claim to be CBI. testing requirements for 10 chemical decomposes before it melts (Ref. 2). For CBI information in a disk or CD– substances by direct final rule. EPA EPA reviewed the submitted ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the received an adverse comment information on physical/chemical outside of the disk or CD–ROM that you concerning the chemical substance C.I. properties and decided that melting mail to EPA, mark the outside of the Pigment Blue 61. Consequently, in point, boiling point, and vapor pressure disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then accordance with the procedures determinations were not relevant identify electronically within the disk or described in the March 16, 2012 Federal because C.I. Pigment Blue 61 CD–ROM the specific information that Register document, EPA is withdrawing decomposes before it melts and the is claimed as CBI. In addition to one the revocation of certain testing decomposition temperature had been complete version of the comment that requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61 in reported (Ref. 4). EPA accepted the includes information claimed as CBI, a a separate document published submitted data on water solubility as copy of the comment that does not elsewhere in today’s Federal Register, satisfying the Agency’s data needs for contain the information claimed as CBI and is now issuing this proposed rule. that endpoint, but did not accept the must be submitted for inclusion in the calculated value submitted to satisfy the public docket. Information so marked B. What is the Agency’s authority for testing requirement for octanol/water will not be disclosed except in taking this action? partition coefficient (Ref. 4). EPA accordance with procedures set forth in Section 4(a) of TSCA authorizes EPA believes the calculated value would, 40 CFR part 2. to require testing if certain findings are most likely, underestimate the measured made. The TSCA section 4(a) findings value (Ref. 4) required to be determined 2. Tips for preparing your comments. include: by the test rule. When submitting comments, 1. The chemical substance was EPA reviewed CPMA’s SAR argument remember to: produced in substantial quantities. concerning C.I. Pigment Blue 61 and C.I. i. Identify the document by docket ID 2. There are insufficient data upon Pigment Blue 56 and agreed that C.I. number and other identifying which the effects of manufacture, Pigment Blue 56 is an acceptable

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28342 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

surrogate for C.I. Pigment Blue 61, commenter objected to EPA’s placing has placed in the docket, regardless of thereby allowing adequate data on C.I. the robust summaries in the docket whether the other documents are Pigment Blue 56 to satisfy data needs for rather than applying the disclosure physically located in the docket. C.I. Pigment Blue 61 (Ref. 5). As a result, requirements of TSCA section 14(b) to 1. EPA. Testing of Certain High Production a biodegradation study of C.I. Pigment the full health and safety studies. The Volume Chemicals; Final Rule. Federal Blue 56, found adequate by an EPA submitter of these studies has Register (71 FR 13708, March 16, 2006) review, satisfies the need for subsequently withdrawn the CBI claim (FRL–7335–2). Document ID number biodegradation data on C.I. Pigment on these studies. The full studies and EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033–0001. Blue 61 (Ref. 5). Likewise, a fish acute the adverse comment are included in 2. CPMA. Letter to EPA from J. Lawrence toxicity study and a chromosomal the docket for this proposed rule, docket Robinson concerning existing data and damage test of C.I. Pigment Blue 56, ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033. test plan. July 17, 2006. Document ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033– which EPA reviewed and found V. Economic Analysis 0185. adequate, will satisfy the data need for 3. CPMA. Letter to EPA from J. Lawrence those endpoints (Ref. 6) for C.I. Pigment In the economic impact analysis for Robinson concerning existing data and Blue 61. EPA’s review of the existing the final rule (Ref. 1) establishing testing test plan. May 9, 2007. Document ID data on C.I. Pigment Blue 61 found the requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61 EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033–0246. study on mammalian acute toxicity and and 16 other chemical substances, the 4. EPA. Memorandum from Diana Darling, the bacterial mutation assay to be Agency estimated the total testing cost Industrial Chemistry Branch (ICB), adequate to satisfy the data needs for to industry to be $4.03 million for all 17 Economics, Exposure, and Technology those endpoints (Ref. 6). The existing chemical substances included in that Division (EETD), OPPT to Greg Schweer, Chemical Information and Testing study on repeated-dose toxicity, final rule, with an average of approximately $237,000 per chemical Branch (CITB), Chemical Control however, did not satisfy the test Division (CCD), OPPT. Testing requirement for that endpoint (Ref. 6). substance (Ref. 8). This total included requirements and existing data for Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke an additional 25% in administrative physical/chemical properties of the HPV the testing requirements for melting costs. An amendment to the final rule test rule chemical, C.I. Pigment Blue 61 point, boiling point, vapor pressure, revoking testing requirements for coke- (CAS No. 1324–76–1). May 17, 2007. water solubility, biodegradation, fish oven light oil (coal) reduced the total Document ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT– acute toxicity, mammalian acute cost to industry to an estimated $3.7 2005–0033–0280. toxicity, bacterial reverse mutation, and million for the remaining 16 chemical 5. EPA. Memorandum from Bob Boethling, chromosomal damage for C.I. Pigment substances, with an average compliance Exposure Assessment Branch (EAB), OPPT to Greg Schweer, CITB, CCD, Blue 61 by removing those requirements cost of approximately $232,000 per OPPT. Review of SAR argument and a from those listed for that chemical chemical substance. This proposed rule, biodegradation test concerning an HPV substance in Table 2 in 40 CFR combined with the direct final rule test rule chemical, C.I. Pigment Blue 61 799.5085(j). In order to clarify that test revoking all or some of the test rule (CAS No. 1324–76–1). May 15, 2007. requirements for acute toxicity to requirements for 9 other chemical Document ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT– Daphnia (an aquatic invertebrate) and substances (see Ref. 1), would have the 2005–0033–0279. toxicity to algae had not been satisfied effect of further reducing the total 6. EPA. Email and attached review from by existing studies, and that the fish testing cost by an estimated $1.5 million David Brooks, Risk Assessment Division acute toxicity test requirement had been (approximately 41%) (Ref. 9). In (RAD), OPPT to Greg Schweer and satisfied, the test symbol C2 replaces C1 Catherine Roman, CITB, CCD, OPPT. addition, the 25% administrative costs Review of C.I. Pigment Blue (CAS No. for C.I. Pigment Blue 61 in Table 2 in would be eliminated for these tests. The 1324–76–1). August 22, 2007. Document 40 CFR 799.5085(j). The testing reduced total cost for the remaining 12 ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033– requirements for C.I. Pigment Blue 61 chemical substances is estimated to be 0286. that are not proposed to be revoked $2.2 million (i.e., $3.7 million—$1.5 7. CPMA. Robust summaries submitted for include tests for octanol/water partition million), with an average compliance C.I. Pigment Blue 61 on octanol/water coefficient, acute toxicity to Daphnia, cost per chemical substance of partition coefficient, acute toxicity to toxicity to algae, and combined 28-day approximately $184,000 (Ref. 9). Daphnia, toxicity to algae, and combined repeated-dose toxicity with a 28-day repeated-dose toxicity with a reproduction/developmental toxicity VI. Export Notification reproduction/developmental toxicity screen. Studies responding to those test Persons who export or intend to screen. Submitted on November 14, 2008. Document ID number EPA–HQ– requirements were submitted to the export C.I. Pigment Blue 61 are and will OPPT–2005–0033–0318. Agency. The full studies and robust remain subject to TSCA section 12(b) 8. EPA. Economic Analysis for the Final summaries (Ref. 7) are in the docket for export notification requirements (See 40 Section 4 Test Rule for High Production this proposed rule, docket ID number CFR part 707, subpart D). Volume Chemicals. Prepared by EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033. Economic Policy and Analysis Branch VII. References (EPAB), EETD, OPPT. October 28, 2005. IV. Public Comment The following documents are Document ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT– EPA received one adverse comment specifically referenced in the preamble 2005–0033–0131. concerning the March 16, 2012 direct for this proposed rule. In addition to 9. EPA. Email from Stephanie Suazo to final rule that revoked some of the these documents, other materials may Catherine Roman RE: ‘‘Revised testing requirements for C.I. Pigment be available in the docket established Economic Analysis for Revocation of Testing Requirements’’ with attached Blue 61 and nine other chemical for this proposed rule under Docket ID economic analysis. December 14, 2009. substances. The comment concerned the number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033, (Document ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT– statement in the preamble of the direct which you can access through http:// 2005–0033–0350). final rule that certain full studies for C.I. www.regulations.gov. Those interested Pigment Blue 61 had been claimed as in the information considered by EPA in VIII. Statutory and Executive Order CBI and were therefore not available to developing this proposed rule should Reviews the public, although robust summaries also consult documents that are This proposed rule only eliminates were available in the docket. The referenced in the documents that EPA existing requirements; it does not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28343

otherwise impose any new or revised tribal implications, as specified in Populations and Low-Income requirements. As such, this action is not Executive Order 13175, entitled Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, subject to review by the Office of ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 1994). Management and Budget (OMB) as a Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 799 significant regulatory action under 67249, November 9, 2000), or federalism Executive Order 12866, entitled implications as specified in Executive Environmental protection, Chemicals, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 Order 13132, entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 Hazardous substances, Reporting and FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Nor does it FR 43255, August 10, 1999). recordkeeping requirements. impose or change any information Since this action is not economically Dated: May 8, 2012. collection burden that requires significant under Executive Order additional review by OMB under the 12866, it is not subject to Executive James J. Jones, provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Children from Environmental Health Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Because this proposed rule eliminates Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is existing requirements without imposing April 23, 1997), and Executive Order proposed to be amended as follows: any new or revised requirements, the 13211, entitled ‘‘Actions concerning Agency certifies pursuant to section Regulations that Significantly Affect PART 799—[AMENDED] 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), that this FR 28355, May 22, 2001). 1. The authority citation for part 799 action will not have a significant This action does not involve technical continues to read as follows: standards; thus, the requirements of economic impact on a substantial Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2603, 2611, 2625. number of small entities. section 12(d) of the National For the same reasons, it is not subject Technology Transfer and Advancement 2. In § 799.5085, revise the entry to the requirements of sections 202 and Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not ‘‘CAS No. 1324–76–1’’ in Table 2 of 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform apply. paragraph (j) to read as follows: Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538), and This proposed rule does not involve does not significantly or uniquely affect special consideration of environmental § 799.5085 Chemical testing requirements small governments or impose a justice related issues as specified in for certain high production volume significant intergovernmental mandate, Executive Order 12898, entitled chemicals. as described in UMRA sections 203 and ‘‘Federal Actions to Address * * * * * 204. This proposed rule does not have Environmental Justice in Minority (j) * * *

TABLE 2—CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS

Required tests/ CAS No. Chemical name Class (See Table 3 of this section)

*******

1324–76–1 ...... Benzenesulfonic acid, [[4-[[4-(phenylamino)phenyl][4-(phenylimino)-2,5- 2 A4, C2, F1. cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]methyl]phenyl]amino]-.

*******

* * * * * SUMMARY: This document proposes to ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, [FR Doc. 2012–11491 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] amend appendices to NHTSA identified by DOT Docket No. NHTSA– BILLING CODE 6560–50–P regulations on Insurer Reporting 2012–0020 by any of the following Requirements. The appendices list those methods: passenger motor vehicle insurers that • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION are required to file reports on their http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the motor vehicle theft loss experiences. An online instructions for submitting National Highway Traffic Safety comments. insurer included in any of these • Administration appendices would be required to file Mail: Docket Management Facility: three copies of its report for the 2009 U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 49 CFR Part 544 calendar year before October 25, 2012. New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, If the passenger motor vehicle insurers [Docket No.: NHTSA–2012–0020] Washington, DC 20590–0001. remain listed, they must submit reports • Hand Delivery or Courier: West RIN 2127–AL22 by each subsequent October 25. We are Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, proposing to add and remove several 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Insurer Reporting Requirements; List insurers from relevant appendices. Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and of Insurers Required To File Reports DATES: Comments must be submitted 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, AGENCY: National Highway Traffic not later than July 13, 2012. Insurers except Federal holidays. • Safety Administration (NHTSA), listed in the appendices are required to Fax: 1–202–493–2251. Department of Transportation (DOT). submit reports on or before October 25, Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 2012. information on the rulemaking process,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28344 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

see the Public Participation heading of Pursuant to its statutory exemption B. Self-Insured Rental and Leasing the Supplementary Information section authority, the agency exempted certain Companies of this document. Note that all passenger motor vehicle insurers from comments received will be posted the reporting requirements. In addition, upon making certain without change to http:// determinations, NHTSA grants A. Small Insurers of Passenger Motor www.regulations.gov, including any exemptions to self-insurers, i.e., any Vehicles personal information provided. Please person who has a fleet of 20 or more see the Privacy Act heading below. Section 33112(f)(2) provides that the motor vehicles (other than any Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search agency shall exempt small insurers of governmental entity) used for rental or the electronic form of all comments passenger motor vehicles if NHTSA lease whose vehicles are not covered by received into any of our dockets by the finds that such exemptions will not theft insurance policies issued by name of the individual submitting the significantly affect the validity or insurers of passenger motor vehicles, 49 comment (or signing the comment, if usefulness of the information in the U.S.C. 33112(b)(1) and (f). Under 49 submitted on behalf of an association, reports, either nationally or on a state- U.S.C. 33112(e)(1) and (2), NHTSA may business, labor union, etc.). You may by-state basis. exempt a self-insurer from reporting, if review DOT’s complete Privacy Act The term ‘‘small insurer’’ is defined, the agency determines: Statement in the Federal Register in Section 33112(f)(1)(A) and (B), as an (1) The cost of preparing and published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR insurer whose premiums for motor furnishing such reports is excessive in 19477–78) or you may visit http:// vehicle insurance issued directly or relation to the size of the business of the DocketInfo.dot.gov. through an affiliate, including pooling Docket: For access to the docket to insurer; and 33112(e)(1) and (2), arrangements established under state read background documents or (2) The insurer’s report will not law or regulation for the issuance of comments received, go to the street significantly contribute to carrying out motor vehicle insurance, account for address listed above. The internet access the purposes of Chapter 331. less than 1 percent of the total to the docket will be at http:// premiums for all forms of motor vehicle In a final rule published June 22, 1990 www.regulations.gov. Follow the online insurance issued by insurers within the (55 FR 25606), the agency granted a instructions for accessing the dockets. United States. However, that section class exemption to all companies that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: also stipulates that if an insurance rent or lease fewer than 50,000 vehicles, Carlita Ballard, Office of International company satisfies this definition of a because it believed that the largest Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer ‘‘small insurer,’’ but accounts for 10 companies’ reports sufficiently Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey percent or more of the total premiums represent the theft experience of rental Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, by for all motor vehicle insurance issued in and leasing companies. NHTSA electronic mail to a particular state, the insurer must concluded that smaller rental and [email protected]. Ms. Ballard’s report about its operations in that state. leasing companies’ reports do not telephone number is (202) 366–0846. In the final rule establishing the significantly contribute to carrying out Her fax number is (202) 493–2990. insurer reports requirement (52 FR 59; NHTSA’s statutory obligations and that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: January 2, 1987), 49 CFR Part 544, exempting such companies will relieve I. Background NHTSA exercised its exemption an unnecessary burden on them. As a authority by listing in Appendix A each result of the June 1990 final rule, the Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33112, Insurer insurer that must report because it had agency added Appendix C, consisting of reports and information, NHTSA at least 1 percent of the motor vehicle an annually updated list of the self- requires certain passenger motor vehicle insurance premiums nationally. Listing insurers subject to Part 544. Following insurers to file an annual report with the the insurers subject to reporting, instead the same approach as in Appendix A, agency. Each insurer’s report includes of each insurer exempted from reporting NHTSA included, in Appendix C, each information about thefts and recoveries because it had less than 1 percent of the of motor vehicles, the rating rules used of the self-insurers subject to reporting premiums nationally, is by the insurer to establish premiums for instead of the self-insurers which are administratively simpler since the comprehensive coverage, the actions exempted. former group is much smaller than the taken by the insurer to reduce such NHTSA updates Appendix C based latter. In Appendix B, NHTSA lists premiums and the actions taken by the primarily on information from those insurers required to report for insurer to reduce or deter theft. Under Automotive Fleet Magazine and Auto particular states because each insurer the agency’s regulation, 49 CFR part Rental News.2 had a 10 percent or greater market share 544, the following insurers are subject to of motor vehicle premiums in those the reporting requirements: C. When a Listed Insurer Must File a states. In the January 1987 final rule, the (1) Issuers of motor vehicle insurance Report agency stated that it would update policies whose total premiums account Appendices A and B annually. NHTSA Under Part 544, as long as an insurer for 1 percent or more of the total updates the appendices based on data is listed, it must file reports on or before premiums of motor vehicle insurance voluntarily provided by insurance October 25 of each year. Thus, any issued within the United States; companies to A.M. Best.1 A.M. Best insurer listed in the appendices must (2) Issuers of motor vehicle insurance publishes in its State/Line Report each file a report before October 25, and by policies whose premiums account for 10 spring. The agency uses the data to each succeeding October 25, absent an percent or more of total premiums determine the insurers’ market shares amendment removing the insurer’s written within any one state; and nationally and in each state. name from the appendices. (3) Rental and leasing companies with a fleet of 20 or more vehicles not 1 A.M. Best Company is a well-recognized source 2 Automotive Fleet Magazine and Auto Rental covered by theft insurance policies of insurance company ratings and information. 49 News are publications that provide information on issued by insurers of motor vehicles, U.S.C. 33112(i) authorizes NHTSA to consult with the size of fleets and market share of rental and other than any governmental entity. public and private organizations as necessary. leasing companies.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28345

II. Proposal III. Regulatory Impacts assigned OMB Control Number 2127– 0547 (‘‘Insurer Reporting 1. Costs and Other Impacts 1. Insurers of Passenger Motor Vehicles Requirements’’). This collection of This notice has not been reviewed Appendix A lists insurers that must information is approved for use through under Executive Order 12866. NHTSA April 30, 2015, and the agency will seek report because each had 1 percent of the has considered the impact of this motor vehicle insurance premiums on a to extend the approval afterwards. The proposed rule and determined that the existing information collection indicates national basis. The list was last action is not ‘‘significant’’ within the that the number of respondents for this amended in a final rule published on meaning of the Department of collection is thirty, however, the actual July 13, 2011 (76 FR 41138). Based on Transportation’s regulatory policies and number of respondents fluctuate from the 2009 calendar year data market procedures. This proposed rule year to year. Therefore, because the shares from A.M. Best, NHTSA proposes implements the agency’s policy of number of respondents required to to remove American International ensuring that all insurance companies report for this final rule does not exceed Group from Appendix A and add that are statutorily eligible for the number of respondents indicated in California State Auto Group to exemption from the insurer reporting the existing information collection, the Appendix A. requirements are in fact exempted from agency does not believe that an Each of the 17 insurers listed in those requirements. Only those amendment to the existing information Appendix A are required to file a report companies that are not statutorily collection is necessary. eligible for an exemption are required to before October 25, 2012, setting forth 3. Regulatory Flexibility Act the information required by Part 544 for file reports. NHTSA does not believe that this The agency also considered the effects each State in which it did business in proposed rule, reflecting current data, of this rulemaking under the Regulatory the 2009 calendar year. As long as these affects the impacts described in the final Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 17 insurers remain listed, they will be regulatory evaluation prepared for the seq.). I certify that this proposed rule required to submit reports by each final rule establishing Part 544 (52 FR will not have a significant economic subsequent October 25 for the calendar 59; January 2, 1987). Accordingly, a impact on a substantial number of small year ending slightly less than 3 years separate regulatory evaluation has not entities. The rationale for the before. been prepared for this rulemaking certification is that none of the Appendix B lists insurers required to action. The cost estimates in the 1987 companies proposed for Appendices A, report for particular States for calendar final regulatory evaluation should be B, or C are construed to be a small entity year 2009, because each insurer had a adjusted for inflation, using the Bureau within the definition of the RFA. ‘‘Small 10 percent or greater market share of of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index insurer’’ is defined, in part under 49 motor vehicle premiums in those States. for 2012 (see http://www.bls.gov/cpi). U.S.C. 33112, as any insurer whose Based on the 2009 calendar year data for The agency estimates that the cost of premiums for all forms of motor vehicle market shares from A.M. Best, we compliance is $50,000 (1987 dollars) for insurance account for less than 1 propose to make no change to any insurer added to Appendix A, percent of the total premiums for all Appendix B. $20,000 (1987 dollars) for any insurer forms of motor vehicle insurance issued added to Appendix B, and $5,770 (1987 by insurers within the United States, or The eight remaining insurers listed in dollars) for any insurer added to any insurer whose premiums within any Appendix B are required to report on Appendix C. If this proposed rule is State, account for less than 10 percent their calendar year 2009 activities in made final, for Appendix A, the agency of the total premiums for all forms of every State where they had a 10 percent would propose to remove and add one motor vehicle insurance issued by or greater market share. These reports company, for Appendix B, the agency insurers within the State. This notice must be filed by October 25, 2012, and would propose to make no change, and would exempt all insurers meeting set forth the information required by for Appendix C, the agency would those criteria. Any insurer too large to Part 544. As long as these eight insurers propose to make no change. The agency meet those criteria is not a small entity. remain listed, they would be required to estimates that the net effect of this In addition, in this rulemaking, the submit reports on or before each proposal, if made final, would have no agency proposes to exempt all ‘‘self subsequent October 25 for the calendar cost to insurers as a group. insured rental and leasing companies’’ year ending slightly less than 3 years Interested persons may wish to that have fleets of fewer than 50,000 before. examine the 1987 final regulatory vehicles. Any self-insured rental and evaluation. Copies of that evaluation 2. Rental and Leasing Companies leasing company too large to meet that were placed in Docket No. T86–01; criterion is not a small entity. Notice 2. Any interested person may Appendix C lists rental and leasing 4. Federalism companies required to file reports. obtain a copy of this evaluation by NHTSA proposes to make no change to writing to NHTSA, Technical Reference This action has been analyzed Appendix C. Division, 1201 New Jersey Avenue SE., according to the principles and criteria East Building, Ground Floor, Room contained in Executive Order 12612, Each of the remaining five companies E12–100, Washington, DC 20590, or by and it has been determined that the (including franchisees and licensees) calling (202) 366–2588. proposed rule does not have sufficient listed in Appendix C are required to file federalism implications to warrant the 2. Paperwork Reduction Act reports for calendar year 2009 no later preparation of a Federalism Assessment. than October 25, 2012, and set forth the The information collection information required by Part 544. As requirements in this proposed rule were 5. Environmental Impacts long as those five companies remain submitted to the Office of Management In accordance with the National listed, they would be required to submit and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the Environmental Policy Act, NHTSA has reports before each subsequent October requirements of the Paperwork considered the environmental impacts 25 for the calendar year ending slightly Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). of this proposed rule and determined less than 3 years before. This collection of information is that it would not have a significant

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28346 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

impact on the quality of the human • Provide solid technical and cost 5. Will the Agency consider late environment. data to support your views. comments? • If you estimate potential costs, 6. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) NHTSA will consider all comments explain how you derived the estimate. that Docket Management receives before The Department of Transportation • Provide specific examples to the close of business on the comment assigns a regulation identifier number illustrate your concerns. closing date indicated above under (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in • Offer specific alternatives. DATES. To the extent possible, we will the Unified Agenda of Federal • Include the name, date and docket also consider comments that Docket Regulations. The Regulatory Information number with your comments. Management receives after that date. If Service Center publishes the Unified Docket Management receives a comment Agenda in April and October of each 2. How do I prepare and submit too late for us to consider, in developing year. You may use the RIN contained in comments? a final rule (assuming that one is the heading, at the beginning, of this Your comments must be written in issued), we will consider that comment document to find this action in the English. To ensure that your comments as an informal suggestion for future Unified Agenda. are correctly filed in the Docket, please rulemaking action. 7. Plain Language include the docket number of this document in your comments. 6. How can I read the comments Executive Order 12866 and the Your comments must not exceed 15 submitted by other people? President’s memorandum of June 1, pages long (49 CFR 553.21). We You may read the comments received 1998, require each agency to write all established this limit to encourage you by Docket Management at the address rules in plain language. Application of to write your primary comments given above under ADDRESSES the principles of plain language . The concisely. You may attach necessary includes consideration of the following hours of the Docket are indicated above, documents to your comments. We have questions: in the same location. You may also see no limit on the attachments’ length. • Have we organized the material to the comments on the Internet. To read suit the public’s needs? Please submit two copies of your the comments on the Internet, log onto • Are the requirements in the comments, including the attachments, the Federal eRulemaking Portal at proposal clearly stated? to Docket Management at the address http:www.regulation.gov. given above under ADDRESSES. • Does the proposal contain technical V. Conclusion language or jargon that is not clear? Comments may also be submitted to • Would a different format (grouping the docket electronically by logging onto Based on the foregoing, we are and order of sections, use of headings, the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site proposing to amend Appendices B and paragraphing) make the rule easier to at http:www.regulation.gov. Follow the C of 49 CFR 544, Insurer Reporting understand? online instructions for submitting Requirements. We are also amending • Would more (but shorter) sections comments. § 544.5 to revise the example given the recent update to the reporting be better? 3. How can I be sure that my comments • requirements. Could we improve clarity by adding were received? tables, lists, or diagrams? List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 544 • What else could we do to make the If you wish Docket Management to proposal easier to understand? notify you, upon its receipt of your Crime insurance, Insurance, Insurance If you have any responses to these comments, enclose a self-addressed, companies, Motor vehicles, Reporting questions, you can forward them to me stamped postcard in the envelope and recordkeeping requirements. several ways: containing your comments. Upon In consideration of the foregoing, 49 a. Mail: Carlita Ballard, Office of receiving your comments, Docket CFR part 544 is proposed to be amended International Policy, Fuel Economy and Management will mail the postcard. as follows: Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New 4. How do I submit confidential PART 544—[AMENDED] Jersey Avenue SE., (West Building) business information? Washington, DC 20590; 1. The authority citation for part 544 b. Email: [email protected]; or If you wish to submit any information continues to read as follows: c. Fax: (202) 493–2990. under a confidentiality claim, you should submit three copies of your Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33112; delegation of IV. Comments complete submission, including the authority at 49 CFR 1.50. Submission of Comments information you claim as confidential 2. Paragraph (a) of § 544.5 is revised business information, to the Chief to read as follows: 1. How can I influence NHTSA’s Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, thinking on this proposed rule? NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., § 544.5 General requirements for reports. In developing our rules, NHTSA tries West Building, Washington, DC 20590. (a) Each insurer to which this part to address the concerns of all our In addition, you should submit two applies shall submit a report annually stakeholders. Your comments will help copies, from which you have deleted the before October 25, beginning on October us improve this rule. We invite you to claimed confidential business 25, 1986. This report shall contain the provide views on our proposal, new information, to Docket Management at information required by § 544.6 of this data, a discussion of the effects of this the address given above under part for the calendar year 3 years proposal on you, or other relevant ADDRESSES. When you send a comment previous to the year in which the report information. We welcome your views on containing information claimed to be is filed (e.g., the report due by October all aspects of this proposed rule. Your confidential business information, you 25, 2012, will contain the required comments will be most effective if you should include a cover letter addressing information for the 2009 calendar year). follow the suggestions below: the information specified in our * * * * * • Explain your views and reasoning confidential business information 3. Appendix A to Part 544 is revised clearly. regulation (49 CFR part 512). to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28347

Appendix A—Insurers of Motor Vehicle DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or Insurance Policies Subject to the hand-delivery to: Public Comments Reporting Requirements in Each State Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R9–ES–2011– in Which They Do Business 0099; Division of Policy and Directives 50 CFR Parts 13, 17, and 402 Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Allstate Insurance Group Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS American Family Insurance Group [Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2011–0099; FXES11150900000A2123] 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. Auto Club Enterprise Insurance Group We will post all information received Auto-Owners Insurance Group RIN 1018–AY29 on http://www.regulations.gov. This Berkshire Hathaway/GEICO Corporation generally means that we will post any Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Group personal information you provide us 1 and Plants; Expanding Incentives for California State Auto Group (see Public Comments below for more Erie Insurance Group Voluntary Conservation Actions Under details). Farmers Insurance Group the Endangered Species Act Hartford Insurance Group FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Serfis, Chief, Office of Communications Metropolitan Life Auto & Home Group Interior. and Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish Mercury General Group ACTION: Advance notice of proposed and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Nationwide Group rulemaking; extension of comment Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203 Progressive Group period. (telephone 703–358–2171). If you use a State Farm Group telecommunications device for the deaf SUMMARY: Travelers Companies We, the U.S. Fish and (TDD), call the Federal Information USAA Group Wildlife Service (Service), extend the Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. deadline for submission of public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 4. Appendix B to Part 544 is revised comments to help us identify potential to read as follows: changes to our regulations that Public Comments implement parts of the Endangered We are considering whether and how Appendix B—Issuers of Motor Vehicle Species Act that would create incentives Insurance Policies Subject to the we could revise our regulations to create for landowners and others to take incentives for landowners and others to Reporting Requirements Only in voluntary conservation actions to Designated States take voluntary conservation actions to benefit species that may be likely to benefit species that may be likely to Alfa Insurance Group (Alabama) become threatened or endangered become threatened or endangered Auto Club (Michigan) species. In particular, we seek comment species, including revisions that could Commerce Group, Inc. (Massachusetts) on whether and how the Service can recognize the benefits of such Kentucky Farm Bureau Group (Kentucky) assure those who take such voluntary conservation actions as offsetting the New Jersey Manufacturers Group (New actions that the benefits of their actions adverse effects of actions carried out Jersey) will be recognized as offsetting the after listing by that landowner or others. Safety Group (Massachusetts) adverse effects of activities carried out We request comments, information, and Southern Farm Bureau Group (Arkansas, after listing by that landowner or others. suggestions from the public, other Mississippi) The practice of recognizing these concerned governmental agencies, the Tennessee Farmers Companies (Tennessee) actions, sometimes referred to as scientific community, industry, private ‘‘advance mitigation’’ or ‘‘prelisting 5. Appendix C to Part 544 is revised landowners, or any other interested mitigation,’’ is intended to encourage parties to help us formulate any to read as follows: early conservation efforts that could proposed regulation. reduce or eliminate the need to list Appendix C—Motor Vehicle Rental and You may submit your comments and species as endangered or threatened. If Leasing Companies (Including materials concerning this notice by one you have previously submitted of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We Licensees and Franchisees) Subject to comments, please do not resubmit them, the Reporting Requirements of Part 544 will not accept comments sent by email because we have already incorporated or fax or to an address not listed in Avis Budget Group (subsidiary of Cendant) them into the public record and will ADDRESSES. Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group fully consider them as we decide how If you submit a comment via http:// Enterprise Holding Inc./Enterprise Rent-A- we may propose changes to our www.regulations.gov, your entire Car Company regulations or policies. comment—including your personal Hertz Rent-A-Car Division (subsidiary of The DATES: Electronic comments via http:// identifying information—will be posted Hertz Corporation) www.regulations.gov must be submitted on the Web site. If you submit a hard U-Haul International, Inc. (subsidiary of by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on July 13, copy comment that includes personal AMERCO) 2012. Comments submitted by mail identifying information, you may Issued on: May 8, 2012. must be postmarked no later than July request at the top of your document that Christopher J. Bonanti, 13, 2012. we withhold this information from Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments public review. However, we cannot by one of the following methods: guarantee that we will be able to do so. [FR Doc. 2012–11565 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Electronically: Go to the Federal We will post all hardcopy comments on BILLING CODE 4910–59–P eRulemaking Portal: http:// http://www.regulations.gov. www.regulations.gov. In the Enter Comments and materials we receive, Keyword or ID box, enter FWS–R9–ES– as well as supporting documentation we 2011–0099, which is the docket number used in preparing this notice, will be 1 Indicates a newly listed company which must for this notice. You may submit a available for public inspection on file a report beginning with the report due October comment by clicking on ‘‘Submit a http://www.regulations.gov, or by 25, 2012. Comment.’’ appointment, during normal business

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28348 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules

hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife take conservation measures for we extend the comment period for an Service (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION candidates or other at-risk species. See additional 60 days. CONTACT). that document for specific questions we Authority asked and for more detailed Background information. This notice is published under the authority of the Endangered Species Act On March 15, 2012 (77 FR 15352), we We have received a request for an of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et published an advance notice of extension of the comment period from seq.). proposed rulemaking and requested the Association of Fish & Wildlife comments, information, and suggestions Agencies so that State fish and wildlife Dated: May 7, 2012. from the public on ways to improve agencies could have adequate time to Gregory E. Siekaniec, upon current agreements or create new submit comments in response to the Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. mechanisms to provide incentives to proposal. To accommodate this request, [FR Doc. 2012–11676 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] landowners who fund or voluntarily BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 28349

Notices Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 93

Monday, May 14, 2012

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER the collection of information unless it Total Burden Hours: 1,020. contains documents other than rules or displays a currently valid OMB control Ruth Brown, proposed rules that are applicable to the number. public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Departmental Information Collection committee meetings, agency decisions and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Clearance Officer. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Service [FR Doc. 2012–11480 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] petitions and applications and agency BILLING CODE 3410–34–P statements of organization and functions are Title: Health Certificate for the Export examples of documents appearing in this of Live Crustaceans, Finfish, Mollusks, section. and Related Products. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OMB Control Number: 0579–0278. Food and Nutrition Service DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Summary Of Collection: The Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA) of 2002 is Agency Information Collection Submission for OMB Review; the primary Federal law governing the Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request protection of animal health. The law Comment Request—An Assessment of gives the Secretary of Agriculture broad May 8, 2012. the Roles and Effectiveness of authority to detect, control, or eradicate Community-Based Organizations in The Department of Agriculture has pests or diseases of livestock or poultry. submitted the following information the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance The AHPA is contained in Title X, Program collection requirement(s) to OMB for Subtitle E, Sections 10401–18 of Public review and clearance under the Law 107–171, May 13, 2002, the Farm AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Security and Rural Investment Act of USDA. Public Law 104–13. Comments 2002. The Animal and Plant Health ACTION: regarding (a) whether the collection of Notice. Inspection Service (APHIS) maintains information is necessary for the proper information regarding the import health SUMMARY: In accordance with the performance of the functions of the requirements of other countries for Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this agency, including whether the animals and animal products exported notice invites the general public and information will have practical utility; from the United States. other public agencies to comment on (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate this proposed information collection. Need and Use of the Information: of burden including the validity of the This is a new collection for the Food APHIS requires U.S. exporters to methodology and assumptions used; (c) and Nutrition Service to describe the complete an export health certificate ways to enhance the quality, utility and roles of community-based organizations before exporting any live crustaceans clarity of the information to be (CBOs) in the Supplemental Nutrition and their gametes, live finfish, and their collected; (d) ways to minimize the Assistance Program (SNAP), and to gametes, or live mollucks and their burden of the collection of information assess if, and how, the use of CBOs to gametes, if requested by the importing on those who are to respond, including conduct SNAP applicant interviews has country. The certificate will be through the use of appropriate impacted SNAP program outcomes such completed by an accredited veterinarian automated, electronic, mechanical, or as timeliness, payment error rates, other technological collection with assistance from the producer, and access, and client satisfaction. techniques or other forms of information must be signed by the accredited technology should be addressed to: Desk veterinarian and endorsed by APHIS as DATES: Written comments on this notice Officer for Agriculture, Office of the competent Federal authority who must be received on or before July 13, Information and Regulatory Affairs, certifies the health status of the 2012. Office of Management and Budget shipment being exported. The health ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: (OMB), certificate identifies the names of the (a) Whether the proposed collection of [email protected] or species being exported from the U.S., information is necessary for the proper fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental their age and weights, and whether they performance of the functions of the Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail are cultured stock or wild stock; their agency, including whether the Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– place of origin, their country of information will have practical utility; 7602. Comments regarding these destination and the date and method of (b) the accuracy of the agency’s burden information collections are best assured transport. If this information were not estimate for the proposed collection of of having their full effect if received collected, or collected less frequently, information, including the validity of within 30 days of this notification. export trade would decrease. These the methodology and assumptions that Copies of the submission(s) may be certificates allow APHIS to address the were used; (c) ways to minimize the obtained by calling (202) 720–8958. increasing health attestations of burden of the collection of information An agency may not conduct or importing countries with minimal on those who are to respond, including sponsor a collection of information burden to the public. use of appropriate automated, unless the collection of information Description of Respondents: Business electronic, mechanical, or other displays a currently valid OMB control or other for-profit. technological collection techniques or number and the agency informs other forms of information technology, potential persons who are to respond to Number of Respondents: 69. and (d) ways to enhance the quality, the collection of information that such Frequency of Responses: Reporting: utility and clarity of the information to persons are not required to respond to On occasion. be collected.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28350 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

Written comments may be sent to: satisfaction. Additionally, FNS is In addition to the telephone and in- Steven Carlson, Office of Research and interested in gathering information person interviews, FNS will request two Analysis, Food and Nutrition Service, about variations among the partnering administrative files from each State. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 CBOs in terms of who they serve, what One file will be used to analyze program Park Center Drive, Room 1014, services they offer, how they provide outcomes such as timeliness and Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments may SNAP related services, and the nature of payment error rates. The other file will also be submitted via fax to the attention their partnerships with local SNAP include records of SNAP participants of Steven Carlson at (703) 305–2576 or offices. To address these questions, FNS who were interviewed at a local SNAP via email to has specified the following objectives: office or a partner CBO within the [email protected]. Comments 1. Describe the CBOs conducting timeframe of the demonstration project. will also be accepted through the SNAP interviews and the nature of their This file will be used to select the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to partnerships with State and local SNAP sample for a client satisfaction survey. http://www.regulations,gov, and follow agencies. Affected Public: State and local the online instructions for submitting 2. Describe the response of State government; business-not-for-profit comments electronically. SNAP staff to the involvement of CBOs institutions; individuals or households. All written comments will be open for in conducting applicant interviews. Respondent groups identified include: public inspection at the office of the 3. Describe the response of CBO (1) State SNAP Directors; (2) employees Food and Nutrition Service during interviewers to their involvement with from selected local SNAP offices; (3) regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 SNAP. CBO Directors; (4) CBO staff; and (5) p.m., Monday through Friday) at 3101 4. Describe how the experiences of SNAP participants. Estimated Number of Respondents: Park Center Drive, Room 1014, SNAP applicants who are interviewed The total estimated number of Alexandria, Virginia 22302. by CBO staff compare to the experiences respondents is 2,620 across all 5 States. All responses to this notice will be of SNAP applicants who are This estimate includes: Completed summarized and included in the request interviewed by SNAP staff. telephone surveys with 2,500 SNAP for OMB approval. All comments will 5. Describe the services that the CBOs participants (500 per State, but will also become a matter of public record. offer. recruit 750 per State to account for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 6. Document the impacts of CBOs nonrespondents and ensure the targeted Requests for additional information or conducting SNAP interviews on number is obtained); 5 telephone copies of this information collection program outcomes. interviews with SNAP Directors (1 per should be directed to Steven Carlson at The information collection plan for State); 10 telephone interviews with 703–305–2017. Information requests this study includes interviews with: (1) CBO Directors (2 per State); 20 in- submitted through email should refer to State SNAP directors; (2) CBO directors; person interviews with local SNAP the title of this proposal. (3) local SNAP office directors and office directors (1 per office, with 4 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SNAP staff who train or supervise CBO offices per State); 20 in-person Title: An Assessment of the Roles and partners on SNAP policies and interviews with employees of local Effectiveness of Community-based application procedures; (4) CBO site SNAP offices (1 per office, with 4 offices Organizations in the Supplemental directors and staff who are responsible per State); 20 in-person interviews with Nutrition Assistance Program. for conducting SNAP applicant local CBO site directors; 40 interviews OMB Number: 0584–NEW. interviews; and (5) SNAP participants with local CBO site staff/interviewers (2 Form Number: Not Applicable. who were interviewed by SNAP or CBO per office, 4 offices per State); and Expiration Date: Not yet determined. staff at the time of application or requests for administrative data from 5 Type of Request: New collection of recertification for SNAP. FNS will use State SNAP personnel in charge of information. the information collected from these information technology (IT)/data (1 per Abstract: To provide more timely and sources to evaluate whether the State). efficient services to the growing number Community Partner Interviewer Projects Estimated Number of Responses per of applicants to SNAP, State and local have helped to improve SNAP access Respondent: Each respondent will be SNAP offices are partnering with CBOs and performance, as well as to asked to respond once. that have the capacity to provide document the ways in which the Estimated Time per Respondent: The application assistance and conduct projects have been implemented in burden estimate for State SNAP applicant interviews for SNAP. FNS has different States (e.g., with specific Directors is 1.25 hours, and the burden approved these partnerships as part of a populations or in specific types of estimate for CBO directors is 1.0 hour, demonstration of ‘‘Community Partner partners). including time to prepare for and Interviewer Projects.’’ Although these FNS’ data collection strategy aims to complete the interview. For local SNAP projects have existed for several years, maximize both efficiency and data office directors and local CBO site they have never been fully evaluated. To quality. The interviews with State SNAP directors, the burden estimate is 1.5 assess the impact of these SNAP–CBO Directors and CBO Directors will be hours, including time for scheduling the partnerships on SNAP program conducted by telephone and will last no site visit, completing the interview, and outcomes, FNS is seeking to collect data more than 1 hour. Following the coordinating the schedules of office staff from the five States that are telephone interviews, FNS seeks to to be interviewed. For SNAP office and participating in the demonstration. conduct site visits to local SNAP offices CBO site staff, the burden estimate is 1.0 The overarching goal of this study is and nearby CBO locations in each State. hour each. The burden estimate for to determine whether the use of CBOs The site visits will provide the SNAP participants to complete a survey to conduct SNAP applicant interviews opportunity to conduct in-person is 0.3 hours (20 minutes), including has an impact on SNAP program interviews with local SNAP office time to review the advance letter, performance, and if so, what the nature directors, SNAP staff, local CBO site schedule an appointment, and complete of that impact is. Specific program directors and CBO staff who have been the interview. outcomes of interest include efficiency, trained to conduct SNAP applicant Estimated Total Annual Burden on payment accuracy and client interviews. Respondents: The total estimated

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28351

burden on respondents is 750 hours for administrative data files) for a total of decline participation in the survey. The the SNAP participant surveys, 130 925 hours. See table below for a burden estimate associated with these hours for State and CBO directors and complete breakdown of burden hours. non-respondents, not shown in the staff members, and 45 hours for State In addition, we estimate that 625 SNAP table, is .08 hours each, for a total of 50 SNAP IT staff (for providing participants will be contacted but will hours of burden on non-respondents.

BURDEN ESTIMATES FOR RESPONDENTS

Average Number of respond- Frequency of Total burden per Total burden Type of respondent Type of instrument ents response responses response (in hours) (in hours)

State SNAP Director .. Telephone interview ... 5 ...... 1 5 1.25 6.25 Local SNAP Agency In person interview ..... 20 (1 per office, 4 of- 1 20 1.5 30 Director. fices per State, 5 states). Local SNAP Agency In person interview ..... 20 (1 per office, 4 of- 1 20 1 20 Staff. fices per State, 5 States). CBO Director ...... Telephone interview ... 10 (2 per State, 5 1 10 1 10 States). Local CBO Site Direc- In person interview ..... 20 (1 per office, 4 of- 1 20 1.5 30 tor. fices per State, 5 states). Local CBO Staff ...... In person interview ..... 40 (2 per office, 4 of- 1 40 1 40 fices per State, 5 States). Adults (18+ years of Telephone survey 2,500 (500 per State) 1 2,500 .3 750 age). questionnaire. (completed). Adults (18+ years of Telephone survey 1,250 (250 per State) 1 1,250 .05 1.04 age). questionnaire. (Nonrespondent). State SNAP IT Staff ... Administrative data file 5 ...... 3 15 5 45

Total ...... 3,870 ...... 3,880 ...... 926 .04

Dated: May 8, 2012. national estimates of participating administration and to identify ways to Robin Bailey, Jr., households as well as estimates for large make the program more beneficial to Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition subgroups, such as households with participants. Service. elderly participants. For a sample of DATES: Written comments must be [FR Doc. 2012–11589 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) or received on or before July 13, 2012. BILLING CODE 3410–30–P State-administered FDPIR programs, ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on (a) participating households will be whether the proposed collection of selected for data collection. Data information is necessary for the proper DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE collection will consist of case record performance of the functions of the reviews (abstracting standard eligibility Food and Nutrition Service agency, including whether the information for all household members) information shall have practical utility; and, for each selected household, Agency Information Collection (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate interviews with the person who applied Activities: Proposed Collection; of the burden of the proposed collection for FDPIR assistance (noted as the Head Comment Request—Study of the Food of information, including the validity of of Household on some forms) or his/her Distribution Program on Indian the methodology and assumptions used; Reservations (FDPIR) proxy. Site visits will be conducted to (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, a subset of the ITOs or State- and clarity of the information to be AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, administered programs to obtain collected; and (d) ways to minimize the USDA. qualitative information on program burden of the collection of information ACTION: Notice. operations and experiences of FDPIR on those who are to respond, including participants and eligible use of appropriate automated, SUMMARY: In accordance with the nonparticipants. Site visit data electronic, mechanical, or other Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this collection will include interviews with technological collection techniques or notice invites the general public and Tribal leaders, FDPIR administrators other forms of information technology. other public agencies to comment on and staff, and other service providers; Comments, identified by the title of proposed information collections. This visits to FDPIR enrollment sites, the information activity, may be sent to is a new information collection in warehouses, and distribution sites; and Steven Carlson, Office of Research and which Food and Nutrition Service seeks discussion groups with FDPIR Analysis, Food and Nutrition Service/ an updated description of Food participants and eligible USDA, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room Distribution Program on Indian nonparticipants. Information obtained 1014, Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments Reservations (FDPIR) participants and will provide updated information on may also be submitted via fax to the programs, and a better understanding of FDPIR participants and program attention of Steven Carlson at 703–305– why FDPIR participation has been operations and will be used by FNS to 2576 or via email to Steve.Carlson@fns. declining. This study will provide inform decisions regarding program usda.gov. Comments will also be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28352 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

accepted through the Federal • Obtaining an updated demographic Respondent Types: Respondents are eRulemaking Portal. Go to http:// profile of participants, FDPIR managers and administrative regulations.gov, and follow the online • Exploring reasons for the decline in staff, Tribal leaders, and other service instructions for submitting comments FDPIR participation, providers that work with or coordinate electronically. • Examining food package with FDPIR programs and FDPIR All written comments will be open for distribution approaches and other key participants and FDPIR eligible non- public inspection at the office of the aspects of FDPIR operations, participants. Food and Nutrition Service during • Learning about FDPIR’s Estimated Number of Respondents: regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 contribution to participants’ food Case record reviews require FDPIR staff p.m., Monday through Friday) at 3101 supply, and Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA • Learning about participant to pull case records selected for the 22302, Room 1014. satisfaction with the program. sample and subsequently return them to All responses to this notice will be The study will be conducted over a the appropriate file. One staff person at summarized and included in the request 3-year period. Data collection activities each site will be responsible for this for Office of Management and Budget will include case record reviews, task, for a total of 26 respondents. The approval. All comments will be a matter participant surveys, and site visits. A total estimated number of sample of public record. nationally-representative sample of 998 members for the survey is 998. The total FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: participating households will be estimated number of respondents to the Requests for additional information or included in the case record reviews and survey is 832 or 80% of the sample. The copies of the information collection participant interviews. This sample will total estimated number of sample should be directed to Steven Carlson at be selected at random from participating members for the on-site staff interviews (703) 305–2017. households in each of 26 FDPIR is 170. A 100% response rate is anticipated for the staff interviews. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: programs. Site visits to 17 programs will Title: Study of the Food Distribution consist of staff interviews, discussion total estimated number of sample Program on Indian Reservations groups with participants and non- members for the focus groups is 300. (FDPIR). participants, and tours of program The total estimated number of responses OMB Number: 0584–NEW. facilities. for the focus groups is 240 (80% Form Number: N/A. Clearance is requested for the response rate). The total number of Expiration Date: To be determined. following new data collection activities: respondents is estimated to be 1,444. Type of Request: New collection of (1) Case record review/abstraction of Number of Responses per information. case record data elements; (2) survey of Respondent: All data collection Abstract: This study will provide FDPIR participants; (3) on-site components are one-time only, and in current, nationally representative interviews and observations of FDPIR most cases respondents will respond information on FDPIR participants and program operations; and (4) discussion only once. Some FDPIR management or will provide updated information on groups with participants and eligible administrative staff may be providing local program operations across the nonparticipants. case record data as well as participating nation. Information will be collected on In addition to primary data collection, in on-site staff interviews, and a small perceptions about the program, the study will model effects of how number of FDPIR participants may potential access barriers, and changes in FDPIR policy, changes in respond to the survey and participate in participation in the Supplemental household composition and a discussion group. Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) characteristics, and economic factors and other food assistance programs in may affect eligibility. The study will Estimated Time per Response: The order to identify reasons for declining also use Census data files to consider estimated average response time for participation. The last nationally FDPIR participation in the context of obtaining the case record is 15 minutes. representative study was completed in demographic and geographic shifts in The estimated average response time is 1990. Since then, significant changes the Native American population. 30 minutes for the survey, 60 minutes have occurred in FDPIR, including Consultations with Tribal officials and for the on-site staff interviews, and 120 changes to eligibility rules, foods extensive outreach to Tribes will occur minutes to participate in the discussion offered, and food delivery options. This in order to seek input from all FDPIR group. study is needed to help FNS make programs and to develop collaborative Estimated Total Annual Burden on decisions regarding program relationships with Tribal partners at Respondents: The estimated response administration and identify ways to each program in the study sample to time in hours is 249.5 for the case make the program more beneficial to increase survey participation. record review, 421.8 for the survey, participants. The study’s objectives Affected Public: State, Local, Tribal 170.0 for the on-site staff interviews, include, but are not limited to: agencies; Individuals and Households. and 489.6 for the discussion groups.

Estimated Estimated Time per Annual Affected public Respondent Type of number of Frequency total annual respondent burden type instrument respondents of response responses (in hours) hours

State, Local and FDPIR admin. Case record re- Completed * ...... 26 ...... 38.38 998 0.25 249.5 Tribal Agencies. staff. views. Tribal leaders, On-site staff Completed * ...... 170 (17 sites; 10 1 170 1 170 FDPIR man- interviews. respon-dents agers and per site). staff, other service pro- viders.

SA Sub-total ...... 196 ...... 1,168 ...... 419.5

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28353

Estimated Estimated Time per Annual Affected public Respondent Type of number of Frequency total annual respondent burden type instrument respondents of response responses (in hours) hours

Individuals/ FDPIR partici- HH survey ...... Completed ...... 832 ...... 1 832 0.5 416 Households. pants. Attempted ...... 116 ...... 116 0.05 5.8 FDPIR partici- Discussion Completed ...... 240 (20 groups; 1 240 2 480 pants; eligible groups. 12 per group). non-partici- pants. Attempted ...... 60 ...... 1 60 0.16 9.6

I/H Sub-total ...... 1,248.00 ...... 1,248.00 ...... 911.4

Total Es- ...... 1,444.00 ...... 2,416.00 ...... 1,330.90 timat- ed Re- porting Bur- den.

*NOTE: FNS expects 100 percent participation from State Agencies.

Dated: May 7, 2012. Components and materials sourced controllers; control panel assemblies; Robin Bailey, Jr., from abroad include: Ethanol; lamps; LEDs; photo sensors; diodes; Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition naphthalenes; mineral oil; sulfuric acid; EEPROMs; wires and cables (including Service. nitric acid; phosphoric acid; silica gel fiber optic cable); insulators; filters; [FR Doc. 2012–11590 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] sacs; deionized water; trimethylpentane; lenses; mirrors; prisms; other optical BILLING CODE 3410–30–P benzene; anthracene; methanol; elements; flat panel displays; isopropyl alcohol; ethylene glycol; thermometers; electrical pressure acetone; perfluorotributylamine; primer; gauges; measuring instruments and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE nitrile function compounds, including sensors; chromatographs and parts; acetonitrile and nitrophenol; silicone spectroscopes and parts; and other Foreign-Trade Zones Board compounds; lubricating oils; grease; testing machines (duty rates range from adhesives; photographic film; activated free to 10.7%). The request indicates [B–34–2012] carbon; sealing compounds; articles of that certain bearings are subject to an plastic, including pipes, hoses and antidumping/countervailing duty (AD/ Foreign-Trade Zone 45—Portland, OR, fittings, film, sheets, shapes, bags, Notification of Proposed Production CVD) order. The FTZ regulations (15 bottles, lids and caps; hardware and CFR 400.14(e)) require that merchandise Activity, Shimadzu USA fasteners; self-adhesive labels and tapes; subject to AD/CVD actions be admitted Manufacturing, Inc. (Chromatograph sponges; articles of rubber, including to the zone in privileged foreign status and Mass Spectrometer Production), belts, o-rings, gaskets, seals, and (19 CFR 146.41). Canby, OR stoppers; wood cases; self-adhesive The Port of Portland, grantee of FTZ paper; direct thermal paper; cleaning Public comment is invited from 45, submitted a notification of proposed wipes; cardboard boxes; notebooks and interested parties. Submissions shall be production activity on behalf of binders; filter paper; technical books addressed to the Board’s Executive Shimadzu USA Manufacturing, Inc. and manuals; textile-covered foam Secretary at the address below. The (Shimadzu), for its facility located in shielding; ceramic hardware and closing period for their receipt is June Canby, Oregon. An application for fittings; lab glassware; wool and 25, 2012. subzone status at the facility was also fiberglass insulation; glass insulator A copy of the notification will be submitted and will be processed under pins; gold-plated screws; plungers and available for public inspection at the Section 400.31 of the Board’s ball seat sets of semi-precious stones; Office of the Executive Secretary, regulations. The facility is used for the zinc-coated wire; articles of stainless Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, production of chromatographs, mass steel, including bars; pipes, tubing, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 fittings, mesh, and hardware; brass and spectrometers and related equipment Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, copper hardware; articles of aluminum, such as liquid chromatograph pumps, DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading including washers, sheets and foil; fraction collectors, auto samplers, lab Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, bearings, hand tools; metal fittings; instruments, controllers, and column which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ ovens. pumps; fans; refrigeration and freezing ftz. Production under FTZ procedures equipment; heat exchangers; filtering could exempt Shimadzu from customs equipment; work holders and jigs; For further information, contact Diane duty payments on the foreign status computer equipment; mechanical Finver at [email protected] or components used in export production. appliances; metal machined parts; (202) 482–1367. On its domestic sales, Shimadzu would valves; bearings; transmission parts; Dated: May 8, 2012. gears; pulleys; motors; transformers; be able to choose the duty rates during Elizabeth Whiteman, customs entry procedures that apply to power supplies; magnets; magnetic the finished equipment (duty free to parts; lithium-ion batteries; column Acting Executive Secretary. 2.7%) for the foreign status inputs noted ovens; heaters and parts; recording [FR Doc. 2012–11652 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] below. Customs duties also could media; capacitors; resistors; fuses; BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P possibly be deferred or reduced on sensors; switches; lamp holders; foreign status production equipment. connectors; terminals; programmable

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28354 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE questionnaire and did not request an request an extension by the stated extension by the stated deadline. deadline. International Trade Administration On February 6, 2012, we selected an additional mandatory respondent, Pu Statutory Time Limits [A–570–918] Jiang County Command Metal Products Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act Co., Ltd (‘‘Pu Jiang’’) as a replacement of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the for Shaoxing Liangbao.5 In our cover People’s Republic of China: Extension letter, we established a Section A requires the Department to issue the of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of questionnaire response deadline of preliminary results of an administrative the Third Antidumping Duty February 27, 2012.6 Pu Jiang did not review within 245 days after the last day Administrative Review respond to the Department’s Section A of the anniversary month of an order for which a review is requested. Consistent AGENCY: Import Administration, questionnaire and did not request an with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the International Trade Administration, extension by the stated deadline. Department of Commerce. On March 8, 2012, we selected Department may extend the 245-day Shaoxing Shunji Metal Clotheshorse period to 365 days if it is not practicable DATES: Effective Date: May 14, 2012. Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shaoxing Shunji’’) as a to complete the review within a 245-day FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: replacement mandatory respondent for period. Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations, Pu Jiang and served its U.S. counsel Office 9, Import Administration, with the questionnaire.7 In our cover Extension of Time Limit of Preliminary International Trade Administration, letter, we established a Section A Results U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th questionnaire response deadline of The preliminary results are currently Street and Constitution Avenue NW., March 29, 2012.8 Shaoxing Shunji did due on July 2, 2012. The Department Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) not respond to the Department’s Section 482–2593. A questionnaire and did not request an determines that completion of the preliminary results of this review within Background extension by the stated deadline. On April 9, 2012, we selected the statutory time period is not On November 30, 2011, the Shaoxing Zhongbao Metal practicable because of an ongoing Department of Commerce (‘‘the Manufactured Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shaoxing surrogate country selection issue.11 Department’’) published in the Federal Zhongbao’’) as a replacement mandatory Thus, the Department requires more Register a notice of initiation of an respondent and served its U.S. counsel time to gather and analyze surrogate administrative review of the with the questionnaire.9 In our cover country and value information, review antidumping duty order on steel wire letter, we established a Section A questionnaire responses, and issue garment hangers from the People’s questionnaire response deadline of supplemental questionnaires. The Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) covering the April 30, 2012.10 Shaoxing Zhongbao current date of the preliminary results period, October 1, 2010, through did not respond to the Department’s does not afford the Department adequate September 30, 2011.1 On December 22, Section A questionnaire and did not time to gather and analyze surrogate 2011, the Department selected Shanghai country and value information, request 5 Wells Hanger Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shanghai See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, supplementary information, and allow Office 9, from Kabir Archuletta, International Trade Wells’’) and Shaoxing Liangbao Metal parties to fully participate in the Manufactured Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shaoxing Compliance Analyst, Office 9, regarding Third Administrative Review of Steel Wire Garment proceeding. Liangbao’’), as mandatory respondents Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: in the above referenced review.2 On Selection of Additional Mandatory Respondent Therefore, in accordance with section December 28, 2011, the Department (February 6, 2012). 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department 6 issued a non-market economy See Letter to Pu Jiang from Catherine Bertrand, finds that it is not practicable to Program Manager, Office 9, Import Administration; antidumping questionnaire to Shanghai regarding the Antidumping Duty Administrative complete the preliminary results within Wells and Shaoxing Liangbao.3 As Review of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the the original time period and, thus, the stated in the cover letter of our People’s Republic of China: Non-market Economy Department is extending the time limit questionnaire, the deadlines for Section Questionnaire (February 6, 2012). for issuing the preliminary results by 7 See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, A was January 18, 2012, and for Office 9, from Kabir Archuletta, International Trade 120 days until October 30, 2012. The Sections C and D were February 3, Compliance Analyst, Office 9, regarding Third final results continue to be due 120 days 2012.4 Shaoxing Liangbao did not Administrative Review of Steel Wire Garment after the publication of the preliminary respond to the Department’s Section A Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Selection of Additional Mandatory Respondent results. (March 8, 2012). This notice is published pursuant to 1 See Initiation of Antidumping and 8 See Letter to Shaoxing Shunji from Catherine section 777(i) of the Act. Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Bertrand, Program Manager, Office 9, Import Request for Revocation in Part, 76 FR 74041 Administration; regarding the Antidumping Duty Dated: May 8, 2012. (November 30, 2011). Administrative Review of Steel Wire Garment 2 See Memorandum to James Doyle, Director, Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Non- Christian Marsh, Office 9, from Irene Gorelik, Senior International market Economy Questionnaire (March 8, 2012). Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 9, regarding 9 See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, and Countervailing Duty Operations. Third Administrative Review of Steel Wire Garment Office 9, from Kabir Archuletta, International Trade [FR Doc. 2012–11654 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Compliance Analyst, Office 9, regarding Third Selection of Mandatory Respondents (December 22, Administrative Review of Steel Wire Garment BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 2011). Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: 3 See Letters to Shanghai Wells and Shaoxing Selection of Additional Mandatory Respondent Liangbao from Catherine Bertrand, Program (April 9, 2012). 11 See Letter from Catherine Bertrand, Program Manager, Office 9, Import Administration; regarding 10 See Letter to Shaoxing Zhongbao from the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Catherine Bertrand, Program Manager, Office 9, Manager, Office 9, Import Administration; regarding Steel Garment Wire Hangers from the People’s Import Administration; regarding the Antidumping the Third Administrative Review of Steel Wire Republic of China: Non-market Economy Duty Administrative Review of Steel Wire Garment Garment Hangers from the People’s Republic of Questionnaire (December 28, 2011). Hangers from the People’s Republic of China: Non- China: Deadlines for the Surrogate Country and 4 See id. market Economy Questionnaire (April 9, 2012). Surrogate Value Comments (March 2, 2012).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28355

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE States within a reasonably foreseeable order would be likely to lead to time.3 continuation or recurrence of dumping International Trade Administration and of material injury to an industry in Scope of the Order [A–570–831] the United States, pursuant to section The products subject to the 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department Fresh Garlic From the People’s antidumping duty order are all grades of hereby orders the continuation of the Republic of China: Continuation of garlic, whole or separated into antidumping duty order on fresh garlic Antidumping Duty Order constituent cloves, whether or not from the PRC. peeled, fresh, chilled, frozen, U.S. Customs and Border Protection AGENCY: Import Administration, provisionally preserved, or packed in will continue to collect antidumping International Trade Administration, water or other neutral substance, but not duty cash deposits at the rates in effect Department of Commerce. prepared or preserved by the addition of at the time of entry for all imports of SUMMARY: As a result of the other ingredients or heat processing. subject merchandise. determination by the Department of The differences between grades are The effective date of continuation of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) and the based on color, size, sheathing, and the order will be the effective date listed International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’) level of decay. above. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of that revocation of the antidumping duty The scope of the order does not the Act, the Department intends to order on fresh garlic from the People’s include the following: (a) Garlic that has initiate the next five-year review of the Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) would be been mechanically harvested and that is order not later than 30 days prior to the likely to lead to continuation or primarily, but not exclusively, destined fifth anniversary of the effective date of recurrence of dumping and of material for non-fresh use; or (b) garlic that has this continuation of the antidumping injury to an industry in the United been specially prepared and cultivated duty order. States within a reasonably foreseeable prior to planting and then harvested and This five-year (sunset) review and this time, the Department is publishing otherwise prepared for use as seed. notice are in accordance with sections notice of the continuation of the The subject merchandise is used 751(c) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 antidumping duty order. principally as a food product and for CFR 351.218(f)(4). seasoning. The subject garlic is DATES: Effective Date: April 30, 2012. Dated: May 8, 2012. currently classifiable under subheadings FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 0703.20.0010, 0703.20.0020, Paul Piquado, Sean Carey or Dana Mermelstein, AD/ 0703.20.0090, 0710.80.7060, Assistant Secretary for Import CVD Operations, Office 6, Import 0710.80.9750, 0711.90.6500, and Administration. Administration, International Trade 2005.99.9700 of the Harmonized Tariff [FR Doc. 2012–11609 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Administration, U.S. Department of Schedule of the United States BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution (‘‘HTSUS’’).4 Although the HTSUS Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; subheadings are provided for DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE telephone: (202) 482–3964 and (202) convenience and customs purposes, the 482–1391, respectively. written description of the scope of the International Trade Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: order is dispositive. In order to be Background excluded from the antidumping duty Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) order, garlic entered under the HTSUS Review; Correction On September 1, 2011, the subheadings listed above that is (1) Department published the notice of mechanically harvested and primarily, AGENCY: Import Administration, initiation of the third sunset review of but not exclusively, destined for non- International Trade Administration, the antidumping duty order on fresh fresh use or (2) specially prepared and Department of Commerce. garlic from the PRC pursuant to section cultivated prior to planting and then SUMMARY: On May 1, 2012, the 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as harvested and otherwise prepared for Department of Commerce (‘‘the 1 amended (Act). The Department use as seed must be accompanied by Department’’) published a notice in the conducted an expedited sunset review declarations to U.S. Customs and Border Federal Register that incorrectly of this order. As a result of its review, Protection to that effect. identified the antidumping duty order the Department found that revocation of for which a five-year review (‘‘Sunset the antidumping duty order would be Continuation of the Order Review’’) was being initiated.1 This likely to lead to continuation or As a result of the determinations by notice is a correction. recurrence of dumping and notified the the Department and the ITC that DATES: Effective Date: May 1, 2012. ITC of the magnitude of the margins revocation of the antidumping duty FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: likely to prevail were the order to be Brenda E. Waters, Office of AD/CVD 2 revoked. 3 See Fresh Garlic From China; Determination, 77 Operations, Customs Unit, Import On April 27, 2012, the ITC issued its FR 26579 (May 4, 2012). Administration, International Trade 4 Effective January 10, 2002, HTSUS subheading determination pursuant to section Administration, U.S. Department of 751(c) of the Act that revocation of the 0711.90.60 was replaced by 0711.90.65. See Proclamation 7515—To Modify the Harmonized Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution antidumping duty order on fresh garlic Tariff Schedule of the United States, To Provide Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, from the PRC would be likely to lead to Rules of Origin Under the North American Free telephone: (202) 482–4735. continuation or recurrence of material Trade Agreement for Affected Goods, and for Other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: injury to an industry in the United Purposes, 66 FR 66549 (December 26, 2001). Effective February 3, 2007, HTSUS subheading 2005.90.97 was replaced by 2005.99.97. See Background 1 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 76 Proclamation 8097—To Modify the Harmonized In the Initiation Notice published in FR 54430 (September 1, 2011). Tariff Schedule of the United States, To Adjust 2 See Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of Rules of Origin Under the United States-Australia the Federal Register on May 1, 2012, the China: Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of Free Trade Agreement and for Other Purposes By the Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 777 (January the President of the United States of America, 72 1 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 77 6, 2012). FR 453 (January 4, 2006). FR 25683 (May 1, 2012) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28356 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

Department incorrectly identified correcting that notice: the antidumping Correction of Initiation of Review ‘‘Activated Cabron [sic]’’ from the duty order order for which the People’s Republic of China as the Department is inititiating a sunset In accordance with 19 CFR antidumping duty order for which a review is Polyester Staple Fiber from 351.218(c), effective May 1, 2012, we are five-year review (‘‘Sunset Review’’) was China. The initiation is effective May 1, initiating the Sunset Review of the being initiated. The Department is now 2012. following antidumping duty order:

DOC Case No. ITC Case No. Country Product Department contact

A–570–905 ...... 731–TA–709 ...... China ...... Polyester Staple Fiber (1st Review) ...... Jennifer Moats (202) 482–5047.

Effect of Correction of Initiation Notice (Taiwan), Office 9, AD/CVD Operations, For the reason stated by Petitioners, Additional information concerning Import Administration, International and because there are no compelling the Department’s Sunset proceedings Trade Administration, U.S. Department reasons to deny the request, the can be found in the ‘‘Filing of Commerce, 14th Street and Department is postponing the deadline Information’’ and ‘‘Information Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, for the preliminary determinations with Required From Interested Parties’’ DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–6905 or respect to Vietnam and Taiwan by 50 sections of the Initiation Notice.2 All (202) 482–0413, respectively. days to July 26, 2012, pursuant to filing requirements and deadlines under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, CFR 351.205(e). In accordance with Background as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR section 735(a)(1) of the Act, the deadline 351.218 for the above-identified Sunset On January 18, 2012, the Department for the final determinations of these Review were established with of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) initiated antidumping duty investigations will publication of the Initiation Notice on antidumping duty investigations of steel continue to be 75 days after the date of May 1, 2012. Because of the wire garment hangers from the Socialist these preliminary determinations, circumstances requiring this correction Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’) and unless extended at a later date. of the Intiation Notice, and pursuant to Taiwan.1 The period of investigation This notice is issued and published in 19 CFR 351.302(b), the Department will (‘‘POI’’) for the Vietnam investigation is accordance with section 733(c)(2) of the consider requests from interested parties April 1, 2011, through September 30, Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). for the extension of the deadlines 2011, and the POI for the Taiwan Dated: May 8, 2012. established by 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i) investigation is October 1, 2010, through Paul Piquado, for filing of a notice of intent to September 30, 2011. The current Assistant Secretary for Import particpate, by 19 CFR 351.218(d)(2)(i) deadline for the preliminary Administration. for filing of a statement of waiver, and determinations of these investigations is [FR Doc. 2012–11658 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] by 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i) for filing of June 6, 2012. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P a substantive response. Postponement of Preliminary This correction of the notice of Determinations initiation is published in accordance DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act CFR 351.218(c). of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Dated: May 8, 2012. requires the Department to complete its preliminary determinations for these Christian Marsh, Pacific Fishery Management Council; investigations no later than 140 days Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping Public Meeting and Countervailing Duty Operations. after the date of issuance of the initiation (i.e., June 6, 2012). AGENCY: [FR Doc. 2012–11607 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] National Marine Fisheries On April 27, 2012, M&B Metal Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Products Company, Inc.; Innovative Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Fabrication LLC/Indy Hanger; and US Commerce. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Hanger Company, LLC (collectively, ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. ‘‘Petitioners’’) made a timely request International Trade Administration pursuant to 19 CFR 351.205(e) for a SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery postponement of the preliminary Management Council (Pacific Council) [A–552–812, A–583–849] determinations with respect to Vietnam will convene a conference call of its Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the and Taiwan. Petitioners requested Subpanel (CPSAS) and Coastal Pelagic Socialist Republic of Vietnam and postponement of the preliminary Species Management Team (CPSMT). A Taiwan: Postponement of Preliminary determinations of the antidumping duty listening station will be available at the Determinations of Antidumping Duty investigations so that they have Pacific Council offices for interested Investigations adequate time to analyze and comment upon the responses of the various members of the public. AGENCY: Import Administration, companies selected as respondents.2 DATES: The conference call will be held International Trade Administration, Monday, June 11, 2012 from 11 a.m. to Department of Commerce. 1 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the 12:30 p.m. DATES: Effective Date: May 14, 2012. Socialist Republic of Vietnam and Taiwan: ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 77 via conference call, with a public FR 3731 (January 25, 2012). Irene Gorelik (Vietnam) or Paul Walker 2 See Letter from Petitioners, re; ‘‘Request for listening station available at the Pacific Extension of Time for Preliminary Determination,’’ Council offices: 7700 NE Ambassador 2 See id. at 25684. dated April 27, 2012. Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28357

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the teleconference only: US TOLL: 1– Commission of Fine Arts, at the above Kerry Griffin, Staff Officer; telephone: 650–479–3207; Access code: 992 449 address; by emailing [email protected]; or by (503) 820–2280. 749 calling 202–504–2200. Individuals SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council address: North Pacific requiring sign language interpretation primary purpose of the conference call Fishery Management Council, 605 W. for the hearing impaired should contact is to discuss a proposed harvest 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK the Secretary at least 10 days before the parameters workshop, forage fish issues 99501–2252. meeting date. (on the Pacific Council’s agenda for its FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dated: May 7, 2012, in Washington, DC. June meeting), and potential changes to Steve MacLean, NPFMC; telephone: Thomas Luebke, streamline the CPS exempted fishing (907) 271–2809. AIA, Secretary. permit protocol. Other items that may SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This be discussed include the Stock [FR Doc. 2012–11545 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] public meeting will occur during the BILLING CODE 6331–01–M Assessment and Fishery Evaluation scoping period for the Steller Sea Lion document, the upcoming Canadian Protection Measures EIS (77 FR 22750, trawl survey review meeting, and April 17, 2012). Information on EIS Pacific mackerel management for CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND development, potential alternatives, and COMMUNITY SERVICE 2012–13. issues for analysis may be discussed. Action will be restricted to those The public is encouraged to attend in issues specifically listed in this notice Proposed Information Collection; this meeting, however, comments Comment Request and any issues arising after publication specific to the EIS should be submitted of this notice that require emergency in writing to NMFS before the close of AGENCY: Corporation for National and action under Section 305(c) of the the scoping period on October 15, 2012. Community Service. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery More information on the EIS scoping ACTION: Notice. Conservation and Management Act, process and instructions for submitting provided the public has been notified of written public comments are available SUMMARY: The Corporation for National the CPSAS or CPSMT’s intent to take on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at and Community Service (hereinafter the final action to address the emergency. http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ ‘‘Corporation’’), as part of its continuing Special Accommodations sustainablefisheries/sslpm/eis/ effort to reduce paperwork and default.htm. Additional information is respondent burden, conducts a pre- This listening station is physically posted on the Council Web site: http:// clearance consultation program to accessible to people with disabilities. www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/. provide the general public and federal Requests for sign language agencies with an opportunity to interpretation or other auxiliary aids Special Accommodations comment on proposed and/or should be directed to Mr. Kris These meetings are physically continuing collections of information in Kleinschmidt, at (503) 820–2280, at accessible to people with disabilities. accordance with the Paperwork least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Requests for sign language Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 Dated: May 9, 2012. interpretation or other auxiliary aids U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program Tracey L. Thompson, should be directed to Gail Bendixen, helps to ensure that requested data can Acting Director, Office of Sustainable (907) 271–2809, at least 5 working days be provided in the desired format, Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. prior to the meeting date. reporting burden (time and financial [FR Doc. 2012–11541 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Dated: May 9, 2012. resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Tracey L. Thompson, the impact of collection requirement on Acting Director, Office of Sustainable respondents can be properly assessed. Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Individuals who use a [FR Doc. 2012–11542 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] telecommunications device for the deaf National Oceanic and Atmospheric BILLING CODE 3510–22–P (TTY–TDD) may call (202) 565–2799 Administration between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday. North Pacific Fishery Management COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS Currently, the Corporation is Council (NPFMC); Public Meeting soliciting comments concerning Notice of Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries AmeriCorps Application Instructions: Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and The next meeting of the U.S. State Commissions; State and National Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled Competitive; Professional Corps; Indian Commerce. for 17 May 2012, at 10:00 a.m. in the Tribes; States and Territories without ACTION: Notice of a public committee Commission offices at the National Commissions; and State and National meeting. Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Planning. Applicants will respond to Square, 401 F Street NW., Washington, the questions included in this ICR in SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery DC 20001–2728. Items of discussion order to apply for funding through these Management Council’s (Council) Steller may include buildings, parks, and grant competitions. Sea Lion Mitigation Committee memorials. Copies of the information collection (SSLMC) will meet via teleconference. Draft agendas and additional request can be obtained by contacting DATES: The teleconference will be held information regarding the Commission the office listed in the addresses section on May 31, 2012, from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. are available on our Web site: of this notice. Alaska time. www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding the DATES: Written comments must be ADDRESSES: Event address for attendees: agenda and requests to submit written submitted to the individual and office https://npfmc.webex.com/npfmc/ or oral statements should be addressed listed in the ADDRESSES section by July onstage/g.php?d=992449749&t=a For to Thomas Luebke, Secretary, U.S. 13, 2012.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28358 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, until the revised Application Protection and Improvement Act of identified by the title of the information Instructions are approved by OMB. The 2000, Public Law 106–541. collection activity, by any of the current Application Instructions are due The Task Force shall provide following methods: to expire on April 30, 2015. independent advice and (1) By mail sent to: Corporation for Type of Review: Renewal. recommendations to the Secretary of the National and Community Service; Agency: Corporation for National and Army on plans and projects to reduce Attention Amy Borgstrom, Associate Community Service. siltation of the Missouri River in the Director for Policy, Room 9515; 1201 Title: AmeriCorps Application State of North Dakota and to meet the New York Avenue NW., Washington, Instructions: State Commissions; State objectives of the Pick-Sloan Program. DC 20525. and National Competitive; Professional Specifically, the Task Force shall: (2) By hand delivery or by courier to Corps; Indian Tribes; States and Prepare and approve, by a majority of the Corporation’s mailroom at Room Territories without Commissions; and the members, a plan for the use of the 8100 at the mail address given in State and National Planning. funds made available under Public Law paragraph (1) above, between 9:00 a.m. OMB Number: 3045–0047. 106–541, to promote conservation and 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, Agency Number: None. practices in the Missouri River except Federal holidays. Affected Public: Nonprofit watershed, control and remove the (3) By fax to: (202) 606–3476, organizations, State, Local and Tribal. sediment from the Missouri River, Attention Amy Borgstrom, Associate Total Respondents: 654. protect recreation on the Missouri River Director for Policy. Frequency: Annually. from sedimentation, and protect Indian (4) Electronically through the Average Time per Response: 24 hours. and non-Indian historical and cultural Corporation’s email address system: Estimated Total Burden Hours: 15,696 sites along the Missouri River from [email protected] or hours. erosion; develop and recommend to the www.regulations.gov. Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): Secretary of the Army for None. implementation critical restoration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Total Burden Cost (operating/ projects meeting the goals of the plan; Amy Borgstrom, (202) 606–6930, or by maintenance): None. and determine if these projects email at [email protected]. Comments submitted in response to primarily benefit the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: this notice will be summarized and/or Government. The Corporation is particularly included in the request for Office of The Task Force shall report to the interested in comments that: Management and Budget approval of the Secretary of the Army and the U.S. • Evaluate whether the proposed information collection request; they will Army Corps of Engineers. As prescribed collection of information is necessary also become a matter of public record. by Public Law 106–541, the Task Force for the proper performance of the Dated: May 7, 2012. shall be composed of not more than functions of the Corporation, including Rosa Moreno-Mahoney, twenty members. Specifically, the Task whether the information will have Force membership shall be composed practical utility; Acting Director, AmeriCorps State and National. of: The Secretary of the Army or • Evaluate the accuracy of the designee, who shall serve as the agency’s estimate of the burden of the [FR Doc. 2012–11554 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Chairperson; the Secretary of proposed collection of information, BILLING CODE 6050–$$–P Agriculture or designee; the Secretary of including the validity of the Energy or designee; the Secretary of the methodology and assumptions used; Interior or designee; and The Trust. • Enhance the quality, utility, and DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE The Trust is composed of sixteen clarity of the information to be members to be appointed by the collected; and Office of the Secretary Secretary of the Army, including: • Minimize the burden of the Renewal of Department of Defense Twelve members recommended by the collection of information on those who Federal Advisory Committees Governor of North Dakota that represent are expected to respond, including the equally the various interest of the use of appropriate automated, AGENCY: DoD. public. Included in these twelve electronic, mechanical, or other ACTION: Renewal of Federal Advisory members, there shall be technological collection techniques or Committee. recommendations of representatives of other forms of information technology the North Dakota Department of Health, (e.g., permitting electronic submissions SUMMARY: Under the provisions of 10 the North Dakota Parks and Recreation of responses). U.S.C. 2166(e), the Federal Advisory Department, the North Dakota Background: These application Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Department of Game and Fish, the North instructions will be used by applicants Appendix), the Government in the Dakota State Water Commission, the for funding through AmeriCorps State Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b), North Dakota Indian Affairs and National grant competitions. and 41 CFR 102–3.50(a), the Department Commission, agricultural groups, Current Action: The Corporation seeks of Defense gives notice that it is environmental or conservation groups, to renew and revise the current renewing the charter for the Missouri the hydroelectric power industry, AmeriCorps State and National River (North Dakota) Task Force recreation user groups, local Application Instructions. The (hereafter referred to as ‘‘the Task governments, and other appropriate Application Instructions are being Force’’). interests. The Trust also shall include revised to accurately describe new The Task Force shall provide one member recommended by each of performance measurement screens. The independent advice and the four Indian Tribes in the State of Application Instructions will be used in recommendations on plans and projects North Dakota. the same manner as the existing to reduce siltation of the Missouri River These individuals recommended for Application Instructions. The in the State of North Dakota, as The Trust shall be appointed by the Corporation also seeks to continue using described in this notice and in Section Secretary of the Army as representative the current Application Instructions 705 of Title VII, the Missouri River members to the Task Force. All Task

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28359

Force members shall be appointed for All written statements shall be Collections’’ link and by clicking on two-year terms and generally will serve submitted to the Designated Federal link number 04807. When you access no more than four years total on the Officer for the Task Force, and this the information collection, click on Task Force, or as determined by the individual will ensure that the written ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. Secretary of the Army or designee. In statements are provided to the Written requests for information should addition, all Task Force members shall, membership for their consideration. be addressed to U.S. Department of with the exception of travel and per Contact information for the Task Force Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., diem for official travel, serve without Designated Federal Officer can be LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. compensation. This same term of obtained from the GSA’s FACA Requests may also be electronically service limitation also applies to any Database—https://www.fido.gov/ mailed to [email protected] or faxed DoD authorized subcommittees. facadatabase/public.asp. to 202–401–0920. Please specify the With DoD approval, the Task Force is The Designated Federal Officer, complete title of the information authorized to establish subcommittees, pursuant to 41 CFR 102–3.150, will collection and OMB Control Number as necessary and consistent with its announce planned meetings of the Task when making your request. mission. These subcommittees or Force. The Designated Federal Officer, Individuals who use a working groups shall operate under the at that time, may provide additional telecommunications device for the deaf provisions of the FACA, the guidance on the submission of written (TDD) may call the Federal Information Government in the Sunshine Act, and statements that are in response to the Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– other appropriate Federal statutes and stated agenda for the planned meeting 8339. in question. regulations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Such subcommittees or working Dated: May 8, 2012. 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of groups shall not work independently of Aaron Siegel, 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) requires that the chartered Task Force, and shall Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Federal agencies provide interested report all their recommendations and Officer, Department of Defense. parties an early opportunity to comment advice to the Task Force for full [FR Doc. 2012–11482 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] on information collection requests. The deliberation and discussion. BILLING CODE 5001–06–P Acting Director, Information Collection Subcommittees or working groups have Clearance Division, Privacy, Information no authority to make decisions on and Records Management Services, behalf of the chartered Task Force; nor DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Management, publishes this can they report directly to the notice containing proposed information Department of Defense or any Federal Notice of Submission for OMB Review; collection requests at the beginning of officers or employees. Office of Planning, Evaluation and the Departmental review of the All subcommittees operate under the Policy Development; Evaluation of the information collection. The Department provisions of FACA, the Government in 21st Century Community Learning of Education is especially interested in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. Centers State Competitions public comment addressing the § 552b), governing Federal statutes and following issues: (1) Is this collection regulations, and governing DoD SUMMARY: This study will examine state necessary to the proper functions of the policies/procedures. subgrant competitions conducted under Department; (2) will this information be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim the 21st Century Community Learning processed and used in a timely manner; Freeman, Advisory Committee Centers (CCLC) program in order to (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; Management Officer for the Department glean ‘‘lessons learned’’ that can inform (4) how might the Department enhance of Defense, 703–692–5952. efforts to improve the state capacity for the quality, utility, and clarity of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Task conducting state competitions for information to be collected; and (5) how Force shall meet at the call of the Task similarly-structured grant programs might the Department minimize the Force’s Designated Federal Officer, in under the Elementary and Secondary burden of this collection on the consultation with the Task Force’s Education Act of 1965, as amended. respondents, including through the use Chairperson. The estimated number of More specifically, the study will of information technology. Please note Task Force meetings is no less than two examine how states conduct their 21st that written comments received in per year. CCLC competitions; state-level response to this notice will be In addition, the Designated Federal conditions and capacity issues affecting considered public records. Officer is required to be in attendance the conduct of such competitions; how Title of Collection: Evaluation of the at all Task Force and subcommittee states evaluate the quality of local 21st Century Community Learning meetings for the entire duration of each applications and plans; and potential Centers State Competitions. and every meeting; however, in the strategies for improvement. OMB Control Number: Pending. absence of the Designated Federal DATES: Interested persons are invited to Type of Review: New. Officer, the Alternate Designated submit comments on or before June 13, Total Estimated Number of Annual Federal Officer shall attend the entire 2012. Responses: 153. duration of the Task Force or ADDRESSES: Written comments Total Estimated Number of Annual subcommittee meeting. regarding burden and/or the collection Burden Hours: 153. Pursuant to 41 CFR §§ 102–3.105(j) activity requirements should be Abstract: Evaluation findings will and 102–3.140, the public or interested electronically mailed to support federal- and state-level staff in organizations may submit written [email protected] or mailed to U.S. developing a deeper understanding of statements to Task Force membership Department of Education, 400 Maryland the capacity of states to carry out about the Task Force’s mission and Avenue SW., LBJ, Washington, DC subgrant competitions, highlight factors functions. Written statements may be 20202–4537. Copies of the proposed that are important to consider in submitted at any time or in response to information collection request may be administering a state grant competition, the stated agenda of planned meeting of accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, and assist states in developing high- the Task Force. by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending quality grant programs that meet the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28360 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

community needs. Additionally, the Clearance Division, Privacy, Information Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance results from this review will inform the and Records Management Services, (CFDA) Number: 84.103A. Department’s technical assistance and Office of Management, publishes this DATES: monitoring activities. notice containing proposed information Applications Available: May 14, 2012. Deadline for Transmittal of Dated: May 9, 2012. collection requests at the beginning of the Departmental review of the Applications: June 13, 2012. Tomakie Washington, information collection. The Department Deadline for Intergovernmental Acting Director, Information Collection of Education is especially interested in Review: August 13, 2012. Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and Records Management Services, Office of public comment addressing the Full Text of Announcement Management. following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the I. Funding Opportunity Description [FR Doc. 2012–11603 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Department; (2) will this information be Purpose of Program: The Training BILLING CODE 4000–01–P processed and used in a timely manner; Program provides grants to train the (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; staff and leadership personnel DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (4) how might the Department enhance employed in, participating in, or the quality, utility, and clarity of the preparing for employment in, projects Notice of Proposed Information information to be collected; and (5) how funded under the Federal TRIO Collection Requests; Office of might the Department minimize the Programs to improve the operation of Planning, Evaluation and Policy burden of this collection on the these projects. Development; Exploratory Study on respondents, including through the use Priorities: This notice contains five the Identification of English Learners of information technology. Please note absolute priorities and three competitive With Disabilities that written comments received in preference priorities. In accordance with response to this notice will be 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv) and 34 CFR SUMMARY: The purpose of this study is considered public records. 75.105(b)(2)(ii), the absolute priorities to learn more about current processes Title of Collection: Exploratory Study are from section 402G(b) of the Higher and personnel involved in the on the Identification of English Learners Education Act of 1965, as amended identification of English Learners (ELs) with Disabilities. (HEA), and the regulations for this for special education services. OMB Control Number: Pending. program (34 CFR 642.24). The DATES: Interested persons are invited to Type of Review: New. competitive preference priorities are submit comments on or before July 13, Total Estimated Number of Annual from the Department’s notice of final 2012. Responses: 126. supplemental priorities and definitions ADDRESSES: Written comments Total Estimated Number of Annual for discretionary grant programs, regarding burden and/or the collection Burden Hours: 258. published in the Federal Register on Abstract: The study has two main activity requirements should be December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486), and components: (1) A review of recent electronically mailed to corrected on May 12, 2011 (76 FR research on the identification of ELs [email protected] or mailed to U.S. 27637). with special needs, and (2) case studies Department of Education, 400 Maryland of nine school districts and two schools Note: Each year, the Training Program Avenue SW., LBJ, Washington, DC in each district. Findings will be projects must offer training covering every 20202–4537. Copies of the proposed topic listed within the applicable priority or descriptive in nature. The study is not information collection request may be priorities. And, each year, one or more a program evaluation and does not accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, Training Program projects must provide purport to assess program outcomes; by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending training for new project directors. Each however, findings may be useful in Collections’’ link and by clicking on applicant must identify in its application informing a future, nationally how it will meet this requirement as link number 04831. When you access representative study. provided in 34 CFR 642.11. the information collection, click on ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. Dated: May 8, 2012. Absolute Priorities: For FY 2012 and Written requests for information should Tomakie Washington, any subsequent year in which the be addressed to U.S. Department of Acting Director, Information Collection Department makes awards from the list Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and of unfunded applicants from this LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. Records Management Services, Office of competition, these priorities are Requests may also be electronically Management. absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR mailed to [email protected] or faxed [FR Doc. 2012–11477 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 75.105(c)(3), we consider only to 202–401–0920. Please specify the BILLING CODE 4000–01–P applications that meet these priorities. complete title of the information Each application must address one of collection and OMB Control Number these absolute priorities. An applicant when making your request. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION must submit a separate application for Individuals who use a each absolute priority it proposes to Applications for New Awards; Training telecommunications device for the deaf address. Program for Federal TRIO Programs (TDD) may call the Federal Information These priorities are: Absolute Priority 1. Training to Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary 8339. Education, Department of Education. improve: Reporting student and project performance; and the rigorous ACTION: Notice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section evaluation of project performance in 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of order to design and operate a model Overview Information 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) requires that TRIO project. Federal agencies provide interested Training Program for Federal TRIO Number of expected awards: 1. parties an early opportunity to comment Programs (Training Program). Maximum award amount: $250,000. on information collection requests. The Notice inviting applications for new Absolute Priority 2. Training on: Acting Director, Information Collection awards for fiscal year (FY) 2012. Budget management, and the statutory

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28361

and regulatory requirements for only Competitive Preference Priorities 2 student needs, college and university operation of projects funded under the or 3 or both. An applicant submitting an admissions, student financial aid, tutorial Federal TRIO Programs. application under Absolute Priority 2 programs, and the coordination of project Number of expected awards: 1. may apply using only competitive activities with other available resources and activities. Maximum award amount: $250,000. Preference Priority 3. An applicant Absolute Priority 3. Training on: submitting an application under Competitive Preference Priority 2— Assessment of student needs; retention Absolute Priorities 3, 4, or 5 may apply Enabling More Data-Based Decision- and graduation strategies, including using all three Competitive Preference Making (Up to 5 Additional Points) both secondary and postsecondary Priorities. retention and graduation strategies; and These priorities are: Background: The Department is using the use of appropriate educational Competitive Preference Priority 2 technology in the operation of projects Competitive Preference Priority 1— because the Department believes that funded under the Federal TRIO Turning Around Persistently Lowest- the effective use of data to make programs. Achieving Schools (Up to 5 Additional informed decisions is essential to the Number of expected awards: 1. Points) continuous improvement of educational Maximum award amount: $325,000. Background: The Department is using results. We believe that inclusion of this Absolute Priority 4. Training on: Competitive Preference Priority 1 competitive preference priority is Assisting students in receiving adequate because an essential element in important because accurate, timely, financial aid from programs assisted strengthening our education system is relevant, and appropriate data are key to under Title IV of the HEA and from dramatic improvement of student knowing what is working for students other programs; college and university performance in each State’s persistently and what is not. Data can show which admissions policies and procedures; lowest-achieving schools. These schools students are on track to college- and and proven strategies to improve the often require intensive interventions to career-readiness and which students financial literacy and economic literacy improve the school culture and climate, need additional support, which of students, including topics such as strengthen the school staff and instructional strategies are working, and basic personal finance information, instructional program, increase student which schools or institutions are household money management and attendance and enrollment in advanced successfully improving student learning financial planning skills, and basic courses, provide more time for learning, and performance. Data can also show economic decision making skills. and ensure that social services and which teachers or faculty excel in Number of expected awards: 1. community support are available for increasing student achievement so that Maximum award amount: $250,000. students in order to raise student they can, for example, be given the Absolute Priority 5. Training on: achievement, graduation rates, and opportunity to coach others or to lead Strategies for recruiting and serving college enrollment rates. communities of professional practice. hard to reach populations—including Competitive Preference Priority 1: The Training Program grant students who are limited English Projects that are designed to address one competition represents an opportunity proficient, students from groups that are or more of the following priority areas: to develop training for TRIO project traditionally underrepresented in (a) Improving student achievement directors and the high school staff/ postsecondary education, students who (as defined in this notice) in persistently personnel with whom they work to are individuals with disabilities, lowest-achieving schools (as defined in strengthen their capacity to make data- students who are homeless children and this notice). based decisions for their TRIO projects. youths (as this term is defined in (b) Increasing graduation rates TRIO grantees must set project Section 725 of the McKinney-Vento (as defined in this notice) and college objectives that are based on verifiable Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. enrollment rates for students in data taken from reliable sources that 11434a), students who are foster care persistently lowest-achieving schools will be measured by cohort or class over youth, or other disconnected students. (as defined in this notice). time. In addition, all TRIO grantees are Number of expected awards: 1. (c) Providing services to students required to report project outcomes Maximum award amount: $325,000. enrolled in persistently lowest- relative to their approved objectives in Competitive Preference Priorities: For achieving schools (as defined in this their Annual Performance Reports. All FY 2012 and any subsequent year in notice). grantees use standard approved which the Department makes awards objectives that are measurable Note 1: For the purposes of this priority, from the list of unfunded applicants the Department considers schools that are longitudinally and individual student from this competition, these priorities identified as Tier I or Tier II schools under data can be aggregated in many are competitive preference priorities. the School Improvement Grants Program (see programs. Therefore, it is essential that Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award 75 FR 66363) as part of a State’s approved FY grantees know how to use data obtained up to an additional five points to an 2009 or FY 2010 applications to be from State longitudinal systems or third application that meets Competitive persistently lowest-achieving schools. A list parties to compare and contrast the Preference Priority 1, up to an of these Tier I and Tier II schools can be efficacy of the performance and delivery found on the Department’s Web site at additional five points to an application http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html. of student services. Moreover, as they that meets Competitive Preference analyze project data to find ways of Priority 2, and up to an additional five Note 2: Applicants choosing to address this improving and enhancing reliable points to an application that meets priority might want to consider describing reporting on student outcomes, having Competitive Preference Priority 3, how they will train project directors, project access to and using data from local and depending on how well the application staff, high school staff, and personnel of State longitudinal databases are meets each of these priorities. The Upward Bound and Talent Search projects to invaluable for TRIO projects in maximum competitive preference points turn around persistently lowest-achieving succeeding years of the grant cycle. schools. Training must focus on services and an application can receive under this activities that are authorized in the Grantees can also use data to identify competition is 10. An applicant legislation and relevant to high school best practices. In sum, having access to submitting an application under students. Training may be provided on basic and using reliable State or third-party Absolute Priority 1 may apply using skills instruction, counseling, assessment of data sources is a key component of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28362 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

running an efficient and effective TRIO teacher compensation systems, use of permits their free use or repurposing by project. open educational resources (as defined others. Competitive Preference Priority 2: in this notice), or other strategies. Persistently lowest-achieving schools Projects that are designed to collect (or Note 1: The types of projects identified means, as determined by the State: (i) obtain), analyze, and use high-quality above are suggestions for ways to improve Any Title I school in improvement, and timely data, including data on productivity. The Department recognizes that corrective action, or restructuring that program participant outcomes, in some of these examples, such as modification (a) is among the lowest-achieving five accordance with privacy requirements of teacher compensation systems, may not be percent of Title I schools in (as defined in this notice), in one or relevant within the context of a particular improvement, corrective action, or more of the following priority areas: application. Therefore, applicants addressing restructuring or the lowest-achieving (a) Improving postsecondary student this priority might want to consider five Title I schools in improvement, outcomes relating to enrollment, explaining how they will provide training corrective action, or restructuring in the persistence, and completion and leading opportunities to the same or an increased State, whichever number of schools is number of individuals at a lower cost per to career success. greater; or (b) is a high school that has (b) Providing reliable and participant while improving the quality of their training support. Applicants might also had a graduation rate as defined in 34 comprehensive information on the want to consider describing how they will CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 implementation of Department of achieve this productivity by increasing percent over a number of years; and (ii) Education programs, and participant efficiency in the use of resources. any secondary school that is eligible for, outcomes in these programs, by using but does not receive, Title I funds that: Maximum number of applications: In data from State longitudinal data (a) Is among the lowest-achieving five accordance with 34 CFR 642.7, each systems or by obtaining data from percent of secondary schools or the application must clearly identify the reliable third-party sources. lowest-achieving five secondary schools specific absolute priority for which a in the State that are eligible for, but do Competitive Preference Priority 3— grant is requested and must address not receive, Title I funds, whichever Improving Productivity (Up to 5 each of the topics listed under that number of schools is greater; or (b) is a Additional Points) specific absolute priority. An high school that has had a graduation application for a grant under a specific Background: The Department is using rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that absolute priority must address only that Competitive Preference Priority 3— is less than 60 percent over a number of Improving Productivity because it absolute priority. A grantee who wants years. believes that it is more important than to apply under more than one absolute To identify the persistently lowest ever to support TRIO projects that are priority must submit separate achieving schools, a State must take into designed to significantly increase applications for each absolute priority. account both: (i) The academic efficiency in the use of resources while If an applicant submits more than one achievement of the ‘‘all students’’ group improving student outcomes. A key application for the same absolute in a school in terms of proficiency on performance measure for the Training priority, we will accept only the the State’s assessments under Section Program is its cost effectiveness, based application with the latest ‘‘date/time 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA in reading/ on the number of TRIO project received’’ validation, and we will reject language arts and mathematics personnel receiving training each year. all other applications the applicant combined; and (ii) the school’s lack of Furthermore, cost per participant is submits for that priority. progress on those assessments over a considered in all TRIO programs. For example, an application for a number of years in the ‘‘all students’’ Applicants proposing projects designed grant under Absolute Priority 1 must group. to offer increased opportunities to address only training described under Privacy requirements means the provide high-quality training for more that priority. requirements of the Family Educational individuals—that is, decrease their cost Definitions: These definitions are Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 per participant while improving from the notice of final supplemental U.S.C. 1232g, and its implementing participant outcomes will be more likely priorities and definitions for regulations in 34 CFR part 99, the to perform well on this efficiency discretionary grant programs, published Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, as well as all measure. in the Federal Register on December 15, applicable Federal, State, and local The Department is also emphasizing 2010 (75 FR 78486), and corrected on requirements regarding privacy. productivity in other TRIO competitions May 12, 2011 (76 FR 27637), and they Student achievement means— for 2012. Accordingly, both new and apply to the competitive preference (a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) existing grantees will need assistance priorities in this competition. A student’s score on the State’s learning about, selecting, and Graduation rate means a four-year assessments under the ESEA; and, as implementing strategies that can help adjusted cohort graduation rate appropriate, (2) other measures of them be more productive while consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1) and student learning, such as those improving student outcomes. As such, may also include an extended-year described in paragraph (b) of this we are interested in projects that adjusted cohort graduation rate definition, provided they are rigorous propose to work with projects to adopt consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(v) if and comparable across schools. productivity improving strategies. the State in which the proposed project (b) For non-tested grades and subjects: Competitive Preference Priority 3: is implemented has been approved by alternative measures of student learning Projects that are designed to the Secretary to use such a rate under and performance, such as student scores significantly increase efficiency in the Title I of the Elementary and Secondary on pre-tests and end-of-course tests; use of time, staff, money, or other Education Act of 1965, as amended student performance on English resources while improving student (ESEA). language proficiency assessments; and learning or other educational outcomes Open educational resources means other measures of student achievement (i.e., outcome per unit of resource). teaching, learning, and research that are rigorous and comparable across Such projects may include innovative resources that reside in the public schools. and sustainable uses of technology, domain or have been released under an Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070a–11 modification of school schedules and intellectual property license that and 1070a–17.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28363

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 20006–8510. Telephone: (202) 502–7600 Profile form; Part III–B—the one-page Education Department General or by email: [email protected]. Project Abstract form; and Part IV—the Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in If you use a telecommunications Assurances and Certifications. If you 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 82, 84, device for the deaf (TDD) or a text include any attachments or appendices, 86, 97, 98 and 99. (b) The Education telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay these items will be counted as part of Department suspension and debarment Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– Part III—the Project Narrative for regulations in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The 8339. purposes of the page limit requirement. regulations for this program in 34 CFR Individuals with disabilities can You must include your complete part 642. (d) The notice of final obtain a copy of the application package response to the selection criteria and supplemental priorities and definitions in an accessible format (e.g., braille, priorities in Part III—The Project for discretionary grant programs, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) Narrative. published in the Federal Register on by contacting the program contact We will reject your application if you December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486), and person listed in this section. exceed the page limit. 2. Content and Form of Application corrected on May 12, 2011 (76 FR 3. Submission Dates and Times: 27637). Submission: Requirements concerning the content of an application, together Applications Available: May 14, 2012. Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 with the forms you must submit, are in Deadline for Transmittal of apply to all applicants except Federally Applications: June 13, 2012. recognized Indian tribes. the application package for this program. Applications for grants under this Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 Page Limit: The application narrative program must be submitted apply to institutions of higher education is where you, the applicant, address the electronically using the Grants.gov only. selection criteria that reviewers use to Apply site (Grants.gov). For information evaluate your application. You must (including dates and times) about how II. Award Information limit the application narrative (Part III) to submit your application Type of Award: Discretionary grants. to no more than 50 pages. However, any electronically, or in paper format by Estimated Available Funds: application addressing the competitive mail or hand delivery if you qualify for $1,400,000. preference priorities may include up to an exception to the electronic Contingent upon the availability of four additional pages for each priority submission requirement, please refer to funds and the quality of applications, addressed in a separate section of the section IV. 7. Other Submission we may make additional awards in FY application submission to discuss how Requirements of this notice. 2013 from the list of unfunded the application meets the competitive We do not consider an application applicants from this competition. preference priority or priorities. These that does not comply with the deadline Maximum Award: We will reject any additional pages cannot be used for or requirements. application that proposes a budget transferred to the project narrative. Individuals with disabilities who exceeding the maximum award amount Partial pages will count as a full page need an accommodation or auxiliary aid listed for the applicable priority, listed toward the page limit. For purposes of in connection with the application as follows, for a single budget period of determining compliance with the page process should contact the person listed 12 months: limit, each page on which there are under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION • Absolute Priority 1: $250,000. words will be counted as one full page. CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If • Absolute Priority 2: $250,000. Applicants must use the following the Department provides an • Absolute Priority 3: $325,000. standards: accommodation or auxiliary aid to an • ″ ″ • Absolute Priority 4: $250,000. A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5 x 11 , on one side individual with a disability in ″ • Absolute Priority 5: $325,000. only, with 1 margins at the top, bottom, connection with the application and both sides. Page numbers and an process, the individual’s application The Assistant Secretary for ″ Postsecondary Education may change identifier may be within the 1 margin. remains subject to all other • Double space (no more than three the maximum award amount through a requirements and limitations in this lines per vertical inch) all text in the notice published in the Federal notice. project narrative, including titles, Register. Deadline for Intergovernmental Estimated Number of Awards: 5. headings, footnotes, quotations, Review: August 13, 2012. references, and captions, as well as all Note: The Department is not bound by any text in figures and graphs. Text in charts 4. Intergovernmental Review: This estimates in this notice. and tables may be single-spaced. You program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR Project Period: Up to 24 months. should also include a table of contents in the project narrative, which will not part 79. Information about III. Eligibility Information be counted against the 50-page limit. Intergovernmental Review of Federal 1. Eligible Applicants: Institutions of • Use a font that is either 12 point or Programs under Executive Order 12372 higher education and other public and larger, or no smaller than 10 pitch is in the application package for this private nonprofit institutions and (characters per inch). program. organizations. • Use one of the following fonts: 5. Funding Restrictions: We specify 2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This Times New Roman, Courier, Courier unallowable costs in 34 CFR part program does not require cost sharing or New, or Arial. An application submitted 642.31. We reference additional matching. in any other font (including Times regulations outlining funding Roman and Arial Narrow) will not be restrictions in the Applicable IV. Application and Submission accepted. Regulations section of this notice. Information The page limit does not apply to Part 6. Data Universal Numbering System 1. Address To Request Application I—the Application for Federal Number, Taxpayer Identification Package: Suzanne Ulmer, U.S. Assistance face sheet (SF 424); Part II— Number, and Central Contractor Department of Education, 1990 K Street the Budget Information Summary form Registry: To do business with the NW., Room 7000, Washington, DC (ED Form 524); Part III–A—the Program Department of Education, you must—

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28364 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

a. Have a Data Universal Numbering We will reject your application if you Grants.gov under News and Events on System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer submit it in paper format unless, as the Department’s G5 system home page Identification Number (TIN); described elsewhere in this section, you at www.G5.gov. b. Register both your DUNS number qualify for one of the exceptions to the • You will not receive additional and TIN with the Central Contractor electronic submission requirement and point value because you submit your Registry (CCR), the Government’s submit, no later than two weeks before application in electronic format, nor primary registrant database; the application deadline date, a written will we penalize you if you qualify for c. Provide your DUNS number and statement to the Department that you an exception to the electronic TIN on your application; and qualify for one of these exceptions. submission requirement, as described d. Maintain an active CCR registration Further information regarding elsewhere in this section, and submit calculation of the date that is two weeks your application in paper format. with current information while your • application is under review by the before the application deadline date is You must submit all documents Department and, if you are awarded a provided later in this section under electronically, including all information grant, during the project period. Exception to Electronic Submission you typically provide on the following You can obtain a DUNS number from Requirement. forms: The Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number You may access the electronic grant Education Supplemental Information for can be created within one business day. application for the Training Program at SF 424, Budget Information—Non- If you are a corporate entity, agency, www.Grants.gov. You must search for Construction Programs (ED 524), and all institution, or organization, you can the downloadable application package necessary assurances and certifications. obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number’s • You must upload any narrative Service. If you are an individual, you alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search sections and all other attachments to can obtain a TIN from the Internal for 84.103, not 84.103A). your application as files in a PDF Revenue Service or the Social Security Please note the following: (Portable Document Format) read-only, Administration. If you need a new TIN, • When you enter the Grants.gov site, non-modifiable format. Do not upload please allow 2–5 weeks for your TIN to you will find information about an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you become active. submitting an application electronically upload a file type other than a read- The CCR registration process may take through the site, as well as the hours of only, non-modifiable PDF or submit a five or more business days to complete. operation. password-protected file, we will not If you are currently registered with the • Applications received by Grants.gov review that material. CCR, you may not need to make any are date and time stamped. Your • Your electronic application must changes. However, please make certain application must be fully uploaded and comply with any page-limit that the TIN associated with your DUNS submitted and must be date and time requirements described in this notice. number is correct. Also note that you stamped by the Grants.gov system no • After you electronically submit will need to update your CCR later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC your application, you will receive from registration on an annual basis. This time, on the application deadline date. Grants.gov an automatic notification of may take three or more business days to Except as otherwise noted in this receipt that contains a Grants.gov complete. section, we will not accept your tracking number. (This notification In addition, if you are submitting your application if it is received—that is, date indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not application via Grants.gov, you must (1) and time stamped by the Grants.gov receipt by the Department.) The be designated by your organization as an system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, Department then will retrieve your Authorized Organization Representative DC time, on the application deadline application from Grants.gov and send a (AOR); and (2) register yourself with date. We do not consider an application second notification to you by email. Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these that does not comply with the deadline This second notification indicates that steps are outlined at the following requirements. When we retrieve your the Department has received your Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/ application from Grants.gov, we will application and has assigned your applicants/get_registered.jsp. notify you if we are rejecting your application a PR/Award number (an ED- 7. Other Submission Requirements: application because it was date and time specified identifying number unique to Applications for grants under this stamped by the Grants.gov system after your application). program must be submitted 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on • We may request that you provide us electronically unless you qualify for an the application deadline date. original signatures on forms at a later exception to this requirement in • The amount of time it can take to date. accordance with the instructions in this upload an application will vary Application Deadline Date Extension section. depending on a variety of factors, in Case of Technical Issues with the including the size of the application and Grants.gov System: If you are a. Electronic Submission of the speed of your Internet connection. experiencing problems submitting your Applications Therefore, we strongly recommend that application through Grants.gov, please Applications for grants under the you do not wait until the application contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, Training Program—CFDA Number deadline date to begin the submission toll free, at 1–800–518–4726. You must 84.103A must be submitted process through Grants.gov. obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case electronically using the • You should review and follow the Number and must keep a record of it. Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site Education Submission Procedures for If you are prevented from at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, submitting an application through electronically submitting your you will be able to download a copy of Grants.gov that are included in the application on the application deadline the application package, complete it application package for this program to date because of technical problems with offline, and then upload and submit ensure that you submit your application the Grants.gov system, we will grant you your application. You may not email an in a timely manner to the Grants.gov an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., electronic copy of a grant application to system. You can also find the Education Washington, DC time, the following us. Submission Procedures pertaining to business day to enable you to transmit

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28365

your application electronically or by NW., room 7000, Washington, DC except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal hand delivery. You also may mail your 20006–8510. FAX: (202) 502–7857. holidays. application by following the mailing Your paper application must be Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper instructions described elsewhere in this submitted in accordance with the mail Applications: If you mail or hand deliver notice. or hand delivery instructions described your application to the Department— If you submit an application after in this notice. (1) You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on b. Submission of Paper Applications by the application deadline date, please Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, Mail including suffix letter, if any, of the FOR contact the person listed under competition under which you are submitting FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in If you qualify for an exception to the your application; and section VII of this notice and provide an electronic submission requirement, you (2) The Application Control Center will explanation of the technical problem may mail (through the U.S. Postal mail to you a notification of receipt of your you experienced with Grants.gov, along Service or a commercial carrier) your grant application. If you do not receive this with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case application to the Department. You notification within 15 business days from the Number. We will accept your must mail the original and two copies application deadline date, you should call application if we can confirm that a of your application, on or before the the U.S. Department of Education application deadline date, to the Application Control Center at (202) 245– technical problem occurred with the 6288. Grants.gov system and that that problem Department at the following address: affected your ability to submit your U.S. Department of Education, Note: Applicants must include in the one- application by 4:30:00 p.m., Application Control Center, Attention: page abstract submitted with the application Washington, DC time, on the (CFDA Number 84.103A), LBJ Basement a statement indicating which competitive application deadline date. The Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., preference priorities they have addressed. Washington, DC 20202–4260. The priorities addressed in the application Department will contact you after a must also be listed on the Training Program determination is made on whether your You must show proof of mailing Profile Sheet. application will be accepted. consisting of one of the following: (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service Note: The extensions to which we refer in V. Application Review Information postmark. this section apply only to the unavailability 1. Selection Criteria: The selection of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. criteria for this program are in 34 CFR system. We will not grant you an extension 642.21 and are listed in the application if you failed to fully register to submit your Postal Service. application to Grants.gov before the (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or package. 2. Review and Selection Process: A application deadline date and time, or if the receipt from a commercial carrier. panel of non-Federal reviewers will technical problem you experienced is (4) Any other proof of mailing review each application in accordance unrelated to the Grants.gov system. acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. with the selection criteria in 34 CFR Department of Education. Exception to Electronic Submission 642.21. The individual scores of the If you mail your application through Requirement: You qualify for an reviewers will be added and the sum the U.S. Postal Service, we do not exception to the electronic submission divided by the number of reviewers to accept either of the following as proof requirement, and may submit your determine the peer review score of mailing: application in paper format, if you are received in the review process. (1) A private metered postmark. unable to submit an application through Additionally, in accordance with 34 (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the Grants.gov system because— CFR 642.22, the Secretary will award • the U.S. Postal Service. You do not have access to the prior experience points to eligible If your application is postmarked after Internet; or applicants by evaluating the applicant’s • the application deadline date, we will You do not have the capacity to current performance under its expiring not consider your application. upload large documents to the Training program grant. Pursuant to 34 Grants.gov system; and Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not CFR 642.22(b)(1), prior experience • No later than two weeks before the uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before points, if any, will be added to the application deadline date (14 calendar relying on this method, you should check application’s averaged peer review score with your local post office. days; or, if the fourteenth calendar day to determine the total score for each before the application deadline date application. falls on a Federal holiday, the next c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery Under Section 402A(c)(3) of the HEA, business day following the Federal the Secretary is not required to make holiday), you mail or fax a written If you qualify for an exception to the awards under the Training Program for statement to the Department, explaining electronic submission requirement, you Federal TRIO Programs in the order of which of the two grounds for an (or a courier service) may deliver your the scores received by the application in exception prevent you from using the paper application to the Department by the peer review process and adjusted for Internet to submit your application. hand. You must deliver the original and prior experience. If you mail your written statement to two copies of your application by hand, In the event a tie score exists, the the Department, it must be postmarked on or before the application deadline Secretary will select for funding the no later than two weeks before the date, to the Department at the following applicant that has the greatest capacity application deadline date. If you fax address: U.S. Department of Education, to provide training to eligible your written statement to the Application Control Center, Attention: participants in all regions of the Nation Department, we must receive the faxed (CFDA Number 84.103A) 550 12th in order to assure accessibility to the statement no later than two weeks Street SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center greatest number of prospective training before the application deadline date. Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260. participants, consistent with 34 CFR Address and mail or fax your The Application Control Center accepts 642.20(e). statement to: Eileen Bland, U.S. hand deliveries daily between 8:00 a.m. 3. Special Conditions: Under 34 CFR Department of Education, 1990 K Street and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, 74.14 and 80.12, the Secretary may

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28366 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

impose special conditions on a grant if and the percentage of Training Program official edition of the Federal Register the applicant or grantee is not participants that, each year, evaluate the and the Code of Federal Regulations is financially stable; has a history of trainings as benefiting them in available via the Federal Digital System unsatisfactory performance; has a increasing their knowledge and at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you financial or other management system understanding of the Federal TRIO can view this document, as well as other that does not meet the standards in 34 Programs. All grantees will be required documents of this Department CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable; has to submit an annual performance report published in the Federal Register, in not fulfilled the conditions of a prior documenting their success in training text or Adobe Portable Document grant; or, is otherwise not responsible. personnel working on TRIO-funded Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must projects, including the average cost per have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is VI. Award Administration Information trainee and the trainees’ evaluations of available free at this site. 1. Award Notices: If your application the effectiveness of the training You may also access documents of the is successful, we notify your U.S. provided. The success of the Training Department published in the Federal Representative and U.S. Senators and Program also is assessed on the Register by using the article search send you a Grant Award Notification quantitative and qualitative outcomes of feature at: www.federalregister.gov. (GAN). We may notify you informally, the training projects based on project Specifically, through the advanced also. evaluation results. search feature at this site, you can limit If your application is not evaluated or 5. Continuation Awards: In making a your search to documents published by not selected for funding, we notify you. continuation award, the Secretary may the Department. 2. Administrative and National Policy consider, under 34 CFR 75.253, the Dated: May 9, 2012. Requirements: We identify extent to which a grantee has made Eduardo M. Ochoa, administrative and national policy ‘‘substantial progress toward meeting requirements in the application package the objectives in its approved Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education. and reference these and other application.’’ This consideration requirements in the Applicable includes the review of a grantee’s [FR Doc. 2012–11621 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Regulations section of this notice. progress in meeting the targets and BILLING CODE 4000–01–P We reference the regulations outlining projected outcomes in its approved the terms and conditions of an award in application, and whether the grantee DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION the Applicable Regulations section of has expended funds in a manner that is this notice and include these and other consistent with its approved application Privacy Act of 1974; System of specific conditions in the GAN. The and budget. In making a continuation Records GAN also incorporates your approved grant, the Secretary also considers application as part of your binding whether the grantee is operating in AGENCY: Office of the Inspector General, commitments under the grant. compliance with the assurances in its U.S. Department of Education. 3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a approved application, including those ACTION: Notice of an altered system of grant under this competition, you must applicable to Federal civil rights laws records. ensure that you have in place the that prohibit discrimination in programs necessary processes and systems to or activities receiving Federal financial SUMMARY: In accordance with the comply with the reporting requirements assistance from the Department (34 CFR Privacy Act of 1974, as amended in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). (Privacy Act), the Department of funding under the competition. This Education (Department) publishes this does not apply if you have an exception VII. Agency Contacts notice to revise the system of records under 2 CFR 170.110. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: notice for the Office of the Inspector (b) At the end of your project period, Suzanne Ulmer, or if unavailable, General Data Analytics System (18–10– you must submit a final performance contact Eileen S. Bland, U.S. 02). The Department amends this report, including financial information, Department of Education, 1990 K Street system of records notice by: (1) as directed by the Secretary. If you NW., room 7000, Washington, DC Clarifying the purposes of the system receive a multi-year award, you must 20006–8510. Telephone: (202) 502–7600 and adding that a purpose of the system submit an annual performance report or by email: [email protected]. is to coordinate relationships with other that provides the most current If you use a telecommunications Federal, State, local, or foreign agencies performance and financial expenditure device for the deaf (TDD) or a text or other public authorities responsible information as directed by the Secretary telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay for assisting in the investigation, under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– prosecution, oversight, or enforcement may also require more frequent 8339. of violations of administrative, civil, or performance reports under 34 CFR criminal law or regulations; (2) 75.720(c). For specific requirements on VIII. Other Information proposing to revise routine use (1), reporting, please go to http:// Accessible Format: Individuals with ‘‘Disclosure for Use by Other Law www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/ disabilities can obtain this document Enforcement Agencies,’’ to allow for the appforms/appforms.html. and a copy of the application package in disclosure of information to a Federal, 4. Performance Measures: The success an accessible format (e.g., braille, large State, local, or foreign agency or other of the Training Program is measured by print, audiotape, or compact disc) on public authority responsible for its cost-effectiveness based on the request to one of the program contact assisting the Department in the number of TRIO project personnel persons listed under FOR FURTHER investigation, prosecution, oversight, or receiving training each year; the INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of enforcement of violations of percentage of Training Program this notice. administrative, civil, or criminal law or participants that, each year, evaluate the Electronic Access to This Document: regulations; (3) proposing to revise training as benefiting them in increasing The official version of this document is routine use (12), ‘‘Disclosure to the their qualifications and skills in meeting the document published in the Federal President’s Council on Integrity and the needs of disadvantaged students; Register. Free Internet access to the Efficiency (PCIE),’’ to allow disclosure

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28367

to its successor entity, the Council of Assistance to Individuals With Accessible Format: Individuals with Inspectors General for Integrity and Disabilities in Reviewing the disabilities can obtain this document in Efficiency or any successor entity; (4) Rulemaking Record an accessible format (e.g., braille, large revising the safeguards of the system to On request we will provide an print, audiotape, or compact disc) on allow data in the system to be accessed appropriate accommodation or auxiliary request to the contact person listed by authorized users; and, (5) updating aid to an individual with a disability under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION the person listed as the System who needs assistance to review the CONTACT. Manager. comments or other documents in the Electronic Access to This Document: public rulemaking record for this notice. The official version of this document is DATES: The Department seeks comments If you want to schedule an appointment the document published in the Federal on the revised routine uses of the for this type of accommodation or Register. Free Internet access to the information in the altered system of auxiliary aid, please contact the person official edition of the Federal Register records described in this notice, in listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION and the Code of Federal Regulations is accordance with the requirements of the CONTACT. available via the Federal Digital System at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you Privacy Act. We must receive your FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments on or before June 13, 2012. can view this document, as well as all Shelley Shepherd, Assistant Counsel to other documents of this Department The Department filed a report the Inspector General, 400 Maryland published in the Federal Register, in describing the altered system of records Avenue SW., room 8166, PCP building, text or Adobe Portable Document covered by this notice with the Chair of Washington, DC 20202–1510. Format (PDF). To use PDF you must the Senate Committee on Homeland Telephone: (202) 245–7077. If you use a have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is telecommunications device for the deaf Security and Governmental Affairs, the available free at the site. Chair of the House Committee on (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), you You may also access documents of the Oversight and Government Reform, and can call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) Department published in the Federal the Administrator of the Office of at 1–800–877–8339. Register by using the article search Information and Regulatory Affairs, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Office of Management and Budget Introduction Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit (OMB) on May 9, 2012. This altered The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) your search to documents published by system of records will become effective requires the Department to publish in the Department. at the later date of—(1) The expiration the Federal Register this notice of an of the 40-day period for OMB review on altered system of records (5 U.S.C. Dated: May 9, 2012. June 18, 2012 unless OMB waives 10 552a(e)(4) and (11)). The Department’s Kathleen S. Tighe, days of its 40-day review period, in regulations implementing the Privacy Inspector General. which case on June 8, 2012, or (2) June Act are contained in the Code of Federal For the reasons discussed in the 13, 2012, unless the system of records Regulations (CFR) in 34 CFR part 5b. preamble, the Inspector General of the needs to be changed as a result of public The Department first published notice U.S. Department of Education publishes comment or OMB review. The of the Office of the Inspector General a notice of an altered system of records. Department will publish any changes to Data Analytics System (18–10–02) in the The following amendments are made to the revised routine use that results from Federal Register on October 16, 2008 the Notice of New System of Records public comment or OMB review of this (73 FR 61406). entitled ‘‘The Office of Inspector notice. The Privacy Act applies to General Data Analytics Program information about an individual that (ODAS)’’ (18–10–02), as published in ADDRESSES: Address all comments about contains individually identifying the Federal Register on October 16, the proposed routine uses to this altered information that is retrieved by a unique 2008 (73 FR 61406–61412): system of records to Charles Coe, identifier associated with each 1. On page 61409, third column, Assistant Inspector General for individual, such as a name or social under the heading ‘‘PURPOSE(S)’’, the Information Technology Audits and security number. The information about paragraph is revised to read as follows: Computer Crime Investigations, Office each individual is called a ‘‘record,’’ PURPOSES: of Inspector General, U.S. Department of and the system, whether manual or This system of records is maintained for Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., computer-based, is called a ‘‘system of purposes of: (1) Enabling the Office of Room 8129, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP) records.’’ Inspector General (OIG) to fulfill the building, Washington, DC 20202–1510. The Privacy Act requires each agency requirements of section (4)(a)(1), (3), and (4) If you prefer to send comments by to publish a notice of a system of of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as email, use the following address: records in the Federal Register and to amended, which require OIG to provide [email protected]. prepare a report to OMB whenever the policy direction for and to conduct, agency publishes a new system of supervise, and coordinate audits and You must include the term ‘‘OIG Data investigations relating to the programs and Analytics System’’ in the subject line of records or makes a significant change to operations of the Department; to conduct, your electronic message. an established system of records. Each supervise and coordinate activities for the agency is also required to send copies of purpose of promoting economy and During and after the comment period, the report to the Chair of the Senate efficiency in the administration of, or you may inspect all public comments Committee on Homeland Security and preventing and detecting fraud, and abuse in, about this notice at the U.S. Department Governmental Affairs and the Chair of the programs and operations of the of Education, PCP Building, Room 8166, the House Committee on Oversight and Department; and to conduct, supervise, or 500 12th Street SW., Washington, DC Government Reform. The report is coordinate relationships between other Federal, State, and local agencies with 20202–0028, between the hours of 8:00 intended to permit an evaluation of the respect to matters relating to economy and a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, probable or potential effect of the efficiency, or the prevention and detection of Monday through Friday of each week proposal on the privacy rights of fraud, and abuse in programs and operations except Federal holidays. individuals. of the Department or the identification and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28368 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

prosecution of participants in such fraud, or security personnel who check each [email protected]. The abuse; (2) improving the efficiency, quality, individual entering the building for his or her most current information concerning and accuracy of existing data collected by the employee or visitor badge. All data this meeting can be found on the Web Department; (3) conducting data modeling for maintained in the system of records are kept site: http://science.energy.gov/ber/ indications of fraud, waste, and abuse, and on a secured and restricted private network internal control weaknesses concerning and stored in a combination locked computer berac/meetings/. Department programs and operations, the laboratory. ODAS is housed within a secure SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: results of which may be used in the conduct and controlled computer lab. Physical access Purpose of the Meeting: To provide of audits, investigations, inspections, or other to the lab is by authorized OIG personnel advice on a continuing basis to the activities as necessary to promote economy only. The general public does not have access Director, Office of Science of the and efficiency and to prevent and detect to ODAS. Department of Energy, on the many fraud, waste, and abuse in Department All information stored in this system is complex scientific and technical issues programs and operations; and (4) secured by using database encryption that arise in the development and coordinating relationships with other technology and is resistant to tampering and Federal, State, local, or foreign agencies or circumvention by unauthorized users. Access implementation of the Biological and other public authorities responsible for to data by all users will be monitored using Environmental Research Program. assisting in the investigation, prosecution, both automated and manual controls. The Tentative Agenda Topics oversight, or enforcement of violations of information is accessed by users either on a administrative, civil, or criminal law or ‘‘need to know’’ and intended systems usage • Update from the Office of Biological regulations. basis or pursuant to a published routine use and Environmental Research and consistent with the purposes of the • Update/highlights from the 2. On page 61410, first column, under system. Biological Systems Science and Climate the heading ‘‘Routine Uses of Records and Environmental Sciences Divisions Maintained in the System, including 5. On page 61411, 3rd column, under • Committee discussion of charge on Categories of Users and the Purposes for the heading ‘‘SYSTEM MANAGER AND the development and use of new tools Such Uses’’, the paragraph labeled ‘‘(1) ADDRESS’’, the paragraph is revised to • read as follows: Science talks Disclosure for Use by Other Law • New Business Enforcement Agencies’’, is revised to SYSTEM MANAGER AND ADDRESS: • Public Comment read as follows: Director, Computer Assisted Assessment Public Participation: The day and a ‘‘(1) Disclosure for Use by Other Law Techniques, Information Technology Audits half meeting is open to the public. If you Enforcement Agencies. The Department and Computer Crimes Investigations, would like to file a written statement may disclose information from this Department of Education, Office of Inspector with the Committee, you may do so system of records as a routine use to any General, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., PCP, Washington, DC 20202–1510. either before or after the meeting. If you Federal, State, local, foreign agency, or would like to make oral statements other public authority responsible for [FR Doc. 2012–11617 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] regarding any of the items on the enforcing, investigating, prosecuting, BILLING CODE 4000–01–P agenda, you should contact David overseeing, or assisting in the Thomassen at the address or telephone enforcement, investigation, prosecution, number listed above. You must make or oversight of, violations of DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY your request for an oral statement at administrative, civil, or criminal law or least five business days before the Biological and Environmental regulation if that information is relevant meeting. Reasonable provision will be Research Advisory Committee to any enforcement, regulatory, made to include the scheduled oral investigative, prosecutorial, or oversight AGENCY: Office of Science, Department statements on the agenda. The responsibility of the Department or of of Energy. Chairperson of the Committee will the receiving entity.’’ ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. conduct the meeting to facilitate the 3. On page 61411, first column, under orderly conduct of business. Public the heading ‘‘Routine Uses of Records SUMMARY: This notice announces a comment will follow the 10-minute Maintained in the System, including meeting of the Biological and rule. Categories of Users and the Purposes for Environmental Research Advisory Minutes: The minutes of this meeting Such Uses’’, the paragraph labeled Committee (BERAC). The Federal will be available for public review and ‘‘Disclosure to the President’s Council Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– copying within 45 days at the BERAC on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE)’’, is 463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public Web site: http://science.energy.gov/ber/ revised to read as follows: notice of these meetings be announced berac/meetings/berac-minutes/. ‘‘(12) Disclosure to the Council of in the Federal Register. Issued in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2012. Inspectors General for Integrity and DATES: Wednesday, June 6, 2012—8:30 Efficiency (CIGIE). The Department may LaTanya R. Butler, a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Thursday, June 7, Acting Deputy Committee Management disclose records as a routine use to 2012—8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. members and employees of the CIGIE, or Officer. ADDRESSES: Hilton Hotel, 620 Perry any successor entity, for the preparation [FR Doc. 2012–11633 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Parkway, Gaithersburg, Maryland of reports to the President and Congress BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 20877. on the activities of the Inspectors General.’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 4. On page 61411, 2nd column, under David Thomassen, Designated Federal DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the heading labeled ‘‘Safeguards’’, Officer, BERAC, U.S. Department of Environmental Management Site- paragraphs 1 and 2 are revised to read Energy, Office of Science, Office of Specific Advisory Board, Hanford as follows: Biological and Environmental Research, ‘‘Access to data in ODAS is restricted to SC–23/Germantown Building, 1000 AGENCY: Department of Energy. authorized users and is recorded in an access Independence Avenue SW., ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. log. All physical access to the Department’s Washington, DC 20585–1290. Phone site where this system of records is 301–903–9817; fax (301) 903–5051 or SUMMARY: This notice announces a maintained is controlled and monitored by email: meeting of the Environmental

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28369

Management Site-Specific Advisory agenda items should contact Tifany guide.asp. For user assistance contact Board (EM SSAB), Hanford. The Federal Nguyen at the address or telephone FERC Online Support by email at Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– number listed above. Requests must be [email protected], or by phone 463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public received five days prior to the meeting at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202) notice of this meeting be announced in and reasonable provision will be made 502–8659 for TTY. the Federal Register. to include the presentation in the Docket: Users interested in receiving DATES: Thursday, June 7, 2012—8:30 agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal automatic notification of activity in this a.m.–5:00 p.m. Officer is empowered to conduct the docket or in viewing/downloading Friday, June 8, 2012—8:30 a.m.–3:00 meeting in a fashion that will facilitate comments and issuances in this docket p.m. the orderly conduct of business. may do so at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs- filing/docs-filing.asp. ADDRESSES: Red Lion Hotel, 1101 North Individuals wishing to make public Columbia Center Boulevard, comments will be provided a maximum FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kennewick, WA 99336. of five minutes to present their Ellen Brown may be reached by email comments. at [email protected], telephone FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Minutes: Minutes will be available by at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273– Tifany Nguyen, Federal Coordinator, writing or calling Tifany Nguyen’s office 0873. Department of Energy Richland at the address or phone number listed SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Operations Office, 825 Jadwin Avenue, above. Minutes will also be available at Title: FERC–576, Report of Service P.O. Box 550, A7–75, Richland, WA the following Web site: http:// Interruptions. 99352; Phone: (509) 376–3361; or Email: www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/hab. OMB Control No.: 1902–0004. [email protected]. Type of Request: Three-year extension Issued at Washington, DC, on May 8, 2012. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of the FERC–576 information collection Purpose of the Board: The purpose of LaTanya R. Butler, requirements with no changes to the the Board is to make recommendations Acting Deputy Committee Management current reporting requirements. to DOE–EM and site management in the Officer. Abstract: A natural gas company must areas of environmental restoration, [FR Doc. 2012–11635 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] obtain Commission authorization to waste management, and related BILLING CODE 6450–01–P engage in the transportation, sale, or activities. exchange of natural gas in interstate Tentative Agenda commerce under the Natural Gas Act DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (NGA).1 The NGA also empowers the • Draft Advice Commission to oversee continuity of Æ Federal Energy Regulatory 300 Area Remedial Investigation/ service in the transportation of natural Commission Feasibility Study and Proposed gas in interstate commerce. The Plan [Docket No. IC12–12–000] information collected under FERC–576 Æ State of the Site Meetings notifies the Commission of: (1) Damage Æ Waste Treatment Plant Safety Commission Information Collection to jurisdictional natural gas facilities as Culture Activities (FERC–576); Comment Æ a result of a hurricane, earthquake, or Delay on Implementing Record of Request; Extension other natural disaster, or terrorist Decision for the Tank Closure and activity, (2) serious interruptions to Waste Management Environmental AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. service, and (3) damage to jurisdictional Impact Statement natural gas facilities due to natural • Discussion Topics ACTION: Notice of information collection Æ disaster or terrorist activity, that creates Committee Reports and request for comments. the potential for serious delivery Æ Preliminary Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 problems on the pipeline’s own system Board Work Plan Priorities SUMMARY: In compliance with the or the pipeline grid. Æ Preliminary FY 2013 Board requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Filings (in accordance with the Calendar provisions of section 4(d) of the NGA) 2 Æ Tri-Party Agreement Agency 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or must contain information necessary to Updates advise the Commission when a change Æ Board Business, including FERC) is soliciting public comment on in service has occurred. Section 7(d) of identification of the nominating the currently approved information the NGA 3 authorizes the Commission to committee for Board Chairperson collection FERC–576, Report of Service issue a temporary certificate in cases of Æ Introduction to ‘Hanford Advisory Interruptions. emergency to assure maintenance of Board Values’ Advice Development DATES: Comments on the collection of adequate service or to serve particular Public Participation: The meeting is information are due July 13, 2012. customers, without notice or hearing. open to the public. The EM SSAB, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Respondents to the FERC–576 may Hanford, welcomes the attendance of (identified by Docket No. IC12–12–000) submit the initial reports by email to the public at its advisory committee by either of the following methods: [email protected]. 18 CFR meetings and will make every effort to • eFiling at Commission’s Web Site: 260.9(b) requires that a report of service accommodate persons with physical http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ interruption or damage to natural gas disabilities or special needs. If you efiling.asp. facilities state: (1) The location of the • require special accommodations due to Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: service interruption or damage to a disability, please contact Tifany Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, natural gas pipeline or storage facilities; Nguyen at least seven days in advance Secretary of the Commission, 888 First (2) The nature of any damage to pipeline of the meeting at the phone number Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. or storage facilities; (3) Specific listed above. Written statements may be Instructions: All submissions must be filed with the Board either before or formatted and filed in accordance with 1 Public Law 75 688; 15 U.S.C. 717 & 717w. after the meeting. Individuals who wish submission guidelines at: http:// 2 (15 U.S.C. 717c). to make oral statements pertaining to www.ferc.gov/help/submission- 3 (15 U.S.C. 717f).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28370 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

identification of the facilities damaged; facilities resulting in loss of pipeline Director of the Commission’s Division of (4) The time the service interruption or throughput of storage deliverability Pipeline Certificates, within 30 days of damage to the facilities occurred; (5) shall be reported to the Director of the the reportable incident.4 The customers affected by the service Commission’s Division of Pipeline If the Commission failed to collect interruption or damage to the facilities; Certificates at the earliest feasible time these data, it would lose the ability to (6) Emergency actions taken to maintain when pipeline throughput or storage monitor and evaluate transactions, service; and (7) Company contact and deliverability has been restored. operations, and reliability of interstate telephone number. The Commission In any instance in which an incident pipelines and perform its regulatory may contact other pipelines to or damage report involving functions. determine available supply, and if jurisdictional natural gas facilities is Type of Respondents: Pipeline and necessary, authorize transportation or required by Department of storage company operators. construction of facilities to alleviate the Transportation (DOT) reporting Estimate of Annual Burden: 5 The problem in response to these reports. requirements under the Natural Gas Commission estimates the total Public A report required by 18 CFR Pipeline Safety Act of 1968, a copy of Reporting Burden for this information 260.9(a)(1)(i) of damage to natural gas such report shall be submitted to the collection as:

FERC–576 (IC12–12–000): REPORT OF SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS

Number of Average Number of responses per Total number burden hours Estimated total respondents respondent of responses per response annual burden

(A) (B) (A) × (B) = (C) (D) (C) × (D)

Submittal of original email ...... 40 2 80 1 80 Submittal of damage reports ...... 40 1 40 .25 10 Submittal of DOT incident report ...... 40 1 40 .25 10

Total ...... 100

The total estimated annual cost DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Secretary of the Commission, 888 First burden to respondents is $6,901 [100 Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. hours ÷ 2080 hours 6 per year = 0.04808 Federal Energy Regulatory Instructions: All submissions must be * $143,540/year 7 = $6,900.96]. Commission formatted and filed in accordance with Comments: Comments are invited on: [Docket No. IC12–10–000] submission guidelines at: http:// (1) Whether the collection of www.ferc.gov/help/submission- information is necessary for the proper Commission Information Collection guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support by email at performance of the functions of the Activities (FERC–545); Comment [email protected], or by phone Commission, including whether the Request; Extension at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202) information will have practical utility; AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 502–8659 for TTY. (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate Commission, Energy. Docket: Users interested in receiving of the burden and cost of the collection ACTION: Notice of information collection automatic notification of activity in this of information, including the validity of and request for comments. docket or in viewing/downloading the methodology and assumptions used; comments and issuances in this docket SUMMARY: (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility In compliance with the may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs- and clarity of the information collection; requirements of the Paperwork filing/docs-filing.asp. and (4) ways to minimize the burden of Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the collection of information on those 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Ellen Brown may be reached by email who are to respond, including the use Regulatory Commission (Commission or at [email protected], telephone of automated collection techniques or FERC) is soliciting public comment on at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273– other forms of information technology. the currently approved information collection, Gas Pipeline Rates: Non- 0873. Dated: May 8, 2012. Formal, FERC–545. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Kimberly D. Bose, DATES: Comments on the collection of Title: FERC–545, Gas Pipeline Rates: Secretary. information are due July 13, 2012. Non-Formal. [FR Doc. 2012–11579 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: You may submit comments OMB Control No.: 1902–0154. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P (identified by Docket No. IC12–10–000) Type of Request: Three-year extension by either of the following methods: of the FERC–545 information collection • eFiling at Commission’s Web Site: requirements with no changes to the http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ current reporting requirements. efiling.asp. Abstract: The FERC–545 information • Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: collection applies to filings made Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, pursuant to the Natural Gas Act (NGA) 1

4 18 CFR 260.9(d). information to or for a Federal agency. For further 6 2080 hours = 40 hours/week * 52 weeks (1 year). 5 Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or explanation of what is included in the information 7 Average annual salary per employee in 2012. financial resources expended by persons to collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal 1 15 U.S.C. 717c–717o, Public Law 75–688, 52 generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide Regulations 1320.3. Stat. 822 and 830.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28371

and the Natural Gas Policy Act (NGPA) 2 filings allow customers and interested Estimate of Annual Burden: 3 The by regulated entities. The filings enable parties to monitor, participate, and Commission estimates the total Public the Commission to monitor the influence pipeline tariff changes. Reporting Burden for this information activities and to evaluate transactions of Type of Respondents: Entities collection as: regulated entities. Additionally, these regulated pursuant to the NGA and NGPA.

FERC–545 (IC12–10–000): GAS PIPELINE RATES: NON-FORMAL

Number of Average Number of responses per Total number burden hours Estimated total respondents respondent of responses per response annual burden (A) (B) (A) × (B) = (C) (D) (C) × (D)

General (e.g. Tariff modifications resulting from Commis- sion orders) ...... 164 7 1,148 40 45,920 Standard Rate Case Issues (e.g. Compliance, Cost of Service) ...... 15 2 30 7,500 225,000 Reports (Informational Filings) ...... 47 2 94 12 1,128 Negotiated Rates ...... 57 7 399 12 4,788 Non-Conforming Agreements ...... 50 3 150 12 1,800 NAESB (Tariff Only) ...... 82 2 164 40 6,560

Total ...... 285,196

The total estimated annual cost DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY All documents may be filed burden to respondents is $19,681,266 electronically via the Internet. See 18 [285,196 hours ÷ 2,080 4 hours/year = Federal Energy Regulatory CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the 137.11346 * $143,540/year 5 = Commission instructions on the Commission’s Web $19,681,266]. site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ [Project No. 13590–001] efiling.asp. Commenters can submit Comments: Comments are invited on: brief comments up to 6,000 characters, (1) Whether the collection of Lockhart Power Company, Inc.; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and without prior registration, using the information is necessary for the proper eComment system at http:// performance of the functions of the Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ Commission, including whether the ecomment.asp. You must include your information will have practical utility; Take notice that the following name and contact information at the end (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate hydroelectric application has been filed of your comments. For assistance, of the burden and cost of the collection with the Commission and is available please contact FERC Online Support at of information, including the validity of for public inspection. [email protected], or toll the methodology and assumptions used; a. Type of Application: Subsequent free at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility Minor License. (202) 502–8659. Although the and clarity of the information collection; b. Project No.: 13590–001. Commission strongly encourages and (4) ways to minimize the burden of c. Date filed: August 31, 2010. electronic filing, documents may also be the collection of information on those d. Applicant: Lockhart Power paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an who are to respond, including the use Company, Inc. original and seven copies to: Kimberly of automated collection techniques or e. Name of Project: Riverdale D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Hydroelectric Project. other forms of information technology. Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street f. Location: On the Enoree River, near NE., Washington, DC 20426. Dated: May 7, 2012. Enoree, in Spartanburg and Laurens The Commission’s Rules of Practice Kimberly D. Bose, counties, South Carolina. The proposed require all intervenors filing documents Secretary. project would not affect any Federal with the Commission to serve a copy of [FR Doc. 2012–11578 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] lands. that document on each person on the g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power official service list for the project. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). Further, if an intervenor files comments h. Applicant Contact: Bryan D. Stone, or documents with the Commission Chief Operating Officer, Lockhart Power relating to the merits of an issue that Company, Inc., 420 River Street, P.O. may affect the responsibilities of a Box 10, Lockhart, SC 29364; (864) 545– particular resource agency, they must 2211. also serve a copy of the document on i. FERC Contact: Sarah Florentino at that resource agency. (202) 502–6863, or via email at k. This application has been accepted, [email protected]. but is not ready for environmental j. Deadline for filing motions to analysis at this time. intervene and protests: 60 days from the l. The existing, currently non- issuance date of this notice. operational, Riverdale Project consists

2 15 U.S.C. 3393, Public Law 95–621. information to or for a Federal agency. For further 4 2080 hours/year = 40 hours/week * 52 weeks/ 3 Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or explanation of what is included in the information year. financial resources expended by persons to collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal 5 Average annual salary per employee in 2012. generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide Regulations 1320.3.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:08 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28372 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

of: (1) A 12-foot high, 425-foot-long the schedule will be made as electronically, documents may be paper- concrete gravity dam with 2-foot appropriate. filed. To paper-file, an original and flashboards; (2) a 6.6-acre seven copies should be mailed to: impoundment; (3) a headrace leading to Issue Scoping Document 2 (if May 2012. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory a 110-foot-long steel penstock; (4) a necessary). Commission, 888 First Street NE., powerhouse containing a single 1.24- Notice of application is ready July 2012. Washington, DC 20426. Commenters megawatt turbine-generator unit; (5) a for environmental analysis. can submit brief comments up to 6,000 510-foot-long tailrace channel; and (6) Notice of the availability of the April 2013. characters, without prior registration, EA. appurtenant facilities. The proposed using the eComment system at http:// www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ project would generate about 5,318 Final amendments to the application ecomment.asp. You must include your megawatt-hours annually. Lockhart must be filed with the Commission no name and contact information at the end Power Company, Inc. proposes to repair later than 30 days from the issuance of your comments. Please include the or upgrade the turbine unit and return date of the notice of ready for project number (P–199–224) on any the project operation. environmental analysis. m. A copy of the application is comments, motions, or available for review at the Commission Dated: May 7, 2012. recommendations filed. in the Public Reference Room or may be Kimberly D. Bose, k. Description of Application: South viewed on the Commission’s Web site at Secretary. Carolina Public Service Authority http://www.ferc.gov, using the [FR Doc. 2012–11570 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] requests Commission authorization to ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket BILLING CODE 6717–01–P permit Jack’s Creek Marina to redevelop number, excluding the last three digits and expand its existing commercial in the docket number field to access the facility. The redevelopment would document. For assistance, contact FERC DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY expand the existing 4.39 acre Online Support. A copy is also available commercial facility to include an for inspection and reproduction at the Federal Energy Regulatory adjoining 4.65 acre parcel of land. Major address in item h above. Commission components of the 9.04 acre commercial property would include a boat ramp, You may also register online at [Project No. 199–224] http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ 106-slip marina, fuel and sewage pump- esubscription.asp to be notified via South Carolina Public Service out services, restrooms, parking, shops, email of new filings and issuances Authority; Notice of Application for restaurant, swimming pool, rental related to this or other pending projects. Amendment of License and Soliciting cottages, boardwalk, wooden deck, and remote parking for boat trailers. For assistance, contact FERC Online Comments, Motions To Intervene, and l. Locations of the Application: A Support. Protests copy of the application is available for n. Anyone may submit a protest or a Take notice that the following inspection and reproduction at the motion to intervene in accordance with hydroelectric application has been filed Commission’s Public Reference Room, the requirements of Rules of Practice with the Commission and is available located at 888 First Street NE., Room and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, for public inspection: 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling 385.211, and 385.214. In determining a. Application Type: Non-project use (202) 502–8371. This filing may also be the appropriate action to take, the of project lands and waters. viewed on the Commission’s Web site at Commission will consider all protests b. Project No.: 199–224. http://www.ferc.gov using the filed, but only those who file a motion c. Date Filed: April 3, 2012. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket to intervene in accordance with the d. Applicant: South Carolina Public number excluding the last three digits in Commission’s Rules may become a Service Authority. the docket number field to access the party to the proceeding. Any protests or e. Name of Project: Santee-Cooper document. You may also register online motions to intervene must be received Hydroelectric Project. at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ on, or before, the specified deadline f. Location: The proposed non-project esubscription.asp to be notified via date for the particular application. use would be located on Upper Lake email of new filings and issuances All filings must: (1) Bear in all capital Marion in Clarendon County, South related to this or other pending projects. letters the title ‘‘PROTEST’’ or Carolina. For assistance, call 1–866–208–3676 or ‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE;’’ (2) set g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power email [email protected], for forth in the heading the name of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a–825r. TTY, call (202) 502–8659. A copy is also applicant and the project number of the h. Applicant Contact: Mr. David L. available for inspection and application to which the filing Evans, Manager, Property Management, reproduction at the address in item (h) responds; (3) furnish the name, address, South Carolina Public Service above. and telephone number of the person Authority, P.O. Box 2946101, Moncks m. Individuals desiring to be included protesting or intervening; and (4) Corner, SC 29461–6101, (843) 761–4068. on the Commission’s mailing list should otherwise comply with the requirements i. FERC Contact: Shana High at (202) so indicate by writing to the Secretary of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. 502–8674, or email: of the Commission. Agencies may obtain copies of the [email protected]. n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to application directly from the applicant. j. Deadline for filing comments, Intervene: Anyone may submit A copy of any protest or motion to motions to intervene, and protest: comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene must be served upon each June 6, 2012. intervene in accordance with the representative of the applicant specified All documents may be filed requirements of Rules of Practice and in the particular application. electronically via the Internet. See, 18 Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. o. Procedural schedule and final CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the In determining the appropriate action to amendments: The application will be instructions on the Commission’s Web take, the Commission will consider all processed according to the following site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ protests or other comments filed, but Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to efiling.asp. If unable to be filed only those who file a motion to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28373

intervene in accordance with the Any person desiring to participate in DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission’s Rules may become a this rate proceeding must file a motion party to the proceeding. Any comments, to intervene or to protest this filing must Federal Energy Regulatory protests, or motions to intervene must file in accordance with Rules 211 and Commission be received on or before the specified 214 of the Commission’s Rules of comment date for the particular Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 [Docket No. EL12–65–000] application. and 385.214). Protests will be RC Cape May Holdings, LLC v. PJM o. Filing and Service of Responsive considered by the Commission in Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in determining the appropriate action to be Complaint all capital letters the title taken, but will not serve to make ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘PROTEST’’, or protestants parties to the proceeding. Take notice that on May 7, 2012, ‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE’’ as Any person wishing to become a party pursuant to section 206 of the Rules and applicable; (2) set forth in the heading must file a notice of intervention or Practice and Procedure of the Federal the name of the applicant and the motion to intervene, as appropriate. Energy Regulatory Commission project number of the application to Such notices, motions, or protests must (Commission), 18 CFR 385.206 and which the filing responds; (3) furnish be filed on or before the date as sections 206, 306, and 309 of the the name, address, and telephone indicated below. Anyone filing an Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824(e), number of the person protesting or 825(e), and 825(h), RC Cape May intervention or protest must serve a intervening; and (4) otherwise comply Holdings, LLC (Complainant) filed a copy of that document on the Applicant. with the requirements of 18 CFR formal complaint against PJM 385.2001 through 385.2005. All Anyone filing an intervention or protest Interconnection, L.L.C. (Respondent) comments, motions to intervene, or on or before the intervention or protest alleging that Respondent violated the protests must set forth their evidentiary date need not serve motions to intervene requirements of its open access basis. Agencies may obtain copies of the or protests on persons other than the transmission tariff (Tariff) and the filed application directly from the applicant. Applicant. rate doctrine by incorrectly calculating A copy of any protest or motion to The Commission encourages transmission line ratings that resulted in intervene must be served upon each electronic submission of protests and creating artificial congestion and representative of the applicant specified interventions in lieu of paper using the thereby artificially suppressed the in the particular application. If an ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. locational marginal prices (LMPs) intervener files comments or documents Persons unable to file electronically received by Complainant from June 4, with the Commission relating to the should submit an original and 7 copies 2010 to June 25, 2010. Complainant merits of an issue that may affect the of the protest or intervention to the requests that the Commission direct responsibilities of a particular resource Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondent to refund to Complainant agency, they must also serve a copy of 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC the amount that Complainant would the document on that resource agency. 20426. have received if Respondent had A copy of all other filings in reference correctly calculated LMPs in accordance to this application must be accompanied This filing is accessible on-line at with Respondent’s filed rate. by proof of service on all persons listed http://www.ferc.gov, using the The Complainant states that a copy of in the service list prepared by the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for the Complaint has been served on the Commission in this proceeding, in review in the Commission’s Public contact for the Respondent as listed on accordance with 18 CFR 385.2010. Reference Room in Washington, DC. the Commission list of Corporate Dated: May 7, 2012. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Officials. Kimberly D. Bose, web site that enables subscribers to Any person desiring to intervene or to Secretary. receive email notification when a protest this filing must file in document is added to a subscribed accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of [FR Doc. 2012–11575 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] docket(s). For assistance with any FERC the Commission’s Rules of Practice and BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Online service, please email Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). [email protected], or call Protests will be considered by the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Commission in determining the (202) 502–8659. appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to Federal Energy Regulatory Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Commission the proceeding. Any person wishing to Time on Monday, May 14, 2012. become a party must file a notice of Dated: May 7, 2012. intervention or motion to intervene, as [Docket No. PR12–24–000] Kimberly D. Bose, appropriate. The Respondent’s answer Liberty Energy (Midstates) Corp.; Secretary. and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Notice of Baseline Filing [FR Doc. 2012–11573 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] The Respondent’s answer, motions to Take notice that on April 30, 2012, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P intervene, and protests must be served Liberty Energy (Midstates) Corp. on the Complainants. submitted a baseline filing of their The Commission encourages Statement of Operating Conditions for electronic submission of protests and services provided under Section 311 of interventions in lieu of paper using the the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. (NGPA) to comply with a Delegated Persons unable to file electronically Letter Order issued March 30, 2012, in should submit an original and 14 copies Docket No. CP12–42–000 (138 FERC of the protest or intervention to the ¶ 61,249). Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28374 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

888 First Street NE., Washington, DC be filed on or before the comment date. Such notices, motions, or protests must 20426. The Respondent’s answer, motions to be filed on or before the date as This filing is accessible on-line at intervene, and protests must be served indicated below. Anyone filing an http://www.ferc.gov, using the on the Complainants. intervention or protest must serve a ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for The Commission encourages copy of that document on the Applicant. review in the Commission’s Public electronic submission of protests and Anyone filing an intervention or protest Reference Room in Washington, DC interventions in lieu of paper using the on or before the intervention or protest There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. date need not serve motions to intervene Web site that enables subscribers to Persons unable to file electronically or protests on persons other than the receive email notification when a should submit an original and 14 copies Applicant. document is added to a subscribed of the protest or intervention to the The Commission encourages docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, electronic submission of protests and Online service, please email 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC interventions in lieu of paper using the [email protected], or call 20426. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call This filing is accessible on-line at Persons unable to file electronically (202) 502–8659. http://www.ferc.gov, using the should submit an original and 7 copies Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for of the protest or intervention to the Time on May 29, 2012. review in the Commission’s Public Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Dated: May 7, 2012. Reference Room in Washington, DC. 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Kimberly D. Bose, There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the 20426. web site that enables subscribers to This filing is accessible on-line at Secretary. receive email notification when a http://www.ferc.gov, using the [FR Doc. 2012–11577 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] document is added to a subscribed ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for BILLING CODE 6717–01–P docket(s). For assistance with any FERC review in the Commission’s Public Online service, please email Reference Room in Washington, DC. [email protected], or call There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Web site that enables subscribers to Federal Energy Regulatory (202) 502–8659. receive email notification when a Commission Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern document is added to a subscribed Time on May 24, 2012. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC [Docket No. EL12–64–000] Dated: May 7, 2012. Online service, please email Kimberly D. Bose, [email protected], or call Linden VFT, LLC v. New York (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Secretary. Independent System Operator, Inc.; (202) 502–8659. Notice of Complaint [FR Doc. 2012–11576 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Take notice that on May 4, 2012, Time on Monday, May 14, 2012. pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Dated: May 7, 2012. Power Act and Rule 206 of the Rules of DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Kimberly D. Bose, Practice and Procedure of the Federal Secretary. Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Energy Regulatory [FR Doc. 2012–11571 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] (Commission), 18 CFR 385.206, Linden Commission BILLING CODE 6717–01–P VFT, LLC (Linden VFT or Complainant) filed a formal complaint against New [Docket No. PR10–128–001] York Independent System Operator, Inc. SourceGas Arkansas Inc.; Formerly DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (NYISO or Respondent), alleging that Arkansas Western Gas Company; the Respondent failed to recognize the Notice of Compliance Filing Federal Energy Regulatory actual transmission capacity of Linden Commission VFT in the same manner as similarly Take notice that on April 27, 2012, situated projects is unduly SourceGas Arkansas Inc formerly [Docket No. PR12–7–001] discriminatory. known as Arkansas Western Gas SourceGas Distribution LLC; Notice of Linden VFT certifies that copies of the Company submitted a revised Statement Compliance Filing complaint were served on the contacts of Operating Conditions to comply with for the Respondent as listed on the an unpublished Delegated letter order Take notice that on April 30, 2012, Commission’s list of Corporate Officials. issued on April 24, 2012. SourceGas Distribution LLC (SourceGas) Any person desiring to intervene or to Any person desiring to participate in filed a revised Statement of Operating protest this filing must file in this rate proceeding must file a motion Conditions to comply with an accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of to intervene or to protest this filing must unpublished Delegated letter order the Commission’s Rules of Practice and file in accordance with Rules 211 and issued on April 24, 2012. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Any person desiring to participate in 385.214). Protests will be considered by Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 this rate proceeding must file a motion the Commission in determining the and 385.214). Protests will be to intervene or to protest this filing must appropriate action to be taken, but will considered by the Commission in file in accordance with Rules 211 and not serve to make protestants parties to determining the appropriate action to be 214 of the Commission’s Rules of the proceeding. Any person wishing to taken, but will not serve to make Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 become a party must file a notice of protestants parties to the proceeding. and 385.214). Protests will be intervention or motion to intervene, as Any person wishing to become a party considered by the Commission in appropriate. The Respondent’s answer must file a notice of intervention or determining the appropriate action to be and all interventions, or protests must motion to intervene, as appropriate. taken, but will not serve to make

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28375

protestants parties to the proceeding. with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Any person wishing to become a party Commission’s Rules of Practice and Washington DC 20426. must file a notice of intervention or Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and The technical conference is being motion to intervene, as appropriate. 385.214). Protests will be considered by held pursuant to the Commission’s Such notices, motions, or protests must the Commission in determining the April 27, 2012 order addressing Dixie’s be filed on or before the date as appropriate action to be taken, but will FERC Tariff No. 6.1.0.1 The technical indicated below. Anyone filing an not serve to make protestants parties to conference will address the issues intervention or protest must serve a the proceeding. Any person wishing to raised by the protesters in the copy of that document on the Applicant. become a party must file a notice of proceeding and the issues discussed by Anyone filing an intervention or protest intervention or motion to intervene, as the Commission in P 19 of the April 27, on or before the intervention or protest appropriate. Such notices, motions, or 2012 order concerning the effect of date need not serve motions to intervene protests must be filed on or before the Dixie’s proposed new butane/isobutane or protests on persons other than the date as indicated below. Anyone filing service on its overall system operations. Applicant. an intervention or protest must serve a FERC conferences are accessible The Commission encourages copy of that document on the Applicant. under section 508 of the Rehabilitation electronic submission of protests and Anyone filing an intervention or protest Act of 1973. For accessibility interventions in lieu of paper using the on or before the intervention or protest accommodations please send an email ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. date need not serve motions to intervene to [email protected] or call toll free Persons unable to file electronically or protests on persons other than the (866) 208–3372 (voice) or 202–502–8659 should submit an original and 7 copies Applicant. (TTY), or send a fax to 202–208–2106 of the protest or intervention to the The Commission encourages with the required accommodations. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, electronic submission of protests and All interested persons are permitted 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC interventions in lieu of paper using the to attend. For further information please 20426. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. contact David Faerberg at (202) 502– This filing is accessible on-line at Persons unable to file electronically 8275 or email [email protected]. http://www.ferc.gov, using the should submit an original and 7 copies ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Dated: May 7, 2012. of the protest or intervention to the review in the Commission’s Public Kimberly D. Bose, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Reference Room in Washington, DC. Secretary. 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the [FR Doc. 2012–11574 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 20426. Web site that enables subscribers to BILLING CODE 6717–01–P receive email notification when a This filing is accessible on-line at document is added to a subscribed http://www.ferc.gov, using the docket(s). For assistance with any FERC ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for review in the Commission’s Public ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Online service, please email AGENCY [email protected], or call Reference Room in Washington, DC. (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the [EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0290; A–1–FRL– (202) 502–8659. web site that enables subscribers to 9672–6] Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern receive email notification when a Adequacy Status of the Submitted Time on Monday, May 14, 2012. document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC 2008 and 2022 VOC and NOX Motor Dated: May 7, 2012. Online service, please email Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Kimberly D. Bose, [email protected], or call Transportation Conformity Purposes; Secretary. (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call New Hampshire; Boston-Manchester- [FR Doc. 2012–11572 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] (202) 502–8659. Portsmouth (SE), New Hampshire, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern 8-Hour Ozone Area Time on Monday, May 14, 2012. AGENCY: Environmental Protection DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Dated: May 7, 2012. Agency (EPA). Kimberly D. Bose, ACTION: Notice of adequacy. Federal Energy Regulatory Secretary. SUMMARY Commission [FR Doc. 2012–11580 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] : EPA is notifying the public that EPA has found that the 2008 and BILLING CODE 6717–01–P [Docket No. PR12–25–000] 2022 motor vehicle emissions budgets Eagle Rock Desoto Pipeline, L.P.; in the March 2, 2012 New Hampshire Notice of Petition for Rate Approval DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision are adequate for transportation Take notice that on May 1, 2012, Federal Energy Regulatory conformity purposes. The submittal Eagle Rock Desoto Pipeline, L.P. Commission includes MOVES2010 motor vehicle (Desoto) filed a Rate Election pursuant emissions budgets for 2008 and 2022 for to 284.123(b)(1) of the Commissions [Docket No. IS12–214–000] the Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth regulations. Desoto proposes to utilize (Southeast), New Hampshire 8-hour rates that are the same as those Dixie Pipeline Company LLC; Notice of ozone area. As a result of our finding, contained in Desoto’s transportation rate Technical Conference the State of New Hampshire must use schedules for comparable intrastate these motor vehicle emissions budgets service on file with the Railroad Take notice that the Commission will for future conformity determinations for Commission of Texas as more fully convene a technical conference on the Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth detailed in the petition. Wednesday, May 30, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. Any person desiring to participate in (EDT), in a room to be designated at the 1 Dixie Pipeline Company LLC, 139 FERC ¶61,073 this rate filing must file in accordance offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory (2012).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28376 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

(Southeast), New Hampshire 8-hour (617) 918–0668, email budgets (MVEBs) in the March 2, 2012 ozone area. [email protected]. SIP are adequate for transportation DATES: These motor vehicle emissions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: conformity purposes. This submittal budgets are effective May 29, 2012. Throughout this document, whenever will also be announced on EPA’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean conformity Web site: http:// Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Planning EPA. www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Today’s notice is simply an transconf/adequacy.htm, (once there, Agency, EPA New England Regional announcement of a finding that we have click on ‘‘What SIP submissions has Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, already made. EPA New England sent a EPA already found adequate or Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office letter to the New Hampshire Department inadequate?’’). The adequate 2008 and Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05– of Environmental Services on April 25, 2022 MVEBs are provided in the 2), Boston, MA 02109–3912, telephone 2012, stating that the 2008 and 2022 following table: number (617) 918–1668, fax number MOVES2010 motor vehicle emissions

ADEQUATE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS

VOC (tons per NOX (tons per summer day) summer day)

Year 2008 MVEBs for the Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (Southeast), New Hampshire 8-Hour Ozone Area...... 17.8 37.2 Year 2022 MVEBs for the Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (Southeast), New Hampshire 8-Hour Ozone Area...... 8.9 11.8

Transportation conformity is required ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. AGENCY Washington, DC 20460. EPA’s conformity rule requires that • Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, transportation plans, programs, and [EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0333 FRL–9671–6] Public Reading Room, EPA projects conform to state air quality Headquarters West Building, Room implementation plans and establishes Agency Information Collection 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., the criteria and procedures for Activities; Proposed Collection; Washington, DC 20240. Such deliveries Comment Request; Information determining whether or not they do. are only accepted during the Docket’s Collection Request for the Greenhouse normal hours of operation, and special Conformity to a SIP means that Gas Reporting Program; EPA ICR No. arrangements should be made for transportation activities will not 2300.10 deliveries of boxed information. produce new air quality violations, Instructions: Direct your comments to worsen existing violations, or delay AGENCY: Environmental Protection Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012– timely attainment of the national Agency. 0333. The EPA’s policy is that all ambient air quality standards. ACTION: Notice. comments received will be included in The criteria by which we determine the public docket without change and SUMMARY: In compliance with the whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emissions may be made available online at Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 budgets are adequate for conformity http://www.regulations.gov, including U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document purposes are outlined in 40 CFR any personal information provided, announces that EPA is planning to unless the comment includes 93.118(e)(4). We have described our submit a request to renew an existing process for determining the adequacy of information claimed to be Confidential approved Information Collection Business Information (CBI) or other submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, Request (ICR) to the Office of 2004, preamble starting at 69 FR 40038, information whose disclosure is Management and Budget (OMB). This restricted by statute. Do not submit and we used the information in these ICR is scheduled to expire on November resources while making our adequacy information that you consider to be CBI 30, 2012. Before submitting the ICR to or otherwise protected through http:// determination. Please note that an OMB for review and approval, the EPA www.regulations.gov or email. The adequacy review is separate from EPA’s is soliciting comments on specific http://www.regulations.gov Web site is completeness review, and it also should aspects of the proposed information an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which not be used to prejudge EPA’s ultimate collection as described below. means the EPA will not know your approval of the SIP. Even if we find a DATES: Comments must be submitted on identity or contact information unless budget adequate, the SIP could later be or before July 13, 2012. you provide it in the body of your disapproved. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, comment. If you send an email Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– comment directly to the EPA without OAR–2012–0333, by one of the going through http:// Dated: May 2, 2012. following methods: www.regulations.gov your email address Ira W. Leighton, • http://www.regulations.gov: Follow will be automatically captured and Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New the on-line instructions for submitting included as part of the comment that is England. comments. placed in the public docket and made [FR Doc. 2012–11648 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] • Email: [email protected]. available on the Internet. If you submit BILLING CODE 6560–50–P • Fax: (202) 566–9744. an electronic comment, the EPA • Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and recommends that you include your Information Center, Environmental name and other contact information in Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, the body of your comment and with any

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28377

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA including the validity of the ICR status: This ICR is currently cannot read your comment due to methodology and assumptions used; scheduled to expire on November 30, technical difficulties and cannot contact (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and 2012. An agency may not conduct or you for clarification, the EPA may not clarity of the information to be sponsor, and a person is not required to be able to consider your comment. collected; and respond to, a collection of information, Electronic files should avoid the use of (iv) Minimize the burden of the unless it displays a currently valid OMB special characters, any form of collection of information on those who control number. The OMB control encryption, and be free of any defects or are to respond, including through the numbers for the EPA’s regulations in viruses. For additional information use of appropriate automated electronic, title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA mechanical, or other technological the Federal Register when approved, Docket Center homepage at http:// collection techniques or other forms of are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. information technology, e.g., permitting displayed either by publication in the electronic submission of responses. In Federal Register or by other appropriate FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: particular, the EPA is requesting means, such as on the related collection Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, comments from very small businesses instrument or form, if applicable. The Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC– (those that employ less than 25) on display of OMB control numbers in 6207J), Environmental Protection examples of specific additional efforts certain EPA regulations is consolidated Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., that the EPA could make to reduce the in 40 CFR part 9. Washington, DC 20460; telephone paperwork burden for very small Abstract: In response to the FY2008 number: (202) 343–9263; fax number: businesses affected by this collection. Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. (202) 343–2342; email address: 2764; Pub. L. 110–161) and under [email protected]. What should I consider when I prepare my comments for the EPA? authority of the Clean Air Act, the EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: finalized the Mandatory Reporting of You may find the following Greenhouse Gases Rule (GHG Reporting How can I access the docket and/or suggestions helpful for preparing your Rule) (74 FR 56260; October 30, 2009). submit comments? comments: The GHG Reporting Rule, which became 1. Explain your views as clearly as The EPA has established a public effective on December 29, 2009, possible and provide specific examples. establishes reporting requirements for docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. 2. Describe any assumptions that you EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0333, which is some direct GHG emitters as well as used. suppliers of certain products that will available for online viewing at http:// 3. Provide copies of any technical emit GHG when released, combusted, or www.regulations.gov, or in person information and/or data you used that oxidized, industrial gas suppliers, and viewing at the EPA Air and Radiation support your views. manufacturers of heavy-duty and off- Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/ 4. If you estimate potential burden or road vehicles and engines. It does not DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 costs, explain how you arrived at the require control of greenhouse gases. Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, estimate that you provide. DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room 5. Offer alternative ways to improve Instead, it requires that sources emitting is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., the collection activity. above certain threshold levels of (CO2e) Monday through Friday, excluding legal 6. Make sure to submit your monitor and report emissions. holidays. The telephone number for the comments by the deadline identified Subsequent rules provide corrections Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and under DATES. and clarification on existing the telephone number for the EPA Air 7. To ensure proper receipt by the requirements; include requirements for and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID additional facilities and suppliers; require reporters to provide information Use http://www.regulations.gov to number assigned to this action in the about parent companies, NAICS code(s), obtain a copy of the draft collection of subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the and whether emissions are from information, submit or view public cogeneration; and finalize comments, access the index listing of name, date, and Federal Register citation. confidentiality determinations. the contents of the docket, and to access Specifically, in 2010 and 2011, the EPA those documents in the public docket What information collection activity or promulgated requirements for subparts that are available electronically. Once in ICR does this apply to? T, FF, II, and TT (75 FR 39736; July 12, the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in 2010); information about parent the docket ID number identified in this [Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012– 0333.] companies, NAICS code(s), and document. Affected entities: Entities potentially cogeneration (75 FR 57669; September What information is EPA particularly affected by this action are suppliers of 22, 2010); subpart W (75 FR 74458; interested in? certain products that will emit GHG November 30, 2010); subparts I, L, DD, when released, combusted, or oxidized, QQ, and SS (75 FR 74774; December 1, Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of motor vehicle and engine 2010); subparts RR and UU (75 FR the PRA, the EPA specifically solicits manufacturers, including aircraft engine 75060; December 1, 2010); and comments and information to enable it manufacturers; facilities in certain confidentiality determinations (76 FR to: industrial categories that emit 30782; May 26, 2011). Collectively, the (i) Evaluate whether the proposed greenhouse gases; and facilities that GHG Reporting Rule and its associated collection of information is necessary emit 25,000 metric tons or more of rulemakings are referred to as the for the proper performance of the carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) per Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program functions of the Agency, including year. (GHGRP). whether the information will have Title: Information Collection Request The purpose for this ICR is to renew practical utility; for the Greenhouse Gas Reporting and revise the GHG Reporting Rule ICR (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Program. to update and consolidate the burdens Agency’s estimate of the burden of the ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2300.10, and costs imposed by all of the current proposed collection of information, OMB Control No. 2060–0629. ICRs under the GHGRP.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28378 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

Data submitted under the GHGRP that Are there changes in the estimates from DATES: Additional comments may be is classified as CBI is protected under the last approval? submitted on or before June 13, 2012. the provisions of 40 CFR part 2, subpart There is a decrease of 764,890 hours ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, B. The EPA is determining through a in the total estimated respondent referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– series of rulemaking actions the data burden compared with the combined SFUND–2012–0104, to (1) EPA online elements that will be eligible for burden in the currently approved ICRs using www.regulations.gov (our treatment as CBI. However, according to for the GHGRP identified in the ICRs preferred method), by email to CAA section 114(c), ‘‘emissions data’’ currently approved by OMB (2060– [email protected], or by mail cannot be classified as CBI. The EPA has 0629, –0646, –0647, –0649, –0650, to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental proposed that inputs to emissions –0651, and –0680). This decrease Protection Agency, Mailcode: 28221T, equations meet the definition of reflects the completion of one-time 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., ‘‘emissions data’’ and cannot be activities that occurred in the first year Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by afforded the protections of CBI. The of data collection as well as adjustments mail to: Office of Information and EPA has deferred the reporting deadline in the number of respondents based on Regulatory Affairs, Office of for data elements that are used as inputs facilities that reported information to Management and Budget (OMB), to emissions equations to provide the the EPA. This change is the result of an Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 EPA time needed to fully evaluate and adjustment. 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. resolve issues regarding the reporting FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and potential release of these data (76 What is the next step in the process for Rachel Lentz, Office of Brownfields and FR 53057, August 25, 2011). this ICR? Land Revitalization, (5105T), Burden Statement: The annual public The EPA will consider the comments Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 reporting and recordkeeping burden for received and amend the ICR as Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, this collection of information is appropriate. The final ICR package will DC 20460; telephone number: (202) estimated to average 1.96 hours per then be submitted to OMB for review 566–2745; fax number (202) 566–1476; response. Burden means the total time, and approval pursuant to 5 CFR email address: [email protected]. effort, or financial resources expended 1320.12. At that time, the EPA will issue SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has by persons to generate, maintain, retain, another Federal Register notice submitted the following ICR to OMB for or disclose or provide information to or pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to review and approval according to the for a Federal agency. This includes the announce the submission of the ICR to procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. time needed to review instructions; OMB and the opportunity to submit On February 10, 2012 (77 FR 7143), EPA develop, acquire, install, and utilize additional comments to OMB. If you sought comments on this ICR pursuant technology and systems for the purposes have any questions about this ICR or the to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received one of collecting, validating, and verifying approval process, please contact the comment during the comment period, information, processing and technical person listed under FOR which was not relevant to this ICR, and maintaining information, and disclosing FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. is not addressed in the ICR. Any and providing information; adjust the Dated: April 27, 2012. additional comments on this ICR should existing ways to comply with any Sarah Dunham, be submitted to EPA and OMB within previously applicable instructions and Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs. 30 days of this notice. requirements which have subsequently The EPA has established a public [FR Doc. 2012–11630 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] changed; train personnel to be able to docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. respond to a collection of information; BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EPA–HQ–SFUND–2012–0104, which is search data sources; complete and available for online viewing at review the collection of information; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION www.regulations.gov, or in person and transmit or otherwise disclose the AGENCY viewing at the Superfund Docket in the information. EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA The ICR provides a detailed [EPA–HQ–SFUND–2012–0104; FRL–9516–7] West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution explanation of the EPA’s estimate, Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/ Agency Information Collection which is only briefly summarized here: DC Public Reading Room is open from Activities; Submission to OMB for 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 1. Estimated total number of potential Review and Approval; Comment respondents: 11,290. Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Request; Brownfields Program— telephone number for the Reading Room 2. Frequency of response: Annual, Accomplishment Reporting (Renewal) quarterly. is 202–566–1744, and the telephone AGENCY: Environmental Protection number for the Superfund Docket is 3. Estimated total average number of 202–566–9744. responses for each respondent: 43. Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. Use the EPA’s electronic docket and 4. Estimated total annual burden comment system at hours: 1,000,914 hours. This includes SUMMARY: In compliance with the www.regulations.gov, to submit or view estimated total respondent hours of Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 public comments, access the index 942,344 hours and estimated total EPA U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document listing of the contents of the docket, and hours of 58,570 hours. announces that an Information to access those documents in the docket 5. Estimated total annual costs: Collection Request (ICR) has been that are available electronically. Once in $98,082,191. This includes an estimated forwarded to the Office of Management the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then cost of $28,086,090 for capital and Budget (OMB) for review and key in the docket ID number identified investment as well as maintenance and approval. This is a request to renew an above. Please note that the EPA’s policy operational costs, an estimated existing approved collection. The ICR, is that public comments, whether respondent burden cost of $56,141,455, which is abstracted below, describes the submitted electronically or in paper, and an estimated EPA cost of nature of the information collection and will be made available for public $13,854,646. its estimated burden and cost. viewing at www.regulations.gov as the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28379

EPA receives them and without change, out cleanup activities at brownfields awarded under the Small Business unless the comment contains properties; cooperative agreements to Liability Relief and Brownfields copyrighted material, confidential capitalize revolving loan funds and Revitalization Act. business information (CBI), or other provide subgrants for cleanup activities; Burden Statement: The annual public information whose public disclosure is and job training cooperative agreements reporting and recordkeeping burden for restricted by statute. For further to support the creation and this collection of information is information about the electronic docket, implementation of environmental job go to www.regulations.gov. training and placement programs. Under estimated to average 1.22 hours per Title: Brownfields Program— Subtitle C of the Small Business response. It is estimated to average 4 Accomplishment Reporting (Renewal). Liability Relief and Brownfields hours per response for Job Training ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2104.04, Revitalization Act, State and tribes can recipients, and 1.25 hours per response OMB Control No. 2050–0192. receive cooperative agreements to for subtitle A assessment, cleanup, and ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to establish and enhance their response revolving loan fund and subtitle C expire on July 31, 2012. Under OMB programs. The cooperative agreements recipients. Burden means the total time, regulations, the Agency may continue to support activities necessary to establish effort, or financial resources expended conduct or sponsor the collection of or enhance four elements of state and by persons to generate, maintain, retain, information while this submission is tribal response programs and to meet disclose or provide information to, or pending at OMB. An Agency may not the public record requirements under for, a Federal agency. This includes the conduct or sponsor, and a person is not the statute. The four elements eligible time needed to review instructions; required to respond to, a collection of for funding include: (a) Timely survey develop, acquire, install and utilize information, unless it displays a and inventory of brownfield sites in the technology and systems for the purposes currently valid OMB control number. State or in the tribal land; (b) oversight of collecting, validating and verifying The OMB control numbers for the EPA’s and enforcement authorities or other information, processing and regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after mechanisms and resources; (c) appearing in the Federal Register when maintaining information, and disclosing mechanisms and resources to provide and providing information; adjust the approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, meaningful opportunities for public existing procedures to comply with any are displayed either by publication in participation; and (d) mechanisms for the Federal Register or by other approval of a cleanup plan and previously applicable instructions and appropriate means, such as on the verification and certification that requirements which have subsequently related collection instrument or form, if cleanup is complete. States and tribes changed; train personnel to be able to applicable. The display of OMB control that receive funding under subtitle C respond to a collection of information; numbers in certain EPA regulations is must establish a public record system search data sources; complete and consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. during the funding period unless an review the collection of information; Abstract: The Small Business Liability adequate public record system is and transmit or otherwise disclose the Relief and Brownfields Revitalization already established. information. Act (Pub. L. 107–118) (‘‘the Brownfields Cooperative agreement recipients Respondents/Affected Entities: State, Amendments’’) was signed into law on (recipients) have general reporting and Local, and Tribal Governments. January 11, 2002. The Act amends the record keeping requirements as a Comprehensive Environmental condition of their cooperative agreement Estimated Number of Respondents: Response, Compensation, and Liability that result in burden. A portion of this 1,007. Act (CERCLA), as amended, and reporting and record keeping burden is Frequency of Response: Bi-Annual for authorizes the EPA to award cooperative authorized under 40 CFR Parts 30 and subtitle C recipients; Quarterly for agreements to states, tribes, local 31 and identified in the EPA’s general subtitle A recipients. governments, and other eligible entities grants ICR (OMB Control Number 2030– Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: to assess and clean up brownfields sites. 0020). The EPA requires Brownfields Under the Brownfields Amendments, a program recipients to maintain and 3,167 hours. brownfield site means real property, the report additional information to the EPA Estimated Total Annual Cost: expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of on the uses and accomplishments $308,911, includes $0 annualized which may be complicated by the associated with the funded brownfields capital or O&M costs. presence or potential presence of a activities. The EPA uses several forms to Changes in the Estimates: There is a hazardous substance, pollutant, or assist recipients in reporting the decrease of 13,383 hours in the total contaminant. For funding purposes, the information and to ensure consistency estimated burden currently identified in EPA uses the term ‘‘brownfield of the information collected. The EPA the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR property(ies)’’ synonymously with the uses this information to meet Federal Burdens. This reflects the EPA’s term ‘‘brownfield sites.’’ The stewardship responsibilities to manage Brownfields Amendments authorize the and track how program funds are being updating of burden estimates for this EPA to award several types of spent, to evaluate the performance of collection based on an increase in cooperative agreements to eligible the Brownfields Cleanup and Land number of experienced recipients entities on a competitive basis. Revitalization Program, to meet the familiar with reporting requirements, a Under subtitle A of the Small Agency’s reporting requirements under lowered number of responses based on Business Liability Relief and the Government Performance Results previous data submission, and Brownfields Revitalization Act, States, Act, and to report to Congress and other improvements in the Assessment, tribes, local governments, and other program stakeholders on the status and Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange eligible entities can receive assessment accomplishments of the program. System (ACRES) reporting database. cooperative agreements to inventory, This ICR addresses the burden characterize, assess, and conduct imposed on recipients that are John Moses, planning and community involvement associated with those reporting and Director, Collection Strategies Division. related to brownfields properties; recordkeeping requirements that are [FR Doc. 2012–11500 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] cleanup cooperative agreements to carry specific to cooperative agreements BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28380 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA and OMB within 30 days of this inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are AGENCY notice. required semiannually. EPA has established a public docket These regulations apply to existing [EPA–HQ–OECA–2011–0251; FRL–9516–2] for this ICR under docket ID number facilities and new facilities of the EPA–HQ–OECA–2011–0251, which is Agency Information Collection following four categories: available for public viewing online at Polycarbonates (PC) Production, Acrylic Activities; Submission to OMB for http://www.regulations.gov or in person Review and Approval; Comment and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) viewing at the Enforcement and Production, Acetal Resins (AR) Request; NESHAP for Source Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Categories: Generic Maximum Production, and Hydrogen Fluoride Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room (HF) Production. New facilities include Achievable Control Technology 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Standards (Renewal) those that commenced construction or Washington, DC. The EPA Docket reconstruction after the date of proposal. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Center Public Reading Room is open This information is being collected to Agency (EPA). from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, through Friday, excluding legal ACTION: Notice. subpart YY. holidays. The telephone number for the All reports are sent to the delegated SUMMARY: In compliance with the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and state or local authority. In the event that Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. the telephone number for the there is no such delegated authority, the 3501 et seq.), this document announces Enforcement and Compliance Docket is reports are sent directly to the EPA that an Information Collection Request (202) 566–1752. regional office. This information is (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office Use EPA’s electronic docket and being collected to assure compliance of Management and Budget (OMB) for comment system at http:// with 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY, as review and approval. This is a request www.regulations.gov to either submit or authorized in section 112 and 114(a) of to renew an existing approved view public comments, access the index the Clean Air Act. The required listing of the contents of the docket, and collection. The ICR which is abstracted information consists of emissions data to access those documents in the docket below describes the nature of the and other information that has been that are available electronically. Once in collection and the estimated burden and determined to be private. the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then cost. An agency may not conduct or key in the docket ID number identified sponsor, and a person is not required to DATES: Additional comments may be above. Please note that EPA’s policy is submitted on or before June 13, 2012. that public comments, whether respond to, a collection of information ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, submitted electronically or in paper, unless it displays a currently valid OMB referencing docket ID number EPA–HQ– will be made available for public Control Number. The OMB Control OECA–2011–0251, to: (1) EPA online viewing at http://www.regulations.gov Number for EPA’s regulations are listed using www.regulations.gov (our as EPA receives them and without in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, preferred method), or by email to: change, unless the comment contains and are identified on the form and/or [email protected], or by mail to: EPA copyrighted material, Confidential instrument, if applicable. Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Business Information (CBI), or other Burden Statement: The annual public Protection Agency, Enforcement and information whose public disclosure is reporting and recordkeeping burden for Compliance Docket and Information restricted by statute. For further this collection of information is Center, mail code 28221T, 1200 information about the electronic docket, estimated to average 124 hours per Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, go to www.regulations.gov. response. ‘‘Burden’’ means the total DC 20460; and (2) OMB at: Office of Title: NESHAP for Source Categories: time, effort, or financial resources Information and Regulatory Affairs, Generic Maximum Achievable Control expended by persons to generate, Office of Management and Budget Technology Standards (Renewal). maintain, retain, or disclose or provide (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number information to or for a Federal agency. 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 1871.06, OMB Control Number 2060– This includes the time needed to review 20503. 0420. instructions; develop, acquire, install, ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to and utilize technology and systems for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: expire on June 30, 2012. Under OMB the purposes of collecting, validating, Learia Williams, Monitoring, regulations, the Agency may continue to and verifying information, processing Assistance, and Media Programs conduct or sponsor the collection of and maintaining information, and Division, Office of Enforcement and information while this submission is disclosing and providing information; Compliance Assurance, Mail Code pending at OMB. adjust the existing ways to comply with 2227A, Environmental Protection Abstract: The affected entities are any previously applicable instructions Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue subject to the General Provisions of the and requirements which have NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, subsequently changed; train personnel number: (202) 564–4113; fax number: and any changes, or additions to the to be able to respond to a collection of (202) 564–0050; email address: Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, information; search data sources; [email protected]. subpart YY. Owners or operators of the complete and review the collection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has affected facilities must submit initial information; and transmit or otherwise submitted the following ICR to OMB for notification, performance tests, and disclose the information. review and approval according to the periodic reports and results. Owners or Respondents/Affected Entities: procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. operators are also required to maintain Owners or operators of source On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA records of the occurrence and duration categories: Generic maximum sought comments on this ICR pursuant of any startup, shutdown, or achievable control technology standards to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no malfunction in the operation of an for acetal resin; acrylic and modacrylic comments. Any additional comments on affected facility, or any period during fiber; hydrogen fluoride and this ICR should be submitted to both which the monitoring system is polycarbonate production.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28381

Estimated Number of Respondents: below describes the nature of the to access those documents in the docket 10. collection and the estimated burden and that are available electronically. Once in Frequency of Response: Initially, cost. the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then occasionally, and semiannually. DATES: Additional comments may be key in the docket ID number identified Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: submitted on or before June 13, 2012. above. Please note that EPA’s policy is 3,718. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, that public comments, whether Estimated Total Annual Cost: referencing docket ID number EPA–HQ– submitted electronically or in paper, $554,916, which includes $424,571 in OECA–2011–0252, to: (1) EPA online will be made available for public labor costs, no capital/startup costs, and using www.regulations.gov (our viewing at http://www.regulations.gov $130,345 in operation and maintenance preferred method), or by email to: as EPA receives them and without (O&M) costs. [email protected], or by mail to: EPA change, unless the comment contains Changes in the Estimates: There is an Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental copyrighted material, Confidential increase in costs in the most recently Protection Agency, Enforcement and Business Information (CBI), or other approved ICR. The increase in burden Compliance Docket and Information information whose public disclosure is cost is due to adjustments in labor rates. Center, mail code 28221T, 1200 restricted by statute. For further This ICR uses updated labor rates from Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, information about the electronic docket, the Bureau of Labor Statistics to DC 20460; and (2) OMB at: Office of go to www.regulations.gov. calculate burden costs. Information and Regulatory Affairs, Title: NESHAP for Asbestos (Renewal) There is a decrease of 286 labor hours Office of Management and Budget ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number for the respondents related to (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 0111.13, OMB Control Number 2060– typographical error in the previous ICR. 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 0101. There is no change in the estimation 20503. ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to methodology for labor hours to the expire on June 30, 2012. Under OMB respondents. This is due to two FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: regulations, the Agency may continue to considerations: (1) The regulations have Learia Williams, Monitoring, conduct or sponsor the collection of not changed over the past three years Assistance, and Media Programs information while this submission is and are not anticipated to change over Division, Office of Compliance and pending at OMB. the next three years; and (2) the growth Enforcement Acceptance, Mail Code Abstract: The affected entities are rate for respondents is very low, 2227A, Environmental Protection subject to the General Provisions of the negative, or non-existent. Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NESHAP at 40 CFR part 61, subpart A, There is an increase in O&M costs to NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone and any changes, or additions to the the respondents as compared to the number: (202) 564–4113; fax number: Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 61, previous ICR. The O&M costs were (202) 564–0050; email address: subpart M. updated based on comments received [email protected]. Owners or operators of the affected during consultation with the affected SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has facilities must submit initial entities, and the increase reflects the submitted the following ICR to OMB for notification, performance tests, and costs associated with the maintenance review and approval according to the periodic reports and results. Owners or and calibration of emission controls and procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. operators are also required to maintain monitors. On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA records of the occurrence and duration John Moses, sought comments on this ICR pursuant of any startup, shutdown, or Director, Collection Strategies Division. to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no malfunction in the operation of an [FR Doc. 2012–11499 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] comments. Any additional comments on affected facility, or any period during this ICR should be submitted to both which the monitoring system is BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EPA and OMB within 30 days of this inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are notice. required semiannually. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA has established a public docket Burden Statement: The annual public AGENCY for this ICR under docket ID number reporting and recordkeeping burden for EPA–HQ–OECA–2011–0252, which is this collection of information is [EPA–HQ–OECA–2011–0252; FRL–9516–6] available for public viewing online at estimated to average two hours per http://www.regulations.gov, or in person response. ‘‘Burden’’ means the total Agency Information Collection viewing at the Enforcement and time, effort, or financial resources Activities; Submission to OMB for Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket expended by persons to generate, Review and Approval; Comment Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room maintain, retain, or disclose or provide Request; NESHAP for Asbestos 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., information to or for a Federal agency. (Renewal). Washington, DC. The EPA Docket This includes the time needed to review AGENCY: Environmental Protection Center Public Reading Room is open instructions; develop, acquire, install, Agency (EPA). from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday and utilize technology and systems for ACTION: Notice. through Friday, excluding legal the purposes of collecting, validating, holidays. The telephone number for the and verifying information, processing SUMMARY: In compliance with the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and and maintaining information, and Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. the telephone number for the disclosing and providing information; 3501 et seq.), this document announces Enforcement and Compliance Docket is adjust the existing ways to comply with that an Information Collection Request (202) 566–1752. any previously-applicable instructions (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office Use EPA’s electronic docket and and requirements which have of Management and Budget (OMB) for comment system at http:// subsequently changed; train personnel review and approval. This is a request www.regulations.gov to submit or view to be able to respond to a collection of to renew an existing approved public comments, access the index information; search data sources; collection. The ICR which is abstracted listing of the contents of the docket, and complete and review the collection of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28382 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

information; and transmit or otherwise required by the Paperwork Reduction information is contained in Sections disclose the information. Act (PRA) of 1995. Comments are 154(i), 303, 310 and 533 of the Respondents/Affected Entities: requested concerning whether the Communications Act of 1934, as Owners or operators of demolition and proposed collection of information is amended. renovation of facilities; the disposal of necessary for the proper performance of Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: asbestos waste; asbestos milling, the functions of the Commission, Form 323 collects two types of manufacturing and fabricating; the use including whether the information shall information from respondents: personal of asbestos on roadways; asbestos waste have practical utility; the accuracy of information in the form of names, conversion facilities; and the use of the Commission’s burden estimate; addresses, job titles and demographic asbestos insulation and sprayed-on ways to enhance the quality, utility, and information; and FCC Registration materials. clarity of the information collected; Numbers (FRNs). Estimated Number of Respondents: ways to minimize the burden of the The FCC is in the process of 9,517. collection of information on the publishing a system of records notice Frequency of Response: Initially, respondents, including the use of (SORN), FCC/MB–1, ‘‘Ownership Report occasionally, and semiannually. automated collection techniques or for Commercial Broadcast Stations,’’ to Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: other forms of information technology; cover the collection, purposes(s), 226,407. and ways to further reduce the storage, safeguards, and disposal of the Estimated Total Annual Cost: information collection burden on small PII that individual respondents may $21,694,083, which includes business concerns with fewer than 25 submit on FCC Form 323. FCC Form 323 $21,694,083 in labor costs exclusively; employees. The FCC may not conduct or will include a privacy statement to there are neither capital/startup nor sponsor a collection of information inform applicants (respondents) of the operation and maintenance (O&M) unless it displays a currently valid Commission’s need to obtain the costs. control number. No person shall be information and the protections that the Changes in the Estimates: There is an subject to any penalty for failing to FCC has in place to protect the PII. This adjustment decrease in the total comply with a collection of information privacy statement will be finalized and estimated labor hours from the most subject to the PRA that does not display included with the form instructions recently approved ICR. The decrease is a valid Office of Management and after the Commission has published the due to a mathematical correction in the Budget (OMB) control number. SORN for the collection. FRNs are assigned to applicants who previously approved ICR, which DATES: Written PRA comments should complete FCC Form 160 (OMB Control overestimated the burden for the be submitted on or before July 13, 2012. No. 3060–0917). Form 160 requires respondents. However, there is an If you anticipate that you will be applicants for FRNs to provide their overall increase in labor costs to the submitting comments, but find it Taxpayer Information Number (TIN) respondents due to an increase in labor difficult to do so within the period of and/or Social Security Number (SSN). rates. time allowed by this notice, you should The FCC’s electronic CORES There is an increase in Agency hours advise the contact listed below as soon Registration System then provides each and costs from the most recently as possible. registrant with a FCC Registration approved ICR. The increase is due to a ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to Number (FRN), which identifies the growth in the respondent universe in the Federal Communications registrant in his/her subsequent dealings the past three years, and labor rate Commission via email to [email protected] with the FCC. This is done to protect the increases. This ICR uses updated labor and [email protected]. individual’s privacy. The Commission rates for each of the three labor FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For maintains a SORN, FCC/OMD–9, categories when estimating burden additional information about the ‘‘Commission Registration System costs. information collection, contact Cathy (CORES)’’ to cover the collection, John Moses, Williams at (202) 418–2918. purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and Director, Collection Strategies Division. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: disposal of the PII that individual [FR Doc. 2012–11495 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] OMB Control Number: 3060–0010. respondents may submit on FCC Form 160. FCC Form 160 includes a privacy BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Title: Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations, FCC statement to inform applicants Form 323. (respondents) of the Commission’s need to obtain the information and the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Form Number: FCC Form 323. protections that the FCC has in place to COMMISSION Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. protect the PII. Information Collection Being Reviewed Respondents: Business or other for Privacy Act Impact Assessment: The by the Federal Communications profit entities; not-for-profit institutions; FCC is in the process of publishing a Commission State, Local or Tribal Governments. system of records notice (SORN), FCC/ Number of Respondents/Responses: MB–1, ‘‘Ownership Report for AGENCY: Federal Communications 9,250 respondents; 9,250 responses. Commercial Broadcast Stations,’’ to Commission. Estimated Time per Response: 2.5 cover the collection, purposes(s), ACTION: Notice and request for hours to 4.5 hours. storage, safeguards, and disposal of the comments. Frequency of Response: PII that individual respondents may Recordkeeping requirement; on submit on FCC Form 323. The FCC will SUMMARY: The Federal Communications occasion reporting requirement; publish the SORN in the Federal Commission (FCC), as part of its biennially reporting requirement. Register. Going forward, if the FCC continuing effort to reduce paperwork Total Annual Burden: 38,125 hours. makes substantive changes to Form 323 burdens, invites the general public and Total Annual Costs: $26,940,000. after its SORN is published, the other Federal agencies to take this Nature of Response: Required to Commission will conduct a full Privacy opportunity to comment on the obtain or retain benefits. Statutory Impact Assessment of FCC/MB–1 following information collection, as authority for this collection of SORN, publish a Notice in the Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28383

Register, and post both documents on required by the Paperwork Reduction Frequency of Response: On occasion the FCC Web page, as required by the Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– reporting requirement and third party Office of Management and Budget 3520), the Federal Communications disclosure requirements. (OMB) Memorandum, M–03–22 Commission invites the general public Obligation To Respond: Required to (September 22, 2003). and other Federal agencies to take this obtain or retain benefits. There is no Needs and Uses: Licensees of opportunity to comment on the statutory authority for this information commercial AM, FM, and full power following information collection(s). collection. The reporting requirements television broadcast stations, as well as Comments are requested concerning: are in international agreements and licensees of Class A and Low Power Whether the proposed collection of ITU–R M.541–9. Television stations must file FCC Form information is necessary for the proper Total Annual Burden: 10,000 hours. 323 every two years. Ownership Reports performance of the functions of the Total Annual Cost: N/A. shall provide information accurate as of Commission, including whether the Privacy Impact Assessment: Yes. The October 1 of the year in which the information shall have practical utility; Commission maintains a system of Report is filed. Thereafter, the Form the accuracy of the Commission’s records notice (SORN), FCC/WTB–1, shall be filed biennially beginning burden estimate; ways to enhance the ‘‘Wireless Services Licensing Records,’’ November 1, 2011, and every two years quality, utility, and clarity of the that covers this collection, purpose(s), thereafter. information collected; ways to minimize storage, safeguards and disposal of the Personally Identifiable Information (PII) Also, Licensees and Permittees of the burden of the collection of that marine VHF radio licensees commercial AM, FM, or full power information on the respondents, television stations must file Form 323 maintain under 47 CFR section 80.103. including the use of automated Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: following the consummation of a collection techniques or other forms of transfer of control or an assignment of There is a need for confidentiality with information technology; and ways to respect to all owners of Marine VHF a commercial AM, FM, or full power further reduce the information burden television station license or construction radios with Digital Selective Calling for small business concerns with fewer (DSC) capability in this collection. permit; a Permittee of a new commercial than 25 employees. AM, FM or full power television Pursuant to section 208(b) of the E- The FCC may not conduct or sponsor Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. broadcast station must file Form 323 a collection of information unless it section 3501, in conformance with the within 30 days after the grant of the displays a currently valid OMB control Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552(a), the construction permit; and a Permittee of number. No person shall be subject to Wireless Telecommunications Bureau a new commercial AM, FM, or full any penalty for failing to comply with (WTB or Bureau) instructs licensees to power television broadcast station must a collection of information subject to the use the FCC’s Universal Licensing file Form 323 to update the initial report Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that System (ULS), Antenna Structure or to certify the continuing accuracy and does not display a valid OMB control Registration (ASR), Commission completeness of the previously filed number. Registration System (CORES) and report on the date that the Permittee related systems and subsystems to applies for a license to cover the DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) comments should be submit information. CORES is used to construction permit. receive an FCC Registration Number In the case of organizational submitted on or before July 13, 2012. If (FRN) and password, after which one structures that include holding you anticipate that you will be must register all current call signs and companies or other forms of indirect submitting PRA comments, but find it ASR numbers associated with a FRN ownership, a separate FCC Form 323 difficult to do so within the period of within the Bureau’s system of records must be filed for each entity in the time allowed by this notice, you should (ULS database). Although ULS stores all organizational structure that has an advise the FCC contact listed below as information pertaining to the individual attributable interest in the Licensee if soon as possible. license via the FRN, confidential the filing is a nonbiennial filing or a ADDRESSES: Submit your PRA comments information is accessible only by reportable interest in the Licensee if the to Judith B. Herman, Federal persons or entities that hold the filing is a biennial filing. Communications Commission, via the password for each account, and the Federal Communications Commission. Internet at [email protected]. To submit your PRA comments by email Bureau’s Licensing Division staff. Upon Marlene H. Dortch, send them to: [email protected]. the request of a FRN, the individual Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of licensee is consenting to make publicly Managing Director. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: available, via the ULS database, all [FR Doc. 2012–11568 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Judith B. Herman, Office of Managing information that is not confidential in Director, (202) 418–0214. BILLING CODE 6712–01–P nature. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Information on the marine VHF radios OMB Control Number: 3060–0931. with DSC capability is maintained in FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Title: Section 80.103, Digital Selective the Commission’s system of records, COMMISSION Calling (DSC) Operating Procedures— FCC/WTB–1, ‘‘Wireless Services Maritime Mobile Identity (MMSI). Licensing Records.’’ The licensee Information Collection Being Reviewed Form Number: N/A. records will be publicly available and by the Federal Communications Type of Review: Extension of a routinely used in accordance with Commission currently approved collection. subsection (b) of the Privacy Act. FRN AGENCY: Federal Communications Respondents: Individuals or numbers and material which is afforded Commission. households; business or other for-profit confidential treatment pursuant to a ACTION: Notice and request for entities and Federal Government. request made under 47 CFR section comments. Number of Respondents: 40,000 0.459 of the Commission’s rules, will respondents; 40,000 responses. not be made available for public SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort Estimated Time per Response: .25 inspection. Any PII that individual to reduce paperwork burden and as hours. applicants provide is covered by a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28384 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

system of records, FCC/WTB–1, Comments are requested concerning: Total Annual Burden: 1,398 hours. ‘‘Wireless Services Licensing Records,’’ Whether the proposed collection of Annual Cost Burden: N/A. and these and all other records may be information is necessary for the proper Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. disclosed pursuant to the Routine Uses performance of the functions of the Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: as stated in the system of records notice. Commission, including whether the There is no need for confidentiality. Needs and Uses: The Commission is information shall have practical utility; Needs and Uses: The Commission is seeking OMB approval for an extension the accuracy of the Commission’s seeking Office of Management and of this information collection in order to burden estimate; ways to enhance the Budget (OMB) approval for an extension obtain the full three year approval from quality, utility, and clarity of the of this information collection (no OMB. There is no change to the information collected; ways to minimize change in the reporting requirement). Commission’s previous burden the burden of the collection of The Commission will submit this estimates. information on the respondents, information collection after this 60 day The information collected is including the use of automated comment period. necessary to require owners of marine collection techniques or other forms of The Commission has adjusted its VHF radios with Digital Selective information technology; and ways to previous burden estimates. The total Calling (DSC) capability to register further reduce the information burden annual burden has been reduced by information such as the name, address, for small business concerns with fewer 2,602 hours since 2009 because of fewer type of vessel with a private entity than 25 employees. The FCC may not respondents and responses. issuing marine mobile service identities conduct or sponsor a collection of The Third Report and Order in CC (MMSI). The information would be used information unless it displays a Docket No. 94–102, adopted rules by search and rescue personnel to currently valid control number. No applicable to wireless carriers to permit identify vessels in distress and to select person shall be subject to any penalty the use of network-based solutions, the proper rescue units and search for failing to comply with a collection handset-based solutions, or hybrid methods. The requirement to collect this of information subject to the Paperwork solutions. The adopted rules require information is not contained in a Reduction Act (PRA) that does not changes both to handsets and wireless Commission rule or formal FCC order, display a valid control number. networks in providing caller location but in agreements with the U.S. Coast DATES: Persons wishing to comment on information as part of Enhanced 911 (or Guard and private sector entities that this information collection should E911) services. The Commission issue MMSI’s. submit comments by July 13, 2012. If adopted the Third Report and Order to The information is used by private you anticipate that you will be encourage the deployment of the best entities to maintain a database used to submitting comments, but find it location technology for each area being provide information about the vessel difficult to do so within the period of served, promote competition in E911 owner in distress using marine VHF time allowed by this notice, you should location technology, and speed radios with DSC capability. If the data advise the contact listed below as soon implementation of E911. were not collected, the U.S. Coast Guard as possible. As part of the rules, the Third Report would not have access to this ADDRESSES: Submit your PRA comments and Order also adopted a requirement information which would increase the to Nicolas A. Fraser, Office of that wireless carriers report their plans time and effort needed to complete a Management and Budget (OMB), via fax for implementing Phase II E911 service search and rescue operation. at 202–395–5167, or via the Internet at to the Commission. Specifically, this Federal Communications Commission. [email protected], and report must include the technology they Marlene H. Dortch, to [email protected], Federal plan to use to provide caller location as Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of Communications Commission (FCC). To well as information to enable public Managing Director. submit your comments by email send safety organizations, equipment [FR Doc. 2012–11597 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] them to: [email protected]. manufacturers, local exchange carriers, and the Commission to plan and BILLING CODE 6712–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For support Phase II deployment. The additional information about the Commission required wireless carriers information collection(s), contact Judith to file these initial reports in 2000. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS B. Herman at 202–418–0214. COMMISSION Carriers are required to update these SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: plans within thirty days of the adoption Information Collections Being OMB Control No.: 3060–0910. of any change. The reporting Title: Section 20.18(i), Third Report Reviewed by the Federal requirements are discussed in detail in and Order in CC Docket No. 94–102, To Communications Commission for 47 CFR 20.18(i). Extension Under Delegated Authority Ensure Compatibility With Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems. OMB Control No.: 3060–1004. AGENCY: Federal Communications Form No.: N/A. Title: Section 20.18(g)(1), Commission Commission. Type of Review: Extension of a Rules to Ensure Compatibility With ACTION: Notice and request for currently approved collection. Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling comments. Respondents: Business or other for- Systems. profit and not-for-profit institutions. Form No.: N/A. SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort Number of Respondents: 1,398 Type of Review: Extension of a to reduce paperwork burdens and as respondents; 1,398 responses. currently approved collection. required by the Paperwork Reduction Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour. Respondents: Business or other for- Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13, the Frequency of Response: On occasion profit, not-for-profit institutions and Federal Communications Commission reporting requirement. state, local or tribal government. invites the general public and other Obligation to Respond: Mandatory. Number of Respondents: 178 Federal agencies to take this Statutory authority for this collection of respondents; 508 responses. opportunity to comment on the information is contained in 47 U.S.C. 1, Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour following information collection(s). 4(i), 201, 303, 309 and 332. to 4 hours.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28385

Frequency of Response: Quarterly, reports. The existing information Section 68.110(c) requires that any semi-annual and one time reporting collection only required Tier III carriers available technical information requirements. to file a one-time interim report. Tier III concerning carrier-installed wiring on Obligation to Respond: Required to wireless carriers were also not required the customer’s side of the demarcation obtain or retain benefits. Statutory to submit an Excel spreadsheet with point, including copies of existing authority for this collection of their one-time filings. schematic diagrams and service records, information is contained in 47 U.S.C. 1, This reporting requirement was shall be provided by the telephone 4(i), 201, 303, 309 and 332. further revised in 2005 because on company upon request of the building Total Annual Burden: 1,982 hours. October 21, 2005, the Commission owner or agent thereof. The provider of Annual Cost Burden: N/A. adopted an order finding that certain wireline telecommunications services Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. Tier III carriers did not sufficiently may charge the building owner a Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: support their requests for waiver of the reasonable fee for this service, which There is no need for confidentiality. E911 rules, but providing the carriers shall not exceed the cost involved in Needs and Uses: The Commission is with additional time, until July 2006, to locating and copying the documents. In seeking Office of Management and augment the record to show a clear path the alternative, the provider may make Budget (OMB) approval for an extension to full compliance with the E911 these documents available for review of this information collection (no requirements. The Commission also and copying by the building owner or change in the reporting requirement). imposed conditions and required the his agent. In this case, the wireline The Commission will submit this Tier III carriers to file separate status telecommunications carrier may charge information collection after this 60 day reports by November 21, 2005, and a reasonable fee, which shall not exceed comment period. The Commission is commencing February 1, 2006, the cost involved in making the reporting an adjustment of 780 total additional status reports on a quarterly documents available, and may also annual hours which is due to industry basis for a two-year period. require the building owner or his agent consolidation. The number of Tier 1 The Commission will use the to pay a deposit to guarantee the carriers has gone from 22 to 4, and Tier information submitted by Tier III documents’ return. II carriers are estimated from 12 to 3. carriers subject to reporting The information is needed so that The number of Tier III carriers has requirements to ensure that they comply building owners may choose to contract expanded from 50 to 110. These changes with the Commission’s E911 with an installer of their choice on in the marketplace caused the requirements and the terms of the inside wiring maintenance and Commission to adjust the estimates underlying orders addressing requests installation services to modify existing which also accounts for the change in for waiver relief by all Tiers. wiring or assist with the installation of hourly burden. Distinct from the Commission’s rules OMB Control No.: 3060–0790. additional inside wiring. and precedent regarding waivers of the Title: Section 68.110(c), Availability OMB Control No.: 3060–0791. E911 requirements, in December 2004 of Inside Wiring Information. Title: Section 32.7300, Accounting for Form No.: N/A. Judgments and Other Costs Associated Congress enacted the Ensuring Needed Type of Review: Extension of a Help Arrives Near Callers Employing with Litigation. currently approved collection. Form No.: N/A. 911 Act of 2004 (ENHANCE 911 Act). Respondents: Business or other for- The ENHANCE 911 Act, inter alia, Type of Review: Extension of a profit. currently approved collection. directs the Commission to act on any Number of Respondents: 200 Respondents: Business or other for- petition filed by a qualified Tier III respondents; 1,200 responses. carrier requesting a waiver of 47 CFR Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour. profit. 20.18(g)(1)(v) within 100 days of receipt, Frequency of Response: Number of Respondents: 2 and grant such request for waiver if Recordkeeping requirement and third respondents; 2 responses. ‘‘strict enforcement of the requirements party disclosure requirement. Estimated Time per Response: 4 to 36 of that section would result in Obligation to Respond: Mandatory. hours. consumers having decreased access to Statutory authority for this collection of Frequency of Response: On occasion emergency services.’’ information is contained in 47 U.S.C. reporting requirement and The Commission originally 151, 154, 201–205, 218, 220 and 405 of recordkeeping requirement. established reporting requirements in an the Communications Act of 1934, as Obligation to Respond: Required to order released in October 2001 which amended. obtain or retain benefits. Statutory received OMB approval. Nationwide Total Annual Burden: 1,200 hours. authority for this collection of wireless carriers (‘‘Tier 1’’) generally Annual Cost Burden: $5,000. information is contained in 47 U.S.C. must file quarterly reports with the Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. 151, 152, 154, 161, 201–205 and 218– Commission on February 1, May 1, Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: 220 of the Communications Act of 1934, August 1 and November 1 of each year, There is no need for confidentiality. The as amended. with the exception of T-Mobile, which Commission is not requesting that Total Annual Burden: 40 hours. is required to file semi-annual reports respondents submit any confidential Annual Cost Burden: N/A. (as of October 2002). Mid-sized carriers trade secrets or proprietary information Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. (‘‘Tier II’’) also were required to file to the FCC. Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: quarterly reports under this same time Needs and Uses: The Commission is There is no need for confidentiality. The schedule. seeking Office of Management and Commission is not requesting that In a July 2003 revision approved by Budget (OMB) approval for an extension respondents submit confidential OMB, the Commission decided that the of this information collection (no information to the FCC. information requirements in the change in the recordkeeping and/or Needs and Uses: The Commission is quarterly reports, beginning with the third party disclosure requirements). seeking Office of Management and August 1, 2003 filing, be submitted with The Commission will submit this Budget (OMB) approval for an extension an Excel spreadsheet as an appendix to information collection after this 60 day of this information collection (no Tier I and Tier II carrier narrative comment period to the OMB. change in the recordkeeping and/or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28386 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

reporting requirements). The performance of the functions of the Title: Section 79.1, Closed Captioning Commission will submit this Commission, including whether the of Video Programming, CG Docket No. information collection after this 60 day information shall have practical utility; 05–231. comment period to the OMB. the accuracy of the Commission’s Form Number: N/A. The Commission adopted accounting burden estimate; ways to enhance the Type of Review: Extension of a rules that require carriers to account for quality, utility, and clarity of the currently approved collection. adverse federal antitrust judgments and information collected; ways to minimize Respondents: Business or other for- post-judgment special charges. With the burden of the collection of profit entities; individuals or regard to settlements of such lawsuits information on the respondents, households; and not-for-profit entities. there will be a presumption that carriers including the use of automated Number of Respondents and can recover the portion of the settlement collection techniques or other forms of Responses: 12,609 respondents; 78,633 that represents the avoidable costs of information technology; and ways to responses. litigation; provided that the carrier further reduce the information Estimated Time per Response: 15 makes a required showing. To receive collection burden on small business minutes (0.25 hours) to 10 hours. recognition of its avoided cost of concerns with fewer than 25 employees. Frequency of Response: Annual and litigation a carrier must demonstrate, in The FCC may not conduct or sponsor on occasion reporting requirements; a request for special relief, the avoided a collection of information unless it third party disclosure requirement; costs of litigation by showing the displays a currently valid control recordkeeping requirement. amount corresponding to the additional number. No person shall be subject to Obligation To Respond: Required to litigation expenses discounted to any penalty for failing to comply with obtain or retain benefits. The statutory present value, that the carrier a collection of information subject to the authority for this obligation is found at reasonably estimates it would have paid PRA that does not display a valid Office section 713 of the Communications Act if it had not settled. Settlement costs in of Management and Budget (OMB) of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 613, and excess of the avoided costs of litigation control number. implemented at 47 CFR 79.1. are presumed not recoverable unless a DATES: Written comments should be Total Annual Burden: 198,049 hours. carrier rebuts that presumption by submitted on or before June 13, 2012. If Total Annual Cost: $35,505,816.00. Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: showing the basic factors that enticed you anticipate that you will be Confidentiality is an issue to the extent the carrier to settle and demonstrating submitting comments, but find it that individuals and households that ratepayers benefited from the difficult to do so within the period of provide personally identifiable settlement. time allowed by this notice, you should information, which is covered under the Federal Communications Commission. advise the contacts below as soon as possible. FCC’s system of records notice (SORN), Marlene H. Dortch, FCC/CGB–1, ‘‘Informal Complaints and Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to Inquiries.’’ As required by the Privacy Managing Director. Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via fax 202– Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Commission also [FR Doc. 2012–11596 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 395–5167, or via email published a SORN, FCC/CGB–1 _ _ BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Nicholas A. [email protected]; and ‘‘Informal Complaints and Inquiries,’’ in to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email the Federal Register on December 15, [email protected] and to 2009 (74 FR 66356) which became FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS [email protected]. Include in the effective on January 25, 2010. COMMISSION comments the OMB control number as Privacy Impact Assessment: Yes. The shown in the SUPPLEMENTARY Privacy Impact Assessment for Informal Information Collection Being INFORMATION section below. Complaints and Inquiries was Submitted for Review and Approval to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For completed on June 28, 2007. It may be the Office of Management and Budget additional information or copies of the reviewed at http://www.fcc.gov/omd/ AGENCY: Federal Communications information collection, contact Cathy privacyact/Privacy-Impact- Commission. Williams at (202) 418–2918. To view a Assessment.html. The Commission is in copy of this information collection ACTION: Notice and request for the process of updating the PIA to comments. request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go incorporate various revisions made to to the Web page http://www.reginfo.gov/ the SORN. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the Needs and Uses: The Commission Commission (FCC), as part of its section of the Web page called seeks to extend existing information continuing effort to reduce paperwork ‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ (3) click on collection requirements in its closed burdens, invites the general public and the downward-pointing arrow in the captioning rules (47 CFR 79.1), which other Federal agencies to take this ‘‘Select Agency’’ box below the require that, with some exceptions, all opportunity to comment on the ‘‘Currently Under Review’’ heading, new video programming, and 75 percent following information collection, as (4) select ‘‘Federal Communications of ‘‘pre-rule’’ programming, be closed required by the Paperwork Reduction Commission’’ from the list of agencies captioned. The existing collections Act (PRA) of 1995. An agency may not presented in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, include petitions by video programming conduct or sponsor a collection of (5) click the ‘‘Submit’’ button to the owners, producers and distributors for information unless it displays a right of the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, (6) exemptions from the closed captioning currently valid control number. No when the list of FCC ICRs currently rules, responses by viewers, and replies; person shall be subject to any penalty under review appears, look for the OMB complaints by viewers alleging for failing to comply with a collection control number of this ICR and then violations of the closed captioning rules, of information subject to the PRA that click on the ICR Reference Number. A responses by video programming does not display a valid control number. copy of the FCC submission to OMB distributors, and recordkeeping in Comments are requested concerning will be displayed. support of complaint responses; and whether the proposed collection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: making video programming distributor information is necessary for the proper OMB Control Number: 3060–0761. contact information available to viewers

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28387

in phone directories, on the DATES: June 6, 2012. requests will be accepted, but may be Commission’s Web site and the Web ADDRESSES: Federal Communications impossible to fill. sites of video programming distributors Commission, Room TW–C305 Federal Communications Commission. (if they have them), and in billing (Commission Meeting Room), 445 12th Marlene H. Dortch, statements (to the extent video Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. programming distributors issue them). Secretary. In addition, the Commission seeks to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 2012–11505 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] extend proposed information collection Jeffery Goldthorp, Designated Federal BILLING CODE 6712–01–P requirements. Specifically, on July 21, Officer, (202) 418–1096 (voice) or 2005, the Commission released Closed [email protected] (email); or Captioning of Video Programming; Lauren Kravetz, Deputy Designated FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc. Federal Officer, (202) 418–7944 (voice) REVIEW COMMISSION Petition for Rulemaking, CG Docket No. or [email protected] (email). Sunshine Act Meeting Notice 05–231, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FCC 05–142, published at 70 FR 56150 meeting will be held on June 6, 2012, May 9, 2012. on September 26, 2005 (Closed from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. in the TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, Captioning Notice of Proposed Commission Meeting Room of the May 17, 2012. Rulemaking), which sought comment on Federal Communications Commission, several issues pertaining to these closed Room TW–C305, 445 12th Street SW., PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing captioning rules (47 CFR 79.1). The Washington, DC 20554. The CSRIC. Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey Avenue NW., Washington, DC. Closed Captioning Notice of Proposed The CSRIC is a Federal Advisory Rulemaking sought comment, inter alia, Committee that will provide STATUS: Open. on whether petitions for exemption recommendations to the FCC regarding MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The from the closed captioning rules should best practices and actions the FCC can Commission will consider and act upon be permitted (or required) to be filed take to ensure the security, reliability, the following in open session: Secretary electronically through the Commission’s and interoperability of communications of Labor v. The American Coal Co., Electronic Comment Filing System, and systems. On March 19, 2011, the FCC, Docket Nos. LAKE 2007–139, et al. whether video programming distributors pursuant to the Federal Advisory (Issues include whether certain should be required to submit Committee Act, renewed the charter for safeguard notices are defective because compliance reports to the Commission the CSRIC for a period of two years they fail to identify specific hazards and in cases where the final required through March 18, 2013. Working specify what the operator must do to amount of captioning post phase-in Groups are described in more detail at comply with them.) (e.g., pre-rule programming) is not 100 http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/ Any person attending this meeting percent. These proposed information communications-security-reliability- who requires special accessibility collection requirements remain and-interoperability-council-iii. features and/or auxiliary aids, such as pending. The FCC will attempt to accommodate sign language interpreters, must inform Federal Communications Commission. as many attendees as possible; however, the Commission in advance of those Marlene H. Dortch, admittance will be limited to seating needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d). Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of availability. The Commission will Managing Director. provide audio and/or video coverage of CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Jean [FR Doc. 2012–11595 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the meeting over the Internet from the Ellen (202) 434–9950/(202) 708–9300 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P FCC’s Web page at http://www.fcc.gov/ for TDD Relay/1–800–877–8339 for toll live. The public may submit written free. comments before the meeting to Jeffery Emogene Johnson, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Goldthorp, CSRIC Designated Federal Administrative Assistant. COMMISSION Officer, by email to [FR Doc. 2012–11696 Filed 5–10–12; 4:15 pm] [email protected] or U.S. Postal Federal Advisory Committee Act; Service Mail to Jeffery Goldthorp, BILLING CODE 6735–01–P Communications Security, Reliability, Associate Bureau Chief, Public Safety and Interoperability Council and Homeland Security Bureau, Federal FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM AGENCY: Federal Communications Communications Commission, 445 12th Commission. Street SW., Room 7–A325, Washington, Formations of, Acquisitions by, and ACTION: Notice of public meeting. DC 20554. Open captioning will be Mergers of Bank Holding Companies provided for this event. Other SUMMARY: In accordance with the reasonable accommodations for people The companies listed in this notice Federal Advisory Committee Act, this with disabilities are available upon have applied to the Board for approval, notice advises interested persons that request. Requests for such pursuant to the Bank Holding Company the Federal Communications accommodations should be submitted Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Commission’s (FCC) Communications via email to [email protected] or by calling (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part Security, Reliability, and the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 225), and all other applicable statutes Interoperability Council (CSRIC) will Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) and regulations to become a bank hold its fourth meeting. Several working 418–0432 (tty). Such requests should holding company and/or to acquire the groups will present their best practice include a detailed description of the assets or the ownership of, control of, or recommendations on emergency alerting accommodation needed. In addition, the power to vote shares of a bank or systems such as promoting E9–1–1 please include a way the FCC can bank holding company and all of the reliability and alerting platforms— contact you if it needs more banks and nonbanking companies Emergency Alert System and Common information. Please allow at least five owned by the bank holding company, Alerting Protocol. days’ advance notice; last-minute including the companies listed below.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28388 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

The applications listed below, as well Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve describes the terms of the consent as other related filings required by the System, May 8, 2012. agreement, and the allegations in the Board, are available for immediate Margaret McCloskey Shanks, complaint. An electronic copy of the inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank Associate Secretary of the Board. full text of the consent agreement indicated. The applications will also be [FR Doc. 2012–11481 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] package can be obtained from the FTC available for inspection at the offices of BILLING CODE 6210–01–P Home Page (for May 8, 2012), on the the Board of Governors. Interested World Wide Web, at http://www.ftc.gov/ persons may express their views in os/actions.shtm. A paper copy can be writing on the standards enumerated in FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION obtained from the FTC Public Reference the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the Room, Room 130–H, 600 Pennsylvania proposal also involves the acquisition of [File No. 102 3058] Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, a nonbanking company, the review also either in person or by calling (202) 326– Myspace, LLC; Analysis of Proposed 2222. includes whether the acquisition of the Consent Order To Aid Public Comment nonbanking company complies with the You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider standards in section 4 of the BHC Act AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. your comment, we must receive it on or (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. noted, nonbanking activities will be before June 8, 2012. Write ‘‘Myspace, conducted throughout the United States. SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this File No. 102 3058’’ on your comment. Your comment—including your name Unless otherwise noted, comments matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or and your state—will be placed on the regarding each of these applications public record of this proceeding, must be received at the Reserve Bank deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached including, to the extent practicable, on indicated or the offices of the Board of the public Commission Web site, at Governors not later than June 7, 2012. Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the http://www.ftc.gov/os/ A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York draft complaint and the terms of the publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of (Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President) 33 consent order—embodied in the consent discretion, the Commission tries to Liberty Street, New York, New York agreement—that would settle these remove individuals’ home contact 10045–0001: allegations. information from comments before placing them on the Commission Web 1. Tompkins Financial Corporation, DATES: Comments must be received on Ithaca, New York; through its subsidiary site. or before June 8, 2012. Because your comment will be made TMP Mergeco Inc., Ithaca, New York; to ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a public, you are solely responsible for merge with VIST Financial Corp., and comment online or on paper, by making sure that your comment does thereby acquire VIST Bank, both in following the instructions in the not include any sensitive personal Wyomissing, Pennsylvania. Request for Comment part of the information, like anyone’s Social In connection with this proposal, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section Security number, date of birth, driver’s TMP Mergeco Inc., Ithaca, New York, below. Write ‘‘Myspace, File No. 102 license number or other state has applied to become a bank holding 3058’’ on your comment, and file your identification number or foreign country company by acquiring 100 percent of comment online at https:// equivalent, passport number, financial the voting shares of VIST Financial ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ account number, or credit or debit card Corp., and its subsidiary VIST Bank, myspaceconsent, by following the number. You are also solely responsible both in Wyomissing, Pennsylvania. instructions on the web-based form. If for making sure that your comment does B. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta you prefer to file your comment on not include any sensitive health (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice paper, mail or deliver your comment to information, like medical records or President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., the following address: Federal Trade other individually identifiable health Atlanta, Georgia 30309: Commission, Office of the Secretary, information. In addition, do not include Room H–113 (Annex D), 600 any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or 1. Community Bancshares of Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, financial information which is obtained Mississippi, Inc. Employee Stock DC 20580. from any person and which is privileged Ownership Plan and Community or confidential,’’ as provided in Section Bancshares of Mississippi, Inc., both in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Race Brin (202–326–2106) or 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and Brandon, Mississippi; to acquire 100 FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). percent of the voting shares of Amanda Koulousias (202–326–3334), FTC, Bureau of Consumer Protection, In particular, do not include Community Holding Company of competitively sensitive information Florida, Inc., Miramar Beach, Florida, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. such as costs, sales statistics, and thereby indirectly acquire inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, Community Bank, Destin, Florida. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade manufacturing processes, or customer C. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. names. If you want the Commission to give (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice 46(f), and § 2.34 the Commission Rules your comment confidential treatment, President) 230 South LaSalle Street, of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is you must file it in paper form, with a Chicago, Illinois 60690–1414: hereby given that the above-captioned request for confidential treatment, and 1. Northwest Investment Corp., consent agreement containing a consent you have to follow the procedure Davenport, Iowa; to become a bank order to cease and desist, having been explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR holding company following the filed with and accepted, subject to final 4.9(c).1 Your comment will be kept conversion of its subsidiary, Northwest approval, by the Commission, has been Bank & Trust Company, Davenport, placed on the public record for a period 1 In particular, the written request for confidential Iowa, from a federally chartered savings of thirty (30) days. The following treatment that accompanies the comment must bank to a state chartered bank. Analysis to Aid Public Comment include the factual and legal basis for the request,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28389

confidential only if the FTC General among other features, enables a to visit the user’s personal profile on the Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, consumer who uses the site to create Myspace Web site to obtain personal grants your request in accordance with and customize a personal online profile. information, including, for most users, the law and the public interest. These profiles contain content about their full name. A third-party advertiser Postal mail addressed to the users, such as their name, the names of could also combine the user’s real name Commission is subject to delay due to other users who are their ‘‘friends’’ on and other personal information with heightened security screening. As a the site, photos and videos they upload, additional information contained in the result, we encourage you to submit your messages and comments they post or advertiser’s tracking cookie, a small text comments online. To make sure that the receive from their friends, and other file placed on a user’s browser that may Commission considers your online personal information. Myspace assigns a include information about the user’s comment, you must file it at https:// persistent unique numerical identifier, online browsing history. ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ called a ‘‘Friend ID,’’ to each user The proposed order contains myspaceconsent by following the profile created on Myspace. The Friend provisions designed to prevent Myspace instructions on the web-based form. If ID is a component of the URL for each from engaging in future practices similar this Notice appears at http:// user’s profile page. For example, to those alleged in the complaint. www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also inserting www.myspace.com/12345678 Part I of the proposed order prohibits may file a comment through that Web into the address bar of a web browser Myspace from misrepresenting the site. will bring up the Myspace profile page privacy and confidentiality of any If you file your comment on paper, of the user who is assigned Friend ID ‘‘covered information,’’ as well as the write ‘‘Myspace, File No. 102 3058’’ on 12345678. The Friend ID can be used to company,s compliance with any your comment and on the envelope, and access information about the user, privacy, security, or other compliance mail or deliver it to the following including the user’s profile picture, program, including but not limited to address: Federal Trade Commission, location, gender, age, display name (e.g., the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework. Office of the Secretary, Room H–113 a nickname or pseudonym displayed on ‘‘Covered information’’ is defined (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue the user’s profile), and, in many cases, broadly to include an individual’s: (a) NW., Washington, DC 20580. If possible, the user’s full name. First and last name; (b) home or other submit your paper comment to the Myspace obtains revenue by allowing physical address, including street name Commission by courier or overnight third-party or affiliate advertising and city or town; (c) email address or service. networks to serve advertisements other online contact information, such Visit the Commission Web site at directly on its site. The FTC complaint as an instant messaging user identifier http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice alleges that Myspace made numerous or screen name; (d) mobile or other promises to its users regarding the and the news release describing it. The telephone number; (e) photos and extent to which it shared consumers’ FTC Act and other laws that the videos; (f) Internet Protocol (‘‘IP’’) personal information with third-party Commission administers permit the address, User ID, device ID, or other advertisers. The complaint alleges that collection of public comments to persistent identifier; (g) list of contacts; Myspace promised that: (1) It would not consider and use in this proceeding as or (h) physical location. use or share a user’s personally appropriate. The Commission will Part II of the proposed order requires consider all timely and responsive identifiable information, defined as full name, email address, mailing address, Myspace to establish and maintain a public comments that it receives on or comprehensive privacy program that is before June 8, 2012. You can find more telephone number, or credit card number, without first giving notice to reasonably designed to: (1) Address information, including routine uses privacy risks related to the development permitted by the Privacy Act, in the and receiving permission from users; (2) the means through which it customized and management of new and existing Commission’s privacy policy, at http:// products and services, and (2) protect www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. ads did not allow advertisers to access personally identifiable information or the privacy and confidentiality of Analysis of Agreement Containing individually identify users; (3) the covered information. The privacy Consent Order To Aid Public Comment information shared with advertisers program must be documented in writing and must contain privacy controls and The Federal Trade Commission has regarding web browsing activity was anonymized; and (4) it complied with procedures appropriate to Myspace’s accepted, subject to final approval, a size and complexity, the nature and consent agreement from Myspace LLC the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework. The Commission’s complaint alleges scope of its activities, and the sensitivity (‘‘Myspace’’). of covered information. Specifically, the The proposed consent order has been that Myspace violated Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, by misleading users about order requires Myspace to: placed on the public record for thirty • Designate an employee or (30) days for receipt of comments by what information third-party advertisers received about them. According to the employees to coordinate and be interested persons. Comments received responsible for the privacy program; during this period will become part of FTC complaint, from January 2009 • Identify reasonably-foreseeable, the public record. After thirty (30) days, through June 2010, and again from material risks, both internal and the Commission will again review the October 29, 2010 through October 28, external, that could result in the agreement and the comments received, 2011, when Myspace displayed unauthorized collection, use, or and will decide whether it should advertisements on its Web site from disclosure of covered information and withdraw from the agreement and take certain unaffiliated third-party assess the sufficiency of any safeguards appropriate action or make final the advertisers, Myspace and/or its affiliate in place to control these risks; agreement’s proposed order. provided those advertisers with the • Design and implement reasonable Myspace operates a social networking Friend ID of the user who was viewing privacy controls and procedures to Web site, www.myspace.com, that, the page. With this information, a third- party advertiser could take simple steps control the risks identified through the privacy risk assessment and regularly and must identify the specific portions of the to get detailed information about comment to be withheld from the public record. See individual users. For example, a third- test or monitor the effectiveness of the FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). party advertiser could use the Friend ID safeguards’ key controls and procedures;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28390 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

• Develop and use reasonable steps to VII mandates that Myspace submit an 3090–0007, Contractor’s Qualifications select and retain service providers initial compliance report to the FTC and and Financial Information, by any of the capable of appropriately protecting the make available to the FTC subsequent following methods: privacy of covered information they reports. Part VIII is a provision • Regulations.gov: http:// receive from respondent, and require ‘‘sunsetting’’ the order after twenty (20) www.regulations.gov. Submit comments service providers by contract to years, with certain exceptions. via the Federal eRulemaking portal by implement and maintain appropriate The purpose of the analysis is to aid searching the OMB control number. privacy protections; and public comment on the proposed order. Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ • Evaluate and adjust its privacy It is not intended to constitute an that corresponds with ‘‘Information program in light of the results of the official interpretation of the proposed Collection 3090–0007, Contractor’s testing and monitoring, any material order or to modify its terms in any way. Qualifications and Financial changes to its operations or business By direction of the Commission, Information’’. Follow the instructions arrangements, or any other Commisioner Ohlhausen not participating. provided at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ circumstances that it knows or has Donald S. Clark, screen. Please include your name, reason to know may have a material company name (if any), and Secretary. impact on the effectiveness of its ‘‘Information Collection 3090–0007, privacy program. [FR Doc. 2012–11613 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Contractor’s Qualifications and Part III of the proposed order requires BILLING CODE 6750–01–P Financial Information’’ on your attached that Myspace obtain within 180 days, document. and on a biennial basis thereafter for • Fax: 202–501–4067. twenty (20) years, an assessment and GENERAL SERVICES • Mail: General Services report from a qualified, objective, ADMINISTRATION Administration, Regulatory Secretariat independent third-party professional, (MVCB), 1275 First Street NE., certifying, among other things, that: It [OMB Control No. 3090–0007; Docket 2011– Washington, DC 20417. ATTN: Hada 0016; Sequence 12] has in place a privacy program that Flowers/IC 3090–0007, Contractor’s provides protections that meet or exceed General Services Administration Qualifications and Financial the protections required by Part II of the Acquisition Regulation; Submission Information. proposed order; and its privacy controls for OMB Review; GSA Form 527, Instructions: Please submit comments are operating with sufficient Contractor’s Qualifications and only and cite Information Collection effectiveness to provide reasonable Financial Information 3090–0007, Contractor’s Qualifications assurance that the privacy of covered and Financial Information, in all information is protected. AGENCY: Office of the Chief Finance correspondence related to this Parts IV through VIII of the proposed Officer, GSA. collection. All comments received will order are reporting and compliance ACTION: Notice of request for comments be posted without change to http:// provisions. Part IV requires that regarding an extension to an existing www.regulations.gov, including any Myspace retain for a period of five (5) OMB clearance. personal and/or business confidential years: (a) All ‘‘widely disseminated information provided. statements’’ that describe the extent to SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: which respondent maintains and Paperwork Reduction Act, the protects the privacy and confidentiality Regulatory Secretariat will be A. Purpose of any covered information, along with submitting to the Office of Management The General Services Administration all materials relied upon in making or and Budget (OMB) a request to review will be requesting the Office of disseminating such statements; (b) all and approve an extension of a Management and Budget to extend consumer complaints directed at previously approved information information collection 3090–0007, Myspace, or forwarded to Myspace by a collection requirement regarding GSA concerning GSA Form 527, Contractor’s third party, that allege unauthorized Form 527, Contractor’s Qualifications Qualifications and Financial collection, use, or disclosure of covered and Financial Information. A notice was Information. This form is used to information and any responses to such published in the Federal Register at 77 determine the financial capability of complaints; (c) all subpoenas and other FR 5020, on February 1, 2012. No prospective contractors as to whether communications with law enforcement comments were received. they meet the financial responsibility entities or personnel that relate to its Public comments are particularly standards in accordance with the compliance with the proposed order; (d) invited on: Whether this collection of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) documents that contradict, qualify, or information is necessary and whether it 9.103(a)and 9.104–1 and also the call into question its compliance with will have practical utility; whether our General Services Administration the proposed order. Part IV additionally estimate of the public burden of this Acquisition Manual (GSAM) 509.105–1. requires that Myspace retain all collection of information is accurate, materials relied upon to prepare the and based on valid assumptions and B. Annual Reporting Burden third-party assessments for a period of methodology; ways to enhance the Respondents: 2,940. five (5) years after the date that each quality, utility, and clarity of the Responses per Respondent: 1.2. assessment is prepared. information to be collected. Total Responses: 3,528. Part V requires dissemination of the Hours per Response: 2.5. DATES: Submit comments on or before: order now and in the future to Total Burden Hours: 8,820. principals, officers, directors, and June 13, 2012. Obtaining Copies of Proposals: managers, and to all current and future FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erik Requesters may obtain a copy of the employees, agents, and representatives Dorman, Office of Financial Policy and information collection documents from having supervisory responsibilities Operations, at (202) 501–4568 or via the General Services Administration, relating to the subject matter of the email at [email protected]. Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), order. Part VI ensures notification to the ADDRESSES: Submit comments 1275 First Street NE., Washington, DC FTC of changes in corporate status. Part identified by Information Collection 20417, telephone (202) 501–4755. Please

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28391

cite OMB Control No. 3090–0007, GSA the America COMPETES (7) Federal grantees may not use Form 527, Contractor’s Qualifications Reauthorization Act of 2010 (Pub. L. Federal funds to develop COMPETES and Financial Information, in all 111–358). Act challenge applications unless correspondence. DATES: Effective on May 14, 2012. consistent with the purpose of their Dated: May 2, 2012. Challenge submission period ends grant award. (8) Federal contractors may not use Casey Coleman, November 9, 2012, 11:59 p.m. et. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal funds from a contract to develop Chief Information Officer, Office of the Chief COMPETES Act challenge applications Information Officer. Adam Wong, 202–720–2866; Wil Yu, 202–690–5920 or to fund efforts in support of a [FR Doc. 2012–11604 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] COMPETES Act challenge submission. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 6820–34–P An individual or entity shall not be Subject of Challenge Competition deemed ineligible because the The ‘‘Ocular Imaging Challenge’’ is a individual or entity used Federal DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND facilities or consulted with Federal HUMAN SERVICES multidisciplinary call to innovators and software developers to create an employees during a competition if the facilities and employees are made Announcement of Requirements and application that improves interoperability among office-based available to all individuals and entities Registration for ‘‘Ocular Imaging participating in the competition on an Challenge’’ ophthalmic imaging devices, measurement devices, and EHRs. This equitable basis. Entrants must agree to assume any AGENCY: Office of the National application should: Coordinator for Health Information • Convert output from legacy and all risks and waive claims against Technology, HHS. ophthalmic imaging and measurement the Federal Government and its related ACTION: Notice. devices from proprietary formats to entities, except in the case of willful vendor-neutral standard formats (e.g. misconduct, for any injury, death, Award Approving Official: Farzad using freeware DICOM tools) damage, or loss of property, revenue, or Mostashari, National Coordinator for • Archive data from multiple imaging profits, whether direct, indirect, or Health Information Technology. and measurement devices consequential, arising from my Authority: 15 U.S.C. 3719. • Display images and data for participation in this prize contest, clinicians, and permit basic whether the injury, death, damage, or SUMMARY: The ‘‘Ocular Imaging loss arises through negligence or Challenge’’ is a multidisciplinary call to functionalities such as optimizing viewing parameters (e.g. brightness, otherwise. innovators and software developers to Entrants must also agree to indemnify create an application that improves contrast, color, zoom, pan) • Integrate with existing EHRs (e.g. the Federal Government against third interoperability among office-based ‘‘single sign-on’’) party claims for damages arising from or ophthalmic imaging devices, • Where applicable, leverage and related to competition activities. measurement devices, and EHRs. extend NwHIN standards and services Documentation of the typical Registration Process for Participants including, but not limited to, transport ophthalmology examination in an (Direct, web services), content To register for this challenge electronic health record (EHR) (Transitions of Care, CCD/CCR), and participants should: continues to be challenging. This creates D standardized vocabularies Access the www.challenge.gov Web barriers to full acceptance and use of site and search for the ‘‘Ocular Imaging EHRs within the medical community. Eligibility Rules for Participating in the Challenge’’. Data and images are often stored on the Competition D Access the ONC Investing in acquisition devices in proprietary Innovation (i2) Challenge Web site at: To be eligible to win a prize under Æ databases and file formats, and therefore this challenge, an individual or entity— http://www.health2con.com/ have limited connectivity with EHR (1) Shall have registered to participate devchallenge/challenges/onc-i2- systems and ophthalmology-specific challenges/. in the competition under the rules Æ picture archiving and communication promulgated by the Office of the A registration link for the systems (PACS). There are often National Coordinator for Health challenge can be found on the landing problems with redundant entry of Information Technology. page under the challenge description. demographic and clinical data into (2) Shall have complied with all the Amount of the Prize devices, data transfer from devices to requirements under this section. EHRs and PACS without proprietary D First Prize: $100,000 (3) In the case of a private entity, shall D interfaces, workflow challenges, and Second Prize: $35,000 be incorporated in and maintain a D Third Prize: $15,000 difficulty connecting systems from primary place of business in the United Awards may be subject to Federal different vendors. These same States, and in the case of an individual, income taxes and HHS will comply with challenges occur in a plurality of other whether participating singly or in a IRS withholding and reporting medical specialties that employ office- group, shall be a citizen or permanent requirements, where applicable. based testing and measurement. Given resident of the United States. this fact, there is every expectation that (4) May not be a Federal entity or Payment of the Prize the success of this challenge will be Federal employee acting within the Prize will be paid by contractor. translatable to practices that use scope of their employment. imaging and measurement devices such (5) Shall not be an HHS employee Basis Upon Which Winner Will Be as otorhinolaryngology (ear, nose, and working on their applications or Selected throat), physiatry (physical medicine submissions during assigned duty The ONC review panel will make and rehabilitation), and cardiology, hours. selections based upon the following among others. (6) Shall not be an employee of Office criteria: The statutory authority for this of the National Coordinator for Health D Breadth of input devices and challenge competition is Section 105 of IT. formats

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28392 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

Æ The solution will accept output (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease STATUS: Open to the public, limited from a wide range of ophthalmic Control and Prevention (CDC) only by the space available. Please devices and input formats, and convert announces the aforementioned meeting: register for the meeting at www.cdc.gov/ to standard DICOM formats (e.g. using TIME AND DATE: 12 p.m.–2:30 p.m., June hicpac. freeware tools). 12, 2012 (Closed). PURPOSE: The Committee is charged D Usability and interface for image PLACE: Teleconference. with providing advice and guidance to viewing the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Æ STATUS: The meeting will be closed to The solution will have an easy- Health and Human Services, the the public in accordance with to-use interface for clinicians with a Director, CDC, the Director, National provisions set forth in Section 552b(c) range of experience and comfort level Center for Emerging and Zoonotic (4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the with technology. Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), and the Æ Determination of the Director, The solution will provide the Director, Division of Healthcare Quality Management Analysis and Services ability to view and annotate diagnostic- Promotion regarding 1) the practice of Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92– quality ophthalmic images. healthcare infection control; 2) D Integration with workflow 463. Æ strategies for surveillance, prevention, The solution will be convenient MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED: The meeting and control of infections (e.g., to integrate into clinical ophthalmology will include the initial review, nosocomial infections), antimicrobial workflow, to install on existing office discussion, and evaluation of resistance, and related events in settings hardware platforms, and to integrate applications received in response to where healthcare is provided; and 3) with existing EHR systems (e.g. ‘‘single ‘‘Alcohol-related Motor Vehicle Injury periodic updating of guidelines and sign-on’’). Research, FOA CE12–006, initial other policy statements regarding D Platform Neutrality review.’’ prevention of healthcare-associated Additional Information CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: infections (HAIs) and healthcare-related Jane Suen, Dr.P.H., M.S., Scientific conditions. Ownership of intellectual property is Review Officer, CDC, 4770 Buford determined by the following: MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED: The agenda Highway NE., Mailstop F63, Atlanta, D Each entrant retains title and full will include updates on CDC’s activities Georgia 30341–3724, Telephone (770) ownership in and to their submission. for HAIs including outbreaks and 488–4281. Entrants expressly reserve all guidance on the use of single-dose vials; The Director, Management Analysis intellectual property rights not draft guideline for prevention of and Services Office, has been delegated expressly granted under the challenge infections among patients in neonatal the authority to sign Federal Register agreement. intensive care units (NICU); draft notices pertaining to announcements of D By participating in the challenge, guideline for management of meetings and other committee each entrant hereby irrevocably grants occupational exposures to HIV and management activities, for both the to Sponsor and Administrator a limited, recommendations for post-exposure Centers for Disease Control and non-exclusive, royalty free, worldwide, prophylaxis; draft guidance for facility Prevention and the Agency for Toxic license and right to reproduce, adjudication of infection data; and an Substances and Disease Registry. publically perform, publically display, update on National HealthCare Safety and use the Submission to the extent Dated: May 8, 2012. Network (NHSN) validation and necessary to administer the challenge, Elaine L. Baker, surveillance definitions for central-line and to publically perform and Director, Management Analysis and Services associated bloodstream infections and publically display the Submission, Office, Centers for Disease Control and surgical site infections. Time will be including, without limitation, for Prevention. available for public comment. advertising and promotional purposes [FR Doc. 2012–11546 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Agenda items are subject to change as relating to the challenge. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P priorities dictate. Dated: May 7, 2012. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Farzad Mostashari, Erin Stone, M.S., HICPAC, Division of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCEZID, National Coordinator for Health Information HUMAN SERVICES Technology. CDC, l600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop A–07, Atlanta, Georgia, 30333, [FR Doc. 2012–11591 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Centers for Disease Control and Telephone (404) 639–4045, Email: BILLING CODE 4150–45–P Prevention [email protected]. Healthcare Infection Control Practices The Director, Management Analysis DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Advisory Committee (HICPAC) and Services Office, has been delegated HUMAN SERVICES the authority to sign Federal Register In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of notices pertaining to announcements of Centers for Disease Control and the Federal Advisory Committee Act meetings and other committee Prevention (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease management activities, for both the Control and Prevention (CDC) Centers for Disease Control and Disease, Disability, and Injury announces the following meeting of the Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Prevention and Control Special aforementioned committee: Substances and Disease Registry. Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review TIMES AND DATES: 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m., Dated: May 3, 2012. The meeting announced below June 14, 2012. Elaine L. Baker, concerns Alcohol-related Motor Vehicle 9:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m., June 15, 2012. Director, Management Analysis and Services Injury Research, FOA CE12–006, initial PLACE: CDC, Global Communications Office, Centers for Disease Control and review. Center, Building 19, Auditorium B3, Prevention. In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of 1600 Clifton Road NE., Atlanta, Georgia, [FR Doc. 2012–11547 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the Federal Advisory Committee Act 30333 BILLING CODE 4163–18–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28393

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND and Research and Technical Assistance Families’ (ACF) Children’s Bureau (CB), HUMAN SERVICES for Public Health Laboratories in Haiti is requesting extension of the OMB- to Support Post Earthquake approved data collection instruments Centers for Disease Control and Reconstruction, Cholera and HIV/AIDS used in the Cross-Site Evaluation of the Prevention Response, FOA GH12–002, initial Infant Adoption Awareness Training review. Program (IAATP). The instruments that Disease, Disability, and Injury In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of require extension include the IAATP Prevention and Control Special the Federal Advisory Committee Act Trainee Pretest Survey and the IAATP Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease Trainee Follow-up Survey. The meeting announced below Control and Prevention (CDC) Title XII, Subtitle A, of the Children’s concerns Research to Prevent announces the aforementioned meeting: Health Act of 2000 (CHA) authorizes the Prescription Drug Overdoses, FOA Time and Date: 10:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m., Department of Health and Human CE12–007, initial review. June 26, 2012 (Closed). Services to make Infant Adoption In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of Place: Teleconference. Awareness Training grants available to the Federal Advisory Committee Act Status: The meeting will be closed to the national, regional, and local adoption (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease public in accordance with provisions set organizations for the purposes of forth in Section 552b(c) (4) and (6), Title 5 developing and implementing programs Control and Prevention (CDC) U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, announces the aforementioned meeting: that train the staff of public and non- Management Analysis and Services Office, profit private health service Time and Date: 12:00 p.m.–4:00 p.m., CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92–463. organizations to provide adoption Matters To Be Discussed: The meeting will June 14, 2012 (Closed). information and referrals to pregnant Place: Teleconference. include the initial review, discussion, and Status: The meeting will be closed to the evaluation of applications received in women on an equal basis with all other public in accordance with provisions set response to ‘‘Research and Technical courses of action included in non- forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 Assistance for Public Health Interventions in directive counseling of pregnant U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Haiti to Support Post Earthquake women. Section 1201(a)(2)(A) of the Management Analysis and Services Office, Reconstruction, Cholera and HIV/AIDS IAATP legislation requires grantees to CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92–463. Response, FOA GH12–001,’’ and ‘‘Research develop and deliver trainings that are Matters To Be Discussed: The meeting will and Technical Assistance for Public Health consistent with the Best Practice include the initial review, discussion, and Laboratories in Haiti to Support Post Guidelines for Infant Adoption evaluation of applications received in Earthquake Reconstruction, Cholera and HIV/ AIDS Response, FOA GH12–002, initial Awareness Training. The IAATP response to ‘‘Research to Prevent Prescription guidelines address training goals, basic Drug Overdoses, FOA CE12–007, initial review.’’ review.’’ Contact Person for More Information: skills, curriculum and training Contact Person for More Information: Jane Hylan D. Shoob, Ph.D., M.S.P.H., Scientific structure. A complete description of the Suen, Dr.P.H., M.S., Scientific Review Review Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., guidelines is available at http:// Officer, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, NE., Mailstop D72, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/ Mailstop F63, Atlanta, Georgia 30341–3724, Telephone: (404) 639–4796. programs_fund/discretionary/iaatp.htm. Telephone (770) 488–4281. The Director, Management Analysis and The funded adoption organizations The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the agree to make every effort to ensure that Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and the recipients of the training are the staff authority to sign Federal Register notices of ‘‘eligible health centers’’ as specified pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and in the grant. As defined in the other committee management activities, for legislation, these entities include: (a) both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Eligible health centers that receive Substances and Disease Registry. Dated: May 4, 2012. grants under authority contained in Title X of the Public Health Service Act Cathy Ramadei, Dated: May 3, 2012. (relating to voluntary family planning Elaine L. Baker, Acting Director, Management Analysis and projects); (b) eligible health centers that Director, Management Analysis and Services Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. receive grants under Section 330 of the Office, Centers for Disease Control and Public Health Service Act (relating to Prevention. [FR Doc. 2012–11550 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] community health centers, migrant [FR Doc. 2012–11551 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163–18–P health centers, and centers regarding BILLING CODE 4163–18–P homeless individuals and residents of public housing); and (c) eligible health DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND centers that receive grants under the HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Children’s Health Act of 2000 for the HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and provision of services in schools (subsection (a)(5), 42 U.S.C. 254c– Centers for Disease Control and Families 6(a)(5)(C)). Prevention Proposed Information Collection A total of six organizations were Disease, Disability, and Injury Activity; Comment Request awarded IAATP funding in FY2006. In 2011, each of these organizations was Prevention and Control Special Proposed Projects Emphasis Panel (SEP): Initial Review awarded a new grant for a brief (17 Title: Cross-Site Evaluation of the month) project period. The purpose of The meeting announced below Infant Adoption Awareness Training the new project period, which concerns Research and Technical Program for Projects Initially Funded in commenced October 1, 2011, is for the Assistance for Public Health Fiscal Year 2006. grantees to enhance, adopt, or adapt Interventions in Haiti to Support Post OMB No.: 0970–0371. their existing IAATP curriculum; Earthquake Reconstruction, Cholera and Background and Brief Description: implement the modified training; and HIV/AIDS Response, FOA GH12–001, The Administration for Children and evaluate the outcomes of participants in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28394 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

the training. Specifically, the new cross-site evaluation. Respondents information on an equal basis with all cooperative agreements require the complete the survey prior to receiving other options; and increasing awareness grantees to emphasize and strengthen the training and approximately 90 days of community resources for adoption. four training areas that preliminary after the training, which provides an Pretest and follow-up versions of the cross-site evaluation findings indicate assessment of the extent to which survey require approximately 15 and 10 require improvement: (1) Adoption law, trainees demonstrate sustained gains in minutes, respectively, to complete. The (2) non-directive counseling, (3) their knowledge about adoption, and the estimated response time for the follow- adolescent development and the impact impact of the training on their up survey includes time for respondents on adoption decision making, and (4) subsequent work with pregnant women. to access the Web-based survey and adoption types and practices. The Extension of the pretest and follow-up complete the survey online. cooperative agreements also require the data collection instruments beyond the Respondents will not need to grantees to increase and maximize December 31, 2012 expiration date is implement a recordkeeping system or penetration of the training within the necessary in order to complete a cross- compile source data in order to target population of eligible health care site evaluation of the extent to which complete the survey. Where possible, centers. the IAATP grantees fulfill the key fields in the follow-up version of the As in the previous grant period, each objectives of the new grant period (as survey are pre-filled with static data grantee is required to participate in the stated above). The data collection from the respondent’s pretest (e.g., national cross-site evaluation of the instruments will also continue to be demographics, agency type) in order to extent to which the IAATP training utilized to determine whether the further expedite completion of the objectives are met. The Infant Adoption grantees achieve the core objectives of survey and minimize respondent Awareness Training Program Trainee the IAATP, which include enhancing burden. Survey is the primary outcome data adoption knowledge within the target Respondents: Infant Adoption collection instrument for the national population; providing adoption Awareness Program Trainees.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Responses Number of instrument Average Number of per Hours per burden respondents respondent response

IAATP: Trainee Survey Pretest Administration ...... 870 1 0.25 217.5 IAATP: Trainee Survey Follow-Up Administration ...... 870 1 0.17 147.9

Estimated Total Annual Burden of automated collection techniques or ways to minimize the burden Hours: 365. other forms of information technology. information to be collected; and (d) In compliance with the requirements Consideration will be given to ways to minimize the burden of the of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the comments and suggestions submitted collection of information on Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the within 60 days of this publication. respondents, including through the use Administration for Children and In compliance with the requirements of automated collection techniques or Families is soliciting public comment of Section 506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork other forms of information technology. on the specific aspects of the Reduction Act of 1995, the Consideration will be given to information collection described above. Administration for Children and comments and suggestions submitted Copies of the proposed collection of Families is soliciting public comment within 60 days of this publication. information can be obtained and on the specific aspects of the comments may be forwarded by writing information collection described above. Robert Sargis, to the Administration for Children and Copies of the proposed collection of Reports Clearance Officer. Families, Office of Administration, information can be obtained and [FR Doc. 2012–11526 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Office of Information Services, 370 comments may be forwarded by writing BILLING CODE 4184–01–P L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, to the Administration for Children and DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Families, Office of Planning, Research Officer. Email address: and Evaluation, 370 L’Enfant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND [email protected]. All requests Promenade, SW., Washington, DC HUMAN SERVICES should be identified by the title of the 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance information collection. Officer. Email address: Health Resources and Services The Department specifically requests [email protected]. All requests Administration comments on: (a) Whether the proposed should be identified by the title of the collection of information is necessary information collection. National Advisory Committee on Rural for the proper performance of the The Department specifically requests Health and Human Services; Notice of functions of the agency, including comments on: (a) Whether the proposed Meeting whether the information shall have collection of information is necessary practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the for the proper performance of the In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of agency’s estimate of the burden of the functions of the agency, including the Federal Advisory Committee Act proposed collection of information; (c) whether the information shall have (Pub. L. 92–463), notice is hereby given the quality, utility, and clarity of the practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the of the meeting of the following National information to be collected; and (d) agency’s estimate of the burden of the Advisory body scheduled to meet ways to minimize the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) during the month of June 2012. collection of information on the quality, utility, and clarity of the The National Advisory Committee on respondents, including through the use information to be collected; and (d) Rural Health will convene its seventy-

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28395

first meeting in the time and place DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND criteria for trainees’ qualifications and specified below: HUMAN SERVICES competency of the project director and Name: National Advisory Committee on staff, cooperative agreements in the case National Institutes of Health Rural Health and Human Services. of joint applications, the adequacy of training plans and resources, including Dates And Times: Proposed Collection; Comment June 18, 2012, 9:00 a.m.–5 p.m. budget and curriculum, and response to Request; Hazardous Waste Worker June 19, 2012, 9:00 a.m.–5 p.m. meeting training criteria in OSHA’s June 20, 2012, 8:45 a.m.–11:15 a.m. Training Hazardous Waste Operations and Place: Kansas City Marriott Downtown, AGENCY: National Institute of Emergency Response Regulations (29 200 West 12th Street, Kansas City, MO Environmental Health Sciences, CFR 1910.120). As a cooperative 64105, (816) 421–6800. Division of Extramural Research and agreement, there are additional Status: The meeting will be open to the Training, NIH, HHS. requirements for the progress report public. SUMMARY: In compliance with the section of the application. Grantees are Purpose: The National Advisory to provide their information in hard Committee on Rural Health and Human requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of copy as well as enter information into Services provides counsel and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, recommendations to the Secretary with for opportunity for public comment on the WETP Grantee Data Management respect to the delivery, research, proposed data collection projects, the System. The information collected is development, and administration of health National Institute of Environmental used by the Director through officers, and human services in rural areas. Health Sciences (NIEHS), the National employees, experts, and consultants to Agenda: At 9:00 a.m. on June 18, the Institutes of Health (NIH) will publish evaluate applications based on technical meeting will be called to order by the periodic summaries of proposed merit to determine whether to make Honorable Ronnie Musgrove, Chairman of projects to be submitted to the Office of awards. Frequency of Response: the Committee. The Committee will be Management and Budget (OMB) for Biannual. Affected Public: Non-profit examining potential long term impacts on the review and approval. organizations. Type of Respondents: rural healthcare infrastructure and the Proposed Collection: Title: Hazardous Grantees. The annual reporting burden intersection of the Child Care and Waste Worker Training—42 CFR part is as follows: Estimated Number of Development Fund and the Head Start Respondents: 20; Estimated Number of program. The day will conclude with a 65. Type of Information Collection period of public comment at approximately Request: Extension of OMB No. 0925– Responses per Respondent: 2; Average 4:30 p.m. 0348 and expiration date September 30, Burden Hours per Response: 14; and At approximately 9:00 a.m. on June 19, the 2012. Need and Use of Information Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours Committee will break into Subcommittees Collection: This request for OMB review Requested: 560. The annualized cost to and depart for site visits to rural healthcare and approval of the information respondents is estimated at: $18,200. and human service providers in Kansas and collection is required by regulation 42 There are no Capital Costs, Operating Missouri. One panel from the Health CFR part 65(a)(6). The National Institute Costs and/or Maintenance Costs to Infrastructure Subcommittee will visit the of Environmental Health Sciences report. Hiawatha Community Hospital in Hiawatha, (NIEHS) was given major responsibility Request for Comments: Written KS. Another panel from the Health comments and/or suggestions from the Infrastructure Subcommittee will visit Carroll for initiating a worker safety and health training program under Section 126 of public and affected agencies should County Memorial Hospital in Carrollton, MO. address one or more of the following The Human Services panel will visit a Head the Superfund Amendments and Start program in Marshall, MO. The day will Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) for points: (1) Whether the proposed conclude at the Kansas City Marriott hazardous waste workers and collection of information is necessary Downtown with a period of public comment emergency responders. A network of for the proper performance of the at approximately 4:30 p.m. non-profit organizations that are function of the agency, including At 9:00 a.m. on June 20, the Committee committed to protecting workers and whether the information will have will summarize key findings from the their communities by delivering high- practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the meeting and develop a work plan for the next quality, peer-reviewed safety and health agency’s estimate of the burden of the quarter and the following meeting. curricula to target populations of proposed collection of information, For Further Information Contact: Steve hazardous waste workers and including the validity of the Hirsch, MSLS, Executive Secretary, National emergency responders has been methodology and assumptions used; (3) Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Human Services, Health Resources and developed. In twenty-four years (FY Services Administration, Parklawn Building, 1987–2011), the NIEHS Worker Training clarity of the information to be Room 5A–05, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, program has successfully supported 20 collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the MD 20857, Telephone (301) 443–0835, Fax primary grantees that have trained more burden of the collection of information (301) 443–2803. than 2.7 million workers across the on those who are to respond, including Persons interested in attending any portion country and presented over 160,913 the use of appropriate automated, of the meeting should contact Aaron Wingad classroom and hands-on training electronic, mechanical, or other at the Office of Rural Health Policy (ORHP) courses, which have accounted for technological collection techniques or via telephone at (301) 443–0835 or by email nearly 36 million contact hours of actual other forms of information technology. at [email protected]. The Committee training. Generally, the grant will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To meeting agenda will be posted on ORHP’s Web site http://www.hrsa.gov/ initially be for one year, and subsequent request more information on the advisorycommittees/rural/. continuation awards are also for one proposed project or to obtain a copy of year at a time. Grantees must submit a the data collection plans and Dated: May 8, 2012. separate application to have the support instruments, contact: Joseph T. Hughes, Reva Harris, continued for each subsequent year. Jr., Director, Worker Education and Acting Director, Division of Policy and Grantees are to provide information in Training Branch, Division of Extramural Information Coordination. accordance with S65.4(a), (b), (c) and Research and Training, NIEHS, P.O. Box [FR Doc. 2012–11598 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 65.6(a) on the nature, duration, and 12233, Research Triangle Park, NC BILLING CODE 4165–15–P purpose of the training, selection 27709 or call non-toll-free number (919)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28396 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

541–0217 or Email your request, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Dated: May 8, 2012. including your address to Room 750, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Anna P. Snouffer, Bethesda, MD 20892–2542, 301–594–8886, [email protected]. Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Comments Due Date: Comments [email protected]. Committee Policy. regarding this information collection are (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance [FR Doc. 2012–11611 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] best assured of having their full effect if Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, BILLING CODE 4140–01–P received within 60 days of the date of Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; this publication. 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Dated: March 27, 2012. Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND and Hematology Research, National Institutes Joellen M. Austin, HUMAN SERVICES of Health, HHS) Associate Director for Management. [FR Doc. 2012–11606 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Dated: May 8, 2012. National Institutes of Health BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Anna P. Snouffer, National Center for Complementary & Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. Alternative Medicine Notice of Closed Meeting DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND [FR Doc. 2012–11608 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] HUMAN SERVICES BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Pursuant to section 10(d) of the National Institutes of Health Federal Advisory Committee Act, as DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is National Institute of Diabetes and hereby given of the following meeting. Digestive and Kidney Diseases Notice HUMAN SERVICES of Closed Meetings The meeting will be closed to the National Institutes of Health public in accordance with the Pursuant to section 10(d) of the provisions set forth in sections Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institute of Allergy and 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Infectious Diseases Notice of Closed as amended. The grant applications and hereby given of the following meetings. Meeting the discussions could disclose The meetings will be closed to the confidential trade secrets or commercial public in accordance with the Pursuant to section 10(d) of the provisions set forth in sections property such as patentable material, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as and personal information concerning 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is individuals associated with the grant as amended. The grant applications and hereby given of the following meeting. the discussions could disclose applications, the disclosure of which The meeting will be closed to the confidential trade secrets or commercial would constitute a clearly unwarranted public in accordance with the property such as patentable material, invasion of personal privacy. and personal information concerning provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Name of Committee: National Center for individuals associated with the grant Complementary and Alternative Medicine as amended. The grant applications and applications, the disclosure of which Special Emphasis Pane,l Clinical Research of the discussions could disclose would constitute a clearly unwarranted Complementary Medical Care. confidential trade secrets or commercial invasion of personal privacy. Date: June 5, 2012. property such as patentable material, Name of Committee: National Institute of Time: 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Special Emphasis Panel, Training in individuals associated with the grant applications. Behavioral Research in Type 1 Diabetes. applications, the disclosure of which Place: National Institutes of Health Two Date: June 11, 2012. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Democracy Plaza 6707 Democracy Boulevard Time: 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. invasion of personal privacy. Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Name of Committee: National Institute of Call). Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Contact Person: Hungyi Shau, Ph.D., Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Emphasis Panel, NIAID Science Education Scientific Review Officer, National Center for Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Awards (R25). Complementary, and Alternative Medicine, Conference Call). Date: June 5, 2012. National Institutes of Health, 6707 Contact Person: Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MD 20892, 301–402–1030, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, [email protected]. Room 753, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, applications. Bethesda, MD 20892–2542, (301) 594–8898, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6700B (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training Name of Committee: National Institute of (Telephone Conference Call). in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Contact Person: Uday K. Shankar, Ph.D., National Institutes of Health, HHS) Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, Improving Dated: May 8, 2012. Adherence in Type 1 Diabetes. Program, DEA/NIAID/NIH/DHHS, Room Date: June 13, 2012. 3246, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Anna P. Snouffer, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594–3193, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. Committee Policy. applications. [FR Doc. 2012–11614 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Contact Person: Elena Sanovich, Ph.D., Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28397

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND as amended. The grant applications and Integrated Review Group, Neuroscience and HUMAN SERVICES the discussions could disclose Ophthalmic Imaging Technologies Study confidential trade secrets or commercial Section. National Institutes of Health property such as patentable material, Date: June 6–7, 2012. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant National Institute of Arthritis and individuals associated with the grant Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; applications. applications, the disclosure of which Place: Renaissance Washington, DC Notice of Closed Meeting would constitute a clearly unwarranted Dupont Circle Hotel, 1143 New Hampshire Pursuant to section 10(d) of the invasion of personal privacy. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20037. Contact Person: Yvonne Bennett, Ph.D., Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Center for amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Conflict: Craniofacial Development and Scientific Review, National Institutes of hereby given of the following meeting. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5199, The meeting will be closed to the Skeletal Genetics. Date: May 31, 2012. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–379– public in accordance with the Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 3793, [email protected]. provisions set forth in sections Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Emerging 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., applications. Technologies and Training Neurosciences as amended. The grant applications and Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Integrated Review Group, Molecular the discussions could disclose Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Neurogenetics Study Section. confidential trade secrets or commercial (Telephone Conference Call). Date: June 7–8, 2012. property such as patentable material, Contact Person: Rajiv Kumar, Ph.D., Chief, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and personal information concerning MOSS IRG, Center for Scientific Review, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge applications. individuals associated with the grant Drive, Room 4216, MSC 7802, Bethesda, MD Place: Renaissance Mayflower Hotel, 1127 applications, the disclosure of which 20892, 301–435–1212, [email protected]. Connecticut Avenue NW., Washington, DC would constitute a clearly unwarranted Name of Committee: Bioengineering 20036. invasion of personal privacy. Sciences & Technologies Integrated Review Contact Person: Eugene Carstea, Ph.D., Name of Committee: National Institute of Group, Modeling and Analysis of Biological Scientific Review Officer, Center for Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Systems Study Section. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, P30 Date: June 4–5, 2012. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5194, Rheumatic Diseases Core Center Review. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408– Date: June 13–14, 2012. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 9756, [email protected]. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. applications. Name of Committee: Musculoskeletal, Oral Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 and Skin Sciences Integrated Review Group, applications. Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Skeletal Biology Development and Disease Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Contact Person: Craig Giroux, Scientific Study Section. Review Officer, BST IRG, Center for Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. Date: June 7–8, 2012. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Contact Person: Kan Ma, Ph.D., Scientific Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5150, Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–2204, National Institute of Arthritis, applications. [email protected]. Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, National Place: Westin Alexandria, 400 Courthouse Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Square, Alexandria, VA 22314. Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20892–4872, 301– Review Special Emphasis Panel, Behavioral Contact Person: Priscilla B Chen, Ph.D., 451–4838, [email protected]. Genetics and Epidemiology: Collaborative Scientific Review Officer, Center for Applications. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: June 4, 2012. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4104, Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1787, [email protected]. National Institutes of Health, HHS) applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Dated: May 8, 2012. Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street Review Special Emphasis Panel, RFA–RM– Anna P. Snouffer, NW., Washington, DC 20036. Contact Person: George Vogler, Ph.D., 11–007: NIH Director’s Early Independence Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Scientific Review Officer, PSE IRG, Center for Award Review. Committee Policy. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: June 7–8, 2012. [FR Doc. 2012–11615 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3140, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–0694, [email protected]. applications. Name of Committee: Integrative, Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD 20852. HUMAN SERVICES Integrated Review Group, Somatosensory and Chemosensory Systems Study Section. Contact Person: Weijia Ni, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health Date: June 5–6, 2012. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Drive, Room 3184, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD Center for Scientific Review Notice of 20892, (301) 237–9918, [email protected]. Closed Meetings applications. Place: Baltimore Marriott Waterfront, 700 Name of Committee: Biobehavioral and Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Aliceanna Street, Baltimore, MD 21202. Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Contact Person: M Catherine Bennett, Group, Adult Psychopathology and Disorders Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is of Aging Study Section. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: June 7–8, 2012. hereby given of the following meetings. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5182, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The meetings will be closed to the MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant public in accordance with the 1766, [email protected]. applications. provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: Emerging Place: Hilton Alexandria Old Town, 1767 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Technologies and Training Neurosciences King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28398 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

Contact Person: Serena Chu, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Contact Person: Eugene Carstea, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, BBBP IRG, Center Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Officer, Center for for Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3178, Place: Latham Hotel, 3000 M Street NW., Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5194, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–500– Washington, DC 20007. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408– 5829, [email protected]. Contact Person: Wei-Qin Zhao, Ph.D., 9756, [email protected]. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Name of Committee: Population Sciences (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5181, Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Neurological, Aging and Musculoskeletal 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Epidemiology Study Section. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892–7846, 301– 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Date: June 7–8, 2012. 435–1236, [email protected]. 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Time: 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Special Emphasis Panel, AREA (R15) Institutes of Health, HHS) applications. Applications in Biobehavioral Regulation, Dated: May 8, 2012. Learning and Ethology. Place: Santa Monica, CA, 530 Pico Anna P. Snouffer, Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA 90405. Date: June 8, 2012. Contact Person: Heidi B Friedman, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Committee Policy. Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. [FR Doc. 2012–11612 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Place: Sheraton Delfina Santa Monica Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1012A, BILLING CODE 4140–01–P MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Hotel, 530 West Pico Boulevard, Santa 1721, [email protected]. Monica, CA 90405. Contact Person: Melissa Gerald, Ph.D., Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Center for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Review Special Emphasis Panel, PAR–11– Scientific Review, National Institutes of HUMAN SERVICES 216: Early Phase Clinical Trials in Imaging Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3172, and Image-Guided Interventions. MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408– National Institutes of Health Date: June 7, 2012. 9107, [email protected]. Time: 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. National Institute of Allergy and Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Healthcare Delivery applications. and Methodologies Integrated Review Group, Infectious Diseases Notice of Closed Place: Hyatt Regency Miami, 400 SE 2nd Biomedical Computing and Health Meeting Avenue, Miami, FL 33131. Informatics Study Section. Contact Person: David L Williams, Ph.D., Date: June 8, 2012. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5110, hereby given of the following meeting. MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street 1174, [email protected]. NW., Washington, DC 20036. The meeting will be closed to the Contact Person: Melinda Jenkins, Ph.D., public in accordance with the Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Center for Review Special Emphasis Panel, Dental provisions set forth in sections Scientific Review, National Institutes of 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Biomechanics and Implants. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3156, Date: June 7, 2012. MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–437– as amended. The grant applications and Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 7872, [email protected]. the discussions could disclose Agenda: To review and evaluate grant confidential trade secrets or commercial applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, PAR–12– property such as patentable material, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 010: NIH Competitive Revision Applications and personal information concerning Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 for Research Relevant to the Family Smoking individuals associated with the grant (Telephone Conference Call). Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (R01) Contact Person: Yi-Hsin Liu, Ph.D., applications, the disclosure of which Review Meeting. Scientific Review Officer, Center for would constitute a clearly unwarranted Date: June 8, 2012. Scientific Review, National Institutes of invasion of personal privacy. Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4214, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Microbiology, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– applications. Infectious Diseases and AIDS Initial Review 1781, [email protected]. Place: Sheraton Delfina Santa Monica Group, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Hotel, 530 West Pico Boulevard, Santa B Subcommittee. Review Special Emphasis Panel, PAR09–218: Monica, CA 90405. Date: June 7, 2012. Innovations in Biomedical Computational Contact Person: Melissa Gerald, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Science and Technology. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 7, 2012. Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Time: 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3172, Place: Crystal Gateway Marriott, 1700 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408– Jefferson Davis Highway, Salon G, Arlington, applications. 9107, [email protected]. VA 22202. Place: Renaissance Washington, DC Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Nancy Lewis Ernst, Ph.D., Dupont Circle Hotel, 1143 New Hampshire Review Special Emphasis Panel, PAR12–010 Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20037. Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review and PAR12–011: Competitive Revision Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Contact Person: Yvonne Bennett, Scientific Applications for Research Relevant to the Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 6700B Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Control Act. 20892–7616, 301–451–7383, Drive, Room 5199, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD Date: June 8, 2012. [email protected]. 20892, 301–379–3793, [email protected]. Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Name of Committee: Integrative, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience applications. Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Integrated Review Group, Neurobiology of Place: Renaissance Mayflower Hotel, 1127 and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Learning and Memory Study Section. Connecticut Avenue NW., Washington, DC Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Date: June 8, 2012. 20036. Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28399

Dated: May 8, 2012. Collection of Information Recovery, Federal Emergency Anna P. Snouffer, Title: National Fire Incident Reporting Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory System (NFIRS) v5.0. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3886. Committee Policy. Type of Information Collection: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice [FR Doc. 2012–11610 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Revision of a currently approved of a major disaster declaration for the BILLING CODE 4140–01–P information collection. State of West Virginia is hereby OMB Number: OMB No. 1660–0069. amended to include the following areas Form Titles and Numbers: The among those areas determined to have National Fire Incident Reporting System been adversely affected by the event DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND (NFIRS) v5.0. declared a major disaster by the SECURITY Abstract: NFIRS provides a President in his declaration of March mechanism using standardized 22, 2012. Federal Emergency Management reporting methods to collect and Agency Lincoln and Mingo Counties for Individual analyze fire incident data at the Federal, Assistance (already designated for Public State, and local levels. Data analysis Assistance). [Docket ID: FEMA–2012–0008; OMB No. helps local fire departments and States The following Catalog of Federal Domestic 1660–0069] to focus on current problems, predict Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used future problems in their communities, for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Agency Information Collection and measure whether their programs are Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Activities: Submission for OMB working. Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; Review; Comment Request, National 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Fire Incident Reporting System (NFRS) Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); Government. v5.0 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; Estimated Number of Respondents: 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to AGENCY: Federal Emergency 23,890. Individuals and Households In Presidentially Management Agency, DHS. Estimated Number of Responses: Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 29,970,120. Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— ACTION: Notice. Estimated Total Annual Burden Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals Hours: 13,704,900 hours. and Households; 97.050 Presidentially SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Estimated Cost: The estimated annual Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals Management Agency (FEMA) will operations and maintenance costs to and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance submit the information collection respondents or recordkeepers resulting abstracted below to the Office of (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, from the collection of information is Hazard Mitigation Grant. Management and Budget for review and $13,775,850. The estimated annual cost clearance in accordance with the to the Federal Government is W. Craig Fugate, requirements of the Paperwork $2,794,252. Reduction Act of 1995. The submission Administrator, Federal Emergency will describe the nature of the Dated: April 30, 2012. Management Agency. information collection, the categories of John J. Jenkins, Jr, [FR Doc. 2012–11529 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] respondents, the estimated burden (i.e., Acting Director, Records Management BILLING CODE 9111–23–P the time, effort and resources used by Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal respondents to respond) and cost, and Emergency Management Agency, Department the actual data collection instruments of Homeland Security. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND FEMA will use. [FR Doc. 2012–11527 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] SECURITY BILLING CODE P DATES: Comments must be submitted on Federal Emergency Management or before June 13, 2012. Agency ADDRESSES: Submit written comments DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4058– on the proposed information collection SECURITY DR; Docket ID FEMA–2012–0002] to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Federal Emergency Management Indiana; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of Management and Budget. Comments Agency a Major Disaster Declaration should be addressed to the Desk Officer [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4061– AGENCY: Federal Emergency for the Department of Homeland DR; Docket ID FEMA–2012–0002] Management Agency, DHS. Security, Federal Emergency ACTION: Notice. Management Agency, and sent via West Virginia; Amendment No. 2 to electronic mail to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice [email protected] or faxed AGENCY: Federal Emergency of a major disaster declaration for State to (202) 395–5806. Management Agency, DHS. of Indiana (FEMA–4058–DR), dated March 9, 2012, and related FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Notice. Requests for additional information or determinations. copies of the information collection SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice DATES: Effective Date: April 10, 2012. should be made to Director, Records of a major disaster declaration for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Management Division, 1800 South Bell State of West Virginia (FEMA–4061– Peggy Miller, Office of Response and Street, Arlington, VA 20598–3005, DR), dated March 22, 2012, and related Recovery, Federal Emergency facsimile number (202) 646–3347, or determinations. Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., email address FEMA–Information- DATES: Effective Date: April 20, 2012. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3886. [email protected]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and Federal Emergency Management Agency

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28400 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

(FEMA) hereby gives notice that disaster by the President in his not a toll-free number). Copies of the pursuant to the authority vested in the declaration of April 18, 2012. proposed forms and other available Administrator, under Executive Order Maui County for Public Assistance. documents submitted to OMB may be 12148, as amended, Michael R. Scott, of The following Catalog of Federal Domestic obtained from Ms. Fletcher. FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coordinating Officer for this disaster. for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Department will submit the proposed This action terminates the Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora information collection to OMB for appointment of Gregory W. Eaton as Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; review, as required by the Paperwork Federal Coordinating Officer for this 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. disaster. Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); chapter 35, as amended). 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; The following Catalog of Federal Domestic 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to This Notice is soliciting comments Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Individuals and Households In Presidentially from members of the public and affected for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, agencies concerning the proposed Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— collection of information to: (1) Evaluate Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals whether the proposed collection of 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, and Households; 97.050 Presidentially information is necessary for the proper Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals performance of the functions of the 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to agency, including whether the Disaster Grants—Public Assistance information will have practical utility; Individuals and Households In Presidentially (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Hazard Mitigation Grant. (2) evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— estimate of the burden of the proposed Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals W. Craig Fugate, collection of information; (3) enhance and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Administrator, Federal Emergency the quality, utility, and clarity of the Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals Management Agency. information to be collected; and (4) and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, [FR Doc. 2012–11530 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] minimize the burden of the collection of Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, BILLING CODE 9111–23–P information on those who are to Hazard Mitigation Grant. respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection W. Craig Fugate, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND techniques or other forms of information Administrator, Federal Emergency URBAN DEVELOPMENT technology that will reduce burden, Management Agency. (e.g., permitting electronic submission [Docket No. FR–5609–N–04] [FR Doc. 2012–11528 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] of responses). This Notice also lists the following BILLING CODE 9111–23–P Notice of Proposed Information information: Collection for Public Comment on the Title of Proposal: Study of Public Study of Public Housing Agencies’ Housing Agencies’ Engagement with DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Engagement With Homeless SECURITY Homeless Households—Follow-up Households—Follow-up Sample Sample Survey. Federal Emergency Management Survey OMB Control Number: XXXX- Agency AGENCY: Office of Policy Development pending. and Research, HUD. Description of the need for the [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4062– information and proposed use: This ACTION: Notice of proposed information DR; Docket ID FEMA–2012–0002] information collection will support collection. research that will explore and document Hawaii; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of SUMMARY: how public housing agencies (PHAs) a Major Disaster Declaration The proposed information collection requirement described below currently serve and interact with AGENCY: Federal Emergency will be submitted to the Office of homeless households, to achieve the Management Agency, DHS. Management and Budget (OMB) for following: (1) Establish a baseline level of PHAs’ current engagement in serving ACTION: Notice. review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– homeless households, (2) document the SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice 13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). The practices of PHAs that have an explicit of a major disaster declaration for the Department is soliciting public preference for homeless households; (3) State of Hawaii (FEMA–4062–DR), comments on the subject proposal. explore PHA perceptions of barriers to, dated April 18, 2012, and related DATES: Comments Due Date: July 13, or concerns about, increasing the determinations. 2012. number of homeless households served or targeting homeless households for DATES: Effective Date: May 4, 2012. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are priority housing assistance; and (4) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: invited to submit comments regarding identify mechanisms to address or Peggy Miller, Office of Response and this proposal. Comments should refer to eliminate barriers to serving homeless Recovery, Federal Emergency the proposal by name and/or OMB households in mainstream housing Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Control Number and should be sent to: assistance, with a focus on the housing Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3886. Reports Liaison Officer, Office of Policy choice voucher (HCV) program and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Development and Research, Department public housing. Findings of this study of a major disaster declaration for the of Housing and Urban Development, will enable the U.S. Department of State of Hawaii is hereby amended to 451 7th Street SW., Room 8234, Housing and Urban Development include the following area among those Washington, DC 20410. (HUD), which funds PHAs, to develop areas determined to have been adversely FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: strategies to expand access to affected by the event declared a major Anne Fletcher at (202) 402–4347 (this is mainstream housing opportunities for

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28401

homeless households that are rooted in to be administered to a purposeful Estimation of the total number of evidence and informed by the PHAs sample of 125 public housing agencies. hours needed to prepare the information themselves. This proposed data Members of affected public: Public collection including number of collection consists of a telephone survey housing agencies. respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response:

ESTIMATED RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS

Average time to complete Form Respondent sample Number of (minimum, Frequency Total burden respondents maximum) in (hours) minutes

Telephone Survey ...... A purposeful sample of public hous- 125 60 1 125 ing agencies.

Total Burden Hours ...... 125

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. and view all related materials. We will personnel using technology, Status of the proposed information post all comments. precautions, and techniques sufficient collection: Pending OMB approval. • Email [email protected]. to prevent or minimize the likelihood of Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. Section 9(a), Mail or hand-carry comments to the blowouts, loss of well control, fires, and Title 12, U.S.C., Section 1701z–1 et seq. Department of the Interior; Bureau of spillages, physical obstruction to other Safety and Environmental Enforcement; users of the waters or subsoil and Dated: May 2, 2012. Regulations Development Branch; seabed, or other occurrences which may Erika C. Poethig, Attention: Cheryl Blundon; 381 Elden cause damage to the environment or to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Street, MS–4024; Herndon, Virginia property, or endanger life or health.’’ Development. 20170–4817. Please reference ICR 1014– BSEE’s Legacy Data Verification [FR Doc. 2012–11514 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 0009 in your comment and include your Process (LDVP) requests operators to BILLING CODE 4210–67–P name and return address. supply missing data or corrected data FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: for wells drilled prior to January 2000 Cheryl Blundon, Regulations that do not have an assigned API number. This notice announces our DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Development Branch at (703) 787–1607 to request additional information about intention to request a 3-year extension Bureau of Safety and Environmental this ICR. for this information collection. Enforcement SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information we collect under this Title: Legacy Data Verification Process NTL, is missing data for wellbores that [Docket ID No. BSEE–2012–0008; OMB (LDVP)—NTL (formerly known as BSEE has not assigned API numbers and Control Number 1014–0009] Historical Well Data Cleanup). other well data discovered as missing OMB Control Number: 1014–0009. while completing the well database Information Collection Activities: Abstract: The Outer Continental Shelf cleanup. We are not able to manage and Legacy Data Verification Process (OCS) Lands Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. utilize data from drilling operations (LDVP); Submitted for Office of 1331 et seq. and 43 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), accurately without the information for Management and Budget (OMB) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior the missing wells. We will use the Review; Comment Request (Secretary) to prescribe rules and information to identify other well data regulations necessary for the (e.g., logs, surveys, tests) missing from ACTION: 60-day notice. administration of the leasing provisions our records, geologically map existing of the Act related to the mineral BSEE data to the correct wellbore/ SUMMARY: To comply with the resources on the OCS. Such rules and location, and correctly exchange Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 regulations will apply to all operations information with the operators and (PRA), BSEE is inviting comments on a conducted under a lease. Operations on industry. Our geoscientists can use the collection of information that we will the OCS must preserve, protect, and information to evaluate resources for submit to the Office of Management and develop oil and natural gas resources in lease sales for fair market value. With Budget (OMB) for review and approval. a manner that is consistent with the respect to safety concerns, we believe The information collection request (ICR) need to make such resources available that there may be anywhere from 1,500 concerns a renewal to the paperwork to meet the Nation’s energy needs as to 4,500 unidentified completed and requirements in a Notice to Lessees and rapidly as possible; to balance orderly abandoned wellbores (bypasses and Operators (NTL) discussed below. energy resource development with sidetracks), some of which may contain DATES: You must submit comments by protection of human, marine, and stuck drill pipe or other materials. In July 13, 2012. coastal environments; to ensure the approving permits and other operations ADDRESSES: You may submit comments public a fair and equitable return on the in an area, it is important for us to know by either of the following methods listed resources of the OCS; and to preserve what may be adjacent to or near the below. and maintain free enterprise vicinity of the activity we are approving • Electronically: go to http:// competition. to minimize the risk of blowouts, loss of www.regulations.gov. In the entry titled, The OCSLA at 43 U.S.C. 1332(6) well control, and endangerment to life, Enter Keyword or ID, enter BSEE–2012– states that ‘‘operations in the [O]uter health, and the environment. This is 0008 then click search. Follow the Continental Shelf should be conducted particularly important as, over the years, instructions to submit public comments in a safe manner by well-trained the number of wells drilled constantly

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28402 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

increases, thereby increasing the risk to of service components. For further permit number for each application adjacent activities if operators are not information on this burden, refer to 5 when submitting comments. aware of what might be in the area. CFR 1320.3(b)(1) and (2), or contact the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: We will protect information Bureau representative listed previously Susan Jacobsen, Chief, Endangered respondents submit that is considered in this notice. Species Division, P.O. Box 1306, proprietary under the Freedom of We will summarize written responses Albuquerque, NM 87103; (505) 248– Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), its to this notice and address them in our 6651. implementing regulations (43 CFR part submission for OMB approval. As a 2), and 30 CFR 250.197, Data and result of your comments, we will make SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information to be made available to the any necessary adjustments to the burden Public Availability of Comments public or for limited inspection. No in our submission to OMB. The Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) items of a sensitive nature are collected. Public Comment Procedures: Before prohibits activities with endangered and Responses are mandatory. including your address, phone number, threatened species unless a Federal Frequency: On occasion. email address, or other personal permit allows such activities. Along Description of Respondents: Potential identifying information in your with our implementing regulations in respondents comprise Federal OCS oil, comment, you should be aware that the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at gas, and sulphur lessees. your entire comment—including your 50 CFR part 17, the Act provides for Estimated Reporting and personal identifying information—may permits, and requires that we invite Recordkeeping Hour Burden: The be made publicly available at any time. public comment before issuing these currently approved annual reporting While you can ask us in your comment permits. burden for this collection is 11,250 to withhold your personal identifying A permit granted by us under section hours for approximately 4,500 wells, information from public review, we 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act authorizes based on: cannot guarantee that we will be able to applicants to conduct activities with (1) 0.5 hours to locate and copy a do so. summary of drilling operations (e.g., U.S. endangered or threatened species scout tickets) for each well; and Dated: May 4, 2012. for scientific purposes, enhancement of (2) 2 hours to retrieve and analyze Douglas W. Morris, survival or propagation, or interstate each well file and retrieve other missing Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs. commerce. Our regulations regarding data. There are no recordkeeping [FR Doc. 2012–11631 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] implementation of section 10(a)(1)(A) requirements. BILLING CODE 4310–VH–P permits are found at 50 CFR 17.22 for Estimated Reporting and endangered wildlife species, 50 CFR Recordkeeping Non-Hour Cost Burden: 17.32 for threatened wildlife species, 50 We have identified no paperwork non- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR CFR 17.62 for endangered plant species, hour cost burdens for this collection. and 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plant Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA Fish and Wildlife Service species. (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a Applications Available for Review and [FWS–R2–ES–2012–N087; Comment collection of information unless it FXES11130200000F5–123–FF02ENEH00] displays a currently valid OMB control We invite local, State, Tribal, and number. Until OMB approves a Endangered and Threatened Species Federal agencies, and the public to collection of information, you are not Permit Applications comment on the following applications. obligated to respond. Please refer to the appropriate permit AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Comments: Before submitting an ICR number (e.g., Permit No. TE–123456) Interior. to OMB, PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) when requesting application documents requires each agency ‘‘* * * to provide ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications; and when submitting comments. notice * * * and otherwise consult request for public comment. Documents and other information the with members of the public and affected SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and applicants have submitted with these agencies concerning each proposed Wildlife Service, invite the public to applications are available for review, collection of information * * *’’. comment on the following applications subject to the requirements of the Agencies must specifically solicit to conduct certain activities with Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) and comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the endangered or threatened species. The Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. collection is necessary or useful; (b) Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 552). evaluate the accuracy of the burden of amended (Act), prohibits activities with the proposed collection of information; Permit TE–67487A endangered and threatened species (c) enhance the quality, usefulness, and Applicant: Rogelio M. Rodriguez, unless a Federal permit allows such clarity of the information to be Denver, Colorado. activities. The Act and the National collected; and (d) minimize the burden Applicant requests a new permit for Environmental Policy Act also require on the respondents, including the use of research and recovery purposes to that we invite public comment before technology. conduct presence/absence surveys for issuing these permits. Agencies must also estimate the non- lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris hour paperwork cost burdens to DATES: To ensure consideration, written curasoae yerbabuenae) and Mexican respondents or recordkeepers resulting comments must be received on or before long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris nivalis) from the collection of information. June 13, 2012. within Arizona and New Mexico. Therefore, if you have other than hour ADDRESSES: Marty Tuegel, Section 10 burden costs to generate, maintain, and Coordinator, by U.S. mail at Division of Permit TE–67491A disclose this information, you should Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Applicant: Permits West, Inc., comment and provide your total capital Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, Room Edgewood, New Mexico. and startup cost components or annual 6034, Albuquerque, NM 87107 at (505) Applicant requests a new permit for operation, maintenance, and purchase 248–6920. Please refer to the respective research and recovery purposes to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28403

conduct presence/absence surveys of Permit TE–71618A Applicant requests an amendment to southwestern willow flycatcher Applicant: Museum of Southwestern a current permit for research and (Empidonax traillii extimus) within Biology University of New Mexico recovery purposes to conduct presence/ Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. Herbarium, Albuquerque, New Mexico. absence surveys and monitoring for repatriation of loach minnow (Tiaroga Permit TE–67494A Applicant requests a new permit for research and recovery purposes to cobitis) and spikedace (Meda fulgida) Applicant: Melanie Snyder, Lockhart, conduct presence/absence surveys; within the Coconino National Forest. Texas. collect flowers, seeds, and voucher Permit TE–66055A Applicant requests a new permit for specimens; conduct genetic analysis; research and recovery purposes to and conduct a pollinator study of the Applicant: SWCA Inc., Flagstaff, conduct presence/absence surveys of following endangered plants within Arizona. black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla), New Mexico: Applicant requests an amendment to golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica • Argemone pleiacantha ssp. a current permit for research and chrysoparia), and Houston toad (Bufo pinnatisecta (Sacramento prickly recovery purposes to conduct presence/ houstonensis) within Texas. poppy) absence surveys and monitoring of • Astragalus humillimus (Mancos loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) and Permit TE–70795A milkvetch) spikedace (Meda fulgida) within • Arizona. Applicant: Bowers Environmental Coryphantha sneedii var. sneedii Consulting, Tucson, Arizona. (Sneed’s pincushion cactus) Permit TE–72065A • Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri Applicant requests a new permit for (Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus) Applicant: Prescott National Forest, research and recovery purposes to • Hedeoma todsenii (Todsen’s Prescott, Arizona. conduct presence/absences surveys of pennyroyal) Applicant requests a new permit for the following wildlife species, and leaf • Ipomopsis sancti-spiritus (Holy research and recovery purposes to and flower collection of the following Ghost ipomopsis) conduct presence/absence surveys of plant species across their ranges, as • Pediocactus knowltonii (Knowlton’s the following species within Arizona: appropriate, within Arizona, New cactus) • Colorado pikeminnow Mexico, and Texas: (Ptychocheilus lucius) Permit TE–001623 • Arizona hedgehog cactus • Desert pupfish (Cyprinodon (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. Applicant: American Southwest macularius) arizonicus) Ichthyological Researchers, LLC, • Gila chub (Gila intermedia) • • Black-footed ferret (Mustela Albuquerque, New Mexico. Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis nigripes) Applicant requests an amendment to occidentalis occidentalis) a current permit for research and • Loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) • Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis recovery purposes to conduct • Razorback sucker (Xyrauchen occidentalis) distributional investigations, population texanus) • • Huachuca water umbel (Lilaeopsis monitoring, population estimation, Southwestern willow flycatcher schaffneriana spp. recurva) spawning activities documentation, (Empidonax traillii extimus) • • Kearney’s blue star (Amsonia movement studies, genetic studies, Spikedace (Meda fulgida) kearneyana) habitat association studies, and life Permit TE–72079A • Lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris history studies of Gila chub (Gila curasoae yerbabuenae) intermedia), loach minnow (Tiaroga Applicant: John Rinne, Flagstaff, • cobitis), and spikedace (Meda fulgida) Arizona. Loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) Applicant requests a new permit for • within New Mexico. Nichol’s Turk’s head cactus research and recovery purposes to (Echinocactus horizonthalonius var. Permit TE–43746A conduct presence/absence surveys of nicholii) loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) and • Applicant: Northern Arizona Pima pineapple cactus University, Flagstaff, Arizona. spikedace (Meda fulgida) within New (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina) Applicant requests an amendment to Mexico. • Razorback sucker (Xyrauchen a current permit for research and Permit TE–800611 texanus) recovery purposes to conduct presence/ • Southwestern willow flycatcher absence surveys for southwestern Applicant: SWCA, Inc., San Antonio, (Empidonax traillii extimus) willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii Texas. Applicant requests a new permit for • Spikedace (Meda fulgida) extimus) within Nevada and Utah. • research and recovery purposes to Yaqui topminnow (Poeciliopsis Permit TE–71870A conduct presence/absence surveys of occidentalis sonorensis) Applicant: Western Area Power Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) and gray bat • Yuma clapper rail (Rallus Administration, Phoenix, Arizona. (Myotis grisescens) throughout the longirostris yumanensis) Applicant requests a new permit for species’ ranges, as appropriate, within Permit TE–71473A research and recovery purposes to Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, conduct presence/absence surveys of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Applicant: Richard Sherwin, Newport southwestern willow flycatcher Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, New News, Virginia. (Empidonax traillii extimus) and Yuma Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Applicant requests a new permit for clapper rail (Rallus longirostris Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, research and recovery purposes to yumanensis) within Arizona. Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. conduct presence/absence surveys of lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris Permit TE–026711 National Environmental Policy Act curasoae yerbabuenae) and Mexican Applicant: U.S. Department of (NEPA) long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris nivalis) Agriculture—Forest Service, Flagstaff, In compliance with NEPA (42 U.S.C. within Arizona and New Mexico. Arizona. 4321 et seq.), we have made an initial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28404 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

determination that the proposed Schedule of the United States, that the Wire from China and Mexico: activities in these permits are U.S. Department of Commerce has Investigation Nos. 701–TA–479 and categorically excluded from the determined are subsidized by the 731–TA–1183–1184 (Final). requirement to prepare an Government of China and sold in the Issued: May 8, 2012. environmental assessment or United States at less than fair value By order of the Commission. environmental impact statement (516 (LTFV). The Commission further DM 6 Appendix 1, 1.4C(1)). determines,2 pursuant to section 735(b) James R. Holbein, of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)), that an Secretary to the Commission. Public Availability of Comments industry in the United States is not [FR Doc. 2012–11556 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] All comments and materials we materially injured or threatened with BILLING CODE 7020–02–P receive in response to this request will material injury, and the establishment of be available for public inspection, by an industry in the United States is not appointment, during normal business materially retarded, by reason of DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE hours at the address listed in the imports from Mexico of galvanized steel ADDRESSES section of this notice. wire, provided for in subheadings Antitrust Division Before including your address, phone 7217.20.30, 7217.20.45, and number, email address, or other 7217.90.10 3 of the Harmonized Tariff Notice Pursuant to the National personal identifying information in your Schedule of the United States, that the Cooperative Research and Production comment, you should be aware that U.S. Department of Commerce has Act of 1993—Pistoia Alliance, Inc. your entire comment—including your determined are sold in the United States Notice is hereby given that, on April personal identifying information—may at less than fair value (LTFV). be made publicly available at any time. 17, 2012, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the While you can ask us in your comment Background National Cooperative Research and to withhold your personal identifying The Commission instituted these Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 information from public review, we investigations effective March 31, 2011, et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Pistoia Alliance, Inc. cannot guarantee that we will be able to following receipt of petitions filed with has filed written notifications do so. the Commission and Commerce by simultaneously with the Attorney Davis Wire Corporation, Irwindale, CA; General and the Federal Trade Authority: We provide this notice under Commission disclosing changes in its section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) Johnstown Wire Technologies, Inc., membership. The notifications were Dated: April 30, 2012. Johnstown, PA; Mid-South Wire Company, Inc., Nashville, TN; National filed for the purpose of extending the Joy E. Nicholopoulos, Standard, LLC/DW-National Standard- Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of Acting Regional Director, Southwest Region. Niles, LLC, Niles, MI; and Oklahoma antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages [FR Doc. 2012–11553 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Steel & Wire Company, Inc., Madill, OK. under specified circumstances. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P The final phase of the investigations Specifically, Richard Lewin Wife was scheduled by the Commission (individual), The Hague, THE following notification of preliminary NETHERLANDS; Scitegrity Limited, INTERNATIONAL TRADE determinations by Commerce that Sandwich, Kent, UNITED KINGDOM; COMMISSION imports of galvanized steel wire from Chris Barber (individual), Leeds, China were subsidized within the Yorkshire, UNITED KINGDOM; Ted [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–479 and 731– Kalbfleisch (individual), Louisville, KY; TA–1183–1184 (Final)] meaning of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(b)) and that imports of Andrea Splendiani (individual), Galvanized Steel Wire From China and galvanized steel wire from China and London, UNITED KINGDOM; Oracle Mexico Mexico were sold at LTFV within the America, Inc., Redwood Shores, CA; meaning of 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. and Edinburgh Parallel Computing Determinations 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of Centre (EPCC), Edinburgh, UNITED On the basis of the record 1 developed the final phase of the Commission’s KINGDOM, have been added as parties in the subject investigations, the United investigations and of a public hearing to to this venture. States International Trade Commission be held in connection therewith was Also, Novartis, Cambridge, MA; and (Commission) determines,2 pursuant to given by posting copies of the notice in Genome Quest, Westborough, MA, have sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Tariff the Office of the Secretary, U.S. withdrawn as parties to this venture. Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)) and (19 International Trade Commission, No other changes have been made in U.S.C. 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an Washington, DC, and by publishing the either the membership or planned industry in the United States is not notice in the Federal Register on activity of the group research project. materially injured or threatened with November 25, 2011 (76 FR 72721). The Membership in this group research material injury, and the establishment of hearing was held in Washington, DC, on project remains open, and Pistoia an industry in the United States is not March 22, 2012, and all persons who Alliance, Inc. intends to file additional materially retarded, by reason of requested the opportunity were written notifications disclosing all imports from China of galvanized steel permitted to appear in person or by changes in membership. wire, provided for in subheadings counsel. On May 28, 2009, Pistoia Alliance, 7217.20.30, 7217.20.45, and The Commission transmitted its Inc. filed its original notification 7217.90.10 3 of the Harmonized Tariff determinations in these investigations to pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The the Secretary of Commerce on May 8, Department of Justice published a notice 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the 2012. The views of the Commission are in the Federal Register pursuant to Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 contained in USITC Publication 4323 Section 6(b) of the Act on July 15, 2009 CFR 207.2(f)). (74 FR 34364). 2 Vice Chairman Williamson and Commissioner (May 2012), entitled Galvanized Steel Pinkert dissenting. The last notification was filed with 3 Galvanized steel wire may also enter under HTS 7229.20.0090, 7229.90.5008, 7229.90.5016, the Department on January 27, 2012. A statistical reporting numbers 7229.20.0015, 7229.90.5031, and 7229.90.5051. notice was published in the Federal

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28405

Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (OMB) for review and approval for use Act on February 16, 2012 (77 FR 9266). in accordance with the Paperwork Antitrust Division Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Patricia A. Brink, 3501 et seq.). Approval of the ICR would Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Notice Pursuant to the National reinstate authority to conduct this Division. Cooperative Research and Production survey, which the BLS temporarily [FR Doc. 2012–11513 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Act of 1993—Petroleum Environmental discontinued March 31, 2011. Research Forum BILLING CODE P DATES: Submit comments on or before Notice is hereby given that, on April June 13, 2012. 17, 2012, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE National Cooperative Research and applicable supporting documentation; Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 including a description of the likely Antitrust Division et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Petroleum respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden Notice Pursuant to the National Environmental Research Forum may be obtained from the RegInfo.gov Cooperative Research and Production (‘‘PERF’’) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney Web site, http://www.reginfo.gov/ Act of 1993—PXI Systems Alliance, General and the Federal Trade public/do/PRAMain, on the day Inc. Commission disclosing changes in its following publication of this notice or membership. The notifications were by contacting Michel Smyth by Notice is hereby given that, on April filed for the purpose of extending the telephone at 202–693–4129 (this is not 12, 2012, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of a toll-free number) or sending an email National Cooperative Research and antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages to [email protected]. Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 under specified circumstances. Submit comments about this request et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), PXI Systems Specifically, CH2MHILL, Houston, TX, to the Office of Information and Alliance, Inc. has filed written has been added as a party to this Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk notifications simultaneously with the venture. Officer for DOL–BLS, Office of Attorney General and the Federal Trade No other changes have been made in Management and Budget, Room 10235, Commission disclosing changes in its either the membership or planned Washington, DC 20503, Telephone: membership. The notifications were activity of the group research project. 202–395–6929/Fax: 202–395–6881 filed for the purpose of extending the (these are not toll-free numbers), email: Membership in this group research _ Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of project remains open, and PERF intends OIRA [email protected]. antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages to file additional written notifications FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: under specified circumstances. disclosing all changes in membership. Contact Michel Smyth by telephone at Specifically, Amplicon Liveline Ltd., On February 10, 1986, PERF filed its 202–693–4129 (this is not a toll-free original notification pursuant to Section number) or by email at Brighton, UNITED KINGDOM; and _ _ Guidetech, LLC, Sunnyvale, CA, have 6(a) of the Act. The Department of DOL PRA [email protected]. been added as parties to this venture. Justice published a notice in the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Also, Tracewell Systems, Westerville, Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth OH, has withdrawn as a party to this Act on March 14, 1986 (51 FR 8903). 1979 (NLSY79) is a representative venture. The last notification was filed with national sample of persons who were the Department on January 31, 2012. A born in the years 1957 to 1964 and lived No other changes have been made in notice was published in the Federal in the U.S. in 1978. These respondents either the membership or planned Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the were ages 14 to 22 when the first round activity of the group research project. Act on March 8, 2012 (77 FR 14046). of interviews began in 1979; and they Membership in this group research will be ages 47 to 56 when the planned Patricia A. Brink, project remains open, and PXI Systems twenty-fifth round of interviews is Alliance, Inc. intends to file additional Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust conducted in 2012 and 2013. In Division. written notifications disclosing all addition to the main NLSY79, the changes in membership. [FR Doc. 2012–11515 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] biological children of female NLSY79 BILLING CODE P On November 22, 2000, PXI Systems respondents have been surveyed since Alliance, Inc. filed its original 1986. A battery of child cognitive, socio- emotional, and physiological notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of DEPARTMENT OF LABOR the Act. The Department of Justice assessments has been administered biennially since 1986 to NLSY79 published a notice in the Federal Office of the Secretary mothers and their children. Starting in Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the 1994, children who had reached age 15 Act on March 8, 2001 (66 FR 13971). Agency Information Collection by December 31, of the survey year (the Activities; Submission for OMB The last notification was filed with Young Adults) were interviewed about Review; Comment Request; National the Department on January 26, 2012. A their work experiences, training, Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 notice was published in the Federal schooling, health, fertility, self-esteem, Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the ACTION: Notice. and other topics. The longitudinal focus Act on February 16, 2012 (77 FR 9265). of the NLSY79 and associated Child and SUMMARY: The Department of Labor Young Adult surveys requires Patricia A. Brink, (DOL) is submitting the Bureau of Labor information to be collected from the Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Statistics (BLS) sponsored information same individuals over many years in Division. collection request (ICR) titled, ‘‘National order to trace their education, training, [FR Doc. 2012–11516 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979,’’ to work experience, fertility, income, and BILLING CODE P the Office of Management and Budget program participation. One of the goals

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28406 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

of the DOL is to produce and e.g., permitting electronic submission of ebsa/aboutebsa/ disseminate timely, accurate, and responses. erisa_advisory_council.html. The EBSA relevant information about the U.S. Agency: DOL–BLS. update is scheduled for the afternoon of labor force. The BLS contributes to this Title of Collection: National June 13, subject to change. goal by gathering information about the Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Organizations or members of the labor force and labor market and OMB Control Number: 1220–0109. public wishing to submit a written disseminating it to policymakers and Affected Public: Individuals or statement may do so by submitting 30 the public so that participants in those Households. copies on or before June 5 to Larry markets can make more informed, and Total Estimated Number of Good, Executive Secretary, ERISA thus more efficient, choices. Research Respondents: 14,185. Advisory Council, U.S. Department of based on the NLSY79 contributes to the Total Estimated Number of Labor, Suite N–5623, 200 Constitution formation of national policy in the areas Responses: 15,505. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. of education, training, employment Total Estimated Annual Burden Statements also may be submitted as programs, and school-to-work Hours: 13,853. email attachments in text or pdf format transitions. Total Estimated Annual Other Costs transmitted to [email protected]. It is This information collection is subject Burden: $0. requested that statements not be to the PRA. A Federal agency generally Dated: May 8, 2012. included in the body of the email. cannot conduct or sponsor a collection Michel Smyth, Statements deemed relevant by the of information, and the public is Departmental Clearance Officer. Advisory Council and received on or generally not required to respond to an [FR Doc. 2012–11488 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 a.m.] before June 5 will be included in the information collection, unless it is BILLING CODE 4510–24–P record of the meeting and made approved by the OMB under the PRA available in the EBSA Public Disclosure and displays a currently valid OMB Room, along with witness statements. Control Number. In addition, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Do not include any personally notwithstanding any other provisions of identifiable information (such as name, law, no person shall generally be subject Employee Benefits Security address, or other contact information) or to penalty for failing to comply with a Administration confidential business information that collection of information if the you do not want publicly disclosed. collection of information does not 161st Meeting of the Advisory Council Written statements submitted by invited display a valid OMB Control Number. on Employee Welfare and Pension witnesses will be posted on the See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The Benefit Plans; Notice of Meeting Advisory Council page of the EBSA Web DOL obtains OMB approval for this Pursuant to the authority contained in site, without change, and can be information collection under OMB retrieved by most Internet search Control Number 1220–0109. For Section 512 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 engines. additional information, see the related Individuals or representatives of notice published in the Federal Register U.S.C. 1142, the 161st open meeting of the Advisory Council on Employee organizations wishing to address the on December 8, 2011. Advisory Council should forward their Interested parties are encouraged to Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans (also requests to the Executive Secretary by send comments to the OMB, Office of known as the ERISA Advisory Council) email or telephone (202) 693–8668. Oral Information and Regulatory Affairs at will be held on June 12–14, 2012. presentations will be limited to ten the address shown in the ADDRESSES The three-day meeting will take place minutes, time permitting, but an section within 30 days of publication of in C5521 Room 4, U.S. Department of extended statement may be submitted this notice in the Federal Register. In Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., for the record. Individuals with order to help ensure appropriate Washington, DC 20210. The meeting disabilities who need special consideration, comments should will run from 9:00 a.m. to accommodations should contact the reference OMB Control Number 1220– approximately 5:00 p.m. on June 12 and Executive Secretary by June 5. 0109. The OMB is particularly 13 and from 8:30 a.m. to approximately interested in comments that: 4:30 p.m. on June 14, with a one hour Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of • Evaluate whether the proposed break for lunch. The purpose of the May 2012. collection of information is necessary open meeting is for Advisory Council Michael L. Davis, for the proper performance of the members to hear testimony from invited Deputy Assistant Secretary, Employee functions of the agency, including witnesses and to receive an update from Benefits Security Administration. whether the information will have the Employee Benefits Security [FR Doc. 2012–11588 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] practical utility; Administration (EBSA). BILLING CODE 4510–29–P • Evaluate the accuracy of the The Advisory Council will study the agency’s estimate of the burden of the following issues: (1) Managing proposed collection of information, Disability Risks in an Environment of including the validity of the Individual Responsibility; (2) Current NUCLEAR REGULATORY methodology and assumptions used; Issues Regarding Income Replacement COMMISSION • Enhance the quality, utility, and During Retirement Years; and (3) clarity of the information to be Current Challenges and Best Practices [NRC–2012–0108] collected; and Concerning Beneficiary Designations in • Minimize the burden of the Retirement and Life Insurance Plans. Spent Fuel Transportation Risk collection of information on those who The schedule for testimony and Assessment are to respond, including through the discussion of these issues generally will AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory use of appropriate automated, be one issue per day in the order noted Commission. electronic, mechanical, or other above. Descriptions of these topics are ACTION: Draft NUREG; request for technological collection techniques or available on the Advisory Council page comment. other forms of information technology, of the EBSA Web site, at www.dol.gov/

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28407

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS found to be acceptable. Since that time Commission (NRC or the Commission) Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, there have been two affirmations of this is issuing for public comment a draft please contact the NRC’s Public conclusion for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) NUREG, NUREG–2125, ‘‘Spent Fuel Document Room (PDR) reference staff at transportation, each using improved Transportation Risk Assessment 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by tools and information. This report (SFTRA).’’ email to [email protected]. The draft presents the results of a fourth NUREG is available electronically under DATES: Submit comments by July 13, investigation into the safety of SNF ADAMS Accession No. ML12125A218. 2012. Comments received after this date transportation. The risks associated with The draft NUREG will also be accessible will be considered if it is practical to do SNF transportation come from the through the NRC’s public site under so, but the NRC staff is able to ensure radiation that the spent fuel emits, draft NUREGs for comment. which is reduced—but not eliminated— consideration only for comments • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and received on or before this date. by the transportation cask’s shielding, purchase copies of public documents at and from the possibility of the release of ADDRESSES: You may access information the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One some quantity of radioactive material and comment submissions related to White Flint North, 11555 Rockville during a severe accident. This this document by searching on http:// Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. investigation shows that the risk from www.regulations.gov under Docket ID B. Submitting Comments the radiation emitted from the cask is a NRC–2012–0108. small fraction of naturally occurring You may submit comments by the Please include Docket ID NRC–2012– background radiation, and that the risk following methods: 0108 in the subject line of your from accidental release of radioactive • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to comment submission, in order to ensure material is several orders of magnitude http://www.regulations.gov and search that the NRC is able to make your less. Because there have been only for Docket ID NRC–2012–0108. Address comment submission available to the minor changes to the radioactive questions about NRC dockets to Carol public in this docket. material transportation regulations Gallagher; telephone: 301–492–3668; The NRC cautions you not to include between NUREG–0170 and this risk email: [email protected]. identifying or contact information in assessment, the calculated dose due to • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, comment submissions that you do not the radiation from the cask under Chief, Rules, Announcements, and want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC routine transport conditions is similar to Directives Branch (RADB), Office of posts all comment submissions at what was found in earlier studies. The Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– http://www.regulations.gov as well as improved analysis tools and techniques, B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory entering the comment submissions into improved data availability, and a Commission, Washington, DC 20555– ADAMS, and the NRC does not edit reduction in the number of conservative 0001. comment submissions to remove assumptions has made the estimate of • Fax comments to: RADB at 301– identifying or contact information. accident risk from the release of 492–3446. If you are requesting or aggregating radioactive material in this study For additional direction on accessing comments from other persons for approximately five orders of magnitude information and submitting comments, submission to the NRC, then you should less than what was estimated in see ‘‘Accessing Information and inform those persons not to include NUREG–0170. The results demonstrate Submitting Comments’’ in the identifying or contact information in that the NRC regulations continue to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of their comment submissions that they do provide adequate protection of public this document. not want to be publicly disclosed. Your health and safety during the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John request should state that the NRC will not edit comment submissions to transportation of SNF. The staff is R. Cook, Office of Nuclear Material seeking any information that is germane Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear remove such information before making the comment submissions available to to these results that the public may wish Regulatory Commission, Washington, to offer. DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– the public or entering the comment 3318; email: [email protected]. submissions into ADAMS. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of May, 2012. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I. Accessing Information and The NRC is responsible for issuing Christian Araguas, Submitting Comments regulations (Title 10 of the Code of Acting Chief, Rules, Inspections, and Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 71, A. Accessing Information Operations Branch, Division of Spent Fuel ‘‘Packaging and Transportation of Storage and Transportation, Office of Nuclear Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2012– Radioactive Waste,’’ dated January 26, Material Safety and Safeguards. 0108 when contacting the NRC about 2004) for the packaging and transport of [FR Doc. 2012–11672 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the availability of information regarding spent nuclear fuel (and other large BILLING CODE 7590–01–P this document. You may access quantities of radioactive material) that information related to this document by provide for public health and safety the following methods: during transport. In September 1977, the NUCLEAR REGULATORY • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to NRC published NUREG–0170, ‘‘Final COMMISSION http://www.regulations.gov and search Environmental Statement on the for Docket ID NRC–2012–0108. Transportation of Radioactive Material [NRC–2012–0109] • NRC’s Agencywide Documents by Air and Other Modes,’’ which Access and Management System assessed the adequacy of those Special Nuclear Material Control and (ADAMS): You may access publicly- regulations to provide safety assurance. Accounting Systems for Nuclear available documents online in the NRC In that assessment, the measure of safety Power Plants Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- was the risk of radiation doses to the rm/adams.html. To begin the search, public under routine and accident AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and transport conditions, and the risk was Commission.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28408 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request I. Accessing Information and II. Further Information for comment. Submitting Comments The NRC is issuing for public A. Accessing Information comment a draft guide in the NRC’s SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ‘‘Regulatory Guide’’ series. This series Commission (NRC or the Commission) Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2012– was developed to describe and make is issuing for public comment draft 0109 when contacting the NRC about available to the public such information regulatory guide (DG), DG–5028, the availability of information regarding as methods that are acceptable to the ‘‘Special Nuclear Material Control and this document. You may access NRC staff for implementing specific Accounting Systems for Nuclear Power information related to this document by parts of the NRC’s regulations, Plants.’’ In DG–5028, the NRC proposes the following methods: techniques that the staff uses in to endorse a revised American National • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to evaluating specific problems or Standards Institute (ANSI) document, http://www.regulations.gov and search postulated accidents, and data that the ANSI N15.8–2009, ‘‘Methods of Nuclear for Docket ID NRC–2012–0109. staff needs in its review of applications Material Control—Material Control • for permits and licenses. NRC’s Agencywide Documents The draft regulatory guide, entitled, Systems—Special Nuclear Material Access and Management System Control and Accounting Systems for ‘‘Special Nuclear Material Control and (ADAMS): You may access publicly- Accounting Systems for Nuclear Power Nuclear Power Plants.’’ available documents online in the NRC Plants,’’ is temporarily identified by its DATES: Submit comments by July 16, Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- task number, DG–5028. DG–5028 is 2012. Comments received after this date rm/adams.html. To begin the search, proposed revision 2 of Regulatory Guide will be considered if it is practical to do select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and 5.29, dated June 1975. so, but the NRC is able to ensure then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS The NRC withdrew Regulatory Guide consideration only for comments Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, 5.29 Revision 1 in January 1998 (63 FR received on or before this date. please contact the NRC’s Public 2426; January 15, 1998), because the Document Room (PDR) reference staff at Although a time limit is given, underlying basis standard, ANSI N15.8– 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by comments and suggestions in 1974, ‘‘Methods of Nuclear Material email to [email protected]. DG–5028 connection with items for inclusion in Control—Material Control Systems— is located under ADAMS Accession guides currently being developed or Special Nuclear Material Control and Number ML113550061. The regulatory Accounting Systems for Nuclear Power improvements in all published guides analysis may be found under ADAMS are encouraged at any time. Plants,’’ did not include direction to Accession Number ML113550062. support accountability of partial fuel ADDRESSES: You may access information • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and assemblies. ANSI revised ANSI N15.8 in and comment submissions related to purchase copies of public documents at February 2009. ANSI N15.8–2009 this document by searching on http:// the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One provides guidance on the fundamentals www.regulations.gov under Docket ID White Flint North, 11555 Rockville of an SNM control and accounting NRC–2012–0109. You may submit Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. system, including criteria for the comments by the following methods: receipt, internal control, physical B. Submitting Comments • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to inventory, and shipment of SNM. http://www.regulations.gov and search Please include Docket ID NRC–2012– Additionally, ANSI N15.8–2009 provides specific guidance on the for Docket ID NRC–2012–0109. Address 0109 in the subject line of your control and accounting of 1) fuel rods questions about NRC dockets to Carol comment submission, in order to ensure that are separated from their parent Gallagher; telephone: 301–492–3668; that the NRC is able to make your assemblies; and 2) pieces of irradiated email: [email protected]. comment submission available to the public in this docket. material that are separated as a result of • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, fuel damage. In DG–5028, the NRC is Chief, Rules, Announcements, and The NRC cautions you not to include proposing to endorse ANSI N15.8–2009 Directives Branch (RADB), Office of identifying or contact information in as an acceptable method for Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– comment submissions that you do not implementing material control and B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC accounting requirements at nuclear Commission, Washington, DC 20555– posts all comment submissions at power plants. http://www.regulations.gov as well as 0001. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day • entering the comment submissions into of May 2012. Fax comments to: RADB at 301– ADAMS, and the NRC does not edit For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 492–3446. comment submissions to remove For additional direction on accessing identifying or contact information. Thomas H. Boyce, information and submitting comments, Chief, Regulatory Guide Development Branch, If you are requesting or aggregating Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear see ‘‘Accessing Information and comments from other persons for Regulatory Research. Submitting Comments’’ in the submission to the NRC, then you should [FR Doc. 2012–11585 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of inform those persons not to include BILLING CODE 7590–01–P this document. identifying or contact information in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: their comment submissions that they do Richard Jervey, Office of Nuclear not want to be publicly disclosed. Your POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION request should state that the NRC will Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear [Docket No. MC2012–16 and CP2012–23; Regulatory Commission, Washington, not edit comment submissions to remove such information before making Order No. 1335] DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–251– the comment submissions available to 7401 or email: [email protected]. Product List Changes the public or entering the comment SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submissions into ADAMS. AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28409

ACTION: Notice. The Postal Service II. Notice of Filings contemporaneously filed a contract The Commission establishes Docket SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a related to the proposed new product. recently-filed Postal Service request to Nos. MC2012–16 and CP2012–23 to Id., Attachment B. The contract has consider the Request pertaining to the add Parcel Select Contract 2 to the been assigned Docket No. CP2012–23. competitive product list. This notice proposed Parcel Select Contract 2 Request. In support of its Request, the product and the related contract, addresses procedural steps associated Postal Service filed six attachments as with this filing. respectively. follows: Interested persons may submit DATES: Comments are due: May 18, • Attachment A—a redacted copy of 2012. comments on whether the Postal Governors’ Decision No. 11–6; Service’s filings in the captioned ADDRESSES: Submit comments • Attachment B—a redacted copy of dockets are consistent with the policies electronically via the Commission’s the contract; of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR Filing Online system at http:// • Attachment C—a proposed change part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, www.prc.gov. Commenters who cannot in the Mail Classification Schedule subpart B. Comments are due no later submit their views electronically should competitive product list; than May 18, 2012. The public portions contact the person identified in FOR • Attachment D—a Statement of of these filings can be accessed via the FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by Supporting Justification as required by Commission’s Web site (http:// telephone for advice on alternatives to 39 CFR 3020.32; www.prc.gov). electronic filing. • Attachment E—a certification of The Commission appoints Natalie Rea FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a); and Ward to serve as Public Representative Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel • Attachment F—an application for in these dockets. at 202–789–6820. non-public treatment of materials to III. Ordering Paragraphs SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: maintain redacted portions of the contract and supporting documents It is ordered: Table of Contents under seal. 1. The Commission establishes Docket I. Introduction In the Statement of Supporting Nos. MC2012–16 and CP2012–23 to II. Notice of Filings Justification, Karen F. Key, Manager, consider the matters raised in each III. Ordering Paragraphs Shipping Products, asserts that the docket. I. Introduction service to be provided under the 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Natalie contract will cover its attributable costs, Rea Ward is appointed to serve as an Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 officer of the Commission (Public CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal Service make a positive contribution to institutional costs, and increase Representative) to represent the filed a formal request and associated interests of the general public in these supporting information to add Parcel contribution toward the requisite 5.5 percent of the Postal Service’s total proceedings. Select Contract 1 to the competitive 3. Comments by interested persons in 1 institutional costs. Id., Attachment D. product list. The Commission notes these proceedings are due no later than there is already a Parcel Select Contract Thus, Ms. Key contends there will be no issue of market dominant products May 18, 2012. 1 on the competitive product list. See 4. The Secretary shall arrange for Docket Nos. MC2011–16 and CP2011– subsidizing competitive products as a result of this contract. Id. publication of this order in the Federal 53. It is the Commission’s intent to Register. rename the proposed new product Related contract. A redacted version Parcel Select Contract 2. Participants of the specific Parcel Select Contract 2 By the Commission. may address the name of the new is included with the Request. Id., Shoshana M. Grove, product in their comments. Attachment B. The contract will become Secretary. The Postal Service asserts that Parcel effective on the later of the day [FR Doc. 2012–11581 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Select Contract 1 is a competitive following the date on which the BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P product ‘‘not of general applicability’’ Commission issues all approvals on within the meaning of 39 U.S.C. June 1, 2012. Request at 6. The contract 3632(b)(3). Request at 1. The Postal will expire on May 31, 2019 unless, POSTAL SERVICE Service states that the explanation and among other things, either party justification for this contract are terminates the agreement for Product Change—Parcel Select & provided by Governors’ Decision No. convenience upon 6 months’ written Parcel Return Service Negotiated 11–6, included as Attachment A to the notice to the other party. Id. The Postal Service Agreement Request.2 The Request has been Service represents that the contract is TM assigned Docket No. MC2012–16. consistent with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a). Id., AGENCY: Postal Service . Attachment D. ACTION: Notice. 1 Request of the United States Postal Service to The Postal Service filed much of the SUMMARY: Add Parcel Select Contract 1 to Competitive supporting materials, including the The Postal Service gives Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of notice of filing a request with the Postal Unredacted Governors’ Decision, Contract, and specific Parcel Select Contract 2, under seal. Id., Attachment F. It maintains that Regulatory Commission to add a Supporting Data, May 7, 2012 (Request). The domestic shipping services contract to Request supersedes a similar filing submitted May redacted portions of the contract, 4, 2012. See Notice of the United States Postal Governors’ Decision No. 11–6, and the list of Negotiated Service Service of Filing Errata to Request and Notice, filed related financial information should Agreements in the Mail Classification May 7, 2012. Schedule’s Competitive Products List. 2 Id. at 1; Decision of the Governors of the United remain confidential. Id. at 2–3. This States Postal Service on Establishment of Domestic information includes the price structure DATES: May 14, 2012. Competitive Agreements, Outbound International and terms, expected profit, underlying FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Competitive Agreements, Inbound International Elizabeth A. Reed, 202–268–3179. Competitive Agreements, and Other Non-Published costs and assumptions, cost coverage Competitive Rates, issued March 22, 2011 projections, and customer-related SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The (Governors’ Decision No. 11–6). information. Id. at 3. United States Postal Service® hereby

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28410 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD for a spouse annuity. Completion is 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on May 4, 2012, it required to obtain a benefit. One filed with the Postal Regulatory Agency Forms Submitted for OMB response is requested of each Commission a Request of the United Review, Request for Comments respondent. States Postal Service to Add Parcel Summary: In accordance with the In accordance with amended Select & Parcel Return Service Contract Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 regulation 20 CFR 217.17, the RRB 3 to Competitive Product List. U.S.C. chapter 35), the Railroad proposes the implementation of Form Documents are available at Retirement Board (RRB) is forwarding G–346sum. Proposed Form G–346sum, www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2012–15, an Information Collection Request (ICR) which will mirror the information CP2012–22. to the Office of Information and collected on Form G–346, will be used Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of when an employee, after being Stanley F. Mires, Management and Budget (OMB). Our interviewed by an RRB field office staff Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice. ICR describes the information we seek member ‘‘signs’’ the form using an [FR Doc. 2012–11501 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] to collect from the public. Review and alternative signature method known as BILLING CODE 7710–12–P approval by OIRA ensures that we ‘‘attestation.’’ Attestation refers to the impose appropriate paperwork burdens. action taken by the RRB field office The RRB invites comments on the employee to confirm and annotate the POSTAL SERVICE proposed collection of information to RRB’s records of the applicant’s determine (1) the practical utility of the affirmation under penalty of perjury that Product Change—Parcel Select collection; (2) the accuracy of the the information provided is correct and Negotiated Service Agreement estimated burden of the collection; (3) the applicant’s agreement to sign the ways to enhance the quality, utility, and form by proxy. Completion is required AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. clarity of the information that is the to obtain a benefit. One response is subject of collection; and (4) ways to requested of each respondent. ACTION: Notice. minimize the burden of collections on Previous Requests for Comments: The respondents, including the use of RRB has already published the initial SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives automated collection techniques or 60-day notice (76 FR 62098 on October notice of filing a request with the Postal other forms of information technology. 6, 2011) required by 44 U.S.C. Regulatory Commission to add a Comments to the RRB or OIRA must 3506(c)(2). That request elicited no domestic shipping services contract to contain the OMB control number of the comments. the list of Negotiated Service ICR. For proper consideration of your Information Collection Request (ICR) Agreements in the Mail Classification comments, it is best if the RRB and Schedule’s Competitive Products List. OIRA receive them within 30 days of Title: Employee’s Certification. OMB Control Number: 3220–0140. DATES: May 14, 2012. the publication date. Section 2 of the Railroad Retirement Form(s) submitted: G–346 and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Act (RRA), provides for the payment of G–346sum. Elizabeth A. Reed, 202–268–3179. an annuity to the spouse or divorced Type of request: Revision of a spouse of a retired railroad employee. currently approved collection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information. ® For the spouse or divorced spouse to United States Postal Service hereby qualify for an annuity, the RRB must Affected public: Individuals or gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. determine if any of the employee’s Households. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on May 4, 2012, it current marriage to the applicant is Abstract: Under Section 2 of the filed with the Postal Regulatory valid. Railroad Retirement Act, spouses of Commission a Request of the United The requirements for obtaining retired railroad employees may be States Postal Service to Add Parcel documentary evidence to determine entitled to an annuity. The collection Select Contract 1 to Competitive Product valid marital relationships are obtains information from the employee List. Documents are available at prescribed in 20 CFR 219.30 through about the employee’s previous www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2012–16, 219.35. Section 2(e) of the RRA requires marriages, if any, to determine if any CP2012–23. that an employee must relinquish all impediment exists to the marriage rights to any railroad employer service between the employee and his or her Stanley F. Mires, before a spouse annuity can be paid. spouse. Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice. The RRB uses Form G–346 to obtain Changes proposed: The RRB proposes [FR Doc. 2012–11503 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the information needed to determine no changes to Form BILLING CODE 7710–12–P whether the employee’s current G–346 and the implementation of new marriage is valid. Form G–346 is Form G–346sum. completed by the retired employee who The burden estimate for the ICR is as is the husband or wife of the applicant follows:

Form number Annual responses Time (minutes) Burden (hours)

G–346 ...... 4,830 5 403 G–346sum ...... 2,070 5 172

Total ...... 6,900 ...... 575

Additional Information or Comments: documents can be obtained from Dana Hickman at (312) 751–4981 or Copies of the forms and supporting [email protected].

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28411

Comments regarding the information listed companies is suspended for the the places specified in Item IV below. collection should be addressed to period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on May 10, The Exchange has prepared summaries, Charles Mierzwa, Railroad Retirement 2012, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on May set forth in sections A, B, and C below, Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, 23, 2012. of the most significant parts of such Illinois 60611–2092 or By the Commission. statements. [email protected] and to the Jill M. Peterson, A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s OMB Desk Officer for the RRB, Fax: Assistant Secretary. Statement of the Purpose of, and 202–395–6974, Email address: Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule [email protected]. [FR Doc. 2012–11701 Filed 5–10–12; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Change Charles Mierzwa, 1. Purpose Chief of Information Resources Management. The Exchange proposes to amend the [FR Doc. 2012–11552 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Fee Schedule to make a correction to the BILLING CODE 7905–01–P Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C Step Up [Release No. 34–66946; File No. SR– Tiers. These fees were adopted as of NYSEArca–2012–36] March 1, 2012.4 As described in more SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE detail below, in certain provisions of the COMMISSION Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Fee Schedule, the Exchange [File No. 500–1] Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed inadvertently made a reference to Rule Change Amending the NYSE Arca ‘‘Baseline Month’’ when it should have Adrenalina, Affinity Technology Group, Equities Fee Schedule To Make instead referred to ‘‘billing month.’’ Inc., Braintech, Inc., Builders Correction to the Tape A, Tape B, and Tape A Step Up Tier Transport, Incorporated, and Catuity, Tape C Step Up Tiers Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading Currently, the Tape A Step Up Tier May 8, 2012. allows ETP Holders and Market Makers May 10, 2012. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)1 of the that take liquidity from the Book to pay It appears to the Securities and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the a reduced fee of $0.0029 per share if Exchange Commission that there is a ‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 they directly execute providing volume lack of current and accurate information notice is hereby given that, on April 27, in Tape A Securities during the billing concerning the securities of Adrenalina 2012, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’ month (‘‘Tape A Adding ADV’’) that is because it has not filed any periodic or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed with the at least the greater of (a) the ETP reports since the period ended Securities and Exchange Commission Holder’s or Market Maker’s January September 30, 2008. (the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 2012 (‘‘Baseline Month’’) Tape A It appears to the Securities and change as described in Items I, II, and Adding ADV (‘‘Tape A Baseline ADV’’) Exchange Commission that there is a III below, which Items have been plus 0.075% of US Tape A Consolidated lack of current and accurate information prepared by the self-regulatory Average Daily Share Volume (‘‘CADV’’) concerning the securities of Affinity organization. The Commission is for the Baseline Month or (b) the ETP Technology Group, Inc. because it has publishing this notice to solicit Holder’s or Market Maker’s Tape A not filed any periodic reports since the comments on the proposed rule change Baseline ADV plus 20%, subject to the period ended June 30, 2008. from interested persons. ETP Holders’ and Market Makers’ total It appears to the Securities and providing liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, Exchange Commission that there is a I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and Tape C Securities increasing in an lack of current and accurate information Statement of the Terms of Substance of amount no less than 0.03% of US CADV concerning the securities of Braintech, the Proposed Rule Change over their Baseline Month providing Inc. because it has not filed any periodic The Exchange proposes to amend the liquidity. reports since the period ended NYSE Arca Equities Fee Schedule (‘‘Fee Additionally, if a firm’s ratio of Tape September 30, 2009. Schedule’’) to make a correction to the A Baseline ADV to its total Tape A It appears to the Securities and Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C Step Up average daily volume (‘‘ADV’’) during Exchange Commission that there is a Tiers. The proposed change will be the Baseline Month is less than 30%, lack of current and accurate information operative on May 1, 2012. The text of the $0.0029 rate would only apply to the concerning the securities of Builders the proposed rule change is available at ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s shares Transport, Incorporated because it has the Exchange, www.nyse.com, and the that are executed in an amount up to not filed any periodic reports since the Commission’s Public Reference Room. and including 0.75% of the US Tape A period ended March 31, 1998. CADV during the billing month. The II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s It appears to the Securities and rate of $0.0030 per share would apply Statement of the Purpose of, and Exchange Commission that there is a to the ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule lack of current and accurate information remaining shares that are executed, Change concerning the securities of Catuity, Inc. unless the ETP Holder’s or Market because it has not filed any periodic In its filing with the Commission, the Maker’s Tape A Adding ADV is greater reports since the period ended March self-regulatory organization included than its Tape A Baseline ADV by at least 31, 2007. statements concerning the purpose of, 0.25% of the US Tape A CADV during The Commission is of the opinion that and basis for, the proposed rule change the billing month. Investor Tier ETP the public interest and the protection of and discussed any comments it received Holders or Investor Tier Market Makers investors require a suspension of trading on the proposed rule change. The text cannot qualify for the Tape A Step Up in the securities of the above-listed of those statements may be examined at Tier. companies. Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66568 Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. (March 9, 2012), 77 FR 15819 (March 16, 2012) (SR– trading in the securities of the above- 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. NYSEArca–2012–17) (the ‘‘Release’’).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28412 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

The Exchange proposes to amend the The Exchange proposes to amend the providing volume in Tape C Securities Fee Schedule so that ETP Holders and Fee Schedule so that ETP Holders and during the billing month (‘‘Tape C Market Makers that take liquidity from Market Makers that take liquidity from Adding ADV’’) that is at least the greater the Book to pay a reduced fee of $0.0029 the Book to pay a reduced fee of $0.0026 of (a) the ETP Holder’s or Market per share if they directly execute per share if they directly execute Maker’s Baseline Month Tape C Adding providing volume in Tape A Securities providing volume in Tape B Securities ADV (‘‘Tape C Baseline ADV’’) plus during the billing month (‘‘Tape A during the billing month (‘‘Tape B 0.10% of US Tape C CADV for the Adding ADV’’) that is at least the greater Adding ADV’’) that is at least the greater billing month or (b) the ETP Holder’s or of (a) the ETP Holder’s or Market of (a) the ETP Holder’s or Market Market Maker’s Tape C Baseline ADV Maker’s Baseline Month Tape A Adding Maker’s Baseline Month Tape B Adding plus 20%, subject to the ETP Holders’ ADV (‘‘Tape A Baseline ADV’’) plus ADV (‘‘Tape B Baseline ADV’’) plus and Market Makers’ total providing 0.075% of US Tape A Consolidated 0.25% of US Tape B CADV for the liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, and Tape Average Daily Share Volume (‘‘CADV’’) billing month or (b) the ETP Holder’s or C Securities increasing in an amount no for the billing month or (b) the ETP Market Maker’s Tape B Baseline ADV less than 0.03% of US CADV over their Holder’s or Market Maker’s Tape A plus 20%, subject to the ETP Holders’ Baseline Month providing liquidity. The Baseline ADV plus 20%, subject to the and Market Makers’ total providing Exchange does not propose to make any ETP Holders’ and Market Makers’ total liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, and Tape additional changes to the Tape C Step providing liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, C Securities increasing in an amount no Up Tier. and Tape C Securities increasing in an less than 0.03% of US CADV over their The Exchange notes that the amount no less than 0.03% of US CADV Baseline Month providing liquidity. The discrepancy did not have an adverse over their Baseline Month providing Exchange does not propose to make any effect on ETP Holders with respect to liquidity. The Exchange does not additional changes to the Tape B Step March and April 2012 billing because propose to make any additional changes Up Tier. the total market volume reported to the to the Tape A Step Up Tier. Consolidated Tape in January 2012, Tape C Step Up Tier March 2012, and April 2012 was not Tape B Step Up Tier Currently, the Tape C Step Up Tier significantly different.5 However, going Currently, the Tape B Step Up Tier allows ETP Holders and Market Makers forward, the Exchange believes that, as allows ETP Holders and Market Makers that take liquidity from the Book to pay intended in its original filing, the that take liquidity from the Book to pay a reduced fee of $0.0029 per share if threshold should move in proportion to a reduced fee of $0.0026 per share if they directly execute providing volume volume in the billing month in order to they directly execute providing volume in Tape C Securities during the billing properly incentivize ETP Holders to in Tape B Securities during the billing month (‘‘Tape C Adding ADV’’) that is post more volume on the Exchange. For month (‘‘Tape B Adding ADV’’) that is at least the greater of (a) the ETP example, if overall volume doubles in at least the greater of (a) the ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s Baseline the current billing month, ETP Holders Holder’s or Market Maker’s Baseline Month Tape C Adding ADV (‘‘Tape C volume also may double in terms of Month Tape B Adding ADV (‘‘Tape B Baseline ADV’’) plus 0.10% of US Tape shares, although their volumes relative Baseline ADV’’) plus 0.25% of US Tape C CADV for the Baseline Month or (b) to the entire market remain unchanged. B CADV for the Baseline Month or (b) the ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s The Exchange did not intend to offer the the ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s Tape C Baseline ADV plus 20%, subject more favorable Step Up Tier rates in Tape B Baseline ADV plus 20%, subject to the ETP Holders’ and Market Makers’ these circumstances, and as such, the to the ETP Holders’ and Market Makers’ total providing liquidity in Tape A, correction to the calculation to reflect total providing liquidity in Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C Securities the billing month is necessary. Tape B, and Tape C Securities increasing in an amount no less than The proposed change will be increasing in an amount no less than 0.03% of US CADV over their Baseline operative on May 1, 2012. 0.03% of US CADV over their Baseline Month providing liquidity. 2. Statutory Basis Month providing liquidity. Additionally, if a firm’s ratio of Tape Additionally, if a firm’s ratio of Tape C Baseline ADV to its total Tape C ADV The Exchange believes that the B Baseline ADV to its total Tape B ADV during the Baseline Month is less than proposed rule change is consistent with during the Baseline Month is less than 30%, the $0.0029 rate would only apply Section 6(b) of the Act,6 in general, and 30%, the $0.0026 rate would only apply to the ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,7 in particular, to the ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s shares that are executed in an amount in that it is designed to provide for the shares that are executed in an amount up to and including 1.1% of the US equitable allocation of reasonable dues, up to and including 1.5% of the US Tape C CADV during the billing month. fees, and other charges among its Tape B CADV during the billing month. The rate of $0.0030 per share would members and other persons using its The rate of $0.0028 or $0.0030 per apply to the ETP Holder’s or Market facilities. The Exchange further believes share, as applicable, would apply to the Maker’s remaining shares that are that the correction to the Fee Schedule ETP Holder’s or Market Maker’s executed, unless the ETP Holder’s or is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly remaining shares that are executed, Market Maker’s Tape C Adding ADV is discriminatory because all similarly unless the ETP Holder’s or Market greater than its Tape C Baseline ADV by situated ETP Holders will be subject to Maker’s Tape B Adding ADV is greater at least 0.33% of the US Tape C CADV the same fee structure. In particular, the than its Tape B Baseline ADV by at least during the billing month. Investor Tier Exchange intended to provide an option 0.45% of the US Tape B CADV during ETP Holders or Investor Tier Market to qualify for the Step Up Tiers that the billing month. Investor Tier ETP Makers cannot qualify for the Tape C would be based on a calculation of both Holders, Investor Tier Market Makers, Step Up Tier. and Lead Market Makers (‘‘LMMs’’) The Exchange proposes to amend the 5 The Exchange further notes that each of the examples in the footnotes of the Release correctly cannot qualify for the Tape B Step Up Fee Schedule so that ETP Holders and reflected the Exchange’s intention to reference the Tier. In addition, LMM provide volume Market Makers that take liquidity from billing month. cannot apply to the Tape B Step Up Tier the Book to pay a reduced fee of $0.0029 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). volume requirements. per share if they directly execute 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28413

the ETP Holder’s providing volume in Paper Comments SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE the Baseline Month and the billing • COMMISSION month. The Exchange also believes the Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, [Release No. 34–66945; File No. SR– proposed amendments to the Tape A, NYSEArca–2012–19] Tape B, and Tape C Step Up Tiers will Securities and Exchange Commission, continue to incentivize ETP Holders to 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE increase the orders sent directly to the 20549–1090. Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Exchange and therefore provide All submissions should refer to File Longer Period for Commission Action liquidity that supports the quality of Number SR–NYSEArca–2012–36. This on Proposed Rule Change To Amend price discovery and promotes market file number should be included on the Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca Rule transparency. subject line if email is used. To help the 6.35 B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission process and review your May 8, 2012. Statement on Burden on Competition comments more efficiently, please use On March 9, 2012, NYSE Arca, Inc. only one method. The Commission will The Exchange does not believe that (‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities post all comments on the Commission’s the proposed rule change will impose and Exchange Commission any burden on competition that is not Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section necessary or appropriate in furtherance rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of the purposes of the Act. submission, all subsequent of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 amendments, all written statements thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s with respect to the proposed rule amend Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca Statement on Comments on the change that are filed with the Rule 6.35 and to make non-substantive Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission, and all written changes to NYSE Arca Rules 6.35, 6.37, Members, Participants or Others communications relating to the 6.84, and 10.12. The proposed rule No written comments were solicited proposed rule change between the change was published for comment in or received with respect to the proposed Commission and any person, other than the Federal Register on March 28, 3 rule change. those that may be withheld from the 2012. The Commission received no public in accordance with the comments on this proposal. 4 III. Date of Effectiveness of the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Section 19(b)(2) of the Act provides Proposed Rule Change and Timing for available for Web site viewing and that within 45 days of the publication of Commission Action printing in the Commission’s Public notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or within such longer period up The foregoing rule change is effective Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., to 90 days as the Commission may upon filing pursuant to Section Washington, DC 20549, on official designate if it finds such longer period 19(b)(3)(A) 8 of the Act and business days between the hours of 9 to be appropriate and publishes its subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the reasons for so finding or as to which the thereunder, because it establishes a due, filing also will be available for self-regulatory organization consents, fee, or other charge imposed by the inspection and copying at the principal the Commission shall either approve the NYSE Arca. office of the Exchange. All comments proposed rule change, disapprove the At any time within 60 days of the received will be posted without change; proposed rule change, or institute filing of such proposed rule change, the the Commission does not edit personal proceedings to determine whether the Commission summarily may identifying information from proposed rule change should be temporarily suspend such rule change if submissions. You should submit only disapproved. The 45th day for this filing it appears to the Commission that such information that you wish to make is May 12, 2012. The Commission is action is necessary or appropriate in the available publicly. All submissions extending this 45-day time period. public interest, for the protection of should refer to File Number SR– The Commission finds it appropriate investors, or otherwise in furtherance of NYSEArca–2012–36 and should be to designate a longer period within the purposes of the Act. submitted on or before June 4, 2012. which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time IV. Solicitation of Comments For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated to consider this proposed rule change, Interested persons are invited to authority.10 which would allow a market maker’s submit written data, views, and trades effected on the trading floor to arguments concerning the foregoing, Kevin M. O’Neill, accommodate cross trades executed including whether the proposed rule Deputy Secretary. pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 6.47 to change is consistent with the Act. [FR Doc. 2012–11583 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] count toward the requirement that at Comments may be submitted by any of BILLING CODE 8011–01–P least 75% of a market maker’s trading the following methods: activity be effected in classes within the market maker’s appointment. Electronic Comments Accordingly, the Commission, • Use the Commission’s Internet pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,5 comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ designates June 26, 2012 as the date by rules/sro.shtml); or which the Commission should either • Send an email to rule-comments@ 1 sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. NYSEArca–2012–36 on the subject line. 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66642 (March 22, 2012), 77 FR 18875. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 10 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28414 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

approve or disapprove, or institute statements may be examined at the among members and issuers and other proceedings to determine whether to places specified in Item IV below. The persons using any facility or system disapprove, the proposed rule change Exchange has prepared summaries, set which the Exchange operates or (File No. SR–NYSEArca–2012–19). forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of controls. For the Commission, by the Division of the most significant aspects of such The Exchange believes the proposed Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated statements. reduction of the on-going monthly fee is authority.6 reasonable because it is in line with A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Exchange fees for similar power levels Kevin M. O’Neill, Statement of the Purpose of, and the Deputy Secretary. using multiple cabinets. The Exchange Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule also believes the reduction in the on- [FR Doc. 2012–11536 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Change going monthly fee is equitable and not BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 1. Purpose unfairly discriminatory because the The Exchange is modifying Rule super high-density power option is SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 7034(a) by reducing its co-location entirely voluntary and available to all COMMISSION super high-density cabinet on-going members; therefore, the reduction is monthly fee from $15,000 per month to available to all members that select this [Release No. 34–66944; File No. SR–BX– power option. Also, the Exchange also 2012–029] $13,000 per month. The installation fee for the super high-density cabinet will believes the reduction in fees is Self-Regulatory Organizations; remain the same. equitable and not unfairly NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing Co-location customers have the option discriminatory because the reduction and Immediate Effectiveness of of obtaining several cabinet sizes and diminishes the disparity in the Proposed Rule Change To Modify the power densities. The co-located Exchange’s fees for various co-location Exchange’s Co-Location Super High customer may obtain a half cabinet, a power options. This results in a more Density Cabinet Monthly Fee low density cabinet, a medium density competitive cost structure for the cabinet, a medium-high density cabinet Exchange. The Exchange notes that it May 8, 2012. and a high density cabinet.3 Each operates in a highly competitive market Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the cabinet may vary in size and maximum in which market participants can Securities Exchange Act of 1934 power capacity. The fees related to the readily favor competing venues if they 1 2 (‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, cabinet and power usage are deem fee levels at a particular venue to notice is hereby given that on April 27, incremental, with additional charges be excessive, or opportunities available 2012, The NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. being imposed based on higher levels of at other venues to be more favorable. In (‘‘BX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the cabinet and/or power usage, the use of such an environment, the Exchange Securities and Exchange Commission non-standard cabinet sizes or special must continually adjust its fees to (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule cabinet cooling equipment. The co- remain competitive with other trading change as described in Items I, II, and location customer may obtain more venues. These competitive forces help III below, which Items have been power by choosing a combination of to ensure that the Exchange’s fees are prepared by the Exchange. The lower power density cabinets. reasonable, equitably allocated, and not Commission is publishing this notice to The Exchange previously filed an unfairly discriminatory since market solicit comments on the proposed rule immediately effective filing with the participants can largely avoid fees to change from interested persons. Commission to offer another choice of which they object by changing their ″ operating venue. I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s cabinet, specifically a larger cabinet (30 ″ ″ Statement of the Terms of Substance of W x 48 D x 96 H) with higher power B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Proposed Rule Change (‘‘Super High Density Cabinet’’) as an Statement on Burden on Competition alternative to combining several units The Exchange does not believe that The Exchange proposes to modify the for more power (>10kW<=17.3kW).4 the proposed rule change will result in Exchange’s co-location super high- Currently, the installation fee for the any burden on competition that is not density cabinet monthly fee. The Super High Density Cabinet is $7,000; necessary or appropriate in furtherance Exchange will implement the proposed and the on-going monthly fee is of the purposes of the Act, as amended. change on May 1, 2012. $15,000. At this time, the Exchange The text of the proposed rule change The Exchange is reducing fees through proposes to reduce the current on-going is available at http:// this proposed rule change, thereby monthly fee to $13,000 to bring the fee nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the enhancing the competitiveness of its co- in line with Exchange fees for similar Exchange’s principal office, and at the location offering. power levels using multiple cabinets. Commission’s Public Reference Room. C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 2. Statutory Basis II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the Statement of the Purpose of, and The Exchange believes that the Proposed Rule Change Received From Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule proposed rule change is consistent with Members, Participants, or Others the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,5 Change Written comments were neither in general, and with Section 6(b)(4) of In its filing with the Commission, the solicited nor received. the Act,6 in particular, in that it Exchange included statements provides for the equitable allocation of III. Date of Effectiveness of the concerning the purpose of and basis for reasonable dues, fees and other charges Proposed Rule Change and Timing for the proposed rule change and discussed Commission Action any comments it received on the 3 See Exchange Rule 7034(a). The foregoing rule change has become proposed rule change. The text of these 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66542 (March 8, 2012), 77 FR 15169 (March 14, 2012) (SR– effective pursuant to Section 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). BX–2012–012)[sic]. 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.7 At any time 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii)[sic].

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28415

within 60 days of the filing of the the Commission does not edit personal II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change, the Commission identifying information from Statement of the Purpose of, and summarily may temporarily suspend submissions. You should submit only Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule such rule change if it appears to the information that you wish to make Change Commission that such action is available publicly. All submissions In its filing with the Commission, the necessary or appropriate in the public should refer to File Number SR–BX– Exchange included statements interest, for the protection of investors, 2012–029 and should be submitted on concerning the purpose of and basis for or otherwise in furtherance of the or before June 4, 2012. the proposed rule change and discussed purposes of the Act. If the Commission any comments it received on the takes such action, the Commission shall For the Commission, by the Division of proposed rule change. The text of these institute proceedings to determine Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 8 statements may be examined at the whether the proposed rule should be authority. places specified in Item IV below. The approved or disapproved. Kevin M. O’Neill, Exchange has prepared summaries, set IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of [FR Doc. 2012–11535 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Interested persons are invited to the most significant aspects of such submit written data, views, and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P statements. arguments concerning the foregoing, A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s including whether the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement of the Purpose of, and the change is consistent with the Act. COMMISSION Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Comments may be submitted by any of Change the following methods: [Release No. 34–66943; File No. SR– 1. Purpose Electronic Comments NASDAQ–2012–054] • The Exchange is modifying Rule Use the Commission’s Internet 7034(a) by reducing its co-location Self-Regulatory Organizations; The comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ super high-density cabinet on-going NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of rules/sro.shtml); or monthly fee from $15,000 per month to • Send an email to rule- Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of $13,000 per month. The installation fee [email protected]. Please include File Proposed Rule Change To Modify the for the super high-density cabinet will Number SR–BX–2012–029 on the NASDAQ Co-Location Super High remain the same. subject line. Density Cabinet Monthly Fee Co-location customers have the option Paper Comments May 8, 2012. of obtaining several cabinet sizes and • Send paper comments in triplicate power densities. The co-located Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, customer may obtain a half cabinet, a Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 low density cabinet, a medium density 1 2 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC (‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, cabinet, a medium-high density cabinet 20549–1090. notice is hereby given that on April 27, and a high density cabinet.3 Each All submissions should refer to File 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC cabinet may vary in size and maximum Number SR–BX–2012–029. This file (‘‘NASDAQ’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with power capacity. The fees related to the number should be included on the the Securities and Exchange cabinet and power usage are subject line if email is used. To help the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the incremental, with additional charges Commission process and review your proposed rule change as described in being imposed based on higher levels of comments more efficiently, please use Items I, II, and III below, which Items cabinet and/or power usage, the use of only one method. The Commission will have been prepared by the Exchange. non-standard cabinet sizes or special post all comments on the Commission’s The Commission is publishing this cabinet cooling equipment. The co- Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ notice to solicit comments on the location customer may obtain more rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the proposed rule change from interested power by choosing a combination of submission, all subsequent persons. lower power density cabinets. amendments, all written statements The Exchange previously filed an with respect to the proposed rule I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s immediately effective filing with the change that are filed with the Statement of the Terms of Substance of Commission to offer another choice of the Proposed Rule Change cabinet, specifically a larger cabinet (30″ Commission, and all written ″ ″ communications relating to the W x 48 D x 96 H) with higher power The Exchange proposes to modify the (‘‘Super High Density Cabinet’’) as an proposed rule change between the NASDAQ co-location super high- Commission and any person, other than alternative to combining several units density cabinet monthly fee. The ≤ 4 those that may be withheld from the for more power (>10kW 17.3kW). Exchange will implement the proposed public in accordance with the Currently, the installation fee for the change on May 1, 2012. provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Super High Density Cabinet is $7,000; available for Web site viewing and The text of the proposed rule change and the on-going monthly fee is printing in the Commission’s Public is available at http:// $15,000. At this time, the Exchange Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at the proposes to reduce the current on-going Washington, DC 20549, on official Exchange’s principal office, and at the monthly fee to $13,000 to bring the fee business days between the hours of Commission’s Public Reference Room. in line with Exchange fees for similar 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the power levels using multiple cabinets. filing also will be available for 3 See Exchange Rule 7034(a). 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). inspection and copying at the principal 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66010 office of the Exchange. All comments 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). (December 20, 2011), 76 FR 80993 (December 27, received will be posted without change; 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 2011) (SR–NASDAQ–2011–160).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28416 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

2. Statutory Basis C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change between the Statement on Comments on the Commission and any person, other than The Exchange believes that the Proposed Rule Change Received From those that may be withheld from the proposed rule change is consistent with Members, Participants, or Others public in accordance with the the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,5 Written comments were neither provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be in general, and with Section 6(b)(4) of solicited nor received. available for Web site viewing and the Act,6 in particular, in that it printing in the Commission’s Public provides for the equitable allocation of III. Date of Effectiveness of the Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., reasonable dues, fees and other charges Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Washington, DC 20549, on official among members and issuers and other Commission Action business days between the hours of persons using any facility or system The foregoing rule change has become 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the which the Exchange operates or effective pursuant to Section filing also will be available for controls. 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.7 At any time inspection and copying at the principal The Exchange believes the proposed within 60 days of the filing of the office of the Exchange. All comments reduction of the on-going monthly fee is proposed rule change, the Commission received will be posted without change; reasonable because it is in line with summarily may temporarily suspend the Commission does not edit personal Exchange fees for similar power levels such rule change if it appears to the identifying information from Commission that such action is submissions. You should submit only using multiple cabinets. The Exchange necessary or appropriate in the public information that you wish to make also believes the reduction to the on- interest, for the protection of investors, available publicly. All submissions going monthly fee is equitable and not or otherwise in furtherance of the should refer to File Number SR– unfairly discriminatory because the purposes of the Act. If the Commission NASDAQ–2012–054 and should be super high-density power option is takes such action, the Commission shall submitted on or before June 4, 2012. entirely voluntary and available to all institute proceedings to determine members; therefore, the reduction is For the Commission, by the Division of whether the proposed rule should be Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated available to all members that select this approved or disapproved. authority.8 power option. Also, the Exchange Kevin M. O’Neill, believes the reduction in fees is IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. equitable and not unfairly Interested persons are invited to discriminatory because the reduction submit written data, views, and [FR Doc. 2012–11534 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] diminishes the disparity in the arguments concerning the foregoing, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Exchange’s fees for various co-location including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. power options. This results in a more SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Comments may be submitted by any of competitive cost structure for the COMMISSION Exchange. the following methods: [Release No. 34–66941; File No. SR–CME– The Exchange notes that it operates in Electronic Comments 2012–06] a highly competitive market in which • Use the Commission’s Internet market participants can readily favor comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Self-Regulatory Organizations; competing venues if they deem fee rules/sro.shtml); or Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.; levels at a particular venue to be • Send an email to rule- Order Approving Proposed Rule excessive, or opportunities available at [email protected]. Please include File Change To Amend Rules Related to other venues to be more favorable. In Number SR–NASDAQ–2012–054 on the Credit Default Swap Guaranty Fund such an environment, the Exchange subject line. Allocations, End-of-Day Pricing Procedures, Daily Submission must continually adjust its fees to Paper Comments Deadlines, Holiday Accrual remain competitive with other trading • venues. These competitive forces help Send paper comments in triplicate Processing, and the Price Alignment to ensure that NASDAQ’s fees are to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Interest Payment Timeline Securities and Exchange Commission, reasonable, equitably allocated, and not 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC May 8, 2012. unfairly discriminatory since market 20549–1090. participants can largely avoid fees to I. Introduction All submissions should refer to File which they object by changing their On March 9, 2012, Chicago Mercantile Number SR–NASDAQ–2012–054. This operating venue. Exchange (‘‘CME’’) filed with the file number should be included on the Securities and Exchange Commission B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s subject line if email is used. To help the (‘‘Commission’’) proposed rule change Commission process and review your Statement on Burden on Competition SR–CME–2012–06 pursuant to Section comments more efficiently, please use 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act The Exchange does not believe that only one method. The Commission will of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 the proposed rule change will result in post all comments on the Commission’s thereunder.2 The proposed rule change any burden on competition that is not Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ was published for comment in the necessary or appropriate in furtherance rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Federal Register on March 29, 2012.3 of the purposes of the Act, as amended. submission, all subsequent The Commission received no comment NASDAQ is reducing fees through this amendments, all written statements letters regarding this proposal. For the proposed rule change, thereby with respect to the proposed rule enhancing the competitiveness of its co- change that are filed with the 8 location offering. 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Commission, and all written 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). communications relating to the 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f. 3 Release No. 34–66646 (March 22, 2012), 77 FR 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii)[sic]. 19045 (March 29, 2012).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28417

reasons discussion below, the which they or their customers hold such, the proposed rule change is Commission is granting approval of the open interest. For indices where CDS consistent with the requirements of proposed rule change. clearing members are required to submit Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act. Also, the full clearing eligible tenors of all the requirement that CDS clearing II. Description indices, CME will only cross CDS members submit pricing for all tenors of CME currently offers clearing services clearing members on the tenors in clearing-eligible indices and for the full for certain credit default swap (‘‘CDS’’) which the CDS clearing members or term structure for single-name CDS index products. CME proposes to amend their customers hold open interest. For should enhance CME’s ability to derive certain of its rules that would generally single-name CDS, CME will require CDS end-of-day settlement prices. In affect its CDS clearing offering and to clearing members to submit mid price addition, because the operational make corresponding amendments to levels for the full term structures for the changes CME is proposing would certain sections of its Manual of 0, 0.5-, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 7- and 10-year generally require clearing members to Operations for CME Cleared Credit tenors. However, CME may cross the made trade submissions more promptly, Default Swaps (‘‘CDS Manual’’). The CDS clearing members on any single- require CME to calculate price rule amendments would modify CME’s name reference entity in which the CDS alignment more frequently, and clarify CDS guaranty fund allocation clearing members or their customer(s) when price accrual processing occurs in methodology, end-of-day pricing hold open interest irrespective of tenor. the event of a bank holiday, such a procedures, daily submission deadlines, CME is also amending its CDS Manual change should promote the prompt and holiday accrual processing, and the to change (1) the daily submission accurate clearance and settlement of timeline for price alignment interest deadlines for CDS, (2) the CDS holiday securities transactions and derivative (‘‘PAI’’) payment timeline. accrual processing, and (3) the PAI agreements, contracts, and transactions The proposed changes to text in the payment timeline. With respect to and therefore is consistent with the CME rulebook would amend current operations timelines and reports, CME requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of requirements found in CME Rule would move up the trade submission the Act. 8H07.1 relating to the allocation of the deadline for current day trades from CDS guaranty fund requirements among 7:59 p.m. ET to 6:59 p.m. ET. With IV. Conclusion CDS clearing members. Currently, CME respect to position management, money On the basis of the foregoing, the calculates its guaranty fund monthly calculations, and collateral, the Commission finds the proposal is and proportionally allocates to each revisions to the CDS Manual would consistent with the requirements of the CDS clearing member a guaranty fund require on bank holidays in the country Act and in particular with the requirement based on the CDS clearing of which the swap is denominated (e.g., requirements of 17A of the Act and the member’s 90-day trailing average of its Independence Day for U.S. Dollar rules and regulations thereunder. potential residual loss and 90-day denominated CDS contracts), accrual It is therefore ordered, pursuant to trailing average of its gross notional processing would be included in the Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the open interest outstanding at CME. CME processing for the next business day and proposed rule change (File No. SR– is proposing to change the measurement would not occur on the relevant bank CME–2012–06), be, and hereby is, period from 90 days to 30 days so that holiday. In addition, CME would approved.6 a CME clearing member’s CDS guaranty calculate and pay PAI for CDS contracts fund requirement more quickly react to on a daily basis as opposed to monthly. For the Commission, by the Division of the CDS clearing member’s current Trading and markets, pursuant to delegated 7 activity and to align the measurement III. Discussion authority. period with the frequency of CDS Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs Kevin M. O’Neill, guaranty fund calculations. the Commission to approve a proposed Deputy Secretary. The proposed changes to the text of rule change of a self-regulatory [FR Doc. 2012–11533 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the CDS Manual would modify end-of- organization if it finds that such BILLING CODE 8011–01–P day pricing procedures including proposed rule change is consistent with procedures for CDS price submissions, the requirements of the Act and the crossing, and auction procedures that rules and regulations thereunder SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE CME uses to arrive at the settlement applicable to such organization.4 In COMMISSION price for CDS contracts. Currently, CME particular, Section 17A(b)(3)(F) 5 of the requires CDS clearing members to Act requires, among other things, that [Release No. 34–66940; File No. SR–CME– submit price levels for the full term the rules of a clearing agency be 2012–14] structures of all indices and single-name designed to assure the safeguarding of reference entities by seniority, securities and funds which are in the Self-Regulatory Organizations; restructuring type, and currency eligible custody or control of the clearing agency Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc.; for clearing. If a CDS clearing member or for which it is responsible. By making Notice of Filing and Immediate chooses to submit price levels on a CDS clearing members’ guaranty fund Effectiveness of Proposed Rule cleared contract in which it does not requirements be based on relatively Change To Amend the Fee Schedule hold open interest, CME hold that price more recent histories, the proposed Applicable to OTC S&P GSCI–ER submission as tradable if a cross occurs amended rule governing guaranty fund Swaps Contracts and the submitted instrument is allocations should improve CME’s May 8, 2012. selected pursuant to the auction ability to react to CDS market dynamics Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the process. However, under CME’s current and thereby should help CME better Securities Exchange Act of 1934 procedures, submitted price levels for assure the safeguarding of securities and non-cleared instruments are never funds which are in its custody or actionable (i.e., tradable). CME is 6 In approving the proposed rule change, the control or for which it is responsible. As Commission considered the proposal’s impact on proposing to change it CDS Manual to efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 require CDS clearing members to submit 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C). U.S.C. 78c(f). price levels for all cleared contracts in 5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(B)(3)(F). 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28418 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 2 thereunder, contrasts with the flat fees CME charges temporarily suspend such rule change if notice is hereby given that on April 25, on futures and options on futures it appears to the Commission that such 2012, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. products. CME believes the marketplace action is necessary or appropriate in the (‘‘CME’’) filed with the Securities and would prefer a fee structure for OTC public interest, for the protection of Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) swap products that charges fees on a per investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the proposed rule change described in contract basis. This type of fee structure the purposes of the Act. Items I, II and III, below, which Items is also easier to support from an have been prepared primarily by CME. operational standpoint. CME expects IV. Solicitation of Comments CME filed the proposed rule change this change will attract additional 3 Interested persons are invited to pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of interest and liquidity in these products. submit written data, views and the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) 4 CME has also certified the proposed arguments concerning the foregoing, thereunder, so that the proposed rule rule changes that are the subject of this including whether the proposed rule change was effective upon filing with filing to its primary regulator, the change is consistent with the Act. the Commission. The Commission is Commodity Futures Trading Comments may be submitted by any of publishing this notice to solicit Commission (‘‘CFTC’’), in CME the following methods: comments on the proposed rule change Submission 12–119. from interested parties. The proposed CME rule amendments • Electronic comments may be submitted by using the Commission’s I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s establish or change a member due, fee or other charge imposed by CME under Internet comment form (http:// Statement of the Terms of Substance of www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml), or by the Proposed Rule Change Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder. CME sending an email to rule- CME is proposing to amend the fee believes that the proposed rule change [email protected]. Please include File schedule that currently applies to its is consistent with the requirements of No. SR–CME–2012–14 on the subject OTC S&P GSCI–ER swaps clearing the Act and the rules and regulations line. offering. thereunder, particularly, Section • Paper comments should be sent in II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 17A(b)(3)(D),6 in that the proposed rule triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Statement of the Purpose of, and change provides for the equitable Secretary, Securities and Exchange Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and Commission, 100 F Street NE., Change other charges among participants. CME Washington, DC 20549–1090. notes that it operates in a highly In its filing with the Commission, competitive market in which market All submissions should refer to File CME included statements concerning Number SR–CME–2012–14. This file the purpose of and basis for the participants can readily direct business to competing venues. number should be included on the proposed rule change and discussed any subject line if email is used. To help the comments it received on the proposed B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission process and review your rule change. The text of these statements Statement on Burden on Competition comments more efficiently, please use may be examined at the places specified CME does not believe the proposed only one method. The Commission will in Item IV below. CME has prepared rule change will have any impact or post all comments on the Commission’s summaries, set forth in sections A, B, impose any burden on competition. Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ and C below, of the most significant rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the aspects of these statements.5 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s submission, all subsequent Statement on Comments on the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s amendments, all written statements Proposed Rule Change Received From Statement of the Purpose of, and with respect to the proposed rule Members, Participants, or Others Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule change that are filed with the Change CME has not solicited, and does not Commission, and all written CME currently offers clearing for intend to solicit, comments regarding communications relating to the certain OTC swap products. CME this proposed rule change. CME has not proposed rule change between the proposes to change the fee structure for received any unsolicited written Commission and any person, other than cleared swap contracts in S&P GSCI–ER, comments from interested parties. CME those that may be withheld from the S&P GSCI Gold ER, S&P GSCI Crude Oil will notify the Commission of any public in accordance with the ER, S&P GSCI–ER 2 Month Forward and written comments received by CME. provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be S&P GSCI ER 3 Month Forward. As the III. Date of Effectiveness of the available for Web site viewing and proposed changes relate to fees, they Proposed Rule Change and Timing for printing in the Commission’s Public became effective when they were filed Commission Action Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., on April 25, 2012. CME applied the new Washington, DC 20549, on official The foregoing proposed rule change fee structure, however, only to contract business days between the hours of was filed pursuant to Section months with a trade date of May 1, 2012 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) 7 of the Act and Rule 19b– or later. filing also will be available for 4(f)(2) 8 thereunder, and thus became Currently, fees for these OTC swap inspection and copying at the principal effective upon filing because it products are assessed as a portion (.0005 office of CME, and on CME’s Web site establishes or changes a due, fee, or annually) of the notional value of the at http://www.cmegroup.com/market- other charge applicable only to a open positions in the contracts. This regulation/files/SEC_19b-4_12-14.pdf. member. At any time within 60 days All comments received will be posted after the filing of the proposed rule 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). without change; the Commission does 2 change, the Commission summarily may 17 CFR 240.19b–4. not edit personal identifying 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). information from submissions. You 4 6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(D). 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). should submit only information that 5 The Commission has modified the text of the 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). summaries prepared by CME. 8 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). you wish to make available publicly.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28419

All submissions should refer to File DEPARTMENT OF STATE 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March Number SR–CME–2012–14 and should 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and [Public Notice 7880] be submitted on or before June 4, 2012. Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. For the Commission, by the Division of Culturally Significant Objects Imported 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et Trading and markets, pursuant to delegated for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘Gustav seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of authority.9 Klimt: The Magic of Line’’ October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Kevin M. O’Neill, Authority No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 SUMMARY: Deputy Secretary. Notice is hereby given of the (and, as appropriate, Delegation of following determinations: Pursuant to Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I [FR Doc. 2012–11532 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] the authority vested in me by the Act of hereby determine that the objects to be BILLING CODE 8011–01–P October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. included in the exhibition ‘‘Gauguin, 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March Ce´zanne, Matisse: Visions of Arcadia,’’ 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and imported from abroad for temporary Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION exhibition within the United States, are 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et of cultural significance. The objects are seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of imported pursuant to loan agreements [Disaster Declaration #13065 and #13066] October 1, 1999, and Delegation of with the foreign owners or custodians. Authority No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 Hawaii Disaster Number HI–00026 I also determine that the exhibition or (and, as appropriate, Delegation of display of the exhibit objects at the AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I Philadelphia Museum of Art, Administration. hereby determine that the objects to be Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from on or ACTION: Amendment 1. included in the exhibition ‘‘Gustav about June 20, 2012 until on or about Klimt: The Magic of Line,’’ imported September 3, 2012, and at possible SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the from abroad for temporary exhibition additional exhibitions or venues yet to Presidential declaration of a major within the United States, are of cultural be determined, is in the national disaster for Public Assistance Only for significance. The objects are imported interest. I have ordered that Public the State of Hawaii (FEMA–4062–DR), pursuant to loan agreements with the Notice of these Determinations be dated 04/18/2012. foreign owners or custodians. I also published in the Federal Register. Incident: Severe Storms, Flooding, determine that the exhibition or display FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For and Landslides. of the exhibit objects at the J. Paul Getty further information, including a list of Incident Period: 03/03/2012 through Museum, Los Angeles, California, from the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. 03/11/2012. on or about July 3, 2012 until on or Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of Effective Date: 05/04/2012. about September 23, 2012, and at the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of Physical Loan Application Deadline possible additional exhibitions or State (telephone: 202–632–6469). The Date: 06/18/2012. venues yet to be determined, is in the mailing address is U.S. Department of Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan national interest. I have ordered that State, SA–5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite Application Deadline Date: 01/18/2013. Public Notice of these Determinations 5H03), Washington, DC 20522–0505. be published in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan Dated: May 8, 2012. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For applications to: U.S. Small Business J. Adam Ereli, Administration, Processing and further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of Department of State. the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. [FR Doc. 2012–11622 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] State (telephone: 202–632–6469). The Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, BILLING CODE 4710–05–P mailing address is U.S. Department of U.S. Small Business Administration, State, SA–5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, 5H03), Washington, DC 20522–0505. Washington, DC 20416. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Dated: May 8, 2012. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice [Public Notice: 7873] of the President’s major disaster J. Adam Ereli, declaration for Private Non-Profit Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau Meetings of the United States-Peru organizations in the State of HAWAII, of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Environmental Affairs Council, dated 04/18/2012, is hereby amended to Department of State. Environmental Cooperation include the following areas as adversely [FR Doc. 2012–11619 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Commission and Sub-Committee on affected by the disaster. BILLING CODE 4710–05–P Forest Sector Governance Primary Counties: Maui. ACTION: Notice of meetings of the United All other information in the original DEPARTMENT OF STATE States-Peru Environmental Affairs declaration remains unchanged. [Public Notice 7881] Council, Environmental Cooperation (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Commission and Sub-Committee on Numbers 59002 and 59008) Culturally Significant Objects Imported Forest Sector Governance, and request James E. Rivera, for Exhibition Determinations: for comments. ´ Associate Administrator for Disaster ‘‘Gauguin, Cezanne, Matisse: Visions of Arcadia’’ SUMMARY: The Department of State and Assistance. the Office of the United States Trade [FR Doc. 2012–11587 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the Representative (USTR) are providing BILLING CODE 8025–01–P following determinations: Pursuant to notice that the United States and Peru the authority vested in me by the Act of intend to hold the fifth meeting of the 9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. Sub-Committee on Forest Sector

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28420 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

Governance (the ‘‘Sub-Committee’’) on (2) Amy Karpel, Office of at the business meeting are contained in May 29, 2012, and the third meeting of Environment and Natural Resources, the Supplementary Information section the Environmental Affairs Council (the Office of the United States Trade of this notice. ‘‘Council’’) and the second meeting of Representative, by electronic mail at DATES: June 7, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. _ the Environmental Cooperation Amy [email protected] with the ADDRESSES: Binghamton State Office Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) on subject line ‘‘U.S.-Peru EAC/ECC/Sub- Building, Warren Anderson Community May 31, 2012. The public sessions for Committee Meetings’’. Room (18th Floor), 44 Hawley Street, the Council and Sub-Committee also If you have access to the Internet, you Binghamton, N.Y. 13901. will be held on May 31, at 2:00 p.m. The can view and comment on this notice by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: entire meeting of the Commission will going to http://www.regulations.gov/ Richard A. Cairo, General Counsel, be open to the public and will begin at #!home and searching on its Public telephone: (717) 238–0423, ext. 306; fax: 3:45 p.m. All meetings will take place Notice number: 7873. (717) 238–2436. at 1724 F St. NW., Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The purpose of the meetings is to Tiffany Prather, Telephone (202) 647– Opportunity To Appear and Comment review implementation of: Chapter 18 4548 or Amy Karpel, Telephone (202) Interested parties are invited to attend (Environment) of the United States-Peru 395–7320. the business meeting and encouraged to Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA); the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PTPA review the Commission’s Public PTPA Annex on Forest Sector entered into force on February 1, 2009. Meeting Rules of Conduct, which are Governance (Annex 18.3.4); the United Article 18.6 of the PTPA establishes an posted on the Commission’s Web site, States-Peru Environmental Cooperation Environmental Affairs Council, which is www.srbc.net. As identified in the Agreement (ECA); and the 2011–2014 required to meet at least once a year or public hearing notice referenced below, Work Program under the ECA. written comments on the Regulatory The Department of State and USTR as otherwise agreed by the Parties to discuss the implementation of, and Program projects, amendment to its invite interested organizations and Regulatory Program Fee Schedule, members of the public to attend the progress under, Chapter 18. Annex amendment to its Records Processing public sessions and Commission 18.3.4 of the PTPA establishes a Sub- Fee Schedule, and amendment to the meeting, and to submit written Committee on Forest Sector Comprehensive Plan for the Water comments or suggestions regarding Governance. The Sub-Committee is a Resources of the Susquehanna River implementation of Chapter 18, Annex specific forum for the Parties to Basin that were the subject of the public 18.3.4, the ECA, or the 2011–2014 Work exchange views and share information hearing, and are listed for action at the Program, and any items that should be on any matter arising under the PTPA business meeting, are subject to a included on the meetings’ agendas. If Annex on Forest Sector Governance. comment deadline of May 21, 2012. you would like to attend the public The ECA entered into force on Written comments pertaining to any sessions or Commission meeting, please August 23, 2009. Article III of the ECA notify Tiffany Prather and Amy Karpel establishes an Environmental other matters listed for action at the at the email addresses listed below Cooperation Commission and makes the business meeting may be mailed to the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, under the heading ADDRESSES. Please Commission responsible for developing include your full name and any a Work Program. Chapter 18 of the 1721 North Front Street, Harrisburg, organization or group you represent. PTPA and Article VI of the ECA require Pennsylvania 17102–2391, or submitted In preparing comments, submitters that meetings of the Council and electronically through http:// are encouraged to refer to: Commission respectively include a www.srbc.net/pubinfo/ • Chapter 18 of the PTPA, including public session, unless the Parties publicparticipation.htm. Any such Annex 18.3.4, otherwise agree. At its first meeting, the comments mailed or electronically • The Final Environmental Review of Sub-Committee on Forest Sector submitted must be received by the the PTPA, Governance committed to hold a public Commission on or before June 1, 2012, • The ECA, and session after each Sub-Committee to be considered. • The 2011–2014 Work Program. meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The These documents are available at: Dated: May 7, 2012. business meeting will include actions http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/ on the following items: (1) Election of George N. Sibley, free-trade-agreements/peru-tpa and officers for FY–2013; (2) update on the http://www.state.gov/e/oes/env/trade/ Director, Office of Environmental Policy, Low Flow Protection Policy; (3) the Department of State. peru/index.htm. proposed Water Resources Program; (4) DATES: The public sessions of the [FR Doc. 2012–11624 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] amendment to its Records Processing Council, Sub-Committee and BILLING CODE 4710–09–P Fee Schedule; (5) amendments to its Commission meetings will be held on Regulatory Program Fee Schedule; (6) May 31, 2012, beginning at 2:00 p.m., at authorization to refinance the 1724 F St. NW., Washington, DC. SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN Curwensville Water Storage Project; (7) Comments and suggestions are COMMISSION adoption of a FY–2014 budget; (8) requested in writing no later than amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Commission Meeting May 23, 2012. for the Water Resources of the ADDRESSES: Written comments and AGENCY: Susquehanna River Basin Susquehanna River Basin; (9) a request suggestions should be submitted to Commission. for administrative appeal from both: ACTION: Notice. Anadarko E&P Company LP—Well PW– (1) Tiffany Prather, Office of 11 (Council Run)—Pending No. 2011– Environmental Policy, U.S. Department SUMMARY: The Susquehanna River Basin 021; and (10) Regulatory Program of State, by electronic mail at Commission will hold its regular projects. Projects, proposed fee [email protected] with the subject business meeting on June 7, 2012, in schedules, and amendment to the line ‘‘U.S.-Peru EAC/ECC/Sub- Binghamton, New York. Details comprehensive plan listed for Committee Meetings’’; and concerning the matters to be addressed Commission action are those that were

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices 28421

the subject of a public hearing responsibilities. See the RSAC Web site University of Minnesota and the State conducted by the Commission on May for details on pending tasks at http:// Capitol complex. The purpose of the 10, 2012, and identified in the notice for rsac.fra.dot.gov/. Please refer to the Project is to meet the future transit such hearing, which was published in notice published in the Federal Register needs of the Central Corridor and the 77 FR 23319, April 18, 2012. on March 11, 1996, 61 FR 9740, for Region and to support the economic Authority: Pub. L. 91–575, 84 Stat. 1509 additional information about the RSAC. development goals for the Corridor. It et seq., 18 CFR parts 806, 807, and 808. Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on May allows the opportunity to provide a direct connection to the existing 11.6- Dated: May 3, 2012. 8, 2012. Robert C. Lauby, mile Hiawatha LRT line in Minneapolis Thomas W. Beauduy, Acting Associate Administrator for Railroad thereby, increasing mobility options Deputy Executive Director. Safety/Chief Safety Officer. within the Region. [FR Doc. 2012–11479 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] In June 2009, FTA, in cooperation [FR Doc. 2012–11567 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7040–01–P with the Metropolitan Council, prepared BILLING CODE 4910–06–P a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the Project. FTA issued a DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Record of Decision (ROD) on the Project in August 2009. Subsequent to FTA’s Federal Railroad Administration Federal Transit Administration issuance of the ROD, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota [Docket No. FRA–2000–7257: Notice No. 70] Supplemental Draft Environmental determined that the FEIS did not Impact Statement for the Central adequately evaluate potential impacts Railroad Safety Advisory Committee; Corridor Light Rail Transit Project, on the loss of business revenue during Charter Renewal Minneapolis and Saint Paul, MN construction of the Project and that these impacts must be evaluated AGENCY: Federal Railroad AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration through a supplemental environmental Administration (FRA), Department of (FTA), DOT. Transportation (DOT). review. Memorandum Opinion and ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a ACTION: Announcement of Charter Order, Civil No. 10–147, (Jan. 26, 2011). Supplemental Draft Environmental Pursuant to the court’s order, FTA, in Renewal of the Railroad Safety Advisory Impact Statement. Committee (RSAC). cooperation with the Metropolitan SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Council, prepared a Supplemental SUMMARY: FRA announces the charter Administration (FTA) as the federal lead Environmental Assessment (SEA) renewal of the RSAC, a Federal agency, in cooperation with the pursuant to its NEPA implementing Advisory Committee that develops Metropolitan Council, is issuing this regulations, which was issued in railroad safety regulations through a notice of intent (NOI) to advise February 2011. Subsequent to FTA’s consensus process. This charter renewal interested parties that it proposes to issuance of the SEA, the court will take effect on May 17, 2012, and prepare a Supplemental Draft determined that FTA must also prepare will expire after 2 years. Environmental Impact Statement a supplemental environmental review using the format of an Environmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (SDEIS) for the Central Corridor Light Impact Statement. Memorandum Larry Woolverton, RSAC Designated Rail Transit (LRT) Project, located in Opinion and Order, Civil No. 10–147, Federal Officer/Administrative Officer, Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Minnesota (Jan. 23, 2012). Thus, the SDEIS that FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., (Project). The Project is 10.9 miles long will be prepared pursuant to this notice Mailstop 25, Washington, DC 20590, and consists of 23 Central Corridor Light of intent will evaluate potential impacts (202) 493–6212; or Robert Lauby, Acting Rail Transit (LRT) stations. The SDEIS on the loss of business revenue during Associate Administrator for Railroad will evaluate potential impacts on the construction of the Central Corridor LRT Safety/Chief Safety Officer, FRA, 1200 loss of business revenue during Project. This notice of intent is being New Jersey Avenue SE., Mailstop 25, construction of the Central Corridor LRT published at this time to notify Washington, DC 20590, (202) 493–6474. Project and will be prepared in accordance with the National interested parties and invite SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), its participation in the study. to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Notice regarding the intent to prepare Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– implementing regulations, and provisions of the Safe, Accountable, the SDEIS will be sent to the 463), FRA is giving notice of the charter appropriate Federal, State, and local renewal for the RSAC. The RSAC was Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU). agencies that have expressed or are established to provide advice and known to have an interest or legal role FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: recommendations to FRA on railroad in this proposed action. When complete, safety matters. The RSAC is composed Sheila Clements, Supervisory the SDEIS will be made available for of 63 voting representatives from 37 Community Planner, Federal Transit public and agency review and comment member organizations, representing Administration, Region V, 200 West prior to any public hearings. Following various rail industry perspectives. In Adams Street, Suite 320, Chicago, publication, review, and approval of the addition, there are non-voting advisory Illinois 60606, Telephone: (312) 353– SDEIS, a FEIS will be prepared and representatives from the agencies with 1552. circulated. railroad safety regulatory responsibility SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The The Paperwork Reduction Act seeks, in Canada and Mexico, the National Central Corridor LRT is 10.9-miles in in part, to minimize the cost to the Transportation Safety Board, the length, of which 9.7 miles consists of taxpayer of the creation, collection, Transportation Safety Administration, new alignment and 1.2 miles uses the maintenance, use, dissemination, and and the Federal Transit Administration. existing Hiawatha LRT alignment in disposition of information. Consistent The diversity of the Committee ensures downtown Minneapolis. The Project with this goal and with principles of the requisite range of views and will connect the Minneapolis and Saint economy and efficiency in government, expertise necessary to discharge its Paul downtown areas as well as the it is FTA policy to limit insofar as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 28422 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Notices

possible distribution of complete information collection request maybe DATES: Written comments must be printed sets of NEPA documents. found at www.reginfo.gov. received by VA on or before June 13, Accordingly, unless a specific request 2012. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade for a complete printed set of the NEPA Bureau (TTB) document is received before the ADDRESSES: Although VA prefers document is printed, FTA and its grant OMB Number: 1513–0111. electronic submission of public applicants will distribute only Type of Review: Extension without comments through www.regulations.gov electronic copies of the NEPA change of a currently approved written comments may be submitted document. A complete printed set of the collection. through mail or hand-delivery to the environmental document will be Title: COLAs Online Access Request. Director, Regulations Management available for review at the Metropolitan Form: TTB F 5013.2. (02REG), Department of Veterans Council’s offices and elsewhere; an Abstract: The information on this Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW., Room electronic copy of the complete form will be used by TTB to 1068, Washington, DC 20420, or by fax environmental document will be authenticate end users of the system to to (202) 273–9026. This is not a toll free available on the Metropolitan Council’s electronically file Certificates of Label number. Please view and download the Central Corridor Project Web site Approval (COLAs). The system will Women Veterans’ Task Force Draft (http://www.centralcorridor.org). authenticate end users by comparing Report for public comment at http:// information submitted to records in www.va.gov/opa/publications/ Issued on: May 8, 2012. multiple databases. Draft_2012_Women- Marisol Simon, Affected Public: Private Sector: Veterans_StrategicPlan.pdf. Please write Regional Administrator, FTA Region V. Businesses or other for-profits. ‘‘Strategies for Serving Our Women [FR Doc. 2012–11566 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Estimated Total Burden Hours: 410. Veterans Draft Report for Public BILLING CODE P OMB Number: 1513–0118. Comment’’ in the subject line of your Type of Review: Extension without letter or email. Copies of all comments change of a currently approved received will be available for public collection. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY inspection in the Office of Regulation Title: Formulas for Fomented Policy and Management, Room 1063B, Beverage Products. between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 Submission for OMB Review; Abstract: Formula information is p.m., Monday through Friday (except Comment Request necessary to protect the public and holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 for collect revenue. Brewers must submit May 8, 2012. an appointment. This is not a toll free written notices to obtain formula The Department of the Treasury will number. Comments may also be viewed approval. submit the following information online during the comment period, Affected Public: Private Sector: collection request to the Office of through the Federal Docket Management Management and Budget (OMB) for Businesses or other for-profits. Estimated Total Burden Hours: 500. System at www.regulations.gov. review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of Dawn D. Wolfgang, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Carstensen, Senior Advisor to the 1995, Public Law 104–13, on or after the Treasury PRA Clearance Officer. date of publication of this notice. Secretary, Department of Veterans [FR Doc. 2012–11520 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., DATES: Comments should be received on BILLING CODE 4810–31–P Washington, DC 20420. or before June 13, 2012 to be assured of consideration. Signing Authority ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or the burden estimate, or any other aspect AFFAIRS designee, approved this document and of the information collection, including authorized the undersigned to sign and suggestion for reducing the burden, to 2012 Draft Report: Strategies for submit the document to the Office of the the (1) Office of Information and Serving Our Women Veterans Federal Register for publication Regulatory Affairs, Office of AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. electronically as an official document of Management and Budget, Attention: ACTION: Notice. the Department of Veterans Affairs. John Desk Officer for Treasury, New R. Gingrich, Chief of Staff, Department Executive Office Building, Room 10235, SUMMARY: The Secretary of the of Veterans Affairs, approved this Washington, DC 20503, or email at Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) document on May 8, 2012, for [email protected] and established the Women Veterans’ Task publication. to the (2) Treasury PRA Clearance Force in July 2011, to develop a Officer, 1750 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., comprehensive action plan for VA that Dated: May 9, 2012. Suite 8140, Washington, DC 20220, or will focus on resolving critical issues Robert C. McFetridge, on-line at www.PRAComment.gov. facing women Veterans. The 2012 Draft Director of Regulation Policy and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Report: Strategies for Serving Our Management, Office of the General Counsel, Copies of the submission(s) may be Women Veterans is now complete. VA Department of Veterans Affairs. obtained by calling (202) 927–5331, is inviting public comments on the Draft [FR Doc. 2012–11616 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] email at [email protected], or the entire Report. BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM 14MYN1 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Vol. 77 Monday, No. 93 May 14, 2012

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

40 CFR Parts 50, 51 and 81 Final Rule To Implement the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Classification of Areas That Were Initially Classified Under Subpart 1; Revision of the Anti-Backsliding Provisions To Address 1-Hour Contingency Measure Requirements; Deletion of Obsolete 1-Hour Ozone Standard Provision; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28424 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION area New Source Review (NSR), CAA 3334 in the EPA West Building, located AGENCY section 185 penalty fees, and at 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., contingency measures, as these three Washington, DC. The Public Reading 40 CFR Parts 50, 51 and 81 requirements applied for the 1-hour Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0956; FRL–9668–4] standard. This rule also reinstates the p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 1-hour contingency measures as legal holidays. The telephone number RIN 2060–AO96 applicable requirements that must be for the Public Reading Room is (202) retained until the area attains the 1997 566–1744. Final Rule To Implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Finally, this rule 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For deletes an obsolete provision that stayed Quality Standard: Classification of further general information or the EPA’s authority to revoke the 1-hour Areas That Were Initially Classified information on classification of former ozone standard pending the Agency’s Under Subpart 1; Revision of the Anti- subpart 1 areas, contact Mr. Butch issuance of a final rule that revises or Backsliding Provisions To Address Stackhouse, Office of Air Quality reinstates its revocation authority and 1-Hour Contingency Measure Planning and Standards, U.S. considers and addresses certain other Requirements; Deletion of Obsolete Environmental Protection Agency, issues. That rule has now been issued. 1-Hour Ozone Standard Provision (C539–01), Research Triangle Park, NC DATES: This rule is effective on June 13, 27711, phone number (919) 541–2363, AGENCY: Environmental Protection 2012. fax number (919) 541-0824 or by email Agency (EPA). ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a at [email protected]. For ACTION: Final rule. docket for this rule, identified by Docket information on the 1-hour contingency SUMMARY: The EPA is revising the rules ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0956. All measures associated with the 1-hour for implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone documents in the docket are listed in ozone standard contact Mr. H. Lynn national ambient air quality standards www.regulations.gov. Although listed in Dail, Office of Air Quality Planning and (NAAQS) to address certain limited the index, some information is not Standards, (C504–03), U.S. EPA, portions of the rules vacated by the U.S. publicly available, i.e., confidential Research Triangle Park, North Carolina Court of Appeals for the District of business information or other 27711, phone number (919) 541–2363, Columbia Circuit. This final rule assigns information whose disclosure is fax number (919) 541–0824, or by email Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) restricted by statute. Certain other at [email protected]. classifications and associated state material, such as copyrighted material, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: planning and control requirements to is not placed on the Internet and will be selected ozone nonattainment areas. publicly available only in hard copy I. General Information This final rule also addresses three form. Publicly available docket A. Does this action apply to me? vacated provisions of the 1997 8-hour materials are available either NAAQS—Phase 1 Implementation Rule electronically in www.regulations.gov or Entities potentially affected directly (April 30, 2004) that provided in hard copy at the Air and Radiation by this action include State, local, and exemptions from the anti-backsliding Docket and Information Center, EPA tribal governments and specifically requirements relating to nonattainment Headquarters Library, Room Number include the areas identified in Table 1.

TABLE 1—AFFECTED AREAS INITIALLY CLASSIFIED UNDER SUBPART 1

State Area

Arizona ...... Phoenix-Mesa. California ...... Amador and Calaveras Counties (Central Mountain), Chico, Kern County (Eastern Kern), Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties (Southern Mountain), Nevada County, San Diego, Sutter County (Sutter Buttes). Colorado ...... Denver, Boulder, Greeley, Ft. Collins & Loveland. Nevada ...... Las Vegas. New York ...... Albany-Schenectady-Troy, Buffalo-Niagara Falls, Essex County (Whiteface Mtn.), Jamestown, Rochester. Pennsylvania ...... Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley.

Entities potentially affected indirectly C. How is this document organized? b. Timing of SIP Submission Under by this action include owners and Subpart 2 Classification operators of sources of emissions of The information presented in this c. Timing of Attainment Date volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and Document is organized as follows: d. Data Used for Classification e. Other Comments on Classification of nitrogen oxides (NO ), the two I. General Information X Former Subpart 1 Areas A. Does this action apply to me? pollutants that contribute to ground- B. Anti-Backsliding Under Revoked 1-Hour level ozone concentrations. B. Where can I get a copy of this document Ozone Standard-In General and other related information? B. Where can I get a copy of this 1. Proposal C. How is this document organized? 2. Final Rule document and other related II. What is the background for this rule? 3. Comments information? III. This Action C. Contingency Measures A. Classification of 8-Hour Ozone In addition to being available in the 1. Proposal Nonattainment Areas That the EPA Had 2. Final Rule docket, an electronic copy of this notice Classified Under Subpart 1 3. Comments and Responses is also available on the World Wide 1. The Proposal D. Section 185 Fee Program for 1-Hour Web. A copy of this notice will be 2. Final Rule NAAQS posted at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ 3. Comments and Responses 1. Proposal ozone/o3imp8hr/. a. Classification of Former Subpart 1 Areas 2. Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28425

3. Comments and Responses contingency measures as these under subpart 1.2 The Court vacated the E. Deletion of Obsolete 1-Hour Ozone requirements applied for the 1-hour Phase 1 rule to the extent it placed Standard Provision standard. In the proposal, we planned to certain areas solely under the 1. Proposal remove these provisions from the implementation provisions of subpart 1. 2. Final Rule Therefore, the proposal addressed 3. Comments and Responses regulatory text in 40 CFR 51.905(e). F. Other Comments Finally, we proposed to delete a which provisions of the CAA should 3 G. Correction to a Footnote in Proposal provision that stayed the EPA’s apply to those areas. Rule authority to revoke the 1-hour ozone We also noted that the classifications IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews standard. A more detailed description of that would be established pursuant to A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory the background for this rule appears in this final rule would be the initial Planning and Review and Executive the January 16, 2009, notice of proposed classifications for the affected areas for Order 13563: Improving Regulation and rulemaking (74 FR 2936). the 1997 ozone standard. Therefore, we Regulatory Review proposed to use the 2003 8-hour ozone B. Paperwork Reduction Act III. This Action design values (derived from 2001–2003 C. Regulatory Flexibility Act air quality data), which were used to D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act A. Classification of 8-Hour Ozone designate these areas nonattainment E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism Nonattainment Areas That the EPA Had initially, as the basis for classification. F. Executive Order 13175—Consultation Classified Under Subpart 1 and Coordination With Indian Tribal We also proposed to use the Governments There are a number of areas currently classification table in 40 CFR 51.903 G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of designated nonattainment for the 1997 (established by the Phase 1 Rule) to Children From Environmental Health 8-hour ozone NAAQS (0.08 parts per classify these areas. We noted that CAA and Safety Risks million (ppm)) that originally did not section 181(a) provides that ‘‘at the H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That time’’ areas are designated for the ozone Significantly Affect Energy Supply, receive a classification under subpart 2. In this action, the EPA is establishing NAAQS, they will be classified ‘‘by Distribution, or Use operation of law’’ based on the ‘‘design I. National Technology Transfer and initial classifications for these 16 areas Advancement Act and immediately finalizing the value’’ of the areas and in accordance J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions proposed reclassifications to Moderate with Table 1 of that section. We To Address Environmental Justice in for the areas that would be classified as concluded that this language specifies that the area will be classified based on Minority Populations and Low-Income Marginal but that failed to meet the June the design value that existed for the area Populations 15, 2007 attainment date for Marginal K. Congressional Review at the time of designation. Areas were areas for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. L. Determination Under Section 307(d) designated nonattainment in 2004, V. Statutory Authority Based on the area classifications, the based on design values derived from II. What is the background for this rule? CAA establishes certain planning and data from 2001–2003. control requirements for the areas, and Since the classifications under this On January 16, 2009, the EPA in this rule, the EPA is specifying the proposal would be the initial proposed revisions to the Phase 1 Rule deadlines by which states must submit classifications for the 1997 8-hour for implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone plans to meet these requirements. Once standard for the affected areas, the EPA NAAQS 1 (Phase 1 Rule) to address the ozone air quality in these areas proposed that the provision of CAA several of the limited portions of the meets the 1997 8-hour standard, certain section 181(a)(4) would apply to these rule vacated by the U.S. Court of of these requirements may be suspended areas. This provision would allow the Appeals for the District of Columbia by a determination of attainment (Clean Administrator in her discretion to adjust Circuit in South Coast Air Quality Data Determination, pursuant to 40 CFR the classification—within 90 days after Management District, et al., v. EPA, 472 51.918, 70 FR 71702). The obligation to the initial classification—to a higher or F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) reh’g denied complete and submit those lower classification ‘‘* * * if the design 489 F.3d 1245 (clarifying that the requirements would be suspended as value were 5 percent greater or 5 vacatur was limited to the issues on long as the area continues to attain the percent less than the level on which which the court granted the petitions for standard, and would no longer apply such classification was based.’’ The EPA review). (South Coast). The proposal once the area is redesignated to proposed to address requests for such addressed the classification system for attainment following the requirements classification adjustments for the newly- the subset of initial 8-hour ozone of CAA 107(d)(3). However, other classified areas in a manner similar to nonattainment areas that the Phase 1 requirements will continue to apply, the way requests were handled for the Rule originally covered under CAA title and appropriate SIP elements must be original round of subpart 2 I, part D, subpart 1. The proposal also submitted and approved prior to classifications in 2004. This process is addressed how contingency measures redesignation to attainment. described at 69 FR 23863 et seq. (April that are triggered by failure to attain or 30, 2004). We indicated in the proposal, make reasonable progress toward 1. The Proposal however, that if a state requests a attainment of the 1-hour standard reclassification from Moderate to should apply under the anti-backsliding In the January 16, 2009, proposed provisions of the Phase 1 Rule. In rule, the EPA proposed that all areas 2 As the Court made clear in its decision on addition, the proposal identified the designated nonattainment for the 1997 rehearing, the CAA does not mandate coverage vacated provisions of the rule that 8-hour ozone standard would be under subpart 2 of all areas designated classified under and subject to the nonattainment for an ozone NAAQS. As EPA moves provided exemptions from the anti- forward to develop an implementation strategy for backsliding requirements relating to nonattainment planning requirements of any future new ozone NAAQS, we may consider 1-hour nonattainment NSR, the CAA subpart 2. We proposed to modify the whether subpart 1 alone might apply for some areas section 185 penalty fees for failure to regulatory text to remove current for purposes of implementing that NAAQS. 3 We note that areas subject to subpart 2 are also attain the 1-hour standard, and § 51.902(b), which was vacated by the Court and which subjected certain subject to subpart 1 to the extent subpart 1 specifies requirements that are not suspended by more 1 74 FR 2936, January 16, 2009. nonattainment areas to regulation only specific obligations under subpart 2.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28426 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Marginal for an area that is currently required to demonstrate that emissions would have been initially classified as violating the standard, the EPA would in the build scenario are less than the Marginal, and that did not attain by June not grant the request for the no-build scenario and that emissions in 15, 2007 (based on 2004–6 data), and reclassification because the Marginal the build scenario are less than was unable to attain pursuant to the 1- attainment deadline has already passed. emissions in the 2002 base year. year attainment date extensions allowed We noted that the classification table Marginal areas are required to under section 181(a)(5)(B) and 40 CFR of 40 CFR 51.903 provides an outside demonstrate conformity using the ‘‘no 51.907, is reclassified from Marginal to attainment date based on the number of greater than’’ form of one of the two Moderate under this rule. years after the effective date of the interim emissions tests [40 CFR • CAA section 181(a)(4) applies to all nonattainment designation (e.g., 3 years 93.119(b)(2)(i) and 40 CFR areas affected by this final rule. This for Marginal and 6 years for Moderate). 93.119(b)(2)(ii)(A)&(B)]. provision allows the Administrator in For all nonattainment areas other than The EPA proposed to require states to her discretion to adjust the Denver, the effective date of designation submit all required State classification—within 90 days after the for the 8-hour standard was June 15, Implementation Plan (SIP) elements of initial classification—to a higher or 2004. Thus, Marginal nonattainment the areas’ Marginal or Moderate lower classification ‘‘* * * if the design areas (with the exception of Denver) had classification no later than 1 year after value were 5 percent greater or 5 a maximum statutory attainment date of the effective date of this final rule. The percent less than the level on which June 15, 2007. Since the Marginal area proposal noted that the EPA believed such classification was based.’’ The attainment date has passed, the EPA this to be an appropriate and reasonable process for making these adjustments is proposed that any area that would be amount of time given the attainment described at 69 FR 23863 et seq. (April classified as Marginal based on its 2003 dates that will apply to these areas, and 30, 2004). However, the EPA will not design value and that had not attained that these areas should have made grant a request for reclassification to a by June 15, 2007, or that did not meet significant progress toward developing lower classification if (1) the attainment the criteria for an attainment date SIPs, originally due June 15, 2007, based date for that lower classification has extension under CAA section on the obligations that applied before passed, and (2) the area is or has 181(a)(5)(B) and 40 CFR 51.907, would the subpart 1 provision of the Phase 1 violated the standard such that it would be reclassified immediately as Moderate Rule was vacated in December 2006. not qualify for the first and second 1- under the final rule. year attainment date extensions. Since 2. Final Rule In addition, we noted that a number the Marginal attainment date has of areas that were initially placed in The final rule generally reflects the passed, no area initially classified subpart 1 under the vacated provision of approach we proposed. The final rule Moderate by this notice will be eligible the Phase 1 Rule have since been provides that: for a downward adjustment to Marginal. • redesignated to attainment for the 1997 All areas originally placed under Further, since none of the initial 8-hour standard. We indicated that subpart 1 and that remain designated Moderate areas affected by this notice since these areas are now designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour had a classification design value within attainment for the 1997 8-hour standard, ozone standard at the time of this final 5 percent of the Serious threshold of the classification provisions of the final rule are now classified under and 0.107 ppm, no areas are eligible for an rule would not apply. subject to the nonattainment planning upward classification adjustment to In the proposal, the EPA took the and emissions control requirements of Serious. position that transportation conformity subpart 2, sections 181–185. There are • Areas originally placed under requirements, and current sixteen such areas. subpart 1 that have already been • transportation plan and transportation Initial classifications are based on redesignated to attainment are not improvement program conformity the 8-hour ozone design values (derived affected by these classification determinations for the 1997 8-hour from 2001–2003 air quality data) that provisions, which apply only to areas ozone standard remain valid, and would were used to designate these areas that remain designated nonattainment not be impacted by this final action. nonattainment initially. for the 1997 ozone standard. • These areas are already required to The classification table in 40 CFR In this rulemaking, the EPA is satisfy the applicable CAA section 51.903 (established by the Phase 1 Rule) responding to the Court’s vacatur of the 176(c) conformity requirements for the is used for the classifications. The provision that placed certain 1997 8-hour ozone standard based on classification table of 40 CFR 51.903 nonattainment areas solely under their nonattainment designation in June provides a maximum attainment date subpart 1 and is now classifying those 2004. Thus, no new conformity deadline based on a number of years after the areas under subpart 2. There are sixteen would be triggered for these areas after effective date of the nonattainment such areas identified in Table 2 that are the areas are classified under subpart 2. designation (e.g., 3 years for Marginal; 6 being initially classified under subpart 2 These areas would continue to make years for Moderate). For all areas other based on the area’s design value at the future conformity determinations than Denver,4 the effective date of time of designation. To determine the according to the applicable nonattainment designation and area’s design value, we used 2001–2003 requirements of 40 CFR 93.109(d) and classification for the 8-hour standard ambient air quality data. We then took (e). The EPA indicated that any areas was June 15, 2004. Thus, other than the following steps to determine classified as Moderate that are using the Denver, Marginal nonattainment areas whether any areas classified Marginal interim emissions tests would be had a maximum statutory attainment should be immediately reclassified to required to meet additional test date of June 15, 2007. Since the Moderate. requirements that do not apply to Marginal area attainment date of June Step 1. If the area would be classified Marginal areas [40 CFR 93.119(b)(1)]. 15, 2007 has passed, any area that as Marginal based on its design value at Moderate ozone nonattainment areas are the time of designation, we determined required to satisfy both interim 4 Denver’s special circumstancs as a former EAC if the area attained by the June 15, 2007 area were discussed in the proposal. (74 FR 2939– emissions tests in order to demonstrate 2941). The nonattainment designation for the attainment date based on 2004–2006 conformity. Therefore, any area Denver area became effective November 20, 2007. ambient air quality data. If so (and if the classified as Moderate would be (72 FR 53952 and 53953, September 21, 2007). area has not been formally redesignated

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28427

to attainment) 5 the area remains areas are classified Marginal as a result Any Moderate area that did not attain classified as Marginal. There are 8 areas of this Step. by June 15, 2010 and would not have classified Marginal as a result of this Step 4. For any Marginal area that was been eligible for the first or second 1- Step. (See Table 2 column for ‘‘Status in eligible for the first 1-year extension, but year extension, would be subject to the 2007’’, which identifies 8 Marginal areas did not attain by the end of that CAA’s statutory provisions for as ‘‘Attaining’’.) extension, we then determined if it reclassification (bump-up) to Serious, would have been eligible for the second Step 2. If the Marginal area did not the next higher classification category. 1-year extension.7 If the area would not attain by the June 15, 2007 attainment At the time the January 16, 2009 have been eligible for the second 1-year date, we determined if the area would proposed rule was issued, the Moderate extension, we are reclassifying the area be eligible for the first 1-year extension area attainment date of June 15, 2010, to Moderate. Mariposa and Tuolumne under CAA section 181(a)(5) and 40 Counties (Southern Mountain), CA are had not passed. Thus, the proposed rule CFR 51.907.6 If the area would not have reclassified to Moderate as a result of did not address reclassification from been eligible for the first 1-year this Step. Moderate to Serious. The EPA will extension, we are reclassifying Amador Step 5. For any Marginal area that was address reclassifications from Moderate and Calaveras Counties (Central eligible for the second 1-year extension, to Serious, as necessary, in separate Mountain), CA to Moderate as a result we then reviewed the ambient air rulemaking action. of this Step. quality data from 2006–2008 to Table 2 identifies the final subpart 2 Step 3. For any Marginal area that was determine if the area attained the classification for each area that was eligible for the first 1-year extension, we standard. If so, we are classifying the originally classified under subpart 1 reviewed the ambient air quality data area as Marginal. If the area did not pursuant to our Phase 1 Rule (69 FR from 2005–2007 to determine if the area attain, we are reclassifying the area as 23989, April 30, 2004), and that remains attained the standard by the end of the Moderate. No areas are classified nonattainment for the 1997 ozone first 1-year extension. If so, we are Marginal or reclassified Moderate as a standard. classifying the area as Marginal. No result of this Step.

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF NONATTAINMENT AREAS INITIALLY CLASSIFIED UNDER SUBPART 1 RECEIVING RECLASSIFICATION UNDER SUBPART 2

2004 Initial classification/ Status in 2007 (based on 2004– State Area design value 2001–2003 2006 data) Current subpart 2 (ppm) (ppm) classification

CA ...... Chico, CA ...... Marginal (0.089) ...... Attaining (0.084) ...... Marginal CA ...... Sutter Co. (Sutter Buttes), CA ...... Marginal (0.088) ...... Attaining (0.081) ...... Marginal NV ...... Las Vegas, NV ...... Marginal (0.086) ...... Attaining (0.083) ...... Marginal de AZ ...... Phoenix-Mesa, AZ ...... Marginal (0.087) ...... Attaining (0.083) ...... Marginal e CO ...... Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft Collins- Marginal a (0.087) ...... Attaining a (0.082) ...... Marginal Loveland, CO. NY ...... Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY ...... Marginal (0.087) ...... Attaining (0.078) ...... Marginal d NY ...... Rochester, NY ...... Marginal (0.088) ...... Attaining (0.074) ...... Marginal d NY ...... Essex Co. (Whiteface Mtn), NY ..... Marginal (0.091) ...... Attaining (0.071) ...... Marginal d CA ...... Amador and Calaveras Counties Marginal (0.091) ...... Not attaining (0.093) b ...... Moderate (Central Mtn), CA. CA ...... Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties Marginal (0.091) ...... Not attaining (0.086) c ...... Moderate (Southern Mtn), CA. NY ...... Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY ...... Moderate (0.099) ...... n/a ...... Moderate d PA ...... Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA ...... Moderate (0.094) ...... n/a ...... Moderate d NY ...... Jamestown, NY ...... Moderate (0.094) ...... n/a ...... Moderate d CA ...... Kern Co. (Eastern Kern), CA ...... Moderate (0.098) ...... n/a ...... Moderate CA ...... Nevada Co. (Western Part), CA .... Moderate (0.098) ...... n/a ...... Moderate CA ...... San Diego, CA ...... Moderate (0.093) ...... n/a ...... Moderate Notes: a Denver was identified as an Early Action Compact (EAC) area at the time of designation in 2004 and the effective date of its nonattainment designation was deferred pending the EAC process. The EAC program was later terminated and the nonattainment designation for the area be- came effective on November 20, 2007, based on a 2001–2003 design value of 0.087 ppm placing it in the Marginal classification. The Denver area attained the standard by its attainment date of November 20, 2010 (3 years after the date the area was designated nonattainment) and con- tinues to attain based on 2008–10 data. b Amador and Calaveras Counties did not attain by the attainment date and were not eligible for the first 1-year extension based on 2006 4th highest daily 8-hour average of 0.098 ppm. Thus, the area’s classification was changed to Moderate. The area now attains the standard based on 2008–10 data. c Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties did not attain by the attainment date and were eligible for the first 1-year extension based on 2006 4th highest daily 8-hour average of 0.084 ppm. The area was not eligible for the second 1-year extension based on the average of the original at- tainment year (2006) and first extension year (2007) 4th highest daily 8-hour average of 0.085 ppm. Thus, the area’s classification was changed to Moderate. The area now attains the standard based on 2008–10 data. d Albany-Schenectady-Troy, Rochester, Essex County, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Jamestown, and Las Vegas have received Clean Data Determina- tions.

5 Section 107(d)(3) of the CAA allows states to maintenance plan, and other section 110 and part 7 Under 40 CFR 50.907, an area is eligible for the request nonattainment areas to be redesignated to D requirements. second 1-year extension if the 2-year average of 4th attainment provided certain criteria are met that 6 Under 40 CFR 51.907, an area would be eligible highest daily maximum 8-hour averages for 2006 include an approved SIP, a determination that air for the first 1-year extension of its attainment date and 2007 at the monitor with the highest level is quality improvement is due to permanent and for the 1997 ozone standard if the 4th highest daily equal to or less than 0.084 ppm. enforceable reductions in emissions, an approved maximum 8-hour average in 2006 is equal to or less than 0.084 ppm.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28428 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

e Las Vegas and Phoenix have requested redesignation to attainment.

Subpart 2 contains SIP requirements areas that would be affected by the Clean Data Determinations that suspend that differ from subpart 1. These include Moderate area vehicle inspection and certain planning requirements.8 different attainment deadlines, different maintenance (I/M) program requirement As indicated in Table 3, attainment RFP requirements, requirements to are already implementing approved demonstrations and RFP plans are adopt RACT-based controls for certain programs, and the three areas in the suspended by a Clean Data categories of NO and VOC sources, Ozone Transport Region (Pittsburgh, X Determination, while the remaining specific major source thresholds and PA; Jamestown, NY; and Buffalo- NSR offset ratio requirements for each Niagara, NY) have already submitted requirements are not. However, it is longstanding EPA policy that if an area classification. Table 3 lists new subpart SIPs to address the VOC and NOX RACT 2-related SIP requirements for Marginal requirements. Similarly some areas submits a complete request for and Moderate nonattainment areas. The affected by this rulemaking were redesignation including a maintenance EPA is aware that many of the subpart previously nonattainment under the plan before certain nonattainment area 2 SIP requirements have already been 1-hour ozone standards, and may have requirements become due, those satisfied through previous SIP already established an emissions elements do not need to be submitted in submissions or the requirements have statement rule and completed RACT order for the area to be redesignated to been suspended due to a Clean Data determinations. Also, 7 of the 16 areas attainment.9 Determination. For example, all of the affected by this final rule have received

TABLE 3—ADDITIONAL SIP ELEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH SUBPART 2 FOR PREVIOUS SUBPART 1 8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS [This table is not inclusive of all CAA requirements]

Is requirement Ozone subpart 2 SIP requirement suspended by (CAA section) Marginal areas Moderate areas clean data determination?

Attainment demonstration including RACM (§ 182(b)(1)) ...... Not Required ...... Required ...... Yes. Reasonable Further Progress (§ 182(b)(1)) ...... Not Required ...... Required ...... Yes. Periodic Emissions Inventory (§ 182(a)(3)(A)) ...... Required ...... Required ...... No. Emissions Statement Rule (§ 182(a)(3)(B)) ...... Required ...... Required ...... No. Subpart 2 RACT for VOCs and NOX (§ 182(b)(2)(f)) ...... Not Required ...... Required ...... No. Pre-1990 RACT fix-up (§ 182(a)(2)(A)) ...... Required ...... Not Required ...... No. New Source Review (§ 182(a)(2)(C), (a)(4), (b)(5)) ...... Required ...... Required ...... No. Vehicle I/M (§ 182(a)(2)(B), (b)(4)) ...... Not Required ...... Required∂ ...... No. ∂ Applies only in nonattainment areas with population >200,000 based on 1990 census. (See 74 FR 41818–22, August 19, 2009.)

With respect to transportation 93.109(d) and (e). Any new Moderate 3. Comments and Responses conformity, current transportation plan areas that are using interim emissions a. Classification of Former Subpart 1 and transportation improvement tests will be required to meet additional Areas program conformity determinations for test requirements that do not apply to Comment: A number of commenters the 1997 8-hour ozone standard remain Marginal areas (40 CFR 93.119(b)(1)).10 opposed placing all the former subpart valid, and are not impacted by this Also, areas newly classified under 1 areas under subpart 2. Most of these action. Areas formerly classified under subpart 2 that are using budget test 40 commenters expressed concern that the subpart 1 were already required to CFR 93.118 and whose attainment year subpart 2 requirements for local satisfy the applicable CAA section is within the timeframe of the emission controls would be too 176(c) conformity requirements for the transportation conformity determination burdensome for some of the areas, are 1997 8-hour ozone standard based on and transportation plan must analyze obsolete, and would not necessarily be their designation as nonattainment. the attainment year as required by 40 effective in bringing down ozone levels. Thus, no new conformity deadline is CFR 93.118(d)(2). In the case of Cincinnati, two state air triggered in these areas based on their agency commenters argued that the classification under subpart 2. These requirements would produce absurd areas would make future conformity results because the area had recently determinations according to the dropped the vehicle I/M program in the applicable requirements of 40 CFR wake of meeting the 1-hour ozone

8 The seven areas that have received Clean Data Areas to Attainment,’’ John Calcagni, Director, Air However, such requirements remain due until EPA Determinations are Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA, 76 Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992. completes final action approving a redesignation FR 31237–39, May 31, 2011; Buffalo-Niagara Falls, See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5/memoranda/ request. Jamestown, NY and Essex County (Whiteface redesignmem090492.pdf. This memorandum notes, 10 Moderate ozone nonattainment areas are for example, that, for the purposes of redesignation, Mountain), 74 FR 63993, December 7, 2009; required to satisfy both interim emissions tests in a state must meet the applicable requirements of Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY, Rochester, NY, 73 section 110 and Part D that become due prior to the order to demonstrate conformity. Therefore, they FR 15672, March 25, 2008; and Clark County (Las state’s submittal of a complete redesignation request must demonstrate that emissions in the build Vegas), NV, 76 FR 17343, March 29, 2011. to EPA. For the purposes of evaluating a scenario are less than the no-build scenario and that 9 EPA guidance with respect to redesignations to redesignation request, the EPA will not need to emissions in the build scenario are less than attainment can be found in a memorandum entitled consider the required SIP elements that became due emissions in the 2002 base year. (40 CFR ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate after submittal of the redesignation request. 93.119(b)(1)).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28429

standard. Some commenters also argued threshold for placing areas under requirements, a subpart 2 Moderate area that certain areas would benefit more subpart 1. They noted that the Court in SIP requires much more time and effort from regional controls than from local South Coast had set forth the 0.09 ppm due to the number of mandatory controls. In addition, some of the 8-hour average as a design value to be measures that would have to be affected areas have already made used, such that areas with design values adopted. significant progress toward attainment below that value could be placed in Response: As noted in the proposal, since they were originally designated subpart 1. One commenter subpart 1 areas originally had an nonattainment. Another commenter recommended that the EPA maximize obligation to submit a SIP under section stated that the proposal would take the use of subpart 1 to the extent it 172(c), including an attainment away flexibility that they believe the could. However, on this matter, several demonstration, within 3 years after the CAA allows and that the Court had environmental organizations June 2004 designations. Although the preserved in its ruling by allowing areas commented that the Court in South Court vacated the EPA’s placement of with design values below 0.09 ppm to Coast expressly rejected all of the EPA’s areas under subpart 1, the decision did be classified under subpart 1. Two previously stated rationales for placing not change the requirement that areas commenters supported placing all the some areas only under subpart 1. They designated nonattainment must attain as former subpart 1 areas under subpart 2. also commented that the EPA has not expeditiously as practicable. Moreover, Response: In South Coast, the Court identified any alternative rationales to we note that areas that would have been determined that although the CAA does justify such an approach, and allege that subject only to subpart 1 if the EPA’s not mandate that 8-hour ozone no lawful or non-arbitrary rationales rule had not been vacated would have nonattainment areas with a design value exist. had an attainment date of June 2009, 1 below 0.09 ppm be placed under Response: Although the Court year earlier than the attainment date for subpart 2, the EPA had not identified a determined that an 8-hour design value the Moderate classification. While the reasonable basis for placing any of the of 0.09 ppm is the appropriate threshold Court decision did create some 1997 standard ozone nonattainment for determining which areas must be uncertainty regarding the specific areas under subpart 1. As noted in the placed under subpart 2 and which areas classification that might eventually proposed rule, the EPA was unable to the Agency has discretion to place apply to an area, we note that areas have develop a reasonable basis for doing so under subpart 1, the Court rejected the been on notice since the EPA’s January and, despite soliciting comments on EPA’s rationale in the Phase 1 Rule for 2009 proposal that it is likely they potential rationales, none of the placing areas under subpart 1. At the would be classified under subpart 2. As commenters on the proposed rule time of proposal, the EPA noted that it noted in the proposal, the EPA had identified any such rationale. Therefore, had not developed any rationale for advised states with areas that had been at this time, the EPA is not placing any placing areas in subpart 1 for the 1997 placed under subpart 1, including all of 1997 standard nonattainment areas 8-hour ozone standard and expressly the areas affected by this final rule, to solely under subpart 1. solicited comment on potential continue making progress toward We disagree with the commenters that rationales. However, no commenters attainment for these areas.11 Indeed we suggest that the subpart 2 requirements presented a rationale that differed from are aware that many of these states have associated with the 1997 NAAQS would that which the Court rejected in South been working to adopt and implement not necessarily be effective in bringing Coast. measures necessary for the affected down ozone levels. Even if the Comment: One state air agency areas to attain the 1997 ozone standard, mandated programs under subpart 2 are supported the proposal to not place and the EPA believes 1 year is an not the most effective programs to under subpart 2 those former subpart 1 appropriate amount of additional time achieve emission reductions in a areas that have already been to complete that work. specific area, that does not render the redesignated attainment. For those areas that are still violating programs ‘‘absurd,’’ as the programs will Response: As noted in the proposal, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, it is provide benefits by reducing emissions because the classification provisions critical for them to move forward and of VOC and NOX. We also note that the apply to areas designated achieve the emission reductions needed areas being placed under subpart 2 nonattainment, the final rule does not to ensure timely attainment. through this rulemaking have been classify those former subpart 1 areas Comment: One state agency designated nonattainment for the 1997 that have been redesignated to commenter recommended that the ozone standard for over 7 years. Some attainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. effective date of the new classifications of those areas have attained the 1997 be 1 year after the rule is issued; if the b. Timing of SIP Submission Under standard and have had an opportunity area attains before the effective date, the Subpart 2 Classification to seek redesignation to attainment rule would be waived for that area. before the mandatory subpart 2 Comment: A number of commenters Response: The CAA requires that requirements apply. With regard to argued that the proposal did not give areas be classified ‘‘at the time of those that are still not attaining the 1997 enough time for states to submit SIPs designation by operation of law.’’ The standard, we note that the subpart 1 under the new classification. Some effective date of designation for the 1997 flexibility that has been available to argued that the period of 1 year after the ozone standard was June 15, 2004. these areas to date has not resulted in effective date of this rule for classifying While we do not believe it is attainment for these areas. Thus, it is areas was unreasonable and arbitrary, appropriate to treat the classifications as difficult to argue for these areas that the and that more time was needed for additional flexibility under subpart 1 is analysis and the rule adoption process, 11 Memorandum of March 19, 2007 from William including public hearing. Some L. Wehrum to EPA Regional Administrators, re: more likely to result in attainment than ‘‘Impacts of the Court Decision on the Phase 1 the mandated programs under subpart 2. commenters argued that the EPA should Ozone Implementation Rule’’ (response to Question Comment: Some of the commenters allow the statutory time period in CAA 2) and memorandum of June 15, 2007, from Robert that opposed placing all the former section 181(b)(1) from the date of J. Meyers to Regional Administrators, re: ‘‘Decision subpart 1 areas under subpart 2 believed classification (3 years). Several of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on our Petition for Rehearing of that the EPA did not provide sufficient commenters noted that even if a state the Phase 1 Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone reason for not considering a different had prepared a SIP under subpart 1 NAAQS’’ (Implications for Subpart 1 Areas).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28430 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

‘‘retroactive,’’ such that they would be exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court Response: We agree as a practical considered effective over 5 years ago, warned against in Whitman when the matter that none of the 16 areas affected we also do not believe there is a legal Court rejected the idea of mechanically by this final rule are eligible for a basis for deferring the effective date of applying subpart 2’s method for classification adjustment. the classification for 1 year. Moreover, calculating attainment dates, which is Comment: Several commenters argued as noted above, if the Court had not simply to count forward a certain that the Denver area should have a June vacated our placement of areas only number of years from the effective date 2007 attainment date for its Marginal under subpart 1, the areas affected by of the 1990 CAA amendments. They classification and thus should be this rule would have had an attainment point out that the Court observed that reclassified to Moderate because it did date (June 2009) that is 1 year earlier simplistically using the subpart 2 not attain by a June 2007 attainment than the attainment date (June 2010) scheme ‘‘depending on how far out of date. They claim that the Early Action they would receive if classified as attainment the area started—seems to Compact (EAC) concept was unlawful. Moderate under this rule. Thus, even if make no sense for areas that are first They argue that even assuming the EAC the EPA had a legal basis and discretion classified under a new standard after deferral was legally permissible, Denver to delay the effective date of the November 14, 1990. If for example, was in fact identified as a classification, and thus delay the areas were classified in the year 2000, nonattainment area in the EPA’s original planning and attainment obligations, we many of the deadlines would largely April 30, 2004, designations action. do not believe in this instance that it have expired at the time of Moreover, they point out that the EPA would be reasonable to do so. classification.’’ agrees, ‘‘as it must under the Act,’’ that Response: For the reasons articulated areas identified as of April 30, 2004, as c. Timing of Attainment Date in previous responses, we do not believe violating the 1997 ozone NAAAQS Comment: A number of commenters that it is legally supportable to start the (including Denver) must be classified argued that the proposal did not provide attainment periods from the time of based on their design values as of April newly classified Marginal and Moderate classification pursuant to this rule, nor 30, 2004. They claim that under § 181 of areas sufficient time to attain and that do we believe that such an approach is the Act, such classification occurred by they should have maximum attainment reasonable. The primary trigger for operation of law no later than April 30, dates of 3 and 6 years (respectively) planning for attainment of a NAAQS is 2004. Furthermore, they claim that from the effective date of the new the designation as nonattainment for assigning a November 2010 Marginal classifications, not the original that standard. As noted previously, nonattainment designations in 2004. regardless of whether an area is subject area attainment date to Denver (a Several commenters cited the EPA’s only to subpart 1, or is classified as Marginal area) is also unreasonable and interpretation of the CAA’s attainment Marginal or higher under subpart 2, the arbitrary, given that the EPA is assigning date in the Phase 1 Rule for support by obligation is the same—to attain as a June 2007 attainment date to all other referring to section 181(b)(1) that expeditiously as practicable. Thus, there areas classified as Marginal based on provides that where an area designated is no legal or policy basis to delink the 2001–03 design values. They argue that attainment or unclassifiable is attainment obligation from the time of even if the Act could be read as giving subsequently redesignated to designation and instead link it to the the EPA some discretion in setting the nonattainment, the area shall be time of classification. We disagree that outside attainment date, the statute classified under Table 1 of section 181 this situation is analogous to the expressly requires the attainment date to and shall be subject to the same situation where an area is newly be ‘‘as expeditiously as practicable.’’ requirements applicable if it had been designated nonattainment and for which They argue that the EPA cites no legal classified at the time of notice under section 181(b)(1) provides that any or rational basis, and none exists, for section 107(d)(3), ‘‘except that any submission dates tied to the date of finding that November 2010 is ‘‘as absolute, fixed date applicable in enactment of the CAA Amendments be expeditiously as practicable’’ for connection with any such requirement extended to account for the time of Denver, when every other Marginal area is extended by operation of law by a designation. In such a case, the key is had a 2007 attainment date, nor is there period equal to the length of time that the area is newly designated as any conceivable justification consistent between the date of enactment of the nonattainment—not that the area’s with the Act and its purposes. They CAA Amendments of 1990 and the date classification status has changed or been point out that Denver residents are not the area is classified under this clarified. All of the areas that will somehow less deserving of clean air paragraph.’’ The commenters note that receive a subpart 2 classification than residents of the other areas, nor is while by its terms section 181(b)(1) pursuant to this rule have been there any rational basis for delaying the would not expressly apply to designated nonattainment since June stronger controls in Denver that would reclassification of a nonattainment area, 2004 (except for the Denver area, which come from the reclassification to the section indicates that retroactive was designated nonattainment effective Moderate required for all other Marginal application of time requirements is not November 20, 2007) and thus should be areas that failed to attain by 2007 and favored. The commenters note that well on their way toward planning for were ineligible for attainment date regarding the proposed rule, the EPA attainment of the 1997 ozone standard extensions. They argue that the EPA would be classifying areas in 2009, not as expeditiously as practicable. To the cannot claim that it would be harder for in 2004, and argue that deadlines extent that those efforts have been Denver to adopt Moderate area controls should be calculated from 2009, not delayed, we see no legal basis or than the other areas proposed for from 2004. They also argue that even if justification to provide additional time. Moderate classification, as all of the the EPA believes the deadlines need to Comment: One state air agency other areas will have had the same be adjusted in some way to address this commenter argued that the 5 percent amount of time to prepare and unique situation, the calculation and reclassification provision of the CAA implement SIP requirements. They adjustment should be done from 2009 would be rendered meaningless by the argue that neither is there any inequity after an assessment of the situation as it timing in the proposal, because the in requiring Denver to adopt the same exists in 2009. The commenters also attainment date for Marginal areas has controls on the same schedules as argue that the EPA seems to be doing already passed. required for other areas initially

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28431

classified as Marginal based on 2001–03 FR 53952) and April 30, 2004 (69 FR the area has violated the 1997 standard, design values. To the contrary, they 23857)). To the extent the commenters at which time the obligation would argue, allowing Denver more time than are raising concerns about the effective apply once again. other Marginal areas not only flouts date of designation for the Denver d. Data Used for Classification Congressional intent but is grossly nonattainment area and the attainment inequitable to the other Marginal areas date for that area, those were established A number of the commenters argued required to attain by 2007. The in a final rule published September 21, that the EPA should use more recent commenter also argues that the EPA 2007 (72 FR 53952). Thus, these data for the classification of the former cannot rely on the EAC deferral of the comments are not timely. We note that subpart 1 areas. There were several effective date of Denver’s attainment contrary to the claims of the arguments made in these comments, designation and classification because commenters, the Denver area’s and we address them separately here: that deferral was itself contrary to the classification in this rulemaking is Comment: Commenters claim that Act. ‘‘Nowhere does the Act allow the based on the design value that existed using the 2001–2003 data for the initial EPA to defer the effective dates of ozone at the time the EPA initially published designations ignores the improvements nonattainment designations and (and deferred the effective date of) the in emissions reductions (e.g., through classifications, or to otherwise delay nonattainment designation [April 30, the NOX SIP call) and ambient ozone control requirements triggered by 2004 (69 FR 23858)] and was based on reductions that have occurred since designations. To the contrary, the Act 2001 to 2003 data. With regard to the designations were made in 2004. Some requires nonattainment designations by claims concerning the time periods for commenters note that several of the date-certain deadlines. Section 107(d), SIP submissions, we note that the time areas are close to attaining the standard 42 U.S.C. 7407(d); Pub. L. 105–178, periods for attainment and SIP and would be subjected to mandatory section 6103, 112 Stat. 465 (June 9, submissions for the Denver area are controls that would not be necessary to attain the standard. Another commenter 1998), codified at 42 U.S.C. 7407 Note. linked to the effective date of the notes that Appendix A of the January Promulgating a non-effective designation and/or classification of the 16, 2009 proposal shows that, with one nonattainment designation—i.e., a paper area, as they are for all areas. With exception, the current subpart 1 areas designation that sits in the books respect to the attainment date, the for which a 2005–2007 design value is without being activated—violates this Denver area, which is classified as available had a lower design value in requirement. Further, the Act contains a Marginal under this rule, had an those years than they did for 2001–2003, detailed array of requirements, likewise attainment date of November 2010—3 and the one exception (Las Vegas) had governed by date certain deadlines, years following the effective date of the same design value in both periods; applicable to nonattainment areas, designation. thus using the earlier data would more including submission of Comment: One state agency commenter argued that for Moderate likely subject areas to a higher implementation plans providing for classification. Another commenter notes attainment, rate-of-progress, and various areas, the requirement to provide reasonable further progress toward that section 181(a) directed the EPA in specific programs such as new source 1990 to classify areas using the most review, conformity, and contingency attainment is rendered meaningless by the timing of the proposal, since there recent data (i.e., data from 1990, or measures. See, e.g., CAA sections 181, actually, a future time when 182, 110, 172, 173, 176. By refusing to would be no time to provide progress prior to the attainment date. designations would be made), not data implement these various requirements, Response: Given the timing of the from 6 years earlier. The commenter the EAC scheme violates those maximum statutory attainment date also notes that section 181(a) does not provisions. The Act likewise prescribes (June 15, 2010) and SIP submission date state that the data used to classify areas requirements governing redesignation of (1 year after the effective date of this must be the data that existed at the time nonattainment areas to attainment rulemaking) for Moderate areas, any of designation. They argue that section (setting forth several prerequisites that RFP plan not already in effect will not 181(a) instead specifies only that the must be met before such redesignation have an effect on attainment by the classification occur at the time of can be granted), CAA section attainment date since the attainment designation. They point out that 107(d)(3)(E), and requiring the EPA- date for Moderate areas has already classification is precisely the thing that approved maintenance plans sufficient passed. However, under the CAA, an did not lawfully occur at the time of to remedy any relapse into RFP plan (to obtain 15 percent VOC designation in 2004, through no fault of nonattainment that occurs during the emissions reductions from baseline the states. They argue that the temporal 20-year period following redesignation. emissions within the first 6 years after connection between classification and CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iv), 175A. By the applicable base year) would still be designation has been irretrievably shunting these requirements aside, the a required SIP element, even though the broken. They argue that a second EPA would violate those provisions as 6-year period might end after the temporal connection in section 181(a), well.’’ Moderate area attainment date, namely the connection between Response: The EPA acknowledges the depending on the base year for the classification of areas and data used to commenters’ concerns with the EAC state’s RFP calculation. We note that classify areas, has not been broken and program. However, the EPA’s rules under the Clean Data Policy, codified at should be preserved by using the most regarding EAC areas under the 1997 40 CFR 51.918 (70 FR 71702, November recent data. They claim that doing so ozone NAAQS were promulgated in 29, 2005), if the area attains the allows the EPA to better assess where 2004, and the proper time for standard, a Clean Data Determination states are now and where mandatory challenging the legality of the EAC under the Clean Data Policy provision requirements of a higher classification program and the deferral of the effective would suspend the obligation to submit are really needed to address ozone date of the nonattainment designation the RFP SIP. The suspension would nonattainment. It avoids creating for Denver (and other EAC areas) was remain in place until such time as the artificial deadlines based on retroactive within 60 days of publication in the EPA redesignates the area to attainment, application of time periods and Federal Register of those final actions at which time the requirement would no classification based on a backward- (40 CFR Part 81, September 21, 2007 (72 longer apply, or until EPA determines looking review of data. It avoids

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28432 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

depriving states of the opportunity to Consortium (LADCO) for the EPA, to late in issuing that guidance (which it develop strategies to attain the revised comply with a provision within the determined needed to be issued through standard based upon where the state’s Energy Policy Act of 2005. That rulemaking), States were unable to air quality is, not was. They argue this commenter notes that in NRDC v. EPA, submit timely SIPs that were consistent is particularly true for areas like 22 F.3d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1994), the D.C. with the guidance. There is no Columbus and Cincinnati in Ohio that Circuit Court addressed the EPA’s impossibility argument here. The data have attained the 1-hour standard that failure to meet a November 15, 1991 from 2001–2003 exist and can be used was addressed by subpart 2, and already deadline in the CAA for publication of to classify areas. To the extent that SIP have or are close to attaining the 1997 guidance for states’ preparation of SIPs submission dates for these areas have standard. They claim that these areas do for ‘‘enhanced’’ vehicle inspection and passed, the EPA is providing additional not need to be abruptly classified at the maintenance. Those SIPs were due by time for submission of those plans. To tougher Moderate classification with its November 15, 1992. Because the EPA the extent that a Marginal area affected mandatory emission control measures. failed to publish the necessary guidance by this rule did not attain the standard Response: As we noted in the until nearly a year after the statutory by the June 15, 2007, attainment date (or proposal, the classifications would be deadline for that guidance, states could the extended deadline), the EPA is the initial classifications for these areas not be held to their deadline, and the reclassifying the area to Moderate.12 for the 1997 ozone standard. We noted states’ SIP submissions deadline was Furthermore, we note that the subpart 2 that CAA section 181(a) provides that ‘‘properly extended to further the CAA’s classifications based on 2001–2003 data ‘‘at the time’’ areas are designated for a purposes.’’ The commenter concludes are not ‘‘punishment’’ for the EPA’s NAAQS, they will be classified ‘‘by that for purposes of the proposed rule, failure to classify areas correctly in the operation of law’’ based on the ‘‘design the EPA’s failure in 2004 to meet its initial Phase 1 Rule. Using the 2001– value’’ of the areas and in accordance statutory obligation to classify ozone 2003 data places the areas in the with Table 1 of that section. We believe nonattainment areas lawfully, is no position they would have been in if the this language requires that the area be cause for the EPA to now use the data EPA had initially classified all areas classified based on the design value that it would have used at that time in under subpart 2 in the initial Phase 1 existed for the area ‘‘at the time’’ of classifying areas, where those data Rule. designation. Areas were designated would disadvantage the areas. They Comment: Another commenter notes nonattainment in 2004, based on design comment that the effect of the EPA’s that 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix I states: values derived from data from 2001– proposed approach on this issue is to ‘‘the 3-year average annual fourth- 2003. penalize states, areas, and sources highest maximum 8-hour average ozone We also note that arguments that areas unfairly for the EPA’s legally deficient concentration is also the air quality should be able to develop plans to attain action. design value for the site.’’ The appendix based on what the air quality ‘‘is,’’ not Response: We disagree with the states in section 2.2 that ‘‘The 3-year what it ‘‘was,’’ would only serve to commenter’s suggestion that it would be average shall be computed using the further delay the progress that should an ‘‘absurd result’’ to use designation- three most recent, consecutive calendar already have been made. As noted era data for classification. As we noted years of monitoring data meeting the previously, if the area had remained previously in relation to the concept of data completeness requirements solely subject to subpart 1, the area allowing exemptions from requirements described in this appendix.’’ The would have been required to attain the under subpart 2, the judicial precedents commenter notes that the definition of 1997 standard by June 2009. Those areas in which courts have allowed ‘‘design value’’ in the CFR requires that that have attained and have been exceptions from the strict language of a the three most recent years be used to redesignated as of the effective date of law are fairly narrow. For instance, in calculate it. this final rule will not be classified the final Phase 2 Rule, we said: ‘‘In Response: We disagree with under subpart 2. The EPA has general, we note that to demonstrate an commenters that rely on 40 CFR previously reminded states that they absurd result, a State would need to Appendix I to argue that there is only should remain on track with planning demonstrate that application of the one ‘‘design value’’ for an area and that for attainment despite the Court’s requirement would result in more harm it is based on the most recent 3 years of remand of the subpart 1 classification. than benefit. For example, the programs data. We agree that the current design We also note that it would be mandated under subpart 2 are generally value for an area is based on the most inequitable to most areas previously effective in reducing emissions of the recent 3 years of data, but that does not classified under subpart 2 to classify a two ozone precursors—NOX and VOC— mean design values for previous 3-year former subpart 1 area with similar air and because reductions of those periods of time are no longer relevant. quality using current air quality data. precursors generally lead to improved As explained previously, we believe Most of the areas classified under air quality, we believe that such a that the language in section 181(a) of the subpart 2 in 2004 now have cleaner air demonstration could be made, if at all, than they did in 2004 and thus, if they only in rare instances.’’ See 70 FR at 12 We do not agree with arguments that we should were being classified now based on 71620; November 29, 2005. We do not allow for a Marginal area classification with an more recent air quality data, they too find that the situation at issue here attainment date in the future. As noted in several places, Marginal areas are presumed capable of would receive a lower classification. meets the criteria implied by judicial attaining quickly without the adoption of additional Comment: One commenter alleged precedents. local controls. For that reason, there are virtually no that using the 2001–2003 data for We also disagree with the mandated local control requirements for Marginal Allegan County, MI, produces an absurd commenter’s statement where the areas under section 182(a), nor is there a requirement to develop an attainment result, requiring mandatory local commenter relies upon NRDC v. EPA to demonstration. Thus, to the extent an area would emission controls when the problem is argue against using the data from the have been classified as Marginal based on its 2001– clearly transport from outside the state. time of designation. In NRDC, the Court 2003 design value yet failed to attain by June 2007, The commenter cites the study, faced an impossibility argument. Under we see no argument that such areas would have attained if EPA had ‘‘correctly’’ classified them as ‘‘Western Michigan Ozone Study—Draft the CAA, States were required to Marginal in 2004. (We note that many of the areas Report’’ of November 2008, prepared by develop I/M SIPs consistent with the originally identified as subpart 1 have indeed the Lake Michigan Air Directors EPA guidance. Because the EPA was attained and been redesignated as attainment.)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28433

Act provides that classifications be standard obligations defined as standard. This rule also reinstates 1- based on the design value used for ‘‘applicable requirements’’ until the area hour contingency measures as designation. attains the 8-hour NAAQS. applicable requirements that must be Comment: Another commenter claims Furthermore, § 51.905(b) provides that retained until the area attains the 1997 that ignoring current air quality data is such obligations cannot be removed ozone standard. The EPA has issued out of step with the EPA’s new from a SIP, even if the area is separate guidance 15 and a separate emphasis on science-based decisions. redesignated to attainment for the 8- proposed rule addressing the now- Response: The EPA is not ignoring hour NAAQS, but must remain in the applicable 1-hour requirements for NSR current air quality data, but must SIP as applicable requirements or as (75 FR 51960, August 24, 2010). The classify areas based on the law as contingency measures, as appropriate. EPA will also address reinstatement of described above. Section 51.905(e), as promulgated in the section 185 fee program obligations Comment: Environmental 2004, indicated that certain 1-hour in separate action. standard requirements would no longer organization commenters argue that the 3. Comments and Responses EPA should use the air quality data apply after revocation of the 1-hour available at the time of designation for standard. Among other things, these Comment: One group of initial classification. included 1-hour NSR, section 185 environmental organizations supported Response: The EPA agrees for the penalty fees for the 1-hour NAAQS, and the proposal to remove the three reasons stated in the proposed rule and 1-hour contingency measures for failure exemptions from the regulations, but above in response to comments. to attain or make reasonable progress stated that NSR and the section 185 fee toward attainment of the 1-hour requirement must be added to the list of e. Other Comments on Classification of NAAQS.13 The Court vacated these ‘‘applicable requirements’’ at 40 CFR Former Subpart 1 Areas exemption provisions, and in the 51,900(f). Several commenters Comment: One state air agency January 16, 2009, proposed rule, the expressed other concerns about the commented that the proposed rule does EPA proposed to delete these three implications of removing the 1-hour not adequately address situations like vacated provisions from the Code of NSR and section 185 fee program Allegan County, MI, which is largely Federal Regulations.14 exemptions. Response: In this final rule, the EPA affected by transport but yet is not 2. Final Rule provided any relief under the CAA such is only removing the regulatory as coverage under the rural transport This final rule addresses how anti- language at 40 CFR 50.9(c) that provided area provision of section 182(h). backsliding principles will ensure for the exemptions from 1-hour NAAQS Response: We agree that the CAA continued progress toward attainment of requirements in accordance with the does not provide relief in the form of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The final rule court vacatur. The EPA has addressed in being identified as a ‘‘rural transport removes three vacated provisions of the a separate proposed rulemaking exactly area’’ for areas such as Allegan County, Phase 1 Rule that provided exemptions how the regulatory provisions should MI, whose nonattainment area boundary from the anti-backsliding requirements address the now-applicable 1-hour NSR is adjacent to a metropolitan statistical relating to nonattainment NSR, CAA requirements (75 FR 51960, August 24, area. Part of the EPA’s rationale in the section 185 penalty fees, and 2010), and plans to address application Phase 1 Rule for using subpart 1 was to contingency measures as these of section 185 fee program requirements address situations such as that with requirements applied for the 1-hour for the 1-hour standard in separate Allegan County. However, the court in actions. 13 Note that if the area is nonattainment for the Comment: A state agency commented South Coast found that Congress 1997 8-hour standard, for purposes of the 1997 that the Court never addressed the intended to constrain such discretion. standard, it is subject to nonattainment NSR, requirements that should still apply to The commenter has not suggested any contingency measures and (if classified as Severe or prevent backsliding in areas that had specific relief available under the CAA Extreme for the 1997 ozone NAAQS) the section 185 penalty fee provision. already achieved timely attainment of that the EPA could have applied in this 14 We noted in the proposal that the Court’s June the 1-hour ozone standard and only final rule. 2007 clarification, South Coast, 489 F3d 1245, focused on whether NSR was a required confirms that the December 2006 decision was not B. Anti-Backsliding Under Revoked intended to establish a requirement that areas control for the purposes of CAA section 1-Hour Ozone Standard—In General continue to demonstrate conformity under the 1- 172(e) anti-backsliding provisions for hour ozone standard for anti-backsliding purposes. areas not attaining the 1-hour standard 1. Proposal Therefore, no revisions were proposed to 40 CFR 51.905(e)(3). Section 40 CFR 51.905(e)(3) (such as South Coast Air Basin). The EPA codified anti-backsliding establishes that conformity determinations for the The commenter stated that section provisions governing the transition from 1-hour standard are not required beginning 1 year 51.905(e)(4), which states that upon the revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS to the after the effective date of the revocation of the 1- revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 40 CFR hour standard and any state conformity provisions in an applicable SIP that require 1-hour ozone a 1-hour nonattainment area’s 51.905(a). These provisions, as conformity determinations are no longer federally implementation plans must meet promulgated, retained most of the 1- enforceable. This provision does not require requirements contained in paragraphs hour ozone requirements as ‘‘applicable revision in light of the Court’s decision and (e)(4)(ii) through (e)(4)(iv) of this clarification, because the Court did not require requirements’’ [defined in 40 CFR conformity determinations for the 1-hour standard, section, should not be deleted. Instead, 51.900(f)]. A requirement listed as an and existing regulations already implement the this section should be retained and ‘‘applicable requirement’’ is retained for Court’s holding that 8-hour ozone nonattainment supplemented with further language to an area if the requirement applied in the and maintenance areas must use 1-hour ozone appropriately address the circumstances budgets to determine conformity to the 1997 8-hour area based on the area’s 1-hour ozone standard until such time as 8-hour ozone budgets of 1-hour standard nonattainment areas designation and classification as of the are approved or found adequate for the area. effective date of its 8-hour designation Therefore, current transportation conformity-related 15 Robert J. Meyers Memorandum, October 3, (for most areas, June 15, 2004). 40 CFR regulations set forth in 40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR 2007, New Source Review (NSR) Aspects of the 51.905(e)(3), and the general conformity regulations Decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 51.900(f). in 40 CFR part 93 are consistent with the Court’s District of Columbia Circuit on the Phase 1 Rule to Section 51.905(b) provides that an decision and clarification on the Phase 1 Rule and Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air area remains subject to the 1-hour do not require revision. Quality Standards (NAAQS).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28434 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

that attained the 1-hour standard. For requirements that were retained for an on the anti-backsliding provisions as example, the further language could area were those that applied as of the self-implementing; thus, at a minimum, specify that section 51.905(e)(4) is not effective date of designation for the 1997 as of the date of the Court’s mandate applicable in the circumstances that 8-hour NAAQS. Both the Chicago area (August 29, 2007), areas that were were present with the South Coast Air and the SCAQMD were designated designated nonattainment for the 1-hour Basin. Alternatively, the further nonattainment for the 1-hour standard standard as of the effective date of language could specify that section at the time of designation for the 8-hour designation as nonattainment for the 51.905(e)(4) is applicable only in certain standard and were designated 1997 8-hour standard, have been circumstances, including those that nonattainment for the 8-hour standard. obligated to adopt and implement an were present for the Greater Chicago Thus, both areas were subject to the NSR program consistent with their 1- Ozone Nonattainment Area, which anti-backsliding provisions in 40 CFR hour classification as of the effective attained the 1-hour standard prior to the 51.905(a)(1) that address requirements date of designation for the 1997 ozone November 2007 Severe area deadline. for ‘‘8-Hour NAAQS Nonattainment/1- standard. We note that we have urged Response: In South Coast, the Court Hour NAAQS Nonattainment.’’ states to take steps to comply with the vacated the regulatory provision that Furthermore, the provisions in 40 CFR decision without waiting for further did not retain the obligation for States 51.905(e) that did not retain certain 1- to have 1-hour major NSR requirements hour requirements applied in the same EPA rulemaking. See e.g., Memorandum as part of their approved SIPs. The manner to both areas. Thus, to the from Robert Meyers to Regional Court held that removing such extent the South Coast decision Administrators (October 3, 2007). The provisions from a SIP ‘‘would constitute addresses these regulatory provisions, it necessary actions to achieve such impermissible backsliding.’’ 472 F.3d applies in the same manner to both compliance may vary depending on the 882 (2006), clarified, 489 F.3d 1245 (DC areas. specific situation. Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 76 U.S.L.W. Comment: One commenter Because this rule merely removes the 3095 (U.S. Jan. 14, 2008). maintained that we should ensure and vacated regulatory text, it has no In this final rule, we are removing the confirm that the proposed rules do not ‘‘retroactive effect’’ as suggested by the vacated provision that did not retain 1- have retroactive effect. Speaking in commenter. As noted above, at a hour NSR obligations from the terms of NSR, the commenter said any minimum, as of the date the mandate regulations at 40 CFR part 51 in order changes to the 8-hour ozone issued, areas designated nonattainment to ensure the published regulatory text implementation rule that impose for the 1997 8-hour standard have been is consistent with the Court’s vacatur. additional or new requirements on obligated to ensure that their SIP The South Coast decision means that designated areas should not be effective includes a 1-hour NSR program states remain obligated to have in their until after the implementation rule is consistent with their classification for SIPs the 1-hour major NSR thresholds adopted and any necessary SIP revision the 1-hour standard as of the effective and offsets in those 8-hour is adopted and approved on a timely date of designation for the 1997 ozone nonattainment areas that had not been basis. To support their comment, they standard and to implement such redesignated to attainment for the 1- referenced Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 program. Thus, for any permitting hour ozone NAAQS as of the date of F.3d 63 (DC Cir. 2002). They also actions that have occurred since the designation for the 1997 8-hour ozone commented that the Administrative NAAQS. The Phase 1 Rule (69 FR Procedure Act severely restricts issuance of the Court’s mandate, we do 23972) established the date of the retroactive rulemaking and Congress did not believe there is any argument that designation for the 1997 8-hour ozone not take the unusual step of giving U.S. the requirement to meet 1-hour NSR NAAQS (June 15, 2004 for most areas) EPA the ability to implement rules obligations is ‘‘retroactive.’’ as the relevant date for determining retroactively. The requirement that 1- To the extent the commenter raises what anti-backsliding requirements hour NSR continues to apply to 8-hour the issue of retroactivity, the issue is would apply to areas (i.e., the nonattainment areas that attain the 1- relevant only to the extent to which the requirements that applied based on the hour NAAQS will not be officially Court’s vacatur has retroactive effect. In area’s 1-hour designation and adopted until mid-2009, at the earliest. some instances, a vacated regulation has classification as of the effective date of Hence, for all units that commence been held to be ‘‘void ab initio’’; in designation for the 8-hour standard). In construction (e.g., contract other words, the regulation is treated as a separate rulemaking, we plan to commitments are in place or building if it had never existed. See, e.g., United address the circumstances in which 1- has begun) between 2004 and 2009, in States v. Goodner Bros. Aircraft, Inc., hour NSR requirements might be areas re-designated as attaining the 1- 966 F.2d 380 (8th Cir. 1992). In removed from a SIP, specifically hour NAAQS, 1-hour NSR has not addition, the D.C. Circuit has held that addressing areas that currently attain applied. They asserted the South Coast there is a presumption of retroactivity the 1-hour standard such as Chicago. court could not have intended the for adjudications when such We disagree with the commenter that retroactive application of the adjudications clarify existing law, and the Court’s decision only addressed the requirement. Further the commenter that the presumption is departed from specific circumstances applicable to the maintained that retroactive application only when to do otherwise would lead South Coast Air Quality Management of this rule to sources that have already to manifest injustice. Qwest Services District (SCAQMD). While SCAQMD, as committed contracts is contrary to Corp. v. F.C.C., 509 F.3d 531 (D.C. Cir. the ‘‘lead petitioner,’’ lent its name to fairness and predictability in regulatory 2007). The D.C. Circuit has stated that the case, the challenges to the rule were environments. broad and concerned the anti- Response: In this final rule, we are vacatur has ‘‘the effect of restoring the backsliding requirements as they removing from the regulations at 40 CFR status quo ante.’’ Air Transport applied to all types of areas. part 51 the provision that did not retain Association of Canada v. FAA, 254 F.3d Furthermore, we note that the anti- 1-hour NSR obligations in order to 271, 277 (D.C. Cir. 2001). The EPA will backsliding rules applied in the same ensure the published regulatory text is work with states and sources to resolve manner in the Chicago area as they did consistent with the Court’s vacatur. We any issues arising from permitting in SCAQMD. Under the rules, the view the portions of the Court’s decision actions taken between June 15, 2004 and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28435

August 29, 2007,16 based on a permit determines through rulemaking that the measures under sections 172(c)(9) and program that was consistent with the area is meeting the 1-hour ozone 182(c)(9) of the CAA’’ in the section waiver in 40 CFR 51.905(e)(4). standard, the requirements for the state 51.900(f) list of ‘‘applicable to submit an attainment demonstration requirements.’’ Consistent with 40 CFR C. Contingency Measures and related components such as 51.905(b), areas remain obligated to 1. Proposed Rule contingency measures for failure to adopt and retain these requirements in The Court in South Coast Air Quality attain or make reasonable further their SIPs until they attain and are Management District, et al., v. EPA, 472 progress are suspended as long as the redesignated for the 1997 8-hour ozone F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) reh’g denied area continues to attain the 1-hour NAAQS. The rule at § 51.905(b) 489 F.3d 1245, vacated 40 CFR ozone NAAQS. (We note that such a provides that an 8-hour nonattainment 51.905(e)(2)(iii), which did not retain determination does not relieve an area area will remain subject to the the anti-backsliding requirement of the requirement to comply with a applicable requirements listed in concerning contingency measures, on contingency measure provision in an § 51.900(f) until it attains the 8-hour the basis that they were control approved SIP, but merely suspends any standard and that after an area attains measures that must continue to apply. outstanding submission requirement.) If the 8-hour standard, the state may Therefore, the EPA proposed that states the area subsequently violates the ozone request that the 1-hour obligations be be required to retain 1-hour contingency NAAQS for which the determination shifted to contingency measures, but measures in their SIPs that apply based was made (in this example, the 1-hour may not remove them completely from on a failure to meet 1-hour RFP ozone NAAQS), the EPA would initiate the SIP.17 In addition, if prior to milestones or upon a failure to attain the notice-and-comment rulemaking to attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 1-hour standard by the area’s attainment withdraw the determination of standard, the area attains the 1-hour date. Furthermore, consistent with the attainment, which would reinstate the standard, the EPA may make a EPA’s proposal to retain these 1-hour requirement for the state to submit such determination of attainment for the 1- contingency measure requirements as plans. hour standard which would suspend the anti-backsliding measures, we also The proposal noted that three federal obligation to submit such contingency proposed to add ‘‘contingency measures courts of appeal have upheld the EPA measures if the state has not already under sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of rulemakings applying the Clean Data done so. Policy. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F.3d the CAA’’ to the list of applicable 3. Comments and Responses requirements under § 51.900(f). The 1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. proposal noted that in situations where EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004) and Comment: One environmental an area attains the 1-hour NAAQS by Our Children’s Earth Foundation v. organization commenter recommended the applicable attainment date for that EPA, No. 04–73032 (9th Cir. June 28, that contingency measures for the 8- standard, the area is not subject to the 2005) memorandum opinion. Since the hour standard should be at least as requirement to implement contingency proposal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for stringent as those for the 1-hour measures for failure to attain the the District of Columbia Circuit has also standard. standard by its attainment date. As a upheld the Clean Data Policy, which Response: The proposal addresses the result, any area that has met its was codified in 40 CFR 51.918 for contingency measure requirement as it attainment deadline for the 1-hour purposes of implementing the 1997 relates to anti-backsliding for the 1-hour standard (or meets its deadline if it has ozone NAAQS, in NRDC v. EPA, 571 standard, which was vacated by the not yet passed), would not be required F.3d 1245 (DC Cir. 2009). Court. It does not interpret the Thus if the EPA makes a to implement the contingency measures contingency measure obligations for the determination of attainment of the 1- for failure to attain the standard by its 8-hour standard. Because states have hour ozone standard as provided by the attainment date for purposes of anti- discretion in selecting the measures to Clean Data Policy, the EPA would find backsliding even if the area adopt as contingency measures, that the requirement under the anti- subsequently lapses into nonattainment. concerns regarding the adequacy of backsliding provisions (40 CFR 51.905) Additionally, the contingency measures contingency measures are best to submit any outstanding section 172 for failure to meet RFP milestones addressed in the context of a specific and 182 contingency measures under would not be triggered if the area has SIP rulemaking. the 1-hour standard would be met those milestones. Comment: Several commenters noted suspended for so long as the area The proposal also noted that in that the preamble to the proposed rule continues to attain the 1-hour standard. situations where a 1-hour ozone describes two situations in which states nonattainment area is in attainment of 2. Final Rule would no longer need to retain or that standard based on current air The final rule takes the same implement 1-hour contingency quality, the EPA can make a finding of approach as proposed, namely, that measures: (1) Where a nonattainment attainment. See Memorandum from areas designated nonattainment for the area meets or has met its 1-hour John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS must adopt, attainment date, even if the area Quality Planning and Standards, if not already adopted, and retain in 17 entitled, ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, their SIPs, contingency measures for The preamble to the Phase 1 Rule clarified that, Attainment Demonstration, and Related ‘‘it is appropriate to maintain these mandated failure to meet 1-hour RFP milestones controls to remain as part of the implemented SIP Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment and for failure to attain the 1-hour until an area attains the 8-hour NAAQS and is Areas Meeting the Ozone Ambient Air standard by the area’s attainment date. redesignated to attainment.’’ (69 FR 23983). This Quality Standard,’’ dated May 10, 1995. This requirement applies where an area accompanying preamble text clarifies that an area Under this policy, which is referred to must not only attain, but also must be redesignated remained designated nonattainment for to attainment prior to shifting any ‘‘applicable as the ‘‘Clean Data Policy,’’ if the EPA the 1-hour standard at the time of the requirements’’ to contingency measures. (69 FR area’s designation to nonattainment for 23982–83). This is further supported by the portion 16 That is, between the effective date of the initial of § 51.905(b) that provides for the shifting of the area designations for the 1997 8-hour standard and the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. To 1-hour anti-backsliding measures to contingency the date of the final D.C. Circuit Court ruling on clarify that this requirement continues measures. Such a shift can occur only in the context rehearing of the South Coast case. to apply, we are including ‘‘contingency of an approved section 175A maintenance plan.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28436 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

subsequently lapses into nonattainment; does not agree with the portion of the regulatory provision that was vacated by and (2) where—whether before or after policy that would require states to meet the Court in South Coast. Exactly how its 1-hour attainment date—a any planning requirements stayed the EPA plans to address this applicable nonattainment area has 1-hour pursuant to the policy if there is a anti-backsliding requirement for section attainment air quality and the EPA subsequent violation of a revoked 185 fee programs will be addressed in makes a finding of 1-hour attainment standard. separate action. pursuant to the Clean Data Policy that Response: We note first that the Comment: Several commenters has been in effect since 1995. They proposed rule did not set forth any oppose the requirement to have 3 years recommended that the EPA reaffirm proposal concerning the Clean Data of attaining air quality data under the these principles in its final action in this Policy, but merely described a situation Clean Data Policy in order to suspend rulemaking. in which the Clean Data Policy might be section 185 fees temporarily. They Response: The EPA reaffirms the applied. As noted in the Clean Data believe fees should be suspended for position stated in the proposal that Policy and the regulation codifying that any year with data indicating contingency measures for failure to policy for purposes of the 1997 8-hour compliance with the 1-hour standard. attain would not be triggered where an ozone standard, a determination of They believe requiring a 3-year period area attains the 1-hour standard by its attainment suspends the obligation to of attainment is a more appropriate attainment date, even if the area submit certain planning requirements criterion for permanent cessation of the subsequently lapses into nonattainment. for only so long as the area continues to 1-hour section 185 fees. However, the commenter misinterprets attain the standard. We note that Response: In this rulemaking, the only the scope of the Clean Data Policy. redesignation of the area to attainment issue the EPA is addressing regarding Clean Data Determinations under the for the 1997 8-hour standard would the section 185 requirements is the Clean Data Policy only suspend the relieve the area permanently of the removal of the regulatory provision that requirement to submit certain obligation to submit such planning SIPs. was vacated by the Court in South outstanding planning requirements Coast. The EPA plans to address anti- (such as contingency measures that D. Section 185 Fee Program for 1-Hour backsliding requirements for section 185 would be triggered by a failure to attain NAAQS fee programs in separate action. by the applicable attainment date). In 1. Proposal E. Deletion of Obsolete 1-Hour Ozone addition, the obligation to submit such Standard Provision a SIP is suspended only for so long as The EPA proposed to remove the the area remains in attainment. If the language relating to the vacated 1. Proposal provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that did area is redesignated to attainment, the The EPA proposed to delete 40 CFR not retain the requirement for areas that obligation to make such submission 50.9(c) because it is obsolete. In the were classified as Severe or Extreme for would no longer apply. Furthermore, proposal the EPA explained that when when an area is redesignated to the 1-hour standard at the time of we promulgated the 8-hour ozone attainment, it may also move adopted designation for the 1997 8-hour standard on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), contingency measures linked to a failure standard to include in their SIP a CAA we also revised 40 CFR 50.9 to provide to attain to the contingency measure section 185 penalty fee program for the that the 1-hour ozone standard would be portion of the maintenance plan. To the 1-hour standard (i.e., 40 CFR revoked for an area once the EPA extent contingency measures have been 51.905(e)(2)(ii)). In South Coast, the determined that the area had air quality adopted and approved into the SIP, a Court vacated this exemption provision. meeting the 1-hour standard. Clean Data Determination under the 2. Final Rule Subsequently, because the pending Clean Data Policy does not authorize the litigation over the 1997 8-hour NAAQS We are removing the language in 40 state to remove them from the SIP. Nor created uncertainty regarding the 8-hour does a Clean Data Determination affect CFR 51.905(e)(2)(ii) that did not retain NAAQS and associated implementation the requirement that areas comply with the requirement for areas that were requirements, we revised 40 CFR 50.9 to SIP-approved measures, such as classified as Severe or Extreme for the place two limitations on our authority to contingency measures. Thus, if an area 1-hour standard at the time of apply the revocation rule: (1) The 1997 fails to attain by its attainment date and designation for the 1997 8-hour 8-hour NAAQS must no longer be contingency measures approved into the standard to include a CAA section 185 subject to legal challenge, and (2) it SIP are triggered by that failure, a Clean penalty fee program for the 1-hour must be fully enforceable.18 (65 FR Data Determination that is issued standard in their SIP. 45182, July 20, 2000). These limitations subsequently would not suspend the 3. Comments and Responses were codified as § 50.9(c). In the final obligation to implement the contingency Phase 1 Rule, we again revised § 50.9, Comment: Several commenters measures consistent with terms of the this time to revise § 50.9(b) to provide expressed support for not defining the approved SIP. for revocation of the 1-hour standard 1 1-hour section 185 fee provision as an Comment: One state agency year after designation of areas for the ‘‘applicable requirement’’, as commenter supported removing the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. However, promulgated in § 51.905(e), and vacated provision of the regulations that according to our proposal, in indicated that the fees should only provided that states need not retain 1- promulgating the Phase 1 rule, we apply until an area attains the 1-hour hour standard contingency measures for neglected to remove paragraph (c) standard. failure to attain or make reasonable which was no longer necessary since the further progress toward attaining the 1- Response: The EPA believes that not hour standard. defining the section 185 fee provision as 18 In addition, in June 2003, we stayed our Response: The EPA has removed the an ‘‘applicable requirement’’ is in authority to apply the revocation rule pending our vacated provision from the regulatory conflict with the ruling of the Court. reconsideration in the implementation rule for the text. Nevertheless, in this rulemaking, the 1997 NAAQS of the basis for revocation. (68 FR 38160, June 26, 2003). We completed that Comment: One state agency only issue the EPA is addressing reconsideration in the Phase 1 Rule, which was commenter supported use of the Clean regarding the applicability of section published in the Federal Register of April 30, 2004. Data Policy for the 1-hour standard but 185 requirements is the removal of the (69 FR 23951).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28437

8-hour standard is no longer subject to indicated that the provision was designation, the 1-hour standard was legal challenge and the standard has obsolete and thus we are deleting it in revoked April 15, 2009, the date 1 year been upheld and is enforceable. this final action as proposed. following their effective date of American Trucking Assoc. v. EPA, 283 designation as attainment for the 1997 3. Comments and Responses F.3d 355. (D.C. Cir. 2002) (resolving all NAAQS. For the Denver EAC area, remaining legal challenges to the 8-hour Comment: One commenter expressed which was designated nonattainment ozone standard and upholding the concern about the background for the 1997 NAAQS effective November EPA’s rule establishing that standard.) statements and explanation regarding 20, 2007, the 1-hour standard was the removal of 40 CFR 50.9(c). The revoked November 20, 2008. We believe 2. Final Rule commenter claims there is an incorrect that it is important to retain this In reviewing the regulatory text in citation in the preamble. In the sentence because it specifies the time at light of one of the comments received Background discussion at 74 FR 2938, which the 1-hour standard, identified in on the proposal, we realized that we col 2, paragraph B, the proposal said, 40 CFR 51.9(a), no longer applied to incorrectly described the obsolete referring to the two limitations we areas. regulatory text in 50.9(c). The language placed on our authority to apply the F. Other Comments described in the proposal, which stayed revocation rule, that ‘‘These limitations the EPA’s authority to revoke the 1-hour were codified as § 50.9(c).’’ Comment: Several commenters ozone standard while the 8-hour Response: As provided above, we advised that this rulemaking addressing standard remained subject to legal recognize that the explanation in the the 1997 ozone standard should be challenge, was language that was proposal was confusing because we integrated with planning to address the actually removed in the Phase 1 Rule described regulatory text that was 2008 ozone NAAQS. Several (69 FR 23951, Apr. 30, 2004). That removed from 40 CFR 50.9(b) at the time commenters recommended that language was added to the second we promulgated the Phase 1 Rule, rather addressing the 1997 standard should not sentence of 50.9(b) at the time that the than describing the regulatory text we result in additional paperwork beyond status of the 1997 8-hour standard planned to delete, which is provided in what is needed for the 2008 standard. remained uncertain because of the 40 CFR 50.9(c). However, as explained One commenter recommended that the ongoing litigation challenging that above, the regulatory text in 50.9(c) is EPA rulemaking focus on standard and our ability to enforce it. obsolete as noted in the proposal and implementation of the 2008 ozone (65 FR 45200, July 20, 2000.) Because thus we are moving forward to remove NAAQS and deal with implementation the litigation challenging the 1997 it from the CFR as proposed. deficiencies of the 1997 standard within standard and our ability to enforce that Comment: One environmental the context of implementing the 2008 standard was fully resolved, we deleted commenter expressed concern about NAAQS. One local air agency that regulatory language in the Phase 1 confusing language in 40 CFR 50.9(b) commenter argued that reclassification Rule. and recommended that the second of subpart 1 areas should not be a However, in June 2003, consistent sentence of that provision be removed. priority concern when viewed against with a settlement agreement in a lawsuit Response: Paragraph (b) of § 50.9 other more important priorities, such as challenging the revocation provision we states that the 1-hour standards set forth implementation of the 2008 ozone had promulgated simultaneous with the in the section will remain applicable to NAAQS. 1997 ozone standard, we separately all areas notwithstanding the Response: The Court in South Coast stayed our authority to revoke the 1- promulgation of 8-hour ozone standards vacated portions of the Phase 1 Rule hour ozone standard. (68 FR 38163, June under § 50.10. The 1-hour NAAQS set that addressed certain anti-backsliding 26, 2003). Specifically, we added 40 forth in paragraph (a) of the section will provisions for the 1-hour standard and CFR 50.9(c), which provides that our no longer apply to an area one year after the portion of the rule that classified authority to revoke the 1-hour ozone the effective date of the designation of certain 1997 8-hour standard standard is stayed until ‘‘EPA issues a that area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas under subpart 1. final rule revising or reinstating’’ the pursuant to section 107 of the Clean Air We plan to address the transition from revocation authority and considers and Act. Area designations and the 1997 standard to the 2008 standard addresses certain issues in that classifications with respect to the 1-hour in separate rulemaking. rulemaking process. We considered and standards are codified in 40 CFR part Comment: One commenter noted that addressed those issues in the 81. there are several provisions of subpart X rulemaking for implementing the 1997 The commenter does not specify why that continue to refer to subpart 1 even ozone standard and as part of the final the sentence is confusing and we though the EPA has now proposed to Phase 1 Rule. We revised and reinstated disagree that it is. Rather, that sentence classify all nonattainment areas for the our authority to revoke the 1-hour is the operative sentence for revoking 1997 ozone standard under subpart 2. standard. (68 FR 32818–19, June 2, the 1-hour standard. Pursuant to this These include §§ 51.908(b), 51.910(b), 2003; 69 FR 23969–71, April 30, 2004). sentence of the regulation, the 1-hour 51.912(c) and the portions of § 51.915 However, we neglected at that time to standard was revoked for most areas on that are subject to § 51.902(b). The remove 40 CFR 50.9(c), which became June 15, 2005, the date 1 year after their commenter suggests that these obsolete upon the issuance of the Phase effective date of designation for the 1997 provisions may be extraneous if there 1 Rule. 8-hour standard. For 13 EAC 19 areas are no areas covered under subpart 1. Despite the confusion created by our Response: As an initial matter, we with a deferred effective date of incorrect description in the proposed note that the general implementation rule, we are deleting 40 CFR 50.9(c). As 19 Early Action Compacts (EAC) allowed states to requirements in subpart 1 also apply to provided above, the provision is pledge to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone standard areas classified under subpart 2; thus, obsolete because the future rulemaking earlier than required. State seeking an EAC must we cannot automatically conclude that it refers to is the Phase 1 Rule, which meet a number of criteria and must agree to meet the provisions referred to by the certain milestones. The most significant milestone was promulgated in April 2004. was that the EAC areas had to be in attainment by commenter are extraneous. We choose Although we incorrectly described the December 31, 2007, based on air quality data from to err on the side of retaining provisions provision in the proposal, we correctly 2005, 2006, and 2007. that may not apply to any areas rather

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28438 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

than to remove them in this final rule reclassified under subpart 2 are already to the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if no 8-hour without notice and an opportunity for satisfying the applicable CAA section 176(c) ozone budget exists. comment. conformity requirements for the 1997 8-hour Comment: Several environmental Comment: One environmental ozone standard.’’ The EPA offers no evidence commenters allege that the Clean Data organization commenter indicated and analysis to support this claim, which Policy is unlawful. One commenter goes far beyond the scope of the rulemaking support for the proposal only if the rule proposal. It is neither necessary nor states that for reasons explained in could be interpreted as requiring appropriate for the EPA to make a blanket briefs filed in NRDC v. EPA, No. 06– Marginal areas to meet the CAA statement that areas that would be 1045 (D.C. Cir.) (which were reasonably available control measures reclassified are already in fact satisfying incorporated by reference, and attached (RACM) requirement. The commenter applicable conformity requirements. What to the comment), the EPA is completely noted that the Denver area was a former the EPA can say is that areas that would be without authority to suspend the Act’s EAC area that failed to attain and was reclassified under subpart 2 are already mandates for submission and subsequently designated nonattainment. required to satisfy applicable section 176(c) implementation of these SIP Under the proposed rule, Denver would conformity requirements for the 8-hour components merely because an area is be classified as Marginal. The standard. meeting standards at a given point in commenter pointed out that the table in In another comment they say: time. They note that the Act provides no the proposal that summarized CAA The EPA is also incorrect in stating (at exception or waiver for submission of requirements applicable under both 2941 n.18) that 40 C.F.R. § 51.905(e)(3) does these SIP elements on grounds of subparts 1 and 2 indicates that RACM not require revision. That rule includes temporary attainment. To the contrary, (under subpart 1) applies to subpart 2 language stating that ‘‘any state conformity they note that section 175A(c) of the Act areas also and thus should apply to provisions in an applicable SIP that require makes crystal clear that all requirements Marginal areas. 1-hour ozone conformity determinations are for nonattainment areas must remain in Response: It is true that the RACM no longer federally enforceable.’’ The DC full force and effect unless and until the requirement, which is contained in Circuit has ruled that the EPA cannot declare area is redesignated to attainment and subpart 1, applies to areas classified conformity provisions of an approved SIP to has an approved maintenance plan. For under subpart 2. However, the EPA has be unenforceable. Environmental Defense v. all of these same reasons, they claim the interpreted the RACM requirement for EPA, 467 F.3d 1329, 1337 (D.C. 2 Cir. 2006). The approved provisions of a SIP remain EPA cannot suspend any Part D many years in the context of the enforceable until the state submits and the requirements retained pursuant to the requirement to demonstrate attainment EPA approves their revocation. Id. Act’s anti-backsliding provisions merely as expeditiously as practicable and Accordingly, 40 CFR § 51.905(e)(3) must be because an area is temporarily meeting subpart 2 specifically exempts Marginal revised to delete the above-quoted clause. either the 1-hour or 8-hour standards. areas from the requirement to submit an They assert that the EPA’s ‘‘clean data’’ Response: We agree with the first attainment demonstration. In light of policy is nothing more than an illegal comment that the quoted sentence was that exemption, the EPA has historically attempt to circumvent the Act’s not required Marginal areas to meet the worded poorly. We did not intend by redesignation provisions, section RACM test required of Moderate and that statement to make a determination 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A(c). higher classified areas. However, we that any specific area is satisfying the Another environmental organization note that under our EAC regulations, we conformity requirements. We agree with commenter also alleged that the EPA required EAC areas that were the commenter’s suggestion as to how lacks authority to suspend controls from subsequently designated nonattainment the statement could have been better a SIP by finding the area is meeting the (like Denver) to submit an attainment phrased. 1-hour standard. That commenter demonstration within 1 year of the Regarding the second statement, we alleged that the CAA’s redesignation effective date of designation. 40 CFR disagree that 40 CFR 51.905(e)(3) procedures of section 107 provide a 81.300(e)(3)(ii)(D). Therefore, the RACM requires revision. That regulatory specific method that a nonattainment requirements currently apply to the provision states that ‘‘[u]pon revocation area must follow in order to remove Denver nonattainment area. of the 1-hour NAAQS for an area, controls from a SIP. They note that the Comment: One state air agency conformity determinations pursuant to CAA is silent on any alternative manner commenter recommended that the EPA section 176(c) of the CAA are no longer for a nonattainment area to remove should approve requests for required for the 1-hour NAAQS. At that controls from its SIP, besides being redesignation to attainment for the time, any provisions of applicable SIPs redesignated to a different classification. 1-hour ozone standard. that require conformity determinations They thus claim it is clear that Congress Response: Because the EPA revoked in such areas for the 1-hour NAAQS intended the extensive redesignation the 1-hour ozone standard, the EPA will no longer be enforceable pursuant process described in section 107 to be indicated in the Phase 1 Rule that we to section 176(c)(5) of the CAA.’’ Since the only manner in which an area was were no longer obligated to redesignate there is no 1-hour NAAQS, there is no to be permitted to remove controls from areas to attainment or nonattainment for ongoing conformity requirement for that its SIP. The commenter also notes that the 1-hour standard because once that NAAQS under section 176(c). The the proposed rule ignores the standard was revoked it was no longer regulation also specifically refers to statutorily-required redesignation effective in an area. See 40 CFR section 176(c)(5), which states that procedures provided in section 107. The 51.905(e). We are not reconsidering that conformity determinations apply only commenter further claims that even issue as a part of this rulemaking. in nonattainment and maintenance assuming the Clean Data Policy is valid Comment: Several environmental areas. Therefore, the intent of the as written, it cannot be used to waive commenters alleged that there were regulations is to clarify that SIP fees required under section 185 of the incorrect statements in the discussion of provisions requiring conformity CAA. They point out that the 1995 Seitz conformity in the anti-backsliding demonstrations for the revoked 1-hour memorandum has never even applied to portion of the proposal. In one NAAQS are essentially meaningless in waive the section 185 fees controls, only comment, the commenter says: light of section 176(c)(5). Of course, other planning requirements. Thus, the On page 2940, column 1 of the proposal, 1-hour ozone budgets in approved SIPs EPA would take the Seitz memorandum the EPA states: ‘‘Areas that would be must be used to demonstrate conformity reasoning beyond the situations to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28439

which it purported to apply, yet the how section 185 fees apply for purposes action to the Office of Management and EPA does not even acknowledge this of the 1-hour standard are not addressed Budget (OMB) for review under extension, much less explain why the as part of this rulemaking action and Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 Seitz memo rationale can be extended to thus we are not addressing substantive FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and any section 185 fees. The commenter further comments on such issues here. changes made in response to OMB notes that the 1-hour standard is no recommendations have been longer the standard that the EPA deems G. A Correction to a Footnote in documented in the docket for this requisite to protect public health with Proposed Rule action. an adequate margin of safety. Therefore, The January 16, 2009, proposed rule, B. Paperwork Reduction Act they argue, attaining the 1-hour in the discussion of contingency standard should have no bearing on measures, stated, ‘‘In situations where a This action does not impose any new whether a state may remove 1-hour ozone nonattainment area is in information collection burden. This contingency measures from its SIP. attainment based on current air quality action sets forth the EPA’s rule for Response: The Clean Data Policy, first (e.g., after the area’s attainment date), addressing portions of the partial articulated by the EPA in 1995 with EPA can propose to make a finding of vacatur of the EPA’s Phase 1 Rule for regard to the 1-hour ozone standard, and attainment.’’ Footnote 16 followed that implementation of the 1997 8-hour subsequently upheld by several Courts sentence and read as follows: ‘‘This ozone NAAQS. However, OMB has of Appeals, is not unlawful. The EPA’s applies even if the area did not attain by previously approved the information interpretation of the Clean Data Policy the attainment date; however, the CAA collection requirements contained in the for the 1-hour ozone standard is the requires EPA in these cases to make a existing Phase 1 Rule (April 30, 2004; 69 basis for its Clean Data Policy regulation finding of failure to attain by the FR 23951) and the Phase 2 Rule for the 8-hour ozone standard, which attainment date and either reclassify the (November 29, 2005; 70 FR 71612) was codified at 40 CFR 51.918 and area or apply other requirements (such regulations and has been assigned OMB upheld by the D.C. Circuit in NRDC v. as section 185) as specified for the area’s Control Number 2060–0594. The OMB EPA 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009). classification.’’ (74 FR at 2941, 2942; control numbers for the EPA’s A commenter objects to the Clean January 16, 2009.) The text ‘‘however, regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 Data Policy because it is not ‘‘a valid the CAA requires EPA in these cases to CFR part 9. manner of removing controls from a make a finding of failure to attain by the C. Regulatory Flexibility Act SIP,’’ and that it ‘‘permits EPA to attainment date and either reclassify the The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) remove applicable controls from an area or apply other requirements (such generally requires an Agency to prepare area’s SIP by merely making a ‘factual as section 185) as specified for the area’s a regulatory flexibility analysis of any finding’ of attainment.’’ This comment classification’’ was in error and should regulation subject to notice-and- misconstrues the Clean Data Policy—it have been deleted. The wording would comment rulemaking requirements is not applied to remove any controls have been appropriate had the situation under the Administrative Procedures from the SIP. Rather, it is the EPA’s applied to an existing ozone standard, Act or any other statute unless the interpretation that the obligation to such as the 1997 8-hour standard. Agency certifies the rule will not have submit certain requirements, including However, for the revoked 1-hour a significant economic impact on a those for RFP and contingency standard, EPA has adopted a regulation, substantial number of small entities. measures, is suspended for so long as an that was not challenged, providing that Small entities include small businesses, area attains the standard. Once SIP upon revocation of the NAAQS, the EPA small organizations, and small provisions have been approved into the would no longer be obligated to make SIP, the Clean Data Policy does not governmental jurisdictions. findings of failure to attain the 1-hour For purposes of assessing the impacts operate to remove them. The same standard or to reclassify areas for failure commenter contends that attainment of of these regulation revisions on small to attain the 1-hour standard by the entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A the 1-hour standard should have no area’s attainment date under the 1-hour significance because it has been small business that is a small industrial standard. (See 40 CFR 51.905(e)(2)(i).) entity as defined in the U.S. Small ‘‘discarded.’’ Although the 1-hour Thus, the EPA is clarifying that the standard has been revoked, the 1-hour Business Administration (SBA) size portion of footnote 16 stating that the designation and classification status of standards (See 13 CFR 121.); (2) A EPA remains obligated to make a an area at the time of designation for the governmental jurisdiction that is a finding of failure to attain the 1-hour 8-hour standard remains the basis for government of a city, county, town, ozone standard by an area’s attainment determining the 1-hour ozone anti- school district or special district with a date (under section 181(b)(2) or section backsliding requirements for that area. population of less than 50,000; and (3) 179(c)) and to reclassify the area was Independent of and in addition to the A small organization that is any not-for- erroneous and in conflict with 1-hour standard, the EPA continues to profit enterprise which is independently § 51.905(e)(2)(i). separately implement the 8-hour ozone owned and operated and is not standard and all requirements IV. Statutory and Executive Order dominant in its field. applicable under that NAAQS. As the Reviews After considering the economic EPA noted in its proposal, attainment of impact of these revisions to the and redesignation for the 8-hour A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory regulations on small entities, I certify standard also affects the anti- Planning and Review and Executive that this action will not have a backsliding requirements under the Order 13563: Improving Regulation and significant economic impact on a 1-hour standard. 40 CFR 51.905(b) Regulatory Review substantial number of small entities. Proposal at 74 FR 2942. Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR This rule will not impose any The EPA’s Clean Data Policy does not 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a requirements on small entities. The EPA expressly address the suspension of the significant regulatory action because it is aware that the two small entities requirement that affected emissions raises novel legal or policy issues listed in Table 2, Essex County and sources submit section 185 fees. arising out of legal mandates. Jamestown, NY, have either satisfied the Substantive issues concerning when and Accordingly, the EPA submitted this requirements through previous SIP

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28440 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

revisions or certain requirements have restores provisions that existed under including children. However, the EPA been suspended due to receiving a the 1-hour ozone standard and that solicited comments on whether the Clean Data Determination. would have continued under the 1-hour proposed action would result in an standard had not the EPA issued a adverse environmental effect that would D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act revised ozone standard. Those have a disproportionate effect on This action contains no federal provisions were revoked when the EPA children. No comments were received mandate under the provisions of Title II revoked the 1-hour standard itself. on this specific topic. of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Although a court upheld the EPA’s right H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 for to revoke the 1-hour standard, the court Significantly Affect Energy Supply, state, local, or tribal governments or the ruled that the EPA erroneously revoked Distribution, or Use private sector. This rule restores several 1-hour NAAQS provisions and provisions that existed under the 1-hour vacated those portion of the EPA’s rule. This action is not a ‘‘significant ozone standard and that would have Thus, the court’s own ruling restored energy action’’ as defined in Executive continued under the 1-hour standard the former 1-hour NAAQS provisions. Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, had not the EPA issued a revised ozone This rule merely sets forth a corrective 2001)), because it is not likely to have standard. Those provisions were regulatory mechanism for restoring the a significant adverse effect on the revoked when the EPA revoked the 1- 1-hour provisions that the court had supply, distribution, or use of energy. hour standard itself. Although a court already restored. Thus, Executive Order upheld the EPA’s right to revoke the 1- I. National Technology Transfer and 13132 does not apply to these regulation Advancement Act hour standard, the court ruled that the revisions. EPA erroneously revoked several 1-hour In the spirit of Executive Order 13121 Section 12(d) of the National NAAQS provisions and vacated those and consistent with the EPA policy to Technology Transfer and Advancement portion of the EPA’s rule. Thus, the promote communications between EPA Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law court’s own ruling restored the former 1- and state and local governments, the 104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) hour NAAQS provisions. This rule EPA solicited comments on the proposal directs the EPA to use voluntary merely sets forth a corrective regulatory from state and local officials. consensus standards in its regulatory mechanism for restoring the 1-hour activities unless to do so would be provisions that the court had already F. Executive Order 13175—Consultation inconsistent with applicable law or restored. Therefore, this action is not and Coordination With Indian Tribal otherwise impractical. Voluntary subject to the requirements of section Governments consensus standards are technical 202 and 205 of the UMRA. This action does not have tribal standards (e.g., materials specifications, This action is also not subject to the implications as specified in Executive test methods, sampling procedures, and requirements of section 203 of UMRA Order 13175. It does not have a business practices) that are developed or because it contains no regulatory substantial direct effect on one or more adopted by voluntary consensus requirements that might significantly or Indian tribes, since no tribe has to standards bodies. NTTAA directs the uniquely affect small governments. The develop a SIP under these regulatory EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, EPA has determined that these revisions. Furthermore, these regulation explanations when the Agency decides regulation revisions contain no revisions do not affect the relationship not to use available and applicable regulatory requirements that may or distribution of power and voluntary consensus standards. significantly or uniquely affect small responsibilities between the Federal This rulemaking does not involve governments, including tribal government and Indian tribes. The CAA technical standards. Therefore, the EPA governments. and the Tribal Air Rule establish the did not consider the use of any relationship of the Federal government voluntary consensus standards. E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism and Tribes in developing plans to attain J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Executive Order 13132, entitled the NAAQS, and these revisions to the Actions To Address Environmental ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, regulations do nothing to modify that Justice in Minority Populations and 1999), requires the EPA to develop an relationship. Thus, Executive Order Low-Income Populations accountable process to ensure 13175 does not apply. ‘‘meaningful and timely input by state The EPA specifically solicited Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR and local officials in the development of additional comment on the proposed 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal regulatory policies that have Federalism revisions to the regulations from tribal executive policy on environmental implications.’’ Policies that have officials. justice. Its main provision directs ‘‘Federalism implications’’ are defined Federal agencies, to the greatest extent in the Executive Order to include G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of practicable and permitted by law, to regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct Children From Environmental Health make environmental justice part of their effects on the states, on the relationship and Safety Risks mission by identifying and addressing, between the national government and The EPA interprets Executive Order as appropriate, disproportionately high the states, or on the distribution of 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as and adverse human health or power and responsibilities among the applying only to those regulatory environmental effects of their programs, various levels of government.’’ actions that concern health or safety policies, and activities on minority This action does not have Federalism risks, such that the analysis required populations and low-income implications. It will not have substantial under section 5–501 of the EO has the populations in the United States. direct effects on the states, on the potential to influence the regulation. The EPA has determined that this rule relationship between the national This action is not subject to Executive will not have disproportionately high government and the states, or on the Order 13045 because these rule and adverse human health or distribution of power and revisions address NAAQS-related SIP environmental effects on minority or responsibilities among the various obligations of the CAA. The NAAQS are low-income populations because it does levels of government, as specified in promulgated to protect the health and not affect the level of protection Executive Order 13132. This rule welfare of sensitive populations, provided to human health or the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28441

environment. The revisions to the Transportation, Nitrogen oxides, classified in accordance with section regulations revise SIP obligations Volatile organic compounds. 181 of the CAA, as interpreted in related to the ozone NAAQS, which are § 51.903(a), for purposes of the 1997 40 CFR Part 81 designed to protect all segments of the 8-hour NAAQS, and will be subject to general populations. As such, they do Air pollution control. the requirements of subpart 2 that apply not adversely affect the health or safety Dated: April 27, 2012. for that classification. of minority or low income populations Lisa P. Jackson, (b) [Reserved]. and are designed to protect and enhance Administrator. ■ the health and safety of these and other 6. Section 51.905 is amended by: For the reasons stated in the ■ a. Revising the section heading. populations. preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code ■ K. Congressional Review Act of Federal Regulations is amended as b. Adding a sentence to the end of follows: paragraph (b). The Congressional Review Act, 5 ■ c. Removing and reserving paragraphs U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small PART 50—NATIONAL PRIMARY AND (e)(2)(ii) and (e)(2)(iii). Business Regulatory Enforcement SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY ■ d. Removing paragraph (e)(4). Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides STANDARDS that before a rule may take effect, the The revisions and addition read as agency promulgating the rule must ■ 1. The authority citation for part 50 follows: submit a rule report, which includes a continues to read as follows: § 51.905 How do areas transition from the copy of the rule, to each House of the Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 1-hour NAAQS to the 1997 8-hour NAAQS Congress and to the Comptroller General and what are the anti-backsliding of the United States. The EPA will § 50.9 [Amended] provisions? submit a report containing this rule and ■ 2. Section 50.9 is amended by * * * * * other required information to the U.S. removing paragraph (c). (b) * * * Once an area attains the Senate, the U.S. House of 1-hour NAAQS, the section 172 and 182 Representatives, and the Comptroller PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND contingency measures under the 1-hour General of the United States prior to NAAQS can be shifted to contingency publication of the rule in the Federal SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS measures for the 1997 8-hour ozone Register. A major rule cannot take effect NAAQS and must remain in the SIP until 60 days after it is published in the ■ until the area is redesignated to Federal Register. This action is not a 3. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows: attainment for the 1997 8-hour NAAQS. ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be effective June Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401– * * * * * 13, 2012. 7671q. (e) * * * (2) * * * L. Determination Under Section 307(d) Subpart X—[Amended] (ii) [Reserved] Pursuant to sections 307(d)(1)(E) and ■ 4. Section 51.900 is amended by (iii) [Reserved] 307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA, the adding paragraph (f)(14) to read as * * * * * Administrator determines that this follows: action is subject to the provisions of § 51.900 Definitions. PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS section 307(d). Section 307(d)(1)(V) FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING * * * * * provides that the provisions of section PURPOSES 307(d) apply to ‘‘such other actions as (f) * * * the Administrator may determine.’’ (14) Contingency measures required under CAA sections 172(c)(9) and ■ 7. The authority citation for part 81 V. Statutory Authority 182(c)(9) that would be triggered based continues to read as follows: The statutory authority for this action on a failure to attain the 1-hour NAAQS Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. is provided 42 U.S.C. 7409; 42 U.S.C. by the applicable attainment date or to 7410; 42 U.S.C. 7511–7511f; 42 U.S.C. make reasonable further progress toward Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment 7601(a)(1). attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS. Status Designations * * * * * List of Subjects ■ ■ 5. Section 51.902 is revised to read as 8. In § 81.303, the table entitled 40 CFR Part 50 follows: ‘‘Arizona—Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is amended by revising the entries for Environmental protection, Air § 51.902 Which classification and Phoenix-Mesa, AZ: Maricopa County pollution control, Ozone. nonattainment area planning provisions of (part) and Pinal County (part) to read as the CAA shall apply to areas designated follows: 40 CFR Part 51 nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour NAAQS? Air pollution control, (a) An area designated nonattainment § 81.303 Arizona. Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, for the 1997 8-hour NAAQS will be * * * * * ARIZONA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Phoenix-Mesa, AZ: Maricopa County (part) ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28442 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

ARIZONA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]—Continued

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

T1N, R1E (except that portion in Indian Country); T1N, R2E; T1N, R3E; T1N, R4E; T1N, R5E; T1N, R6E; T1N, R7E; T1N, R1W; T1N, R2W; T1N, R3W; T1N, R4W; T1N, R5W; T1N, R6W; T2N, R1E; T2N, R2E; T2N, R3E; T2N, R4E; T2N, R5E, T2N, R6E; T2N, R7E; T2N, R8E; T2N, R9E; T2N, R10E; T2N, R11E; T2N, R12E (except that portion in Gila County); T2N, R13E (except that portion in Gila County); T2N, R1W; T2N, R2W; T2N, R3W; T2N, R4W; T2N, R5W; T2N, R6W; T2N, R7W; T3N, R1E; T3N, R2E; T3N, R3E; T3N, R4E; T3N, R5E; T3N, R6E; T3N, R7E; T3N, R8E; T3N, R9E; T3N, R10E (except that portion in Gila County); T3N, R11E (except that portion in Gila County); T3N, R12E (except that portion in Gila County); T3N, R1W; T3N, R2W; T3N, R3W; T3N, R4W; T3N, R5W; T3N, R6W; T4N, R1E; T4N, R2E; T4N, R3E; T4N, R4E; T4N, R5E; T4N, R6E; T4N, R7E; T4N, R8E; T4N, R9E; T4N, R10E (except that portion in Gila County); T4N, R11E (except that portion in Gila County); T4N, R12E (except that portion in Gila County); T4N, R1W; T4N, R2W; T4N, R3W; T4N, R4W; T4N, R5W; T4N, R6W; T5N, R1E; T5N, R2E; T5N, R3E; T5N, R4E; T5N, R5E; T5N, R6E; T5N, R7E; T5N, R8E; T5N, R9E (except that portion in Gila County); T5N, R10E (except that portion in Gila County); T5N, R1W; T5N, R2W; T5N, R3W; T5N, R4W; T5N, R5W; T6N, R1E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T6N, R2E; T6N, R3E; T6N, R4E; T6N, R5E; T6N, R6E; T6N, R7E; T6N, R8E; T6N, R9E (except that portion in Gila County); T6N, R10E (except that portion in Gila County); T6N, R1W (except that portion in Yavapai County); T6N, R2W; T6N, R3W; T6N, R4W T6N, R5W T7N, R1E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T7N, R2E; (except that portion in Yavapai County); T7N, R3E; T7N, R4E; T7N, R5E; T7N, R6E; T7N, R7E; T7N, R8E; T7N, R9E (except that portion in Gila Coun- ty); T7N, R1W (except that portion in Yavapai County); T7N, R2W (except that portion in Yavapai County); T8N, R2E (except that por- tion in Yavapai County); T8N, R3E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T8N, R4E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T8N, R5E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T8N, R6E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T8N, R7E (except that portion in Yavapai County); T8N, R8E (except that portion in Yavapai and Gila Counties); T8N, R9E (except that portion in Yavapai and Gila Counties); T1S, R1E (except that portion in Indian Country); T1S, R2E (except that portion in Pinal County and in Indian Country); T1S, R3E; T1S, R4E; T1S, R5E; T1S, R6E; T1S, R7E; T1S, R1W; T1S, R2W; T1S, R3W; T1S, R4W; T1S, R5W; T1S, R6W; T2S, R1E (except that portion in Indian Country); T2S, R5E; T2S, R6E; T2S, R7E; T2S, R1W; T2S, R2W; T2S, R3W; T2S, R4W; T2S, R5W; T3S, R1E; T3S, R1W; T3S, R2W; T3S, R3W; T3S, R4W; T3S, R5W; T4S, 1E; T4S, R1W; T4S, R2W; T4S, R3W; T4S, R4W; T4S, R5W. Pinal County (part) ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Apache Junction: T1N, R8E; T1S, R8E (Sections 1 through 12)

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except otherwise noted. 1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * * ■ a. Amador and Calaveras Cos (Central ■ e. San Diego, CA Mtn), CA ■ f. Sutter Co. (part), CA ■ 9. In § 81.305, the table entitled ■ b. Chico, CA ■ g. Nevada Co. (Western Part), CA ‘‘California—Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ ■ c. Kern Co. (Eastern Kern), CA is amended by revising the entries for ■ d. Mariposa and Tuolumne Cos. § 81.305 California. the following: (Southern Mtn), CA * * * * *

CALIFORNIA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Amador and Calaveras Cos., CA: (Central Mountain Cos.) Amador County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Calaveras County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Chico, CA: Butte County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Kern County (part)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28443

CALIFORNIA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]—Continued

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

That portion of Kern County (with the exception of that portion in Hydrologic Unit Number 18090205—the In- dian Wells Valley) east and south of a line described as follows: Beginning at the Kern-Los Angeles County boundary and running north and east along the north- west boundary of the Rancho La Liebre Land Grant to the point of intersection with the range line common to Range 16 West and Range 17 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian; north along the range line to the point of intersection with the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant boundary; then southeast, north- east, and northwest along the boundary of the Ran- cho El Tejon Grant to the northwest corner of Section 3, Township 11 North, Range 17 West; then west 1.2 miles; then north to the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant boundary; then northwest along the Rancho El Tejon line to the southeast corner of Section 34, Township 32 South, Range 30 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian; then north to the northwest corner of Sec- tion 35, Township 31 South, Range 30 East; then northeast along the boundary of the Rancho El Tejon Land Grant to the southwest corner of Section 18, Township 31 South, Range 31 East; then east to the southeast corner of Section 13, Township 31 South, Range 31 East; then north along the range line com- mon to Range 31 East and Range 32 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, to the northwest corner of Section 6, Township 29 South, Range 32 East; then east to the southwest corner of Section 31, Township 28 South, Range 32 East; then north along the range line common to Range 31 East and Range 32 East to the northwest corner of Section 6, Township 28 South, Range 32 East, then west to the southeast corner of Section 36, Township 27 South, Range 31 East, then north along the range line common to Range 31 East and Range 32 East to the Kern-Tulare County boundary.

******* Mariposa and Tuolumne Cos., CA: (Southern Mountain Counties) Mariposa County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Tuolumne County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. San Diego, CA ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. San Diego County (part) That portion of San Diego County that excludes the areas listed below: La Posta Areas #1 and #2 b, Cuyapaipe Area b, Manzanita Area b, Campo Areas #1 and #2.b

******* Sutter County (part), CA: ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Original. Sutter County (part). (Sutter Buttes) That portion of the Sutter Buttes moun- tain range at or above 2,000 feet in elevation.

******* Nevada County (Western part), CA ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Nevada County (part) That portion of Nevada County, which lies west of a line, described as follows: beginning at the Nevada- Placer County boundary and running north along the western boundaries of Sections 24, 13, 12, 1, Town- ship 17 North, Range 14 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, and Sections 36, 25, 24, 13, 12, Town- ship 18 North, Range 14 East to the Nevada-Sierra County boundary.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28444 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

CALIFORNIA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]—Continued

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise noted. b The boundaries for these designated areas are based on coordinates of latitude and longitude derived from EPA Region 9’s GIS database and are illustrated in a map entitled ‘‘Eastern San Diego County Attainment Areas for the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS,’’ dated March 9, 2004, includ- ing an attached set of coordinates. The map and attached set of coordinates are available at EPA’s Region 9 Air Division office. The designated areas roughly approximate the boundaries of the reservations for these tribes, but their inclusion in this table is intended for CAA planning pur- poses only and is not intended to be a federal determination of the exact boundaries of the reservations. Also, the specific listing of these tribes in this table does not confer, deny, or withdraw Federal recognition of any of the tribes so listed nor any of the tribes not listed. 1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * * is amended by revising the entry for § 81.306 Colorado. ■ 10. In § 81.306, the table entitled Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins- * * * * * ‘‘Colorado—Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ Loveland, CO as follows:

COLORADO—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins-Loveland, CO: Adams County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Arapahoe County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Boulder County (includes part of Rocky Mtn. Nat. Park) 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Broomfield County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Denver County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Douglas County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Jefferson County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Larimer County (part) ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. (includes part of Rocky Mtn. Nat. Park). That portion of the county that lies south of a line described as fol- lows: Beginning at a point on Larimer County’s east- ern boundary and Weld County’s western boundary intersected by 40 degrees, 42 minutes, and 47.1 sec- onds north latitude, proceed west to a point defined by the intersection of 40 degrees, 42 minutes, 47.1 seconds north latitude and 105 degrees, 29 minutes, and 40.0 seconds west longitude, thence proceed south on 105 degrees, 29 minutes, 40.0 seconds west longitude to the intersection with 40 degrees, 33 minutes and 17.4 seconds north latitude, thence pro- ceed west on 40 degrees, 33 minutes, 17.4 seconds north latitude until this line intersects Larimer County’s western boundary and Grand County’s eastern boundary. Weld County (part) ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. That portion of the county that lies south of a line de- scribed as follows: Beginning at a point on Weld County’s eastern boundary and Logan County’s west- ern boundary intersected by 40 degrees, 42 minutes, 47.1 seconds north latitude, proceed west on 40 de- grees, 42 minutes, 47.1 seconds north latitude until this line intersects Weld County’s western boundary and Larimer County’s eastern boundary.

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise noted. 1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 2 Early Action Compact Area, effective date deferred until November 20, 2007.

* * * * * amended by revising the entry for Las § 81.329 Nevada. ■ 11. In § 81.329, the table entitled Vegas, NV as follows: * * * * * ‘‘Nevada—Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28445

NEVADA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Las Vegas, NV: Clark County ...... 2 Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. That portion of Clark County that lies in hydrographic areas 164A, 164B, 165, 166, 167, 212, 213, 214, 216, 217, and 218 but excluding the Moapa River Indian Reservation and the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation.b

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise noted. b The use of reservation boundaries for this designation is for purposes of CAA planning only and is not intended to be a federal determination of the exact boundaries of the reservations. Nor does the specific listing of the Tribes in this table confer, deny or withdraw Federal recognition of any of the Tribes listed or not listed. 1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 2 The effective date is September 13, 2004.

* * * * * ■ a. Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY ■ e. Rochester, NY ■ 12. In § 81.333, the table entitled ■ b. Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY § 81.333 New York. ‘‘New York—Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ ■ c. Essex County (Whiteface Mtn.), is amended by revising the entries for NY—Essex County (Part) * * * * * the following: ■ d. Jamestown, NY

NEW YORK—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY: Albany County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Greene County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Montgomery County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Rensselaer County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Saratoga County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Schenectady County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Schoharie County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY: Erie County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Niagara County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Essex County (Whiteface Mtn.), NY: Essex County (part). The portion of Whiteface Mountain above 1,900 feet in ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. elevation in Essex County.

******* Jamestown, NY: Chautauqua County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate.

******* Rochester, NY: Genesee County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Livingston County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Monroe County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Ontario County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Orleans County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal. Wayne County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Marginal.

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise noted. 1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 2 The effective date is September 13, 2004.

* * * * * Standard)’’ is amended by revising the § 81.339 Pennsylvania. ■ 13. In § 81.339 the table entitled entries for Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA * * * * * ‘‘Pennsylvania—Ozone (8-Hour as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 28446 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

PENNSYLVANIA—OZONE [8-HOUR STANDARD]

Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

******* Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA: Allegheny County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Armstrong County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Beaver County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Butler County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Fayette County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Washington County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate. Westmoreland County ...... Nonattainment ...... 6/13/12 Subpart 2/Moderate.

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except otherwise noted. 1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 2 The effective date is September 13, 2004.

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2012–11232 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:47 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYR2.SGM 14MYR2 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES2 Vol. 77 Monday, No. 93 May 14, 2012

Part III

Department of Transportation

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 350, 385, 395 et al. Electronic On-Board Recorders for Hours-of-Service Compliance; Removal of Final Rule Vacated by Court; Unsatisfactory Safety Rating; Revocation of Operating Authority Registration; Technical Amendments; Final Rules

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 28448 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION a notice of proposed rulemaking 656 F.3d 580 (7th Cir. 2011). The court (NPRM) and an opportunity for public found that FMCSA’s failure to address Federal Motor Carrier Safety comment, the APA provides an the issue of harassment as part of the Administration exception when an agency ‘‘for good rulemaking—a factor the Agency was cause finds * * * that notice and public required to address under 49 U.S.C. 49 CFR Parts 350, 385, 395, and 396 procedure * * * are impracticable, 31137(a)—rendered the rulemaking [Docket No. FMCSA–2012–0006] unnecessary, or contrary to the public arbitrary and capricious. 656 F.3d at interest.’’ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Because 582, 589. Although the court’s opinion RIN 2126–AB45 this rule only makes changes that are focused on the remedial directive for necessary in light of the court’s decision carriers that demonstrated Electronic On-Board Recorders for vacating the April 2010 rulemaking and noncompliance with hours of service Hours-of-Service Compliance; has no substantive effect on the public, rules, the court vacated the entire rule. Removal of Final Rule Vacated by FMCSA finds that notice and 656 F.3d at 584, 589. Court opportunity for public comment is On October 7, 2011, FMCSA AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety unnecessary and contrary to the public announced in a Federal Register notice Administration (FMCSA), DOT. interest under the APA. that it would not appeal the court’s Similarly, given that the changes decision. 76 FR 62496. ACTION: Final rule. included in this rulemaking reflect the III. Impact of Seventh Circuit Decision SUMMARY: This final rule rescinds the regulatory requirements currently in final rule published on April 5, 2010, place as a result of the court’s decision, The effect of the court’s decision was entitled ‘‘Electronic On-Board Recorders FMCSA finds that the normal 30-day to void the changes to Title 49 of the for Hours-of-Service Compliance’’ and minimum delayed effective date CFR that were part of the April 2010 2 amended by a September 13, 2010, following publication of a final rule final rule. Stated otherwise, the technical amendment. This action under the APA does not apply. 5 U.S.C. provisions of Title 49 affected by the responds to a decision of the Court of 553(d)(3). The 30-day delay would serve rulemaking were modified as a result of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit that no purpose other than continue the the court’s action so as to return the vacated the April 2010 final rule. inconsistency between the regulations regulatory text to its posture on June 3, reflected in the CFR system and 2010, immediately before the effective DATES: Effective May 14, 2012. regulations actually in effect. date of the rule vacated by the court. ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to This final rule takes the read background documents, including II. Background Information administrative steps necessary to those referenced in this document, go On April 5, 2010, FMCSA published remove language from the Code of to: a final rule entitled ‘‘Electronic On- Federal Regulations (CFR) that was • Regulations.gov, http:// Board Recorders for Hours-of-Service added by the April 2010 final rule and www.regulations.gov, at any time and Compliance’’ (EOBRs). See 75 FR 17208, to reinstate prior regulatory language, insert FMCSA–2012–0006 in the as amended by 75 FR 55488 (September consistent with the court’s decision. ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then click 13, 2010). Among other changes, the IV. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews ‘‘Search.’’ April 2010 final rule: (1) Prescribed new • Docket Management Facility, Room performance standards for EOBRs Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory W12–140, DOT Building, 1200 New installed in commercial motor vehicles Planning and Review), Executive Order Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC (CMVs) manufactured on or after June 4, 13563 (Improving Regulation and 20590. You may view the docket online 2012; (2) provided for the issuance of Regulatory Review), and DOT by visiting the facility between 9 a.m. remedial directives to carriers that Regulatory Policies and Procedures and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday demonstrated noncompliance with FMCSA has determined that this except Federal holidays. For documents Hours of Service rules at a prescribed action does not meet the criteria for a related to the April 2010 final rule, see level during the course of compliance ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as docket number FMCSA–2004–18940. reviews, requiring such carriers to use specified in Executive Order 12866, as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. EOBRs for a 2-year period; (3) altered supplemented by Executive Order William Varga, Office of Chief Counsel, the Agency’s safety fitness standard to 13563, or within the meaning of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety take into account issuance of a remedial Department of Transportation regulatory Administration, 1200 New Jersey directive when determining a carrier’s policies and procedures (44 FR 11034, Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; fitness; and (4) modified supporting Feb. 26, 1979). While the April 2010 telephone (202) 493–0349. If you have document requirements and compliance final rule was an economically questions on viewing the docket, call review procedures for those carriers that Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, voluntarily chose to use EOBRs. The 2 The court’s decision did not affect carriers that Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– final rule took effect on June 4, 2010.1 voluntarily elect to use EOBRs that satisfy 9826. On June 3, 2010, the Owner-Operator preexisting regulatory requirements to track SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Independent Drivers Association, Inc., compliance with Hours of Service regulations. See filed a petition in the United States 49 CFR 395.15, as modified by this rulemaking. Nor I. Legal Basis for Rulemaking did the court’s decision affect carriers that agree to Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit use electronic monitors that go beyond the minimal The legal basis for the April 2010 final challenging the April 2010 final rule. requirements of 49 CFR 395.15 under settlement rule is fully addressed in the rule and Owner-Operator Indep. Drivers Ass’n v. agreements entered as part of the Agency’s enforcement proceedings. The court’s decision available at 75 FR 17209–17210. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin., eliminated the supporting document relief adopted However, this final rulemaking is made as part of the April 2010 final rule and reflected in necessary by the Court of Appeals for 1 The September 13, 2010 rulemaking, referenced 49 CFR 395.11, but it did not affect an Agency the Seventh Circuit’s vacatur of the above, made technical changes to the April 2010 policy encouraging carriers to employ qualifying rule, including changes to the temperature range in electronic mobile communication/tracking April 2010 rulemaking. which EOBRs must be able to operate and the technology by reducing the type of supporting While the Administrative Procedure connector type specified for the Universal Serial documents the carrier must maintain. See 75 FR Act (APA) normally requires issuance of Bus interface. 32984 (June 10, 2010).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28449

significant regulatory action, as is categorically excluded from further governments. FMCSA analyzed this explained above, this final rule is made analysis and documentation in an action in accordance with Executive necessary by the court’s decision environmental assessment or Order 13132. This final rule does not vacating the April 2010 rulemaking. The environmental impact statement under preempt or modify any provision of rule simply codifies in Title 49 of the FMCSA Order 5610.1, paragraph 6(b) of State law, impose substantial direct CFR the effect of the court’s decision. Appendix 2. This categorical exclusion unreimbursed compliance costs on any covers editorial and procedural Regulatory Flexibility Act State, or diminish the power of any regulations. A Categorical Exclusion State to enforce its own laws. FMCSA is not required to prepare a determination is available for inspection Accordingly, this rulemaking does not final regulatory flexibility analysis for or copying in the Regulations.gov Web have Federalism implications this final rule under the Regulatory site listed under ADDRESSES. warranting the application of Executive Flexibility Act, as amended by the FMCSA also analyzed this action Order 13132. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 601, et Act (CAA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, seq., because the Agency has not issued et seq.), and implementing regulations Distribution, or Use) an NPRM prior to this action. This final promulgated by the Environmental rule also complies with the President’s Protection Agency. Approval of this FMCSA analyzed this action under memorandum of January 18, 2011, action is exempt from the CAA’s general Executive Order 13211, Actions entitled Regulatory Flexibility, Small conformity requirement since it would Concerning Regulations That Business, and Job Creation (76 FR 3827). result in no emissions increase or an Significantly Affect Energy Supply, As addressed above, promulgation of increase in emissions that is clearly de Distribution, or Use. FMCSA this final rule is required as a result of minimis. determined that it is not a ‘‘significant the court’s decision. Additionally, the energy action’’ under that Executive rule was vacated before it took effect, so Executive Order 12372 Order because it is not economically neither costs nor benefits were ever (Intergovernmental Review of Federal significant and is not likely to have an realized. Programs) adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding List of Subjects FMCSA is not required to prepare an intergovernmental consultation on assessment under the Unfunded Federal programs and activities do not 49 CFR Part 350 Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. apply to this action. 1531, et seq., evaluating a discretionary Grant programs—transportation, regulatory action because the Agency Executive Order 12630 (Constitutionally Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor has not issued an NPRM prior to this Protected Property Rights) vehicle safety, Reporting and action. Further, as addressed above, This final rule does not effect a taking recordkeeping requirements. promulgation of this final rule is of private property or otherwise have 49 CFR Part 385 required as a result of the court’s implications under Executive Order decision. 12630. Administrative practice and Paperwork Reduction Act Executive Order 12898 (Environmental procedure, Highway safety, Motor In the April 2010 final rule, FMCSA Justice) carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping. estimated a reduced annual burden for This final rule raises no purposes of the Paperwork Reduction environmental justice issues, nor is 49 CFR Part 395 Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., of 3,110,000 there any collective environmental hours for FMCSA’s information impact resulting from its promulgation. Highway safety, Motor carriers, collection OMB Control Number 2126– Reporting and recordkeeping. 0001, based on the remedial provisions Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 49 CFR Part 396 of the final rule. On August 20, 2010, Reform) OMB approved FMCSA’s most recent This final rule meets applicable Highways and roads, Motor carriers, calculation of the paperwork burden of standards in section 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Motor vehicle equipment, Motor vehicle the Hours of Service rule. As a result of Executive Order 12988 to minimize safety. the court’s action, FMCSA removed the litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduction contemplated in the April reduce burden. For the reasons discussed in the 2010 final rule in its most recent preamble, FMCSA amends 49 CFR application for an extension of this Executive Order 13045 (Protection of chapter III as set forth below: information collection. OMB approved Children) the application on December 11, 2011. This final rule does not pose an PART 350—COMMERCIAL MOTOR environmental risk to health or safety CARRIER SAFETY ASSISTANCE National Environmental Policy Act and that may disproportionately affect PROGRAM Clean Air Act children. FMCSA analyzed this final rule for ■ 1. The authority citation for part 350 Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) the purpose of the National continues to read as follows: Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 A rulemaking has implications for Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13902, 31101–31104, U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined Federalism under Executive Order 31108, 31136, 31140–31141, 31161, 31310– under our environmental procedures 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial 31311, 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. Order 5610.1, issued March 1, 2004 (69 direct effect on State or local FR 9680), that this action does not have governments and would either preempt ■ 2. Amend § 350.201 by revising the any effect on the quality of the State law or impose a substantial direct introductory text and removing environment. Therefore, this final rule cost of compliance on State or local paragraph (z) to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 28450 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

§ 350.201 What conditions must a State § 385.5 Safety fitness standard. § 385.15 Administrative review. meet to qualify for Basic Program Funds? The Satisfactory safety rating is based (a) A motor carrier may request the Each State must meet the following on the degree of compliance with the FMCSA to conduct an administrative twenty-two conditions: safety fitness standard for motor review if it believes the FMCSA has * * * * * carriers. For intrastate motor carriers committed an error in assigning its subject to the hazardous materials safety proposed safety rating in accordance PART 385—SAFETY FITNESS permit requirements of subpart E of this with § 385.15(c) or its final safety rating PROCEDURES part, the motor carrier must meet the in accordance with § 385.11(b). equivalent State requirements. To meet * * * * * ■ 3. The authority citation for part 385 the safety fitness standard, the motor continues to read as follows: carrier must demonstrate it has adequate § 385.17 [Amended] Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, 504, 521(b), safety management controls in place, ■ 11. Amend § 385.17 by removing 5105(e), 5109, 13901–13905, 31133, 31135, which function effectively to ensure paragraphs (k) and (l). 31136, 31137(a), 31144, 31148, and 31502; acceptable compliance with applicable ■ 12. Amend § 385.19 by revising Sec. 113(a), Pub. L. 103–311; Sec. 408, Pub. safety requirements to reduce the risk paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: L. 104–88; Sec. 350 of Pub. L. 107–87; and associated with: 49 CFR 1.73. (a) Commercial driver’s license § 385.19 Safety fitness information. standard violations (part 383), (a) Final ratings will be made ■ 4. Amend § 385.1 by revising (b) Inadequate levels of financial available to other Federal and State paragraph (a) to read as follows: responsibility (part 387), agencies in writing, telephonically or by § 385.1 Purpose and scope. (c) The use of unqualified drivers remote computer access. (part 391), (b) The final safety rating assigned to (a) This part establishes the FMCSA’s (d) Improper use and driving of motor a motor carrier will be made available procedures to determine the safety vehicles (part 392), to the public upon request. Any person fitness of motor carriers, to assign safety (e) Unsafe vehicles operating on the requesting the assigned rating of a motor ratings, to direct motor carriers to take highways (part 393), carrier shall provide the FMCSA with remedial action when required, and to (f) Failure to maintain accident the motor carrier’s name, principal prohibit motor carriers receiving a safety registers and copies of accident reports office address, and, if known, the rating of ‘‘unsatisfactory’’ from (part 390), USDOT number or the ICCMC docket operating a CMV. (g) The use of fatigued drivers (part number, if any. * * * * * 395), * * * * * ■ 5. Amend § 385.3 by removing the (h) Inadequate inspection, repair, and ■ 13. Amend § 385.407 by revising definitions of the terms ‘‘safety fitness maintenance of vehicles (part 396), paragraph (a) to read as follows: determination’’ and ‘‘safety rating or (i) Transportation of hazardous ratings’’ and by adding a definition for materials, driving and parking rule § 385.407 What conditions must a motor the term ‘‘safety ratings,’’ in alphabetical violations (part 397), carrier satisfy for FMCSA to issue a safety order, to read as follows: (j) Violation of hazardous materials permit? regulations (parts 170 through 177), and (a) Motor carrier safety performance. § 385.3 Definitions and acronyms. (k) Motor vehicle accidents and (1) The motor carrier must have a * * * * * hazardous materials incidents. ‘‘Satisfactory’’ safety rating assigned by Safety ratings. (1) Satisfactory safety ■ 7. Amend § 385.9 by revising either FMCSA, pursuant to the Safety rating means that a motor carrier has in paragraph (a) to read as follows: Fitness Procedures of this part, or the place and functioning adequate safety § 385.9 Determination of a safety rating. State in which the motor carrier has its management controls to meet the safety principal place of business, if the State fitness standard prescribed in § 385.5. (a) Following a compliance review of has adopted and implemented safety Safety management controls are a motor carrier operation, the FMCSA, fitness procedures that are equivalent to adequate if they are appropriate for the using the factors prescribed in § 385.7 as the procedures in subpart A of this part; size and type of operation of the computed under the Safety Fitness and particular motor carrier. Rating Methodology set forth in (2) FMCSA will not issue a safety (2) Conditional safety rating means a appendix B of this part, shall determine permit to a motor carrier that: motor carrier does not have adequate whether the present operations of the (i) Does not certify that it has a safety management controls in place to motor carrier are consistent with the satisfactory security program as required ensure compliance with the safety safety fitness standard set forth in in § 385.407(b); fitness standard that could result in § 385.5, and assign a safety rating (ii) Has a crash rate in the top 30 occurrences listed in § 385.5 (a) through accordingly. percent of the national average as (k). * * * * * indicated in the FMCSA Motor Carrier (3) Unsatisfactory safety rating means ■ 8. Amend § 385.11 by revising the Management Information System a motor carrier does not have adequate section heading to read as set forth (MCMIS); or safety management controls in place to below, and by removing paragraph (g). (iii) Has a driver, vehicle, hazardous ensure compliance with the safety materials, or total out-of-service rate in fitness standard which has resulted in § 385.11 Notification of safety fitness the top 30 percent of the national determination. occurrences listed in § 385.5 (a) through average as indicated in the MCMIS. (k). * * * * * * * * * * (4) Unrated carrier means that a safety § 385.13 [Amended] rating has not been assigned to the Subpart J—[Removed] ■ 9. Amend § 385.13 by removing motor carrier by the FMCSA. paragraph (e). ■ 14. Remove and reserve subpart J to * * * * * ■ 10. Amend § 385.15 by revising part 385, consisting of § 385.801 through ■ 6. Revise § 385.5 to read as follows: paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 385.819.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28451

■ 15. Amend Appendix B to part 385 by ‘‘802.11,’’ ‘‘Electronic on-board PART 396—INSPECTION, REPAIR AND revising paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) and recording device (EOBR),’’ ‘‘Integrally MAINTENANCE section VI, paragraph (a), to read synchronized,’’ ‘‘USB,’’ and ‘‘UTC.’’ follows: ■ 19. Amend § 395.8 by revising ■ 26. The authority citation for part 396 continues to read as follows: Appendix B to Part 385—Explanation paragraphs (a)(2) and (e) to read as of Safety Rating Process follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31151, and 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. * * * * * § 395.8 Driver’s record of duty status. ■ (b) As directed, FMCSA promulgated a (a) * * * 27. Amend § 396.9 by revising the safety fitness regulation, entitled ‘‘Safety section heading, the heading of (2) Every driver who operates a Fitness Procedures,’’ which established a paragraph (c), and paragraph (c)(1) to commercial motor vehicle shall record procedure to determine the safety fitness of read as follows: motor carriers through the assignment of his/her duty status by using an safety ratings and established a ‘‘safety automatic on-board recording device § 396.9 Inspection of motor vehicles and fitness standard’’ which a motor carrier must that meets the requirements of § 395.15 intermodal equipment in operation. meet to obtain a satisfactory safety rating. of this part. The requirements of § 395.8 * * * * * (c) Critical regulations are those identified shall not apply, except paragraphs (e) as such where noncompliance relates to (c) Motor vehicles and intermodal management and/or operational controls. and (k)(1) and (2) of this section. equipment declared ‘‘out-of-service.’’ (1) These are indicative of breakdowns in a * * * * * Authorized personnel shall declare and carrier’s management controls. An example (e) Failure to complete the record of mark ‘‘out-of-service’’ any motor vehicle of a critical regulation is § 395.3(a)(1), duty activities of this section or or intermodal equipment which by requiring or permitting a property-carrying reason of its mechanical condition or commercial motor vehicle driver to drive § 395.15, failure to preserve a record of more than 11 hours. such duty activities, or making of false loading would likely cause an accident (d) The safety rating process developed by reports in connection with such duty or a breakdown. An ‘‘out-of-Service FMCSA is used to: activities shall make the driver and/or Vehicle’’ sticker shall be used to mark 1. Evaluate safety fitness and assign one of the carrier liable to prosecution. vehicles and intermodal equipment three safety ratings (satisfactory, conditional, * * * * * ‘‘out-of-service.’’ or unsatisfactory) to motor carriers operating * * * * * in interstate commerce. This process § 395.11 [Removed and Reserved] conforms to 49 CFR 385.5, Safety fitness Issued on: May 1, 2012. standard, and § 385.7, Factors to be ■ 20. Remove and reserve § 395.11. Anne S. Ferro, considered in determining a safety rating. ■ 21. Amend § 395.13 by revising Administrator. 2. Identify motor carriers needing paragraph (b)(2) to read as set forth [FR Doc. 2012–11437 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] improvement in their compliance with the below and removing paragraph (b)(4). Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations BILLING CODE P (FMCSRs) and applicable Hazardous Material § 395.13 Drivers declared out of service. Regulations (HMRs). These are carriers rated unsatisfactory or conditional. * * * * * DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION * * * * * (b) * * * (2) No driver required to maintain a Federal Motor Carrier Safety VI. Conclusion record of duty status under § 395.8 or Administration (a) The FMCSA believes this ‘‘safety fitness § 395.15 of this part shall fail to have a rating methodology’’ is a reasonable record of duty status current on the day 49 CFR Parts 350, 385, and 395 approach for assigning a safety rating which of examination and for the prior seven best describes the current safety fitness [Docket No. FMCSA–2012–0049] consecutive days. posture of a motor carrier as required by the RIN 2126–AB50 safety fitness regulations (§ 385.9). This * * * * * methodology has the capability to ■ 22. Amend § 395.15 by revising the Unsatisfactory Safety Rating; incorporate regulatory changes as they occur. heading of paragraph (a) and paragraph Revocation of Operating Authority * * * * * (a)(1) to read as follows: Registration; Technical Amendments Appendix C to Part 385—[Removed] § 395.15 Automatic on-board recording AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety ■ 16. Remove Appendix C to part 385. devices. Administration (FMCSA), DOT. (a) Authority to use automatic on- ACTION: Final rule. PART 395—HOURS OF SERVICE OF board recording device. (1) A motor DRIVERS carrier may require a driver to use an SUMMARY: This final rule repromulgates automatic on-board recording device to in the Code of Federal Regulations a ■ 17. The authority citation for part 395 statutory requirement that FMCSA continues to read as follows: record the driver’s hours of service in lieu of complying with the requirements revoke the operating authority Authority: 49 U.S.C. 504, 31133, 31136, of § 395.8 of this part. registration of a for-hire motor carrier 31137, and 31502; sec. 113, Pub. L. 103–311, for failure to comply with safety fitness * * * * * 108 Stat. 1673, 1676; sec. 229, Pub. L. 106– requirements; if the Agency determines 159 (as transferred by sec. 4115 and amended § 395.16 [Removed] that a motor carrier is ‘‘Unfit’’ based on by secs. 4130–4132, Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. its Safety Fitness Determination 1144, 1726, 1743, 1744); sec. 4133, Pub. L. ■ 23. Remove § 395.16. 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1744; sec. 108, Pub. procedures, the Agency must revoke the L. 110–432, 122 Stat. 4860–4866; and 49 CFR § 395.18 [Removed] carrier’s operating authority registration. 1.73. Unfit motor carriers are prohibited from ■ 24. Remove § 395.18. operating in interstate commerce, and § 395.2 [Amended] Appendix A to Part 395—[Removed] the Secretary of Transportation is ■ 18. Amend 395.2 by removing the required by statute to revoke their definitions of ‘‘CD–RW,’’ ‘‘CMRS,’’ ■ 25. Remove Appendix A to part 395. operating authority registration. This

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 28452 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

final rule also repromulgates several (EOBRs), which were the subject of that amended by 75 FR 55488 (Sept. 13, technical provisions and makes non- litigation. 2010).1 As part of that rulemaking, substantive administrative changes. The additional administrative and FMCSA set forth in regulation a These changes, initially adopted as part technical corrections described below, statutory requirement enacted in of the April 5, 2010, final rule entitled although not related to the use of SAFETEA–LU § 4104. Subject to certain ‘‘Electronic On-Board Recorders for EOBRs, are nevertheless supported by procedural provisions, FMCSA is Hours-of-Service Compliance,’’ are several broad grants of statutory required under this statute to revoke the necessary because, for reasons unrelated authority that were fully addressed in operating authority registration of a to this final rule, the United States Court the April 2010 rulemaking’s Legal Basis motor carrier that has failed to comply of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit discussion, available at 75 FR 17209— with safety fitness requirements under invalidated the previous rule. 17210. 49 U.S.C. 31144. See 49 U.S.C. DATES: Effective May 14, 2012. While the Administrative Procedure 13905(f)(1)(B) and (3). The EOBR final ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to Act (APA) normally requires issuance of rule took effect on June 4, 2010. On June 3, 2010, the Owner-Operator read background documents, including a notice of proposed rulemaking Independent Drivers Association, Inc., those referenced in this document, go (NPRM) and an opportunity for public filed a petition in the United States to: comment, the APA provides an • Regulations.gov, http:// exception when an agency ‘‘for good Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit www.regulations.gov, at any time and cause finds * * * that notice and public challenging the April 2010 final rule. insert FMCSA–2012–0049 in the procedure * * * are impracticable, The court found that FMCSA’s failure to ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then click unnecessary, or contrary to the public address the issue of harassment through ‘‘Search.’’ interest.’’ 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The the use of electronic monitoring devices Docket Management Facility, Room repromulgation of 49 CFR 385.13(e) as part of the rulemaking, as required W12–140, DOT Building, 1200 New conforms FMCSA’s regulations with a under 49 U.S.C. 31137(a), rendered the Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC statutory requirement for revocation of rulemaking arbitrary and capricious. 20590. You may view the docket online operating authority under prescribed Owner-Operator Indep. Drivers Ass’n, by visiting the facility between 9 a.m. circumstances. The APA exception is Inc. v. Federal Motor Carrier Safety and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday appropriate because FMCSA lacks any Admin., 656 F.3d 580, 582, 589 (7th Cir. except Federal holidays. policy discretion in implementing this 2011). Although the court had focused mandate. Furthermore, the additional on a remedial program under the rule FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. that would have required carriers that William Varga, Office of Chief Counsel, amendments are administrative and technical changes that do not result in demonstrated noncompliance with Federal Motor Carrier Safety hours of service rules to install and use Administration, 1200 New Jersey any substantive modifications in the CFR. For these reasons, FMCSA finds EOBRs, the court vacated the entire rule, Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; including, sub silentio, the provision on telephone (202) 493–0349. that the opportunity for notice and public comment is unnecessary and revocation of operating authority SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION contrary to the public interest under the registration. 656 F.3d at 584, 589. On I. Legal Basis for Rulemaking APA. October 7, 2011, FMCSA announced in a Federal Register notice that it would The legal basis for the repromulgation Similarly, FMCSA finds that the normal 30-day minimum delayed not appeal the court’s decision. 76 FR of 49 CFR 385.13(e) is section 4104 of 62496. the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, effective date following publication of a final rule under the APA does not In a separate final rule published in Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A today’s Federal Register, titled Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU), Public apply. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Because the repromulgation of 49 CFR 385.13(e) Electronic On-Board Recorders for Law 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1716–1717 Hours-of-Service Compliance; Removal (Aug. 10, 2005), which requires the simply codifies a statutory requirement that the Agency is currently required to of Final Rule Vacated by Court, (see the Secretary of Transportation to revoke Final Rules section of this Federal the operating authority registration of a follow, a 30-day delay would serve no purpose other than to postpone Register), FMCSA restores the motor carrier that has been prohibited regulatory text to its posture on June 3, conforming the regulation with current from operating in interstate commerce 2010, immediately before the effective Agency practice consistent with the for failure to comply with safety fitness date of the rule the court vacated. requirements. See 49 U.S.C. statutory requirements. The additional 13905(f)(1)(B) and (3). The administrative and technical changes do Discussion of This Final Rule implementing regulations for the safety not result in any substantive This final rule does two things. First, fitness requirements are codified under modifications. None of the changes it repromulgates 49 CFR 385.13(e), 49 CFR Part 385. Under these requires the regulated industry to codifying in the CFR the statutory requirements, motor carriers determined prepare for implementation. For these requirement that FMCSA revoke the to be ‘‘Unfit’’ are prohibited from reasons, FMCSA finds good cause as to operating authority registration of a operating commercial motor vehicles in why the normal delayed effective date motor carrier that is prohibited from interstate commerce. Implementation of under the APA is not required and the operating in interstate commerce for 49 U.S.C. 13905(f)(1)(B) and (3) has been rules adopted here should become failure to comply with the safety fitness delegated to the Administrator of effective on the date of publication. requirements, subject to certain FMCSA. 49 CFR 1.73(a)(5). FMCSA has II. Background Information and statutory procedural requirements. no policy discretion in the Discussion of This Final Rule Second, this final rule also implementation of this statutory repromulgates certain technical mandate. See 49 U.S.C. 13905(f)(1)(B). Background Information This provision was not the focus of the On April 5, 2010, FMCSA published 1 The September 13, 2010, rulemaking made technical changes to the April 2010 rule, including Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ a final rule titled ‘‘Electronic On-Board changes to the temperature range in which EOBRs August 26, 2011 vacature, nor is it Recorders for Hours-of-Service must be able to operate and the connector type related to electronic on-board records Compliance.’’ See 75 FR 17208, as specified for the Universal Serial Bus interface.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28453

corrections in regulatory text that were includes administrative and technical implications under Executive Order included for administrative convenience corrections. 12630. as part of the April 2010 rulemaking, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 but that are not related to EOBR devices. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental The administrative and technical The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Justice) corrections include: (1) In 49 CFR of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires This final rule raises no 350.201, correcting a reference to the Federal agencies to assess the effects of environmental justice issues nor is there number of factors listed for Basic their discretionary regulatory actions. In any collective environmental impact Program Funds under the Motor Carrier particular this Act addresses actions resulting from its promulgation. Safety Assistance Program; (2) in 49 that may result in the expenditure by a CFR 385.5, clarifying cross-references to State, local, or tribal governments, in the Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice other provisions of Title 49 of the CFR; aggregate, or by the private sector of Reform) (3) in 49 CFR 385.15(a), correcting and $100,000,000 or more in any one year. clarifying a cross-reference relating to This final rule will not result in such an This final rule meets applicable administrative review; (4) in 49 CFR expenditure. standards in section 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to minimize part 385, Appendix B, (d)2, making a Paperwork Reduction Act grammatical correction so that the litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and singular word ‘‘Material’’ is plural; and This final rule calls for no new reduce burden. (5) in 49 CFR 395.8(a)(2), clarifying an collection of information under the Executive Order 13045 (Protection of internal reference to that section. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Children) U.S.C. 3501–3520). III. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews National Environmental Policy Act and This final rule does not pose an Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Clean Air Act environmental risk to health or safety Planning and Review), Executive Order that may disproportionately affect FMCSA analyzed this final rule for 13563 (Improving Regulation and children. the purpose of the National Regulatory Review), and DOT Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) Regulatory Policies and Procedures U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined FMCSA has determined that this under our environmental procedures A rulemaking has implications for action does not meet the criteria for a Order 5610.1, issued March 1, 2004 (69 Federalism under Executive Order ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as FR 9680), that this action does not have 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial specified in Executive Order 12866, as any effect on the quality of the direct effect on State or local supplemented by Executive Order environment. Therefore, this final rule governments and would either preempt 13563, or within the meaning of the is categorically excluded from further State law or impose a substantial direct Department of Transportation regulatory analysis and documentation in an cost of compliance on State or local policies and procedures (44 FR 11034, environmental assessment or governments. FMCSA analyzed this Feb. 26, 1979). While the April 2010 environmental impact statement under action in accordance with Executive final rule was an economically FMCSA Order 5610.1, paragraph 6(b) of Order 13132. This final rule does not significant regulatory action, that Appendix 2. This categorical exclusion preempt or modify any provision of assessment was based on the costs and covers editorial and procedural State law, impose substantial direct benefits of requiring certain motor regulations. A Categorical Exclusion unreimbursed compliance costs on any carriers to use EOBRs. As explained determination is available for inspection State, or diminish the power of any above, this final rule is strictly technical or copying in the Regulations.gov Web State to enforce its own laws. Accordingly, this rulemaking does not in that it repromulgates a site listed under ADDRESSES. nondiscretionary statutory requirement FMCSA also analyzed this action have Federalism implications and includes administrative and under section 176(c) of the Clean Air warranting the application of Executive technical corrections not related to Act (CAA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 Order 13132. EOBRs. However, these changes were et seq.), and implementing regulations Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, made necessary by the court’s decision promulgated by the Environmental Distribution, or Use) vacating the entire April 2010 rule. Protection Agency. Approval of this FMCSA analyzed this action under Regulatory Flexibility Act action is exempt from the CAA’s general conformity requirement since it would Executive Order 13211, Actions FMCSA is not required to prepare a result in no emissions increase or an Concerning Regulations That final regulatory flexibility analysis for increase in emissions that is clearly de Significantly Affect Energy Supply, this final rule under the Regulatory minimis. Distribution, or Use. FMCSA Flexibility Act, as amended by the determined that it is not a ‘‘significant Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Executive Order 12372 energy action’’ under that Executive Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 601, et (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Order because it is not economically seq., because the Agency has not issued Programs) significant and is not likely to have an an NPRM prior to this action. This final The regulations implementing adverse effect on the supply, rule also complies with the President’s Executive Order 12372 regarding distribution, or use of energy. memorandum of January 18, 2011, intergovernmental consultation on entitled Regulatory Flexibility, Small Federal programs and activities do not List of Subjects Business, and Job Creation (76 FR 3827). apply to this action. 49 CFR Part 350 As addressed above, promulgation of this final rule is strictly technical in that Executive Order 12630 (Constitutionally Grant programs—transportation, it repromulgates in FMCSA regulations Protected Property Rights) Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor a nondiscretionary statutory This final rule does not effect a taking vehicle safety, Reporting and requirement currently in place and of private property or otherwise have recordkeeping requirements.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 28454 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

49 CFR Part 385 acceptable compliance with applicable review if it believes FMCSA has Administrative practice and safety requirements to reduce the risk committed an error in assigning its procedure, Highway safety, Motor associated with: proposed or final safety rating in carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting (a) Commercial driver’s license accordance with § 385.11. standard violations (part 383 of this and recordkeeping. * * * * * chapter), 49 CFR Part 395 (b) Inadequate levels of financial Appendix B to Part 385—Explanation of Safety Rating Process Highway safety, Motor carriers, responsibility (part 387 of this chapter), (c) The use of unqualified drivers Reporting and recordkeeping (part 391 of this chapter), ■ 7. Amend Appendix B to part 385 by For the reasons discussed in the (d) Improper use and driving of motor revising paragraph (d)2 to read as preamble, FMCSA amends 49 CFR vehicles (part 392 of this chapter), follows: chapter III as set forth below: (e) Unsafe vehicles operating on the highways (part 393 of this chapter), * * * * * PART 350—COMMERCIAL MOTOR (f) Failure to maintain accident (d) * * * 2. Identify motor carriers needing CARRIER SAFETY ASSISTANCE registers and copies of accident reports PROGRAM improvement in their compliance with the (part 390 of this chapter), Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations ■ (g) The use of fatigued drivers (part (FMCSRs) and applicable Hazardous 1. The authority citation for part 350 395 of this chapter), continues to read as follows: Materials Regulations (HMRs). These are (h) Inadequate inspection, repair, and carriers rated unsatisfactory or conditional. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13902, 31101–31104, maintenance of vehicles (part 396 of this * * * * * 31108, 31136, 31140–31141, 31161, 31310– chapter), 31311, 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. (i) Transportation of hazardous materials, driving and parking rule PART 395—HOURS OF SERVICE OF ■ 2. Amend § 350.201 by revising the DRIVERS introductory text to read as follows: violations (part 397 of this chapter), (j) Violation of hazardous materials § 350.201 What conditions must a State regulations (parts 170–177 of this title), ■ 8. The authority citation for part 395 meet to qualify for Basic Program Funds? and continues to read as follows: Each State must meet the following 25 (k) Motor vehicle accidents and Authority: 49 U.S.C. 504, 31133, 31136, conditions: hazardous materials incidents. 31137, and 31502; sec. 113, Pub. L. 103–311, * * * * * ■ 5. Amend § 385.13 by adding 108 Stat. 1673, 1676; sec. 229, Pub. L. 106– 159 (as transferred by sec. 4115 and amended paragraph (e) to read as follows: PART 385—SAFETY FITNESS by secs. 4130–4132, Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. PROCEDURES § 385.13 Unsatisfactory rated motor 1144, 1726, 1743, 1744); sec. 4133, Pub. L. carriers; prohibition on transportation; 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1744; sec. 108, Pub. ■ 3. The authority citation for part 385 ineligibility for Federal contracts. L. 110–432, 122 Stat. 4860–4866; and 49 CFR 1.73. continues to read as follows: * * * * * ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, 504, 521(b), (e) Revocation of operating authority. 9. Amend § 395.8 by revising 5105(e), 5109, 13901–13905, 31133, 31135, If a proposed ‘‘unsatisfactory’’ safety paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: rating or a proposed determination of 31136, 31137(a), 31144, 31148, and 31502; § 395.8 Driver’s record of duty status. Sec. 113(a), Pub. L. 103–311; Sec. 408, Pub. unfitness becomes final, FMCSA will, L. 104–88; Sec. 350 of Pub. L. 107–87; and following notice, issue an order (a) * * * 49 CFR 1.73. revoking the operating authority of the (2) Every driver who operates a ■ 4. Revise § 385.5 to read as follows: owner or operator. For purposes of this commercial motor vehicle shall record section, the term ‘‘operating authority’’ his/her duty status by using an § 385.5 Safety fitness standard. means the registration required under automatic on-board recording device The satisfactory safety rating is based 49 U.S.C. 13902 and § 392.9a of this that meets the requirements of § 395.15 on the degree of compliance with the subchapter. Any motor carrier that of this part. The requirements of this safety fitness standard for motor operates CMVs after revocation of its section shall not apply, except carriers. For intrastate motor carriers operating authority will be subject to the paragraphs (e) and (k)(1) and (2) of this subject to the hazardous materials safety penalty provisions listed in 49 U.S.C. section. 14901. permit requirements of subpart E of this * * * * * part, the motor carrier must meet the ■ 6. Amend § 385.15 by revising Issued on: May 1, 2012. equivalent State requirements. To meet paragraph (a) to read as follows: the safety fitness standard, the motor Anne S. Ferro, carrier must demonstrate it has adequate § 385.15 Administrative review. Administrator. safety management controls in place, (a) A motor carrier may request [FR Doc. 2012–11438 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] which function effectively to ensure FMCSA to conduct an administrative BILLING CODE P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:49 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYR3.SGM 14MYR3 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES3 Vol. 77 Monday, No. 93 May 14, 2012

Part IV

Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration 23 CFR Part 655 National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Revision; Final Rules

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 28456 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Printing Office’s Web page at: http:// action or materially alter the budgetary www.gpo.gov/fdsys. impact of any entitlements, grants, user Federal Highway Administration fees, or loan programs. Although FHWA Executive Summary did not quantify the costs, we believe 23 CFR Part 655 I. Purpose of the Regulatory Action they will be minimal. One benefit of this rule is reduced expenditures for The FHWA has the authority to [FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2010–0170] locations with identical conditions. For prescribe standards for traffic control example, when a deviation is found to RIN 2125–AF41 devices on all roads open to public be warranted and can be justified, these travel pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 109(d), National Standards for Traffic Control locations will not have to spend funds 114(a), 217, 315, and 402(a). In the 2009 Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic on repetitive or duplicative engineering edition of the MUTCD, the FHWA made Control Devices for Streets and studies. In addition, since the rule clarifying revisions to the 2003 edition Highways; Revision; Final Rule restores language from the 2003 edition of the MUTCD to remove conflicting of the MUTCD, agencies would not have language and provide consistency in the AGENCY: Federal Highway to expend resources to modify their Administration (FHWA), Department of intended use of engineering judgment existing operating procedures. Transportation (DOT). and engineering studies. After issuance Background ACTION: Final rule. of the Final Rule for the 2009 MUTCD, FHWA received correspondence from On August 2, 2011, at 76 FR 46213, SUMMARY: The MUTCD is incorporated several entities indicating that the the FHWA published an NPA proposing in the FHWA regulations, approved by clarifying revisions had the effect of revisions to the MUTCD. Interested the FHWA, and recognized as the removing highway agencies’ flexibility persons were invited to submit national standard for traffic control to address field conditions. This was not comments to the FHWA Docket Number devices used on all streets, highways, FHWA’s intention. Thus, on August 2, FHWA–2010–0170. Based on the bikeways, and private roads open to 2011 the FHWA published a Notice of comments received and its own public travel. The purpose of this final Proposed Amendment (NPA) proposing experience, the FHWA is issuing this rule is to revise certain definitions and revisions to the MUTCD to address final rule and is designating the guidance relating to traffic control these concerns. MUTCD, with these changes devices in Part 1 (General) of the II. Summary of the Major Provisions of incorporated, as Revision 1 of the 2009 MUTCD. The changes will clarify the the Regulatory Action in Question edition of the MUTCD. definition of Standard statements in the The text of Revision 1 of the 2009 MUTCD and clarify the use of In consideration of the comments edition of the MUTCD, with these final engineering judgment and studies in the received in response to the NPA, this rule changes incorporated, is available application of traffic control devices. Final Rule restores certain language for inspection and copying, as DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is contained in the 2003 MUTCD edition. prescribed in 49 CFR part 7, at the effective June 13, 2012. The The restoration of such language will FHWA Office of Transportation incorporation by reference of the continue FHWA’s current practice Operations (HOTO–1), 1200 New Jersey publication listed in this regulation is under Official Interpretation 1(09)–1 (I) Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. approved by the Director of the Office which states that in limited, specific Furthermore, the text of Revision 1 of of the Federal Register as of June 13, cases, deviation from a STANDARD is the 2009 edition of the MUTCD, with 2012. allowed at a location or other locations these final rule changes incorporated, is with the same conditions, provided that available on the FHWA’s MUTCD Web FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. an agency or other official having site at: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. The Chung Eng, Office of Transportation jurisdiction fully documents the original 2009 edition of the MUTCD and Operations, (202) 366–8043; or Mr. engineering reason for the deviation. the 2003 edition of the MUTCD with William Winne, Office of the Chief The MUTCD, with these changes Revisions 1 and 2 incorporated are also Counsel, (202) 366–1397, Federal incorporated, is being designated as available on this Web site. Revision 1 of Highway Administration, 1200 New Revision 1 of the 2009 edition of the the 2009 edition of the MUTCD Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590. MUTCD. supersedes all previous editions and Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 revisions of the MUTCD. p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, III. Costs and Benefits except Federal holidays. The changes in the MUTCD will Summary of Comments SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: provide additional clarification, The FHWA received, reviewed, and guidance, and flexibility in the analyzed the 51 letters submitted to the Electronic Access and Filing application of traffic control devices. docket, which contain more than 125 This document, the notice of The FHWA believes that the uniform different comments on the proposed proposed amendment (NPA), and all application of traffic control devices changes. The American Association of comments received may be viewed will greatly improve the traffic State Highway and Transportation online through the Federal eRulemaking operations efficiency and roadway Officials (AASHTO), the National portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. safety. The standards, guidance, and Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Electronic submission and retrieval help support are also used to create Devices (NCUTCD), the American and guidelines are available on the Web uniformity and to enhance safety and Public Works Association (APWA), the site. It is available 24 hours each day, mobility at little additional expense to National Association of County 366 days this year. Please follow the public agencies or the motoring public. Engineers (NACE), the American Traffic instructions. An electronic copy of this These changes are not anticipated to Safety Services Association (ATSSA), document may also be downloaded adversely affect, in any material way, State departments of transportation from the Office of the Federal Register’s any sector of the economy. In addition, (DOTs), city and county government home page at: http://www.archives.gov/ these changes will not create a serious agencies, other associations, federal-register and the Government inconsistency with any other agency’s transportation consultants, and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28457

individual private citizens submitted national MUTCD. The meaning of The NCUTCD, APWA, and NACE also comments. ‘‘substantial conformance’’ was suggested that the definitions for The AASHTO generally supported considered and established through a ‘‘engineering judgment’’ and FHWA’s proposal to remove the last final rule published in the Federal ‘‘engineering study’’ in Section 1A.13 sentence in the definition of Register on December 14, 2006 at 74 FR should be restored to the text found in STANDARD in Section 1A.13; however, 75111. Because the NPA for this the 2003 edition of the MUTCD. it expressed that the value of such a rulemaking did not propose any changes Specifically, these commenters reasoned change would be minimized by the to this meaning and did not solicit that because this rulemaking pertains to proposed language in Section 1A.09 public comments about this topic, this exercising engineering judgment and regarding the use of engineering issue is outside the scope of this using engineering studies to make traffic judgment and engineering studies. The rulemaking and will not be addressed in control device decisions, it is AASHTO asserted that FHWA’s this final rule. appropriate to restore the definitions of proposed language in Section 1A.09 was Three States also expressed concern these terms to the ones contained in the insufficient because it did not include with compliance dates, suggesting that 2003 edition of the MUTCD. The FHWA additional sentences from the 2003 compliance dates the States viewed as did not propose any changes to the edition of the MUTCD GUIDANCE unessential be removed or delayed. One definitions of ‘‘engineering judgment’’ statement that emphasized the State also suggested that FHWA address or ‘‘engineering study,’’ which are importance of using engineering systematic upgrading of traffic control contained within a STANDARD judgment in the placement of traffic devices in this rulemaking. Comments statement in Section 1A.13, and thus control devices. The AASHTO also related to the issue of compliance dates any changes to these definitions are disagreed with the OPTION statement listed in the MUTCD are currently being outside the scope of this rulemaking. proposed for Section 1A.09 in the NPA, considered in response to an NPA The FHWA might give consideration to contending that it limited the published in the Federal Register on proposing revisions to these definitions application of engineering judgment or August 31, 2011 at 76 FR 54156. in conjunction with a future NPA for the an engineering study to a specific site. Because the NPA for this rulemaking next edition of the MUTCD. The AASHTO submitted a second letter did not propose any changes to the 2. In Section 1A.09, Engineering recommending a new sentence that compliance dates or to the meaning of Study and Engineering Judgment, would allow programmatic deviations ‘‘systematic upgrading of traffic control FHWA proposed in the NPA to add a from a STANDARD based on an devices’’ and did not solicit public GUIDANCE paragraph stating that the engineering study. The NCUTCD, comments about these topics, these decision to use a particular device at a APWA, NACE, 23 State DOTs, 4 local issues are outside the scope of this particular location should be made on agencies, and 1 transportation rulemaking and will not be addressed in the basis of either an engineering study consultant submitted comments similar this final rule. or the application of engineering to AASHTO’s first letter. judgment. The FHWA proposed this The ATSSA and the Association of Discussion of Comments by Section change in order to reinstate one of the American Railroads supported the NPA 1. In the MUTCD Section 1A.13, three GUIDANCE sentences in the 2003 in its entirety and specifically disagreed Definitions of Headings, Words, and edition of the MUTCD that had been with AASHTO’s comments regarding Phrases, the FHWA proposed in the removed in the 2009 edition of the Section 1A.09. Three transportation NPA to delete the last sentence in the MUTCD. The AASHTO, NCUTCD, consultants asserted that the definition definition of the heading STANDARD. APWA, NACE, and the majority of the of STANDARD and the 2009 edition of This sentence, which was added in the State and local agencies supported the MUTCD’s text on the application of 2009 edition of the MUTCD, stated: FHWA’s proposal, but felt that it was engineering judgment and studies are Standard statements shall not be modified insufficient because it did not include appropriate and do not need to be restoration of the two other sentences revised. These comments, including or compromised based on engineering judgment or engineering study. from the 2003 edition of the MUTCD those raised by AASHTO that are GUIDANCE statement. Those second The majority of commenters, including identified above, are discussed in more and third sentences stated: detail in the section-by-section AASHTO, NCUTCD, APWA, NACE, discussions below for both 1A.13 and State DOTs, and local agencies, Thus, while this Manual provides supported removing this sentence. Two Standards, Guidance, and Options for design 1A.09. and applications of traffic control devices, States suggested adding language to the this Manual should not be considered a Comments Outside the Scope of the definition of STANDARD to help clarify Rulemaking substitute for engineering judgment. that site-specific conditions may make it Engineering judgment should be exercised in In addition to commenting on the impossible or impractical for an agency the selection and application of traffic proposed changes, AASHTO and four to comply with a STANDARD. The control devices, as well as in the location and State DOTs suggested that the FHWA FHWA believes that such a change is design of roads and streets that the devices use this rulemaking process to address not necessary because restoration of complement. the issue of ‘‘substantial conformance’’ certain GUIDANCE statements from the Specifically, AASHTO stated that the of State MUTCDs, as defined in the 2003 MUTCD will provide for deviation exclusion of the second sentence from Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). from a STANDARD in limited, specific the 2003 edition of the MUTCD Specifically, AASHTO suggested that cases at a location, or other locations GUIDANCE statement, coupled with FHWA issue interim final rules to revise with the same conditions, provided that FHWA’s proposal, would not 23 CFR 655.602 and 655.603 so that an agency or other official having adequately support the reinstatement of States could apply engineering jurisdiction fully documents the engineering judgment into the judgment and studies to delete engineering reason for the deviation. application of traffic control devices. STANDARDS from their State MUTCDs Therefore, the FHWA adopts the The NCUTCD, NACE, and APWA and still have their State MUTCDs removal of this sentence from the suggested that only the second sentence accepted by FHWA as being in definition of STANDARD in Section from the 2003 edition of the GUIDANCE substantial conformance with the 1A.13, as proposed in the NPA. statement should be restored. Two State

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 28458 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

DOTs agreed with the NPA as proposed. other official having jurisdiction fully operations efficiency and roadway Three transportation consultants documents the engineering reason for safety. The standards, guidance, and disagreed with the proposed the deviation. We would note that support are also used to create GUIDANCE in the NPA, asserting that FHWA did not intend for the proposed uniformity and to enhance safety and the application of engineering judgment OPTION language to trigger studies for mobility at little additional expense to and studies as described in the 2009 each location with similar conditions. public agencies or the motoring public. edition of the MUTCD is appropriate Nevertheless, FHWA has determined These changes are not anticipated to and does not need to be revised. that the OPTION paragraph proposed in adversely affect, in any material way, In a second letter to the docket, the NPA is not needed because the topic any sector of the economy. In addition, AASHTO also recommended adding a is adequately addressed by Official these changes will not create a serious new, fourth sentence to the GUIDANCE Interpretation 1(09)–1 (I), which is still inconsistency with any other agency’s that would state: in effect. action or materially alter the budgetary An engineering study is required for In consideration of the comments impact of any entitlements, grants, user programmatic deviations from Standards received and our determination that the fees, or loan programs. It is anticipated contained within this Manual. OPTION language in the NPA is not that the economic impact of this Such language effectively would allow needed, we have decided, instead, to rulemaking will be minimal; therefore, a agencies to deviate from a STANDARD restore the three 2003 MUTCD full regulatory evaluation is not on a programmatic basis, rather than GUIDANCE sentences that were required. based on impracticality at a specific site subsequently removed in the 2009 Regulatory Flexibility Act supported by engineering judgment or MUTCD edition. The inclusion of such In compliance with the Regulatory study. As noted in the NPA, it is not and language will continue our current Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C. has never been the intention of the practice under Official Interpretation 601–612), the FHWA has evaluated the FHWA to authorize a highway agency to 1(09)–1 (I) to allow deviations from a effects of this action on small entities, adopt or implement broad policies or STANDARD only on the basis of either including small governments. The practices that deviate from a an engineering study or the application FHWA certifies that this action will not STANDARD on a blanket or of engineering judgment. Thus, the have a significant economic impact on programmatic basis jurisdictionwide, GUIDANCE language in Section 1A.09 a substantial number of small entities. regionwide, on all highways of a will now read as follows: This rule will provide clarification and particular class, or using similar criteria. The decision to use a particular device at additional flexibility. Therefore, FHWA believes adding a a particular location should be made on the fourth sentence of GUIDANCE as basis of either an engineering study or the Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) suggested by AASHTO’s second letter is application of engineering judgment. Thus, while this Manual provides Standards, This action has been analyzed in not appropriate. accordance with the principles and In the NPA, FHWA proposed to add Guidance, and Options for design and applications of traffic control devices, this criteria contained in Executive Order a new OPTION paragraph stating that Manual should not be considered a substitute 13132 dated August 4, 1999, and the when an engineering study or the for engineering judgment. Engineering FHWA has determined that this action application of engineering judgment judgment should be exercised in the will not have sufficient federalism determines that unusual site-specific selection and application of traffic control implications to warrant the preparation conditions at a particular location make devices, as well as in the location and design of a federalism assessment. The FHWA compliance with a STANDARD of roads and streets that the devices has also determined that this statement impossible or impractical, an complement. rulemaking will not preempt any State agency may deviate from that The FHWA will continue to consider law or State regulation or affect the STANDARD statement at that location. matters raised by this rulemaking to States’ ability to discharge traditional The AASHTO, NCUTCD, APWA, NACE, inform future decisions regarding the State governmental functions. The and 20 State DOTs disagreed and MUTCD. MUTCD is incorporated by reference in suggested that this language be removed Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 23 CFR part 655, subpart F. These because such an application would be amendments are in keeping with the overly restrictive and financially Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Secretary of Transportation’s authority burdensome on agencies. Specifically, Planning and Review), Executive Order under 23 U.S.C. 109(d), 315, and 402(a) these commenters stated that such 13563 (Improving Regulation and to promulgate uniform guidelines to language would require jurisdictions to Regulatory Review), and DOT promote the safe and efficient use of the study each site individually, even where Regulatory Policies and Procedures highway. The overriding safety benefits multiple locations with the same or The FHWA has determined that this of the uniformity prescribed by the similar conditions make a particular action is a significant regulatory action MUTCD are shared by all of the State deviation necessary. Additionally, within the meaning of Executive Order and local governments, and changes several State agencies indicated that the 12866 and within the meaning of U.S. made by this rule are directed at proposed OPTION statement did not Department of Transportation regulatory enhancing safety. To the extent that reflect the intent of FHWA’s Official policies and procedures because of the these amendments may override any Interpretation number 1(09)–1 (I),1 significant public interest in the existing State requirements regarding dated October 1, 2010, which states that MUTCD. Additionally, this action traffic control devices, they do so in the in limited, specific cases, deviation from complies with the principles of interest of national uniformity. a STANDARD is allowed at a location Executive Order 13563. The changes in or other locations with the same the MUTCD will provide additional Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 conditions, provided that an agency or clarification, guidance, and flexibility in This rule does not impose unfunded the application of traffic control devices. mandates as defined by the Unfunded 1 This Official Interpretation of the MUTCD can be viewed at the following Web site: http:// The FHWA believes that the uniform Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/ application of traffic control devices 104–4, 109 Stat. 48, March 22, 1995). 1_09_1.htm. will greatly improve the traffic The changes provide additional

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28459

guidance, flexibility, and clarification Executive Order 13045 (Protection of § 655.601 Purpose. and will not require an expenditure of Children) To prescribe the policies and funds. This action will not result in the The FHWA has analyzed this action procedures of the Federal Highway expenditure by State, local, and tribal under Executive Order 13045, Administration (FHWA) to obtain basic governments, in the aggregate, or by the Protection of Children from uniformity of traffic control devices on private sector, of $140.8 million or more Environmental Health Risks and Safety in any 1 year (2 U.S.C. 1532). all streets and highways in accordance Risks. This is not an economically with the following references that are Executive Order 13175 (Tribal significant action and does not concern approved by the FHWA for application Consultation) an environmental risk to health or safety on Federal-aid projects: that might disproportionately affect (a) MUTCD. The FHWA has analyzed this action children. under Executive Order 13175, dated (b) AASHTO Guide to Metric November 6, 2000, and believes that it Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Conversion. will not have substantial direct effects Private Property) (c) AASHTO Traffic Engineering on one or more Indian tribes, will not This action would not affect a taking Metric Conversion Factors. impose substantial direct compliance of private property or otherwise have (d) The standards required in this costs on Indian tribal governments, and taking implications under Executive section are incorporated by reference will not preempt tribal law. Therefore, Order 12630, Governmental Actions and a tribal summary impact statement is Interference with Constitutionally into this section in accordance with 5 not required. Protected Property Rights. U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) National Environmental Policy Act specified in this section, the FHWA The FHWA has analyzed this final The agency has analyzed this action must publish notice of change in the rule under Executive Order 13211, for the purpose of the National Federal Register and the material must Actions Concerning Regulations That Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 be available to the public. All approved Significantly Affect Energy Supply, U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined material is available for inspection at Distribution, or Use. The FHWA has that it will not have any effect on the the Federal Highway Administration, determined that this is not a significant quality of the environment and meets Office of Transportation Operations, energy action under that order because the criteria for the categorical exclusion 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., it is not likely to have a significant at 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20). Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366–8043 adverse effect on the supply, and is available from the sources listed Regulation Identification Number distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, below. It is also available for inspection a Statement of Energy Effects under A regulation identification number at the National Archives and Records Executive Order 13211 is not required. (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory Administration (NARA). For Executive Order 12372 action listed in the Unified Agenda of information on the availability of this (Intergovernmental Review) Federal Regulations. The Regulatory material at NARA call (202) 741–6030, Information Service Center publishes or go to http://www.archives.gov/ Catalog of Federal Domestic the Unified Agenda in April and federal-register/cfr/index.html. Assistance Program Number 20.205, October of each year. The RIN contained (1) AASHTO, American Association Highway Planning and Construction. in the heading of this document can be The regulations implementing Executive used to cross reference this action with of State Highway and Transportation Order 12372 regarding the Unified Agenda. Officials, Suite 249, 444 North Capitol Street NW., Washington, DC 20001 intergovernmental consultation on List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 655 Federal programs and activities apply to (i) AASHTO Guide to Metric this program. Design standards, Grant programs— Conversion, 1993; Transportation, Highways and roads, Paperwork Reduction Act (ii) AASHTO, Traffic Engineering Incorporation by reference, Pavement Metric Conversion Factors, 1993— Under the Paperwork Reduction Act Markings, Traffic regulations. Addendum to the Guide to Metric of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), Issued on: May 9, 2012. Conversion, October 1993. Federal agencies must obtain approval Victor M. Mendez, (2) FHWA, Federal Highway from the Office of Management and Administrator. Budget for each collection of Administration, 1200 New Jersey information they conduct, sponsor, or In consideration of the foregoing, the Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, require through regulations. The FHWA FHWA is amending title 23, Code of telephone (202) 366–1993, also available has determined that this action does not Federal Regulations, part 655, subpart F at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. contain a collection of information as follows: (i) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control requirement for the purposes of the PART 655—TRAFFIC OPERATIONS Devices for Streets and Highways PRA. (MUTCD), 2009 Edition, including Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice ■ 1. The authority citation for part 655 Revisions No. 1 and No. 2, FHWA, Reform) continues to read as follows: dated May 2012. Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101(a), 104, 109(d), (ii) [Reserved] This action meets applicable 114(a), 217, 315 and 402(a); 23 CFR 1.32; and [FR Doc. 2012–11712 Filed 5–10–12; 4:15 pm] standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 49 CFR 1.48(b). Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice BILLING CODE 4910–22–P Reform, to minimize litigation, to Subpart F—[Amended] eliminate ambiguity, and to reduce burden. ■ 2. Revise § 655.601, to read as follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 28460 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION streamline and simplify the information. highway agencies and streamline and The MUTCD, with these changes simplify information contained in the Federal Highway Administration incorporated, is being designated as MUTCD without reducing safety. The Revision 2 of the 2009 edition of the FHWA has the authority to prescribe 23 CFR Part 655 MUTCD. standards for traffic control devices on [FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2010–0159] DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is all roads open to public travel pursuant effective June 13, 2012. The to 23 U.S.C. 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, RIN 2125–AF43 incorporation by reference of the and 402(a). publication listed in this regulation is National Standards for Traffic Control II. Summary of the Major Provisions of approved by the Director of the Office Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic the Regulatory Action in Question Control Devices for Streets and of the Federal Register as of June 13, Highways; Revision 2012. This final rule revises Table I–2 of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. MUTCD by eliminating the compliance AGENCY: Federal Highway Chung Eng, Office of Transportation dates for 46 items (8 that had already Administration (FHWA), Department of Operations, (202) 366–8043; or Mr. expired and 38 that had future Transportation (DOT). William Winne, Office of the Chief compliance dates) and extends and/or ACTION: Final rule. Counsel, (202) 366–1397, Federal revises the dates for 4 items. The target SUMMARY: The MUTCD is incorporated Highway Administration, 1200 New compliance dates for 8 items that are in regulations, approved by the FHWA, Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590. deemed to be of critical safety and recognized as the national standard Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 importance will remain in effect. In for traffic control devices used on all p.m., E.T., Monday through Friday, addition, this final rule adds a new streets, highways, bikeways, and private except Federal holidays. Option statement exempting existing roads open to public travel. The purpose SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: historic street name signs within a of this final rule is to revise certain Electronic Access and Filing locally identified historic district from information relating to target the Standards and Guidance of Section compliance dates for traffic control This document, the notice of 2D.43 regarding street sign color, letter devices. This final rule revises Table proposed amendment (NPA), and all size, and other design features, I–2 of the MUTCD by eliminating the comments received may be viewed including retroreflectivity. compliance dates for 46 items (8 that online through the Federal eRulemaking had already expired and 38 that had portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. III. Costs and Benefits Electronic submission and retrieval help future compliance dates) and extends The changes in this rulemaking will and/or revises the dates for 4 items. The and guidelines are available on the Web site. It is available 24 hours each day, not require the expenditure of target compliance dates for 8 items that additional funds, but rather will provide are deemed to be of critical safety 366 days this year. Please follow the State and local governments with the importance will remain in effect. In instructions. An electronic copy of this flexibility to allocate scarce financial addition, this final rule adds a new document may also be downloaded resources based on local conditions and Option statement exempting existing from the Office of the Federal Register’s the useful service life of its traffic historic street name signs within a home page at: http://archives.gov/ control devices. Since this rulemaking locally identified historic district from federal-register and the Government will benefit State and local governments the Standards and Guidance of Section Printing Office’s Web page at: http:// 2D.43 regarding street sign color, letter www.gpo.gov/fdsys. by providing additional clarification, guidance and flexibility, it is anticipated size, and other design features, Executive Summary including retroreflectivity. that the economic impacts will be Consistent with Executive Order I. Purpose of the Regulatory Action minimal and that costs and burdens will 13563, and in particular its emphasis on The purpose of this final rule is to be reduced. Thus, a full regulatory burden-reduction and on retrospective revise certain information relating to evaluation was not conducted. analysis of existing rules, the changes target compliance dates for traffic Revised Table I–2 adopted are intended to reduce the costs control devices. The changes adopted and impacts of compliance dates on are intended to reduce the impacts of This final rule amends Table I–2 of State and local highway agencies and to compliance dates on State and local the 2009 MUTCD to read as follows:

2009 MUTCD 2009 MUTCD Section No.(s) Section title Specific provision Compliance date

2A.08 ...... Maintaining Minimum Implementation and continued use of an as- 2 years from the effective date of this revision Retroreflectivity. sessment or management method that is de- of the 2009 MUTCD*. signed to maintain regulatory and warning sign retroreflectivity at or above the estab- lished minimum levels (see Paragraph 2). 2A.19 ...... Lateral Offset ...... Crashworthiness of sign supports on roads with January 17, 2013 (date established in the 2000 posted speed limit of 50 mph or higher (see MUTCD). Paragraph 2). 2B.40 ...... ONE WAY Signs (R6–1, New requirements in the 2009 MUTCD for the December 31, 2019. R6–2). number and locations of ONE WAY signs (see Paragraphs 4, 9, and 10). 2C.06 through Horizontal Alignment Revised requirements in the 2009 MUTCD re- December 31, 2019. 2C.14. Warning Signs. garding the use of various horizontal align- ment signs (see Table 2C–5).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28461

2009 MUTCD 2009 MUTCD Section No.(s) Section title Specific provision Compliance date

2E.31, 2E.33, Plaques for Left-Hand New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD to use December 31, 2014. and 2E.36. Exits. E1–5aP and E1–5bP plaques for left-hand exits. 4D.26 ...... Yellow Change and Red New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD that du- 5 years from the effective date of this revision Clearance Intervals. rations of yellow change and red clearance of the 2009 MUTCD, or when timing adjust- intervals shall be determined using engineer- ments are made to the individual intersection ing practices (see Paragraphs 3 and 6). and/or corridor, whichever occurs first. 4E.06 ...... Pedestrian Intervals and New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD that the 5 years from the effective date of this revision Signal Phases. pedestrian change interval shall not extend of the 2009 MUTCD, or when timing adjust- into the red clearance interval and shall be ments are made to the individual intersection followed by a buffer interval of at least 3 sec- and/or corridor, whichever occurs first. onds (see Paragraph 4). 6D.03 ** ...... Worker Safety Consider- New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD that all December 31, 2011. ations. workers within the right-of-way shall wear high-visibility apparel (see Paragraphs 4, 6, and 7). 6E.02 ** ...... High-Visibility Safety Ap- New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD that all December 31, 2011. parel. flaggers within the right-of-way shall wear high-visibility apparel. 7D.04 ** ...... Uniform of Adult Cross- New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD for high- December 31, 2011. ing Guards. visibility apparel for adult crossing guards. 8B.03, 8B.04 ..... Grade Crossing Retroreflective strip on Crossbuck sign and December 31, 2019. (Crossbuck) Signs and support (see Paragraph 7 in Section 8B.03 Supports. and Paragraphs 15 and 18 in Section 8B.04). 8B.04 ...... Crossbuck Assemblies New requirement in the 2009 MUTCD for the December 31, 2019. with YIELD or STOP use of STOP or YIELD signs with Crossbuck Signs at Passive signs at passive grade crossings. Grade Crossings. * Types of signs other than regulatory or warning are to be added to an agency’s management or assessment method as resources allow. ** MUTCD requirement is a result of a legislative mandate. Note: All compliance dates that were previously published in Table I–2 of the 2009 MUTCD and that do not appear in this revised table have been eliminated.

Background devices within the target compliance incorporated, as Revision 2 of the 2009 dates previously adopted in the edition of the MUTCD. One of the purposes of the MUTCD is MUTCD. In response to those concerns, The text of Revision 2 of the 2009 to provide for the consistent and the FHWA issued a Request for edition of the MUTCD, with these final uniform application of traffic control Comments in the Federal Register 1 rule changes incorporated, is available devices on streets and highways open to seeking public input on traffic control for inspection and copying, as public travel. These traffic control device compliance dates. prescribed in 49 CFR part 7, at the devices are designed to promote After reviewing and considering the FHWA Office of Transportation highway safety and efficiency. As nearly 600 letters submitted by State Operations (HOTO–1), 1200 New Jersey technology evolves and surroundings and local government highway agencies, Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. change, new provisions for traffic national associations, traffic industry Furthermore, the text of the 2009 control devices and their application representatives, traffic engineering edition of the MUTCD, with these final may be proposed. When new provisions consultants, and private citizens, on rule changes and the changes of are adopted in a new edition or revision August 31, 2011, the FHWA published Revision 1 also incorporated, is of the MUTCD, any new or a Notice of Proposed Amendments available on the FHWA’s MUTCD Web reconstructed traffic control devices (NPA), proposing revisions to the site at: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. The installed after adoption are required to MUTCD at 76 FR 54156. The NPA 2009 edition with Revisions 1 and 2 be in compliance with the new proposed to revise Table I–2 of the 2009 incorporated supersedes all previous provisions. Existing devices already in edition of the MUTCD to eliminate the editions and revisions of the MUTCD. use that do not comply with the new compliance dates for 46 items (8 that Summary of Comments MUTCD provisions are expected to be have already expired and 38 that have upgraded by highway agencies over future compliance dates) and to extend The FHWA received, reviewed, and time to meet the new provisions, unless and/or revise the dates for 4 items. In analyzed 158 letters submitted to the the FHWA establishes a target addition, the NPA proposed to retain docket, which contain nearly 240 compliance date for upgrading such the target compliance dates for eight different comments on the proposed devices. If such a target date has been items that were deemed to be of critical changes. The American Association of established by the FHWA through the safety importance. Interested persons State Highway and Transportation Federal rulemaking process, agencies were invited to submit comments to Officials (AASHTO), the National are to upgrade existing noncompliant FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2010–0159. Committee on Uniform Traffic Control devices on or before the target Based on the comments received and its Devices (NCUTCD), the American compliance date. Due to the current own experience, the FHWA is issuing Public Works Association (APWA), the economic climate, State and local this final rule and is designating the National Association of County agencies have expressed concern about MUTCD, with these changes Engineers (NACE), the American Traffic the potential costs associated with Safety Services Association (ATSSA), replacing noncompliant traffic control 1 75 FR 74128, November 30, 2010. American Road and Transportation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 28462 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Builders Association (ARTBA), State The FHWA adopts the elimination of The additional cost of including guide departments of transportation (DOTs), the compliance dates in Table I–2, as signs would increase the economic city and county government agencies, proposed in the NPA, for Sections burden on agencies, whose funds are other associations, transportation 2B.03, 2B.09, 2B.10, 2B.11, 2B.13, limited due to the current economic consultants, and individual private 2B.26, 2B.55, 2C.04, 2C.13, 2C.20, climate. The revisions to the compliance citizens submitted comments. The 2C.30, 2C.38, 2C.40, 2C.41, 2C.42, date and its applicability will provide majority of the comments were fully or 2C.46, 2C.49, 2C.50, 2C.61, 2C.63, 2D.43 relief and enable agencies to determine partially supportive of the NPA (two provisions), 2D.44, 2D.45, 2G.01 when their resources will allow them to proposal, agreeing with the general through 2G.07, 2G.11 through 2G.15, add signs, other than regulatory and intent. The AASHTO agreed with the 2H.05 and 2H.06, 2I.09, 2I.10, 2J.05, warning signs, to their assessment or NPA, except for two specific 2N.03, 3B.04 and 3B.05, 3B.18, 4D.01, management method. Several compliance dates that were retained in 4D.31, 4E.07, 5C.05, 7B.11, 7B.12, commenters noted the confusion and the NPA (see below for additional 7B.16, 8B.19 and 8C.02 through 8C.05, potential for misinterpretation details). In addition to commenting on 8C.09, 8C.12, and 9B.18. introduced by limiting the compliance the compliance date proposal, several The elimination of a compliance date date to regulatory and warning signs. local jurisdictions and individuals for a given Standard contained in the The FHWA reiterates that the language submitted comments regarding existing MUTCD does not eliminate the in Section 2A.08 still requires agencies provisions in Section 2D.43 of the regulatory requirement to comply with to establish a method for all types of MUTCD that affect ‘‘historic’’ street that Standard. The Standard itself signs, but understands that limiting the name signs in their communities. A remains in the MUTCD and applies to compliance date to regulatory and summary of the comments received and any new installations, but the warning signs could lead some agencies the changes in the MUTCD adopted in compliance date for replacing to mistakenly think that guide signs this final rule are included in the noncompliant devices that exist in the would never be required to be included following section. field is eliminated. To further clarify, in an agency’s method. In addition, any new installation of an existing because the MUTCD requirement is for Discussion of Comments on Table I–2 noncompliant device (such as moving a a method rather than a device, it is and Adopted Revisions noncompliant device to another unclear how agencies would interpret As noted above, most the comments location) would also have to comply the application of ‘‘systematic were fully or partially supportive of the with the Standard upon installation upgrading’’ (applicable to MUTCD NPA proposal, and agreed with the 2. The FHWA proposed to extend the requirements that have no specific general intent of the NPA. Many compliance date by approximately 2 compliance date) in the case of adding commenters had previously taken the years for the provision in Section 2A.08 guide signs to the agency’s management opportunity to comment on the that requires agencies to implement an or assessment method. The FHWA adds November 30, 2010, request for assessment or management method a footnote to Table I–2 to clarify that comments on traffic control compliance designed to maintain sign other types of signs are to be added to dates published at 75 FR 74128. As a retroreflectivity at or above the an agency’s management or assessment result, the proposals in the NPA established minimum levels. As part of method as resources allow. The FHWA reflected many of the commenters’ this proposal, the FHWA proposed to believes that adding this footnote in the concerns and opinions. The following limit this particular compliance date to final rule, rather than being silent on the discussion addresses the significant apply only to regulatory and warning issue, will provide clarity. The FHWA issues raised by comments in opposition signs. This compliance date does not adopts the extension of the compliance to elements of the NPA published on require replacement of any signs by a date from January 22, 2012, to 2 years August 31, 2011 at 76 FR 54156. particular date. Rather, it requires after this final rule and adds a footnote 1. In the NPA, the FHWA proposed to highway agencies to implement an as discussed above. eliminate 46 of the existing compliance assessment or management method for In addition, the FHWA proposed in dates (not including the two associated maintaining sign retroreflectivity, in the NPA to eliminate the compliance with sign retroreflectivity). Six citizens accordance with section 406 of the dates for replacement of signs found not and one association of local Department of Transportation and to meet the minimum retroreflectivity governments in Minnesota opposed Related Agencies Appropriations Act, standards. The ATSSA, the ARTBA, these 46 eliminations, on the basis of 1993 (Pub. L. 102–388; October 6, 1992), other safety advocates, industry reduced uniformity and safety of traffic by the compliance date. Safety advocacy representatives, some States and cities, control devices. The Maryland State organizations, the ARTBA, one State and several citizens disagreed with Highway Administration noted that the DOT, and some industry representatives eliminating the January 22, 2015, and NPA preamble stated that FHWA generally disagreed with the proposal. January 22, 2018, compliance dates and proposed to ‘‘eliminate’’ the dates that The ATSSA and some State DOTs suggested that the dates instead be have already expired for eight items in agreed with the extension for extended to 2018 and 2021, Table I–2, but the note at the bottom of implementing an assessment/ respectively. Even without a specific the table stated that these dates were management method, but requested that date, agencies will still need to replace ‘‘deleted’’ from the table. The eight guide signs not be excluded. However, any sign they identify as not meeting the specific compliance dates that have many agencies stated that including established minimum retroreflectivity expired were intended to be legally guide signs in the assessment method levels. Their schedules replacing the eliminated (rather than just removed would limit funds that could be used for signs, however, would be based on from the table). To clarify this issue, the other projects. The FHWA disagrees resources and relative priorities, rather FHWA revises the note at the bottom of with including guide signs at this time than specific compliance dates. As a the table in the final rule to read, ‘‘All because regulatory and warning signs result, the FHWA eliminates these compliance dates that were originally constitute the highest priority for compliance dates in the final rule. published in Table I–2 of the 2009 assessing retroreflectivity of existing 3. The FHWA proposed to extend the MUTCD that do not appear in this signs. The FHWA, therefore, adopts the compliance dates for signal timing revised table have been eliminated.’’ revisions as proposed in the final rule. adjustments associated with vehicular

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28463

yellow and red clearance intervals in 2019, which would coincide with the general comment, the NCUTCD, the Section 4D.26 and pedestrian clearance date for adding YIELD or STOP signs NACE, three State DOTs, two cities, and intervals in Section 4E.06 from with Crossbuck signs at passive grade two State associations of engineers December 31, 2014, to 5 years after this crossings so that railroad companies and requested that all retained compliance final rule. The National Association of highway agencies can avoid dates be justified by a benefit/cost City Transportation Officials requested a unnecessary expense and achieve analysis in accordance with Executive further extension to 10 years after the greater economies of sending sign crews Order 13563. The FHWA disagrees that final rule and Pennsylvania DOT to crossings only once rather than twice. such an analysis is necessary because suggested eliminating this date instead The FHWA also proposed to extend the the compliance dates are already in the of extending it. The FHWA disagrees compliance date to clarify that the MUTCD and were put in place prior to with extending the compliance date requirements for retroreflective strips the issuance of the Executive Order. even further into the future or are in Section 8B.04 as well as Section This rulemaking is not establishing new, eliminating it, as the extension that was 8B.03 and to clarify that the compliance more burdensome dates for these items proposed in the NPA achieves a date was also intended to apply to the and is actually relieving burdens reasonable balance between the need for retroreflective strip on the backs of the associated with many existing these critical safety retiming efforts and Crossbuck signs. Two State DOTs and compliance dates. The following resource constraints. As mentioned in one consultant opposed this extension, paragraphs describe the concerns that the NPA, the original compliance date suggesting instead that the dates be commenters expressed specifically of December 31, 2014 published for the eliminated. Two commenters related to the target compliance dates 2009 edition of the MUTCD was based questioned the effectiveness of the retained by the FHWA. on what FHWA believed to be the devices but did not provide supporting The FHWA proposed to retain the typical signal retiming frequency of evidence. As a result, the FHWA could January 17, 2013, target compliance date about 5 years. This new proposed not evaluate the commenters’ for provisions in Section 2A.19 compliance date provides agencies with effectiveness concerns. As to the requiring crashworthiness of existing more than 2 additional years to suggestion of eliminating the sign supports on roads with posted implement the new requirements of compliance date entirely, the FHWA speed limits of 50 miles per hour (mph) Sections 4D.26 and 4E.06 at any disagrees with those commenters or higher. This compliance date was locations that have not already been because the extension proposed in the established in the 2003 edition of the made compliant under a previous NPA provides an additional 9 years MUTCD. The AASHTO, the NCUTCD, intersection or corridor retiming. Thus, beyond the original 10-year compliance the NACE, four State DOTs, a city, and the FHWA believes that it is reasonable period established for this requirement a state association of engineers for agencies to retime those signals by in the 2000 edition of the MUTCD, requested extension of the January 17, 2017 that have not already been made while achieving the practical benefit of 2013, compliance date to 2019, or the compliant under a previous intersection allowing agencies and companies to end of the useful life of the sign or corridor retiming. The FHWA adopts apply the retroreflective strips at the supports (with no specific compliance the extension of the compliance dates same time that they add YIELD or STOP date), rather than retaining the existing for Sections 4D.26 and 4E.06 to 5 years signs at those same crossings. The compliance date. The commenters did after this final rule, or when timing FHWA adopts the revision and not provide supporting evidence for adjustments are made to the individual extension of this compliance date to their position. The FHWA disagrees intersections and/or corridor, whichever December 31, 2019, as proposed in the with eliminating or extending the occurs first, as proposed in the NPA. NPA. compliance date because eliminating 4. In the NPA, the FHWA proposed to 5. The FHWA proposed in the NPA to fixed-object hazards on high-speed revise and extend the compliance dates retain the existing target compliance roads remains a critical safety need due in Sections 8B.03 and 8B.04 related to dates for eight items that it deemed to to the potential for death or severe requiring retroreflective strips on the be of critical safety importance, based injury that can result from high-speed, back of Crossbuck signs and on the front on existing evidence, FHWA’s subject run-off-the-road crashes when non- and back of supports for Crossbuck matter expertise, and FHWA’s crashworthy sign supports are struck. signs at passive railroad grade crossings experience in traffic control device The following data on fatal crashes on (those crossings that do not have gates matters. As stated in the NPA, final roads with speed limits of 50 mph or and/or flashing lights activated upon rules establishing compliance dates for higher, where a sign support was the approach of a train). As discussed in the each of the eight items clearly identified ‘‘most harmful event,’’ was obtained NPA, the FHWA proposed to extend the safety justification for the from the Fatality Analysis Reporting this compliance date to December 31, compliance dates established. As a System (FARS).2

Year Most harmful event 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Highway Sign Post ...... 47 56 54 71 53 Overhead Sign Support ...... 9 9 12 17 12

Total Fatalities ...... 56 65 66 88 65

During the 5-year period from 2005 to collisions with sign supports. The most between crashworthy and non- 2009, on average each year, 68 fatalities recent year where full data is available crashworthy supports. However, based occurred that can be attributed to is 2009. The data does not differentiate on this data, if the compliance date was

2 http://www.nhtsa.gov/FARS.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 28464 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

extended by 6 years, about 400 potential necessary. As stated in the NPA, the existing December 31, 2019, target fatalities might occur during that time. FHWA established the 10-year compliance date for the provisions in Collisions with sign supports are the compliance date due to the safety issues Section 8B.04 that require the use of cause of about 15 percent of the total associated with run-off-the-road crashes either a YIELD or STOP sign with the fatalities involving poles of any sort. at horizontal curves and the Crossbuck sign at all passive grade Nevertheless, they represent a disproportionate number of fatalities at crossings. Two State DOTs and a significant problem on high-speed horizontal curves on the Nation’s consultant disagreed with retaining the roads. To address this problem, in late highways. The FHWA adopts the existing compliance date, suggesting 2000, the MUTCD addressed this issue retention of the existing compliance that the date be eliminated. One of these by adding a requirement for a 10-year date for this item, as proposed in the commenters stated that this signing was compliance date (2013), which was NPA. only minimally effective and that formally adopted in 2003. By 2013, One State DOT disagreed with the compliance by the existing date was too agencies will have had 12 years to FHWA’s proposal in the NPA to retain costly but did not provide any evidence comply. The FHWA adopts the the December 31, 2014, compliance date for either of these statements. The retention of the existing January 17, associated with requiring the use of FHWA disagrees, because the 10-year 2013, compliance date for this item, as LEFT EXIT plaques on guide signs for compliance period provides adequate proposed in the NPA. left exits established in Sections 2E.31, time to install these signs and because For provisions in Section 2B.40 that 2E.33, and 2E.36 of the 2009 edition of research has found the signs are needed require agencies to install additional the MUTCD. The State DOT suggested to improve grade crossing safety.4 ONE WAY signs at certain types of eliminating, rather than retaining, the intersections, the FHWA proposed compliance date. The FHWA disagrees, Discussion of Comments on Section retaining the target compliance date of because the 5-year target compliance 2D.43 and Adopted Revisions December 31, 2019, as established in the date was established to address a Comments on the provisions of 2009 edition of the MUTCD. Two State recommendation of the NTSB arising Section 2D.43 regarding Street Name DOTs and a county disagreed with from a significant safety concern with signs were submitted to the docket by retaining the existing compliance date left-hand exits. The NTSB made a officials and citizens of the Township of and asked that the date be eliminated specific recommendation that the Lower Merion, Pennsylvania, the Town instead. The FHWA adopts the retention implementation of the LEFT plaque at of Brookline, Massachusetts, citizens of of the existing compliance date for this left-hand exits be accelerated with a 5- Saugerties and Forest Hills, New York, item, as proposed in the NPA, because year compliance date due to the fact that and the organization Historic New of the safety issues associated with left-hand exits, though relatively rare, England. The comments stated that the wrong-way travel on divided highways continue to violate driver expectancy at communities have ‘‘historic’’ Street (the subject of a current National freeway and expressway locations. The Name signs that do not meet the Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) lack of clear notice of a left-hand exit Standards and Guidance of Section investigation), research on the needs of was cited as a contributing factor in a 2D.43 regarding color, letter size, and older drivers, and the significant safety 2007 fatal crash of a motorcoach that other design features, including benefits to road users that the addition inadvertently departed the freeway retroreflectivity. These communities 3 of such signs may provide. lanes at a left-hand exit. The FHWA asked for an exemption from the The FHWA proposed in the NPA to adopts the retention of the December 31, MUTCD so that they can retain their retain the December 31, 2019, target 2014, compliance date in the final rule. historic Street Name signs without fear compliance date for the provisions in As stated in the NPA, the installation of of noncompliance with the MUTCD. Sections 2C.06 through 2C.14 that these plaques generally does not require These docket comments are similar to require the use of various horizontal replacement of the existing sign or sign other concerns raised previously to the alignment warning signs and support and this change affects FHWA by two other communities (Fox determinations of advisory speed relatively few existing locations Point, Wisconsin, and Waverly, values, adopted in the 2009 edition of throughout the country. Pennsylvania). The FHWA understands the MUTCD. The AASHTO, the As proposed in the NPA, the FHWA the desire of some communities to NCUTCD, the NACE, eight State DOTs, adopts the retention of the existing retain truly historic Street Name signs one city, a State association of December 31, 2011, target compliance that are a key component of maintaining engineers, and a consultant requested date associated with the requirements in the historic character and environment postponing the existing compliance date Sections 6D.03, 6E.02, and 7D.04 that all of a particular district. until National Cooperative Highway workers, including flaggers and school Research Program (NCHRP) Project 03– crossing guards must wear high- The FHWA agrees to provide 106 (‘‘Traffic Control Device Guidelines visibility apparel within the right-of- flexibility for communities with historic for Curves’’) confirms or disproves the way of all highways, not just Federal-aid Street Name signs that do not meet the costs and benefits of these warning highways. Although a consultant provisions of the MUTCD, where the signs, rather than retaining the date. The suggested that the compliance date for community deems the historic Street FHWA disagrees with extending the high-visibility apparel should be Name signs to meet the need for date because the NCHRP research is due eliminated because the compliance date effective navigational information to to be completed by the end of 2015, will have expired by the time the final road users. However, the FHWA which is 4 years before the compliance rule becomes effective, the FHWA believes that such flexibility is date. Four years allows sufficient time retains the existing compliance date. appropriate only in specific for revision of the 2019 date, if Due to safety concerns and minimal circumstances and lower risk situations. costs, the FHWA does not believe The Code of Federal Regulations, in 36 3 ‘‘Guidelines and Recommendations to agencies that have not yet complied CFR part 60, governs the listing on the Accommodate Older Drivers and Pedestrians,’’ should be relieved from compliance at FHWA Report No. FHWA–RD–01–051, May 2001, 4 See NCHRP Report 470: Traffic-Control Devices can be viewed at the following Internet Web site: the earliest possible time. for Passive Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings, http://www.tfhrc.gov/humanfac/01105/cover.htm. Finally, as proposed in the NPA, the available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/ Recommendations I.E(4), I.K(2), and I.K(3). FHWA adopts the retention of the nchrp/nchrp_rpt_470-a.pdf.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 28465

National Register of Historic Places Presidential Memorandum, substantial number of small entities (NRHP) of historic districts and Administrative Flexibility, which calls because this rule will reduce burdens structures such as Street Name signs. for reducing burdens and promoting and provide clarification and additional Specifically, 36 CFR 60.4 provides flexibility for State and local flexibility, and will not require an criteria for evaluating a district to be governments. expenditure of funds. identified as a historic district and for The changes in the MUTCD will evaluating a system of structures, such reduce burdens on State and local Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) government in the application of traffic as Street Name signs, to be identified as This action has been analyzed in control devices. They will provide historic structures. accordance with the principles and additional clarification, guidance, and Therefore, the FHWA adds a new criteria contained in Executive Order flexibility to such governments. The OPTION paragraph at the end of Section 13132 dated August 4, 1999. This action uniform application of traffic control 2D.43 stating, ‘‘On lower speed will increase flexibility for State and roadways, historic street name signs devices will greatly improve roadway local governments. The FHWA has within locally identified historic safety and traffic operations efficiency. determined that this action would not districts that are consistent with the The standards, guidance, options, and have sufficient federalism implications criteria contained in 36 CFR 60.4 for support are also used to create to warrant the preparation of a such structures and districts may be uniformity and to enhance safety and federalism assessment. The FHWA has used without complying with the mobility. The changes in this also determined that this rulemaking provisions of Paragraphs 3, 4, 6, 9, 12 rulemaking will not require the will not preempt any State law or State through 14, and 18 through 20 of this expenditure of additional funds, but regulation or affect the States’ ability to section.’’ rather will provide State and local The FHWA believes that the vast governments with the flexibility to discharge traditional State governmental majority of what is expected to be a allocate scarce financial resources based functions. The MUTCD is incorporated fairly small number of historic Street on local conditions and the useful by reference in 23 CFR part 655, subpart Name signs meeting the criteria will be service life of its traffic control devices. F. These proposed amendments are in on local roads with speed limits of 25 It is anticipated that the economic keeping with the Secretary of mph or less. If a community decides to impact of this rulemaking will be Transportation’s authority under 23 use the new OPTION to retain existing minimal and indeed costs and burdens U.S.C. 109(d), 315, and 402(a) to historic Street Name signs within a will be reduced, not increased; promulgate uniform guidelines to historic district, the FHWA believes it is therefore, a full regulatory evaluation is promote the safe and efficient use of the important for the community to ensure not required. highway. The overriding safety benefits that the historic Street Name signs As noted, this action streamlines of the uniformity prescribed by the provide at least some degree of utility as existing significant regulation to reduce MUTCD are shared by all of the State navigational devices for road users. burden and promote the flexibilities of and local governments. In general, this External illumination of the Street Name State and local governments under rule will increase flexibility for States signs should be considered for this Executive Order 13563. In response to and local governments. To the extent purpose. It is also important to note that concerns about the potential impact of that these amendments override any the OPTION applies only to historic previously adopted MUTCD compliance existing State requirements regarding Street Name signs in historic districts dates on State and local governments in traffic control devices, they do so in the meeting the eligibility criteria of 36 CFR the current economic climate, the interest of national uniformity. FHWA published a Request for 60.4 and does not apply to other types Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 of traffic signs or devices, nor to Comments on traffic control device compliance dates. The FHWA asked for locations outside of historic districts. This rule will not impose unfunded responses to a series of seven questions mandates as defined by the Unfunded Rulemaking Analyses and Notices about compliance dates, their benefits Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. and potential economic impacts, Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 104–4, 109 Stat. 48, March 22, 1995). On especially economic hardships to State Planning and Review), Executive Order the contrary, the rule provides and local governments that might result 13563 (Improving Regulation and additional guidance, flexibility, and from specific target compliance dates for Regulatory Review), and DOT clarification and would not require an upgrading certain non-compliant Regulatory Policies and Procedures expenditure of funds. This action will existing devices. The responses received not result in the expenditure by State, The FHWA has determined that this from that notice were considered in the local, and tribal governments, in the action constitutes a significant development of this final rule. The aggregate, or by the private sector, of regulatory action within the meaning of FHWA anticipates that this rulemaking $140.8 million or more in any 1 year (2 Executive Order 12866 and within the will reduce the impacts of compliance U.S.C. 1532). meaning of DOT regulatory policies and dates on State and local highway procedures due to the significant public agencies and will streamline and Executive Order 13175 (Tribal interest in issues surrounding the simplify information contained in the Consultation) MUTCD. This action complies with MUTCD without reducing safety. The Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 to FHWA has retained compliance dates The FHWA has analyzed this action improve regulation. In particular, this where it is of critical safety importance. under Executive Order 13175, dated action is consistent with, and can be November 6, 2000, and believes that it seen as directly responsive to, the Regulatory Flexibility Act will not have substantial direct effects requirements of Executive Order 13563, In compliance with the Regulatory on one or more Indian tribes, will not and in particular its requirement for Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C. impose substantial direct compliance retrospective analysis of existing rules 601–612), the FHWA has evaluated the costs on Indian tribal governments, and (section 6), with an emphasis on effects these changes on small entities. will not preempt tribal law. Therefore, streamlining its regulations. This I certify that this action will not have a a tribal summary impact statement is approach is also consistent with significant economic impact on a not required.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 28466 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Administration (FHWA) to obtain basic The FHWA has analyzed this final Private Property) uniformity of traffic control devices on rule under Executive Order 13211, This action would not affect a taking all streets and highways in accordance Actions Concerning Regulations That of private property or otherwise have with the following references that are Significantly Affect Energy Supply, taking implications under Executive approved by the FHWA for application Distribution, or Use. The FHWA has Order 12630, Governmental Actions and on Federal-aid projects: determined that this is not a significant Interference with Constitutionally (a) MUTCD. energy action under that order because Protected Property Rights. (b) AASHTO Guide to Metric it is not likely to have a significant National Environmental Policy Act Conversion. adverse effect on the supply, (c) AASHTO Traffic Engineering distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, The agency has analyzed this action Metric Conversion Factors. for the purpose of the National a Statement of Energy Effects under (d) The standards required in this Executive Order 13211 is not required. Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined section are incorporated by reference Executive Order 12372 that it will not have any effect on the into this section in accordance with 5 (Intergovernmental Review) quality of the environment and meets U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that Catalog of Federal Domestic the criteria for the categorical exclusion at 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20). specified in this section, the FHWA Assistance Program Number 20.205, must publish notice of change in the Highway Planning and Construction. Regulation Identification Number Federal Register and the material must The regulations implementing Executive A regulation identification number be available to the public. All approved Order 12372 regarding (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory material is available for inspection at intergovernmental consultation on action listed in the Unified Agenda of the Federal Highway Administration, Federal programs and activities apply to Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Office of Transportation Operations, this program. Information Service Center publishes 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Paperwork Reduction Act the Unified Agenda in April and Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366–8043 and is available from the sources listed Under the Paperwork Reduction Act October of each year. The RIN contained below. It is also available for inspection of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), in the heading of this document can be at the National Archives and Records Federal agencies must obtain approval used to cross reference this action with Administration (NARA). For from the Office of Management and the Unified Agenda. information on the availability of this Budget for each collection of List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 655 material at NARA call (202) 741–6030, information they conduct, sponsor, or Design standards, Grant programs— or go to http://www.archives.gov/ require through regulations. The FHWA Transportation, Highways and roads, federal-register/cfr/index.html. has determined that this action does not Incorporation by reference, Signs, (1) AASHTO, American Association contain a collection of information Traffic regulations. requirement for the purposes of the of State Highway and Transportation PRA. Issued on: May 9, 2012. Officials, Suite 249, 444 North Capitol Victor M. Mendez, Street NW., Washington, DC 20001 Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Administrator. (i) AASHTO Guide to Metric Reform) In consideration of the foregoing, the Conversion, 1993; This action meets applicable FHWA is amending title 23, Code of (ii) AASHTO, Traffic Engineering standards in Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Federal Regulations, part 655, subpart F Metric Conversion Factors, 1993— Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice as follows: Addendum to the Guide to Metric Reform, to minimize litigation, to Conversion, October 1993. eliminate ambiguity, and to reduce PART 655—TRAFFIC OPERATIONS (2) FHWA, Federal Highway burden. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 655 Administration, 1200 New Jersey Executive Order 13045 (Protection of continues to read as follows: Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, Children) telephone (202) 366–1993, also available Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101(a), 104, 109(d), at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. The FHWA has analyzed this action 114(a), 217, 315 and 402(a); 23 CFR 1.32; and under Executive Order 13045, 49 CFR 1.48(b). (i) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Protection of Children from Devices for Streets and Highways Subpart F—[Amended] Environmental Health Risks and Safety (MUTCD), 2009 Edition, including Revisions No. 1 and No. 2, FHWA, Risks. This is not an economically ■ 2. Revise § 655.601 to read as follows: significant action and does not concern dated May 2012. an environmental risk to health or safety § 655.601 Purpose. (ii) [Reserved] that might disproportionately affect To prescribe the policies and [FR Doc. 2012–11710 Filed 5–10–12; 4:15 pm] children. procedures of the Federal Highway BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:51 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14MYR4.SGM 14MYR4 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES4 Vol. 77 Monday, No. 93 May 14, 2012

Part V

The President

Executive Order 13610—Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:53 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\14MYE0.SGM 14MYE0 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6 VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:53 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\14MYE0.SGM 14MYE0 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6 28469

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 77, No. 93

Monday, May 14, 2012

Title 3— Executive Order 13610 of May 10, 2012

The President Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to modernize our regu- latory system and to reduce unjustified regulatory burdens and costs, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Policy. Regulations play an indispensable role in protecting public health, welfare, safety, and our environment, but they can also impose significant burdens and costs. During challenging economic times, we should be especially careful not to impose unjustified regulatory requirements. For this reason, it is particularly important for agencies to conduct retrospective analyses of existing rules to examine whether they remain justified and whether they should be modified or streamlined in light of changed cir- cumstances, including the rise of new technologies. Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regu- latory Review), states that our regulatory system ‘‘must measure, and seek to improve, the actual results of regulatory requirements.’’ To promote this goal, that Executive Order requires agencies not merely to conduct a single exercise, but to engage in ‘‘periodic review of existing significant regulations.’’ Pursuant to section 6(b) of that Executive Order, agencies are required to develop retrospective review plans to review existing significant regulations in order to ‘‘determine whether any such regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed.’’ The purpose of this requirement is to ‘‘make the agency’s regulatory program more effective or less burdensome in achieving the regulatory objectives.’’ In response to Executive Order 13563, agencies have developed and made available for public comment retrospective review plans that identify over five hundred initiatives. A small fraction of those initiatives, already finalized or formally proposed to the public, are anticipated to eliminate billions of dollars in regulatory costs and tens of millions of hours in annual paper- work burdens. Significantly larger savings are anticipated as the plans are implemented and as action is taken on additional initiatives. As a matter of longstanding practice and to satisfy statutory obligations, many agencies engaged in periodic review of existing regulations prior to the issuance of Executive Order 13563. But further steps should be taken, consistent with law, agency resources, and regulatory priorities, to promote public participation in retrospective review, to modernize our regulatory system, and to institutionalize regular assessment of significant regulations. Sec. 2. Public Participation in Retrospective Review. Members of the public, including those directly and indirectly affected by regulations, as well as State, local, and tribal governments, have important information about the actual effects of existing regulations. For this reason, and consistent with Executive Order 13563, agencies shall invite, on a regular basis (to be deter- mined by the agency head in consultation with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)), public suggestions about regulations in need of retrospective review and about appropriate modifications to such regula- tions. To promote an open exchange of information, retrospective analyses of regulations, including supporting data, shall be released to the public online wherever practicable. Sec. 3. Setting Priorities. In implementing and improving their retrospective review plans, and in considering retrospective review suggestions from the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:53 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\14MYE0.SGM 14MYE0 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6 28470 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Presidential Documents

public, agencies shall give priority, consistent with law, to those initiatives that will produce significant quantifiable monetary savings or significant quantifiable reductions in paperwork burdens while protecting public health, welfare, safety, and our environment. To the extent practicable and permitted by law, agencies shall also give special consideration to initiatives that would reduce unjustified regulatory burdens or simplify or harmonize regu- latory requirements imposed on small businesses. Consistent with Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), agencies shall give consideration to the cumulative effects of their own regulations, including cumulative burdens, and shall to the extent practicable and consistent with law give priority to reforms that would make significant progress in reducing those burdens while pro- tecting public health, welfare, safety, and our environment. Sec. 4. Accountability. Agencies shall regularly report on the status of their retrospective review efforts to OIRA. Agency reports should describe progress, anticipated accomplishments, and proposed timelines for relevant actions, with an emphasis on the priorities described in section 3 of this order. Agencies shall submit draft reports to OIRA on September 10, 2012, and on the second Monday of January and July for each year thereafter, unless directed otherwise through subsequent guidance from OIRA. Agencies shall make final reports available to the public within a reasonable period (not to exceed three weeks from the date of submission of draft reports to OIRA). Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) For purposes of this order, ‘‘agency’’ means any authority of the United States that is an ‘‘agency’’ under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5). (b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

THE WHITE HOUSE, May 10, 2012.

[FR Doc. 2012–11798 Filed 5–11–12; 11:15 am] Billing code 3295–F2–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:53 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\14MYE0.SGM 14MYE0 emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6 OB#1.EPS i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 93 Monday, May 14, 2012

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MAY

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 418...... 26991 Proposed Rules: Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: 417...... 27135 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 8805...... 25859 424...... 26706 Other Services 8806...... 26645 8807...... 26647 10 CFR Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 8808...... 26649 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 11...... 26149 8809...... 26651 25...... 26149 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 8810...... 26653 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 73...... 27561 8811...... 26655 110...... 27113 8812...... 26657 431...... 26608 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 8813...... 26907 8814...... 26909 Proposed Rules: World Wide Web 11...... 26213 8815...... 27555 25...... 26213 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications Executive Orders: is located at: www.fdsys.gov. 54...... 28316 13607...... 25861 61...... 26991 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 13608...... 26409 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: 13609...... 26413 12 CFR 13610...... 28469 www.ofr.gov. 618...... 25577 E-mail Administrative Orders: 1012...... 26154 Notices: Proposed Rules: FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is Notice of May 10, 404...... 27140 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 2012 ...... 27559 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 13 CFR of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 5 CFR 124...... 28237 PDF links to the full text of each document. 213...... 28226 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 302...... 28226 14 CFR Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 315...... 28226 39 ...... 26154, 26156, 26158, (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 330...... 28226 26663, 26937, 26943, 26945, 334...... 28226 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 26948, 28238, 28240 362...... 28226 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 71 ...... 26160, 28243, 28244, 531...... 28226 28245, 28246, 28247 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 536...... 28226 91...... 28247 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 537...... 28226 95...... 27357 the instructions. 550...... 28226 97...... 26667, 26669 575...... 28226 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 1240...... 27365 respond to specific inquiries. 733...... 26659 890...... 28226 Proposed Rules: Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 1600...... 26417 39 ...... 25642, 25644, 25647, Federal Register system to: [email protected] 1601...... 26417 25930, 26216, 26993, 26996, The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 1604...... 26417 26998, 27142, 27144, 27659, regulations. 1605...... 26417 27661, 27663, 28328 1650...... 26417 71 ...... 27146, 27148, 27149, Reminders. Effective January 1, 2009, the Reminders, including 27666, 27667 Rules Going Into Effect and Comments Due Next Week, no longer 1651...... 26417 appear in the Reader Aids section of the Federal Register. This 1653...... 26417 15 CFR information can be found online at http://www.regulations.gov. 1655...... 26417 1690...... 26417 744...... 28250 CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no 2423...... 26430 Proposed Rules: longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be 2424...... 26430 742...... 25932 found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. 2425...... 26430 774...... 25932 2429...... 26430 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, MAY 17 CFR 7 CFR 1...... 26672 25577–25858...... 1 1208...... 26911 Proposed Rules: 25859–26148...... 2 3203...... 26660 49...... 26709 26149–26412...... 3 Proposed Rules: 240...... 27150 26413–26658...... 4 457...... 27658 18 CFR 26659–26910...... 7 3201...... 25632 26911–27112...... 8 35...... 26674 27113–27356...... 9 9 CFR 40...... 26688, 27574 27357–27560...... 10 304...... 26991 Proposed Rules: 27561–28236...... 11 381...... 26991 40...... 26714 28237–28470...... 14 417...... 26991 284...... 28331

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:27 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\14MYCU.LOC 14MYCU srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS ii Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Reader Aids

21 CFR 1218...... 25877, 25881 51...... 28424 73...... 27631 179...... 27586 Proposed Rules: 52 ...... 25901, 26438, 26441, 201...... 27591 943...... 25949 26444, 26448, 27626, 28261, 48 CFR 28264 310...... 27591 31 CFR 1...... 27546, 27551 510...... 26697 81...... 26950, 28424 Proposed Rules: 141...... 26072 9...... 27547 520...... 28252 25...... 27548 522...... 26161, 26697 Ch. X...... 27381 142...... 26072 180 ...... 25903, 25904, 26450, 30...... 27550 558...... 26161 32 CFR 52 ...... 27547, 27548, 27550 600...... 26162 26456, 26462, 26467, 26954, 610...... 26162 236...... 27615 27126, 27130, 27628, 28266, Proposed Rules: 2...... 26232 680...... 26162 Proposed Rules: 28270, 28276 2402...... 27151 300...... 27368 22...... 26232 22 CFR 799...... 28281 52...... 26232 62...... 27593 33 CFR Proposed Rules: 123...... 25865 100...... 27115, 27621 52 ...... 25660, 25953, 26474, 49 CFR 26475, 27162, 27671, 28336, 126...... 25865 110...... 25587 40...... 26471 28338 Proposed Rules: 117 ...... 25590, 25591, 25592, Ch. II ...... 25610 60...... 26476 121...... 25944 25889, 25890, 26437, 27115, 228...... 26703 147...... 26231 27624 231...... 26703 23 CFR 180 ...... 25661, 25954, 26477, 165 ...... 25592, 25595, 25890, 236...... 28285 27164 655...... 28456, 28460 25892, 26699, 27116, 27118, 350...... 28448, 28451 799...... 28340 27120, 27123, 27621, 27625, 384...... 26989 24 CFR 28253, 28255 42 CFR 385 ...... 26989, 28448, 28451 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 395...... 28448, 28451 5...... 26218 100...... 25650 441...... 26828 396...... 28448 200...... 26218 117...... 25653, 25655 Proposed Rules: 1152...... 25910 207...... 26218 162...... 27007 412...... 27870 Proposed Rules: 232...... 26218 165 ...... 27156, 27159, 27381 413...... 27870 544...... 28343 334...... 25952, 26229 424...... 27870 26 CFR 661...... 26723 430...... 26232, 26362 1333...... 27384 1 ...... 26175, 26698, 27669 34 CFR 431...... 26232, 26362 602...... 26175 690...... 25893 435...... 26232, 26362 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 436...... 26232, 26362 50 CFR 1...... 27612 Ch. VI...... 25658 438...... 27671 17...... 25611, 26191 440...... 26232, 26362 226...... 25611 27 CFR 37 CFR 441 ...... 26232, 26362, 27671 424...... 25611 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 447 ...... 26232, 26362, 27671 622 ...... 27374, 28305, 28308 9...... 27001 1...... 28331 476...... 27870 648 ...... 25623, 25630, 26104, 41...... 28331 489...... 27870 26129, 26704, 28311 28 CFR 660...... 25915 0...... 26181 38 CFR 43 CFR 679...... 26212 17...... 28258 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 29 CFR 51...... 26183 3160...... 27691 13...... 27174, 28347 104...... 25868 Proposed Rules: 17 ...... 25664, 25668, 25792, 44 CFR Proposed Rules: 4...... 27009 27010, 27386, 27403, 28347 2200...... 27669 64...... 28282 22...... 27174 39 CFR 67...... 26959, 26968 223...... 26478, 27411 30 CFR 111 ...... 26185, 27125, 28259 224...... 26478 915...... 25868 233...... 25596 47 CFR 402...... 28347 936...... 25872 11...... 26701 600...... 26238 938...... 25874 40 CFR 51...... 26987 635...... 25669 1210...... 25877 50...... 28424 54...... 25609, 26987 648...... 27175

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:27 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\14MYCU.LOC 14MYCU srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Reader Aids iii

Register but may be ordered H.R. 886/P.L. 112–104 listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual United States Marshals publaws-l.html LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS pamphlet) form from the Service 225th Anniversary Superintendent of Documents, Commemorative Coin Act Note: This service is strictly This is a continuing list of U.S. Government Printing (Apr. 2, 2012; 126 Stat. 286) public bills from the current Office, Washington, DC 20402 for E-mail notification of new Last List April 2, 2012 session of Congress which (phone, 202–512–1808). The laws. The text of laws is not have become Federal laws. It text will also be made available through this service. may be used in conjunction available on the Internet from PENS cannot respond to with ‘‘P L U S’’ (Public Laws GPO’s Federal Digital System Public Laws Electronic specific inquiries sent to this Update Service) on 202–741– (FDsys) at http://www.gpo.gov/ Notification Service address. 6043. This list is also fdsys. Some laws may not yet (PENS) available online at http:// be available. www.archives.gov/federal- register/laws. H.R. 473/P.L. 112–103 PENS is a free electronic mail Help to Access Land for the notification service of newly The text of laws is not Education of Scouts (Apr. 2, enacted public laws. To published in the Federal 2012; 126 Stat. 284) subscribe, go to http://

VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:27 May 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\14MYCU.LOC 14MYCU srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS