must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB has determined
that it considers this final rule a ``significant regulatory action''
within the meaning of the Executive Order. The EPA has submitted this
action to OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions
or recommendations will be documented in the public record.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in the final rule have been
submitted for approval to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document
prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR number 1415.06 and OMB
Control Number 2060-0234.
    The 2005 revisions to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP contain recordkeeping
and reporting requirements beyond the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements that were promulgated on September 22, 1993. Owners or
operators will continue to keep records and submit required reports to
EPA or the delegated State regulatory authority. Notifications,
reports, and records are essential in determining compliance and are
required, in general, of all sources subject to the 1993 Dry Cleaning
NESHAP. Owners or operators subject to the 1993 Dry Cleaning NESHAP
continue to maintain records and retain them for at least five years
following the date of such measurements, reports, and records.
Information collection requirements that were promulgated on September
22, 1993 in the Dry Cleaning NESHAP prior to the 2005 proposed
amendments, as well the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63,
subpart A), which are mandatory for all owners or operators subject to
national emission standards, are documented in EPA ICR No. 1415.05.
    The information collection requirements described here are only
those notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that are
contained in the 2005 revisions to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. To comply
with the 2005 revisions to the 1993 Dry Cleaning NESHAP, owners or
operators of dry cleaning facilities read instructions to determine how
they are affected. All sources will begin an enhanced LDAR program that
requires a handheld portable monitor. Major source facilities will
purchase a PCE gas analyzer and area sources will purchase a
halogenated hydrocarbon leak detector. Owners and operators will incur
the capital/startup cost of purchasing the monitors, plus ongoing
annual operation and maintenance costs. The total capital/startup cost
for this ICR is $5,049,000. Annual operation and maintenance cost are
$552,825.
    Owners and operators of major and area sources conduct enhanced
leak detection and repair and keep monthly records of enhanced leak
detection and repair events.
    Approximately 28,000 existing area sources and 12 existing major
sources are subject to the rule and are subject to the 1993 Dry
Cleaning NESHAP. We estimate that an average of 2,330 new area sources
per year will become subject to the regulation in the next three years,
but that the overall number of facilities will remain constant as the
new owners will take over old existing facilities. No new major sources
are expected. The estimated annual labor cost for major and area
sources to comply with the 2005 rule is approximately $3.9 million.
    The recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically
authorized by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information
submitted to us pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is
safeguarded according to our policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2,
subpart B.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For the purposes of assessing the impacts of this final rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business based
on the following Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards,
which are based on annual sales receipts: NAICS 812310--Coin-Operated
Laundries and Dry Cleaners--$6.0 million; NAICS 812320--Dry Cleaning
and Laundry Services (Except Coin-Operated)--$4.0 million; NAICS
812332--Industrial Launderers--$12.0 million; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a

population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field. Under these definitions, over 99
percent of commercial dry cleaning firms are small. For more
information, refer to http://www.sba.gov/size/sizetable2002.html. The

economic impacts of the regulatory alternatives were analyzed based on
consumption of PCE, but are described in terms of comparing the
compliance costs to dry cleaning revenues at affected firms. In
addition, we used average revenues for firms in the dry cleaning
industry instead of median revenues. This was because the Census data
source that we utilized did not report medium revenues for firms by
industry. For more detail, see the current Economic Impact Analysis in
the public docket.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small
entities, I certify that the final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
certification is based on the economic impact of the final rule to
affected small entities in the entire PCE dry cleaning source category
and considers the economic impact associated with the options for co-
residential facilities. Over 98 percent of the approximately 20,000
small entities directly regulated by the final rule, including both
major and area sources, are expected to have costs of less than one
percent of sales. The cost impacts for all regulated small entities
range from cost savings to less than 1.9 percent of sales. The small
entities directly regulated by the final rule are dry cleaning
businesses within the NAICS codes 812310, 812320, and 812332. We have
determined that all of the major sources affected by the final rule are
owned by businesses within NAICS 812332. The final rule is expected to
affect 11 ultimate parent businesses that will be regulated as major
sources. Six of the parent businesses are small according to the SBA
small business size standard. None of the six firms has an annualized
cost of more than one percent of sales associated with meeting the
requirements for major sources.
    We have determined that virtually all of the affected small
businesses that own area source dry cleaners are in NAICS 812320. Small
businesses complying with the final area source requirements are
expected to have the following impacts. Ninety-four percent of the
approximately 20,000 small entities owning area sources directly
regulated by the final rule, are expected to have costs of less than
0.9 percent of sales. The one-time cost of $250 for purchasing a
halogenated hydrocarbon detector is less than 0.10 percent of the
average annual revenues for dry cleaning businesses in NAICS 812320,
and there are minimal annualized costs associated with a detector's
use. Of the nearly 200 small businesses that have to replace their
transfer machines (or one percent of the total number of affected small
entities), most of these businesses are expected to experience an
annual cost savings and the others are expected to have compliance
costs of less than 1.2 percent of sales. Of the remaining 1,000
affected small businesses (or 3.5 percent of the total number of
affected small entities), all of which are owners of co-residential
facilities, the compliance costs based on the first option for co-
residential area sources range from 0.9 to 1.9 percent of sales.
    Cost impacts associated with the final decision for major sources
are presented in section V.A of this preamble. These impacts are also
presented for area sources in section V.B, and for co-residential
sources in section V.C. These impacts are detailed in the BID in the
public docket as memoranda five through seven. For more information on
the small entity economic impacts associated with the final decisions
for dry cleaners affected by the final rule, please refer to the
Economic Impact Analysis in the public docket.
    Although the final rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, we nonetheless tried to
reduce the impact of the rule on small entities. When developing the
final standards, we took special steps to ensure that the burdens
imposed on small entities were minimal. We conducted several meetings
with industry trade associations to discuss regulatory options and the
corresponding burden on industry, such as recordkeeping and reporting.
In response to comments, we revised the compliance period for major and
area sources from 90 days to two years. Additionally, we added a
provision to the rule that allows containers for separator water to be
uncovered while the containers are in use.
    Following publication of the final rule, copies of the Federal
Register notice and, in some cases, background documents, will be
publicly available to all industries, organizations, and trade
associations that have had input during the regulation development, as
well as State and local agencies.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    We have determined that the final rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector in any 1 year. Thus, the final rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    EPA has determined that the final rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments because it contains no requirements that apply to such
governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, the final rule
is not subject to section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism,'' (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) requires EPA to develop an accountable process to
ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is
defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    The final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected dry
cleaning facilities are owned or operated by State or local
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed
rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The final rule does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes. No tribal governments own dry cleaning
facilities subject to the final standards for dry cleaning facilities.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the final rule.

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

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    While these final rule amendments are not subject to the Executive
Order because they are not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, the Agency believes this action represents
reasonable further efforts to mitigate risks to the general public,
including effects on children. This conclusion is based on our
assessment of the imposed technological controls that would reduce the
PCE impacts on human health associated with exposures to dry cleaning
operations.

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

    The final rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
    The final rule will have a negligible impact on energy consumption
because less than one percent of the industry will have to install
additional emission control equipment to comply. The cost of energy
distribution should not be affected by the final rule at all since the
standards do not affect energy distribution facilities. We also expect
that there would be no impact on the import of foreign energy supplies,
and no other adverse outcomes are expected to occur with regards to
energy supplies. Further, we have concluded that the final rule is not
likely to have any significant adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d)of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note),
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when
the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    The final revisions to the 1993 NESHAP for PCE dry cleaners do not
include requirements for technical standards beyond what the NESHAP
requires. Therefore, the requirements of the NTTAA do not apply to this
action.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing the final rule
amendment and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the final rule amendment in the Federal
Register. The final rule amendment is not a ``major rule'' as defined
by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final rule is effective on July 27, 2006.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental Protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 13, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart M--[Amended]

0
2. Section 63.320 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (b).
0
b. By revising paragraph (c).
0
c. By revising paragraph (d).
0
d. By revising paragraph (e).

Sec.  63.320  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) The compliance date for a new dry cleaning system depends on
the date that construction or reconstruction commences.
    (1) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after December 9, 1991 and before December 21,
2005, shall be in compliance with the provisions of this subpart except
Sec.  63.322(o) beginning on September 22,

1993 or immediately upon startup, whichever is later, except for dry
cleaning systems complying with section 112(i)(2) of the Clean Air Act;
and shall be in compliance with the provisions of Sec.  63.322(o)
beginning on July 28, 2008, except as provided by Sec.  63.6(b)(4), as
applicable.
    (2)(i) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after December 21, 2005 shall be in compliance
with the provisions of this subpart, except Sec.  63.322(o),
immediately upon startup; and shall be in compliance with the
provisions of Sec.  63.322(o) beginning on July 27, 2006 or immediately
upon startup, whichever is later.
    (ii) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after December 21, 2005, but before July 13, 2006,
and is located in a building with a residence, shall be in compliance
with the provisions of this subpart, except Sec.  63.322(o),
immediately upon startup; shall be in compliance with the provisions of
Sec.  63.322(o)(5)(ii) beginning on July 27, 2006; and shall be in
compliance with the provisions of Sec.  63.322(o)(5)(i) beginning on
July 27, 2009.
    (3) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after July 27, 2006, shall be in compliance with
the provisions of this subpart, including Sec.  63.322(o), immediately
upon startup.
    (c) Each dry cleaning system that commenced construction or
reconstruction before December 9, 1991, and each new transfer machine
system and its ancillary equipment that commenced construction or
reconstruction on or after December 9, 1991 and before September 22,
1993, shall comply with Sec. Sec.  63.322(c), (d), (i), (j), (k), (l),
and (m); 63.323(d); and 63.324(a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4),
and (e) beginning on December 20, 1993, and shall comply with other
provisions of this subpart except Sec.  63.322(o) by September 23,
1996; and shall comply with Sec.  63.322(o) by July 28, 2008.
    (d) Each existing dry-to-dry machine and its ancillary equipment
located in a dry cleaning facility that includes only dry-to-dry
machines, and each existing transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment, and each new transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993, as
well as each existing dry-to-dry machine and its ancillary equipment,
located in a dry cleaning facility that includes both transfer machine
system(s) and dry-to-dry machine(s) is exempt from Sec. Sec.  63.322,
63.323, and 63.324, except Sec. Sec.  63.322(c), (d), (i), (j), (k),
(l), (m), (o)(1), and (o)(4); 63.323(d); and 63.324(a), (b), (d)(1),
(d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), and (e) if the total PCE consumption of the dry
cleaning facility is less than 530 liters (140 gallons) per year.
Consumption is determined according to Sec.  63.323(d).
    (e) Each existing transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment, and each new transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993,
located in a dry cleaning facility that includes only transfer machine
system(s), is exempt from Sec. Sec.  63.322, 63.323, and 63.324, except
Sec. Sec.  63.322(c), (d), (i), (j), (k), (l), (m), (o)(1), and (o)(4),
63.323(d), and 63.324(a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), and (e)
if the PCE consumption of the dry cleaning facility is less than 760
liters (200 gallons) per year. Consumption is determined according to
Sec.  63.323(d).
* * * * *

0
3. Section 63.321 is amended by revising the definition of Filter, and
adding in alphabetical order definitions for Halogenated hydrocarbon
detector, PCE gas analyzer, Residence, Vapor barrier enclosure, and
Vapor leak to read as follows:

Sec.  63.321  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Filter means a porous device through which PCE is passed to remove
contaminants in suspension. Examples include, but are not limited to,
lint filter, button trap, cartridge filter, tubular filter,
regenerative filter, prefilter, polishing filter, and spin disc filter.
    Halogenated hydrocarbon detector means a portable device capable of
detecting vapor concentrations of PCE of 25 parts per million by volume
and indicating a concentration of 25 parts per million by volume or
greater by emitting an audible or visual signal that varies as the
concentration changes.
* * * * *
    PCE gas analyzer means a flame ionization detector, photoionization
detector, or infrared analyzer capable of detecting vapor
concentrations of PCE of 25 parts per million by volume.
* * * * *
    Residence means any dwelling or housing in which people reside
excluding short-term housing that is occupied by the same person for a
period of less than 180 days (such as a hotel room).
* * * * *
    Vapor barrier enclosure means a room that encloses a dry cleaning
system and is constructed of vapor barrier material that is impermeable
to perchloroethylene. The enclosure shall be equipped with a
ventilation system that exhausts outside the building and is completely
separate from the ventilation system for any other area of the
building. The exhaust system shall be designed and operated to maintain
negative pressure and a ventilation rate of at least one air change per
five minutes. The vapor barrier enclosure shall be constructed of
glass, plexiglass, polyvinyl chloride, PVC sheet 22 mil thick (0.022
in.), sheet metal, metal foil face composite board, or other materials
that are impermeable to perchloroethylene vapor. The enclosure shall be
constructed so that all joints and seams are sealed except for inlet
make-up air and exhaust openings and the entry door.
    Vapor leak means a PCE vapor concentration exceeding 25 parts per
million by volume (50 parts per million by volume as methane) as
indicated by a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas analyzer.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 63.322 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (e)(3).
0
b. By revising paragraph (j).
0
c. By revising paragraph (k) introductory text.
0
d. By revising paragraph (k)(11).
0
e. By revising paragraph (m).
0
f. By adding paragraph (o).

Sec.  63.322  Standards.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) Shall prevent air drawn into the dry cleaning machine when the
door of the machine is open from passing through the refrigerated
condenser.
* * * * *
    (j) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall store all
PCE and wastes that contain PCE in solvent tanks or solvent containers
with no perceptible leaks. The exception to this requirement is that
containers for separator water may be uncovered, as necessary, for
proper operation of the machine and still.
    (k) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system shall inspect
the system weekly for perceptible leaks while the dry cleaning system
is operating. Inspection with a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE
gas analyzer also fulfills the requirement for inspection for
perceptible leaks. The following components shall be inspected:
* * * * *

    (11) All Filter housings.
* * * * *
    (m) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system shall repair all
leaks detected under paragraph (k) or (o)(1) of this section within 24
hours. If repair parts must be ordered, either a written or verbal
order for those parts shall be initiated within 2 working days of
detecting such a leak. Such repair parts shall be installed within 5
working days after receipt.
* * * * *
    (o) Additional requirements:
    (1) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system shall inspect
the components listed in paragraph (k) of this section for vapor leaks
monthly while the component is in operation.
    (i) Area sources shall conduct the inspections using a halogenated
hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas analyzer that is operated according to
the manufacturer's instructions. The operator shall place the probe
inlet at the surface of each component interface where leakage could
occur and move it slowly along the interface periphery.
    (ii) Major sources shall conduct the inspections using a PCE gas
analyzer operated according to EPA Method 21.
    (iii) Any inspection conducted according to this paragraph shall
satisfy the requirements to conduct an inspection for perceptible leaks
under Sec.  63.322(k) or (l) of this subpart.
    (2) The owner or operator of each dry cleaning system installed
after December 21, 2005, at an area source shall route the air-PCE gas-
vapor stream contained within each dry cleaning machine through a
refrigerated condenser and pass the air-PCE gas-vapor stream from
inside the dry cleaning machine drum through a non-vented carbon
adsorber or equivalent control device immediately before the door of
the dry cleaning machine is opened. The carbon adsorber must be
desorbed in accordance with manufacturer's instructions.
    (3) The owner or operator of any dry cleaning system shall
eliminate any emission of PCE during the transfer of articles between
the washer and the dryer(s) or reclaimer(s).
    (4) The owner or operator shall eliminate any emission of PCE from
any dry cleaning system that is installed (including relocation of a
used machine) after December 21, 2005, and that is located in a
building with a residence.
    (5)(i) After December 21, 2020, the owner or operator shall
eliminate any emission of PCE from any dry cleaning system that is
located in a building with a residence.
    (ii) Sources demonstrating compliance under Section
63.320(b)(2)(ii) shall comply with paragraph (o)(5)(ii)(A) through (C),
in addition to the other applicable requirements of this section:
    (A) Operate the dry cleaning system inside a vapor barrier
enclosure. The exhaust system for the enclosure shall be operated at
all times that the dry cleaning system is in operation and during
maintenance. The entry door to the enclosure may be open only when a
person is entering or exiting the enclosure.
    (B) Route the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor stream contained
within each dry cleaning machine through a refrigerated condenser and
pass the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor stream from inside the dry
cleaning drum through a carbon adsorber or equivalent control device
immediately before the door of the dry cleaning machine is opened. The
carbon adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions.
    (C) Inspect the machine components listed in paragraph (k) of this
section for vapor leaks weekly while the component is in operation.
These inspections shall be conducted using a halogenated hydrocarbon
detector or PCE gas analyzer that is operated according to the
manufacturer's instructions. The operator shall place the probe inlet
at the surface of each component interface where leakage could occur
and move it slowly along the interface periphery.

0
5. Section 63.323 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. By revising paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1), and (b)(2).
0
c. By revising paragraph (c).

Sec.  63.323  Test methods and monitoring.

    (a) * * *
    (1) The owner or operator shall monitor the following parameters,
as applicable, on a weekly basis:
    (i) The refrigeration system high pressure and low pressure during
the drying phase to determine if they are in the range specified in the
manufacturer's operating instructions.
    (ii) If the machine is not equipped with refrigeration system
pressure gauges, the temperature of the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor
stream on the outlet side of the refrigerated condenser on a dry-to-dry
machine, dryer, or reclaimer with a temperature sensor to determine if
it is equal to or less than 7.2 [deg]C (45 [deg]F) before the end of
the cool-down or drying cycle while the gas-vapor stream is flowing
through the condenser. The temperature sensor shall be used according
to the manufacturer's instructions and shall be designed to measure a
temperature of 7.2 [deg]C (45 [deg]F) to an accuracy of 1.1
[deg]C (2 [deg]F).
* * * * *
    (b) When a carbon adsorber is used to comply with Sec.
63.322(a)(2) or exhaust is passed through a carbon adsorber immediately
upon machine door opening to comply with Sec.  63.322(b)(3) or Sec.
63.322(o)(2), the owner or operator shall measure the concentration of
PCE in the exhaust of the carbon adsorber weekly with a colorimetric
detector tube or PCE gas analyzer. The measurement shall be taken while
the dry cleaning machine is venting to that carbon adsorber at the end
of the last dry cleaning cycle prior to desorption of that carbon
adsorber or removal of the activated carbon to determine that the PCE
concentration in the exhaust is equal to or less than 100 parts per
million by volume. The owner or operator shall:
    (1) Use a colorimetric detector tube or PCE gas analyzer designed
to measure a concentration of 100 parts per million by volume of PCE in
air to an accuracy of 25 parts per million by volume; and
    (2) Use the colorimetric detector tube or PCE gas analyzer
according to the manufacturer's instructions; and
* * * * *
    (c) If the air-PCE gas vapor stream is passed through a carbon
adsorber prior to machine door opening to comply with Sec.
63.322(b)(3) or Sec.  63.322(o)(2), the owner or operator of an
affected facility shall measure the concentration of PCE in the dry
cleaning machine drum at the end of the dry cleaning cycle weekly with
a colorimetric detector tube or PCE gas analyzer to determine that the
PCE concentration is equal to or less than 300 parts per million by
volume. The owner or operator shall:
    (1) Use a colorimetric detector tube or PCE gas analyzer designed
to measure a concentration of 300 parts per million by volume of PCE in
air to an accuracy of 75 parts per million by volume; and
    (2) Use the colorimetric detector tube or PCE gas analyzer
according to the manufacturer's instructions; and
    (3) Conduct the weekly monitoring by inserting the colorimetric
detector or PCE gas analyzer tube into the open space above the
articles at the rear of the dry cleaning machine drum immediately upon
opening the dry cleaning machine door.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 63.324 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraphs (d)(3), (d)(5), and (d)(6).
0
b. By adding paragraph (f).

Sec.  63.324  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) The dates when the dry cleaning system components are inspected
for leaks, as specified in Sec.  63.322(k), (l), or (o)(1), and the
name or location of dry cleaning system components where leaks are
detected;
* * * * *
    (5) The date and temperature sensor monitoring results, as
specified in Sec.  63.323 if a refrigerated condenser is used to comply
with Sec.  63.322(a), (b), or (o); and
    (6) The date and monitoring results, as specified in Sec.  63.323,
if a carbon adsorber is used to comply with Sec.  63.322(a)(2), (b)(3),
or (o)(2).
* * * * *
    (f) Each owner or operator of a dry cleaning facility shall submit
to the Administrator or delegated State authority by registered mail on
or before July 28, 2008 a notification of compliance status providing
the following information and signed by a responsible official who
shall certify its accuracy:
    (1) The name and address of the owner or operator;
    (2) The address (that is, physical location) of the dry cleaning
facility;
    (3) If they are located in a building with a residence(s), even if
the residence is vacant at the time of this notification;
    (4) If they are located in a building with no other tenants, leased
space, or owner occupants;
    (5) Whether they are a major or area source;
    (6) The yearly PCE solvent consumption based upon the yearly
solvent consumption calculated according to Sec.  63.323(d);
    (7) Whether or not they are in compliance with each applicable
requirement of Sec.  63.322; and
    (8) All information contained in the statement is accurate and
true.

[FR Doc. 06-6447 Filed 7-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 100 (Thursday, May 23, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23728-23730]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10730]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 10

[Docket No. OST-2016-0028]
RIN 2105-AE46

Maintenance of and Access to Records Pertaining to Individuals

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On October 4, 2018, the Department of Transportation issued a
notice of proposed rulemaking requesting comment on proposed exemptions
from certain requirements of the Privacy Act for the Department's
insider threat program system of records. The exemptions are necessary
to protect properly classified information from disclosure, preserve
the integrity of insider threat inquiries, and protect the identities
of sources in such inquiries and any related investigations. The
Department received no comments on this proposed rule. As a result,
this final rule will finalize the proposed rule without change.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 23, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may access docket number DOT-OST-2016-0028 by any of the
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claire Barrett, Departmental Chief
Privacy Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOT identifies a system of records that is
exempt from one or more provisions off the Privacy Act (pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(j) or (k)) both in the system of records notice published
in the Federal Register for public comment and in an appendix to DOT's
regulations implementing the Privacy Act (49 CFR part 10, appendix).
This rule exempts records in the Insider Threat Program system of
records from subsections (c)(3) (Accounting of Disclosures), (d)
(Access to Records), (e)(1) and (e)(4)(G) through (I) (Agency
Requirements) and (f) (Agency Rules) of the Privacy Act to the extent
that records are properly classified, in accordance with 5
U.S.C.552a(k)(1), or consist of investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
    As DOT received no comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking
published on October 4, 2018 (83 FR 50053), we are finalizing the
proposed rule without change.

Regulatory Analysis and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    DOT considered the impact of this rulemaking action under Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 (January 18, 2011, ``Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review''), and DOT Order 2100.6, ``Policies and Procedures
for Rulemakings.'' DOT has determined that this action will not
constitute a significant regulatory action within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866 and within the meaning of DOT regulatory policies
and procedures. This rulemaking has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget. This rulemaking will not result in any costs.
Since these records would be exempt from certain provisions of the
Privacy Act, DOT would not have to expend any funds in order to
administer those aspects of the Act.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    DOT has evaluated the effect these changes will have on small
entities and does not believe that this rulemaking will impose any
costs on small entities because the reporting requirements themselves
are not changed and because the rule applies only to information on
individuals that is maintained by the Federal Government or that is
already publicly available. Therefore, I hereby certify that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.

C. National Environmental Policy Act

    DOT has analyzed the environmental impacts of this final action
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) and has determined that it is categorically excluded
pursuant to DOT Order 5610.1C, Procedures for Considering Environmental
Impacts (44 FR 56420, Oct. 1, 1979). Categorical exclusions are actions
identified in an agency's NEPA implementing procedures that do not
normally have a significant impact on the environment and therefore do
not require either an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental
impact statement (EIS). See 40 CFR 1508.4. In analyzing the
applicability of a categorical exclusion, the agency must also consider
whether extraordinary circumstances are present that would warrant the
preparation of an EA or EIS. Id. Paragraph 3.c.5 of DOT Order 5610.1C
incorporates by reference the categorical exclusions for all DOT
Operating Administrations. This action is covered by the categorical
exclusion listed in the Federal Highway Administration's implementing
procedures, ``[p]romulgation of rules, regulations, and directives.''
23 CFR 771.117(c)(20). The purpose of this rulemaking is to amend the
Appendix to DOT's Privacy Act regulations. The Department does not
anticipate any environmental impacts and there are no extraordinary
circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132, Federalism, dated August
4, 1999, and it has been determined that it will not have a substantial
direct effect on, or sufficient Federalism implications for, the
States, nor would it limit the policymaking discretion of the States.
Therefore, the preparation of a Federalism Assessment is not necessary.

F. Executive Order 13084 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments)

    This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13084 (``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''). Because it would not
effect on Indian Tribal Governments, the funding and consultation
requirements of Executive Order 13084 do not apply.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et
seq.),

Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and
Budget for each collection of information they conduct, sponsor, or
require through regulations. The DOT has determined that this action
does not contain a collection of information requirement for the
purposes of the PRA.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub.
L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, March 22, 1995) requires Federal agencies to
assess the effects of certain regulatory actions on State, local, and
tribal governments; and the private sector. The UMRA requires a written
statement of economic and regulatory alternatives for proposed and
final rules that contain Federal mandates. A ``Federal mandate'' is a
new or additional enforceable duty, imposed on any State, local, or
tribal Government; or the private sector. If any Federal mandate causes
those entities to spend, in aggregate, $143.1 million or more in any
one year (adjusted for inflation), an UMRA analysis is required. This
final rule does not impose Federal mandates on any State, local, or
tribal governments; or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 10

    Penalties, Privacy.

    In consideration of the foregoing, DOT amends part 10 of title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 10--MAINTENANCE OF AND ACCESS TO RECORDS PERTAINING TO
INDIVIDUALS

0
1. The authority citation for part 10 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 552a; 49 U.S.C. 322.

Appendix to Part 10 [Designated as Appendix A to Part 10 and Amended]

0
2. Designate the appendix to part 10 as appendix A to part 10 and amend
newly designated appendix A, in Part II, by revising sections A., B.,
F., and G. to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 10--Exemptions

* * * * *

Part II. Specific Exemptions

    A. The following systems of records are exempt from subsection
(c)(3) (Accounting of Certain Disclosures), (d) (Access to Records),
(e)(4)(G), (H), and (I) (Agency Requirements), and (f) (Agency
Rules) of 5 U.S.C. 552a, to the extent that they contain
investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes, in
accordance 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2):
    1. Investigative Record System (DOT/FAA 815) maintained by the
Federal Aviation Administration at the Office of Civil Aviation
Security in Washington, DC; the FAA regional Civil Aviation Security
Divisions; the Civil Aviation Security Division at the Mike Monroney
Aeronautical Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; the FAA Civil
Aviation Security Staff at the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic
City, New Jersey; and the various Federal Records Centers located
throughout the country.
    2. FHWA Investigations Case File System, maintained by the
Office of Program Review and Investigations, Federal Highway
Administration (DOT/FHWA 214).
    3. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
Enforcement Management Information System, maintained by the Chief
Counsel, FMCSA (DOT/FMCSA 002).
    4. DOT/NHTSA Investigations of Alleged Misconduct or Conflict of
Interest, maintained by the Associate Administrator for
Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (DOT/
NHTSA 458).
    5. Civil Aviation Security System (DOT/FAA 813), maintained by
the Office of Civil Aviation Security Policy and Planning, Federal
Aviation Administration.
    6. Suspected Unapproved Parts (SUP) Program, maintained by the
Federal Aviation Administration (DOT/FAA 852).
    7. Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS),
maintained by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (DOT/
FMCSA 001).
    8. Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) database, maintained by
the Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response, Office
of the Secretary.
    9. Departmental Office of Civil Rights System (DOCRS).
    10. Insider Threat Program (DOT/ALL 26).
    These exemptions are justified for the following reasons:
    1. From subsection (c)(3), because making available to a record
subject the accounting of disclosures from records concerning him/
her would reveal investigative interest by not only DOT but also the
recipient agency, thereby permitting the record subject to take
appropriate measures to impede the investigation, as by destroying
evidence, intimidating potential witnesses, fleeing the area to
avoid the thrust of the investigation, etc.
    2. From subsections (d), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), and (f),
because granting an individual access to investigative records, and
granting him/her access to investigative records with that
information, could interfere with the overall law enforcement
process by revealing a pending sensitive investigation, possibly
identify a confidential source, disclose information that would
constitute an unwarranted invasion of another individual's personal
privacy, reveal a sensitive investigative technique, or constitute a
potential danger to the health or safety of law enforcement
personnel.
    B. The following systems of records are exempt from subsections
(c)(3) (Accounting of Certain Disclosures) and (d) (Access to
Records) of 5 U.S.C. 552a, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2):
    1. General Air Transportation Records on Individuals, maintained
by various offices in the Federal Aviation Administration (DOT/FAA
847).
    2. Investigative Records System, maintained by the Assistant
Inspector General for Investigations in the Office of the Inspector
General (DOT/OST 100).
    3. General Investigations Record System, maintained by the
Office of Investigations and Security, Office of the Secretary (DOT/
OST 016).
    4. Insider Threat Program (DOT/ALL 26).
    These exemptions are justified for the following reasons:
    1. From subsection (c)(3), because making available to a record
subject the accounting of disclosures from records concerning him/
her would reveal investigative interest by not only DOT but also the
recipient agency, thereby permitting the record subject to take
appropriate measures to impede the investigation, as by destroying
evidence, intimidating potential witnesses, fleeing the area to
avoid the thrust of the investigation, etc.
    2. From subsection (d), because granting an individual access to
investigative records could interfere with the overall law
enforcement process by revealing a pending sensitive investigation,
possibly identify a confidential source, disclose information that
would constitute an unwarranted invasion of another individual's
personal privacy, reveal a sensitive investigative technique, or
constitute a potential danger to the health or safety of law
enforcement personnel.
* * * * *
    F. Those portions of the following systems of records which
consist of information properly classified in the interest of
national defense or foreign policy in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(1) are exempt from sections (c)(3) (Accounting of Certain
Disclosures), (d) (Access to Records), (e)(4) (G), (H) and (I)
(Agency Requirements), and (f) (Agency Rules) of 5 U.S.C. 552a:
    1. Investigative Record System maintained by the Assistant
Inspector General for Investigations in the Office of the Inspector
General (DOT/OST 100).
    2. Personnel Security Records System, maintained by the Office
of Investigations and Security, Office of the Secretary (DOT/OST
035).
    3. Civil Aviation Security System (DOT/FAA 813), maintained by
the Office of Civil Aviation Security, Federal Aviation
Administration.
    4. General Investigations Record System, maintained by the
Office of Investigations and Security, Office of the Secretary (DOT/
OST 016).
    5. Insider Threat Program (DOT/ALL 26).
    The purpose of these exemptions is to prevent the disclosure of
material authorized to be kept secret in the interest of national
defense or foreign policy, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1) and
552a(k)(1).
    G. Those portions of the following systems of records which
consist of information properly classified in the interest of
national defense or foreign policy in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552a(b)(1) are exempt from subsections (c)(3) (Accounting of Certain
Disclosures) and (d) (Access to Records) of 5 U.S.C. 552a:
    1. Investigative Record System (DOT/FAA 815) maintained by the
Federal Aviation

Administration at the Office of Civil Aviation Security in
Washington, DC; the FAA regional Civil Aviation Security Divisions;
the Civil Aviation Security Division at the Mike Monroney
Aeronautical Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; the FAA Civil
Aviation Security Staff at the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic
City, New Jersey; and the various Federal Records Centers located
throughout the country.
    2. Insider Threat Program (DOT/ALL 26).
    The purpose of these exemptions is to prevent the disclosure of
material authorized to be kept secret in the interest of national
defense or foreign policy, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1) and
552a(k)(1).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2019.
Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-10730 Filed 5-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 72 (Friday, April 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20182-20183]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07769]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4473-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4473-DR), dated January 16,
2020, and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued March 25, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is hereby amended to include the
following area among those areas determined to have been adversely
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of January 16, 2020.

    The Municipality of Rinc[oacute]n for Individual Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance

(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation
Grant.

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-07769 Filed 4-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15994-15995]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06369]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0077; FRL-9908-60-OAP]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program (Renewal); EPA ICR
No. 1596.08, OMB Control No. 2060-0226

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program (40 CFR part 82, subpart G)
(Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1596.08, OMB Control No. 2060-0226) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
August 31, 2014. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 23, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2004-0077, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca von dem Hagen, Environmental
Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of
Atmospheric Programs, MC 6205J, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
343-9445; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;

email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i)
evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: Information collected under this rulemaking is necessary
to implement the requirements of the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program for evaluating and regulating substitutes for
ozone-depleting chemicals being phased out under the stratospheric
ozone protection provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and globally
under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.
Under CAA Section 612, EPA is authorized to identify and restrict the
use of substitutes for class I and class II ozone-depleting substances
where EPA determines other alternatives are available or potentially
available that reduce overall risk to human health and the environment.
The SNAP program, based on information collected from the
manufacturers, formulators, and/or sellers of such substitutes,
identifies acceptable substitutes. Responses to the collection of
information are mandatory under Section 612 for anyone who sells or, in
certain cases, uses substitutes for an ozone-depleting substance after
April 18, 1994, the effective date of the final rule. Measures to
protect confidentiality of information collected under the SNAP program
are based on EPA's confidentiality regulations (40 CFR 2.201 et seq.,
or Subpart B). Submitters may designate all or portions of their forms
or petitions as confidential. EPA requires the submitters to
substantiate their claim of confidentiality. Under CAA Section 114(c),
emissions information may not be claimed as confidential.
    To develop the lists of acceptable and unacceptable substitutes,
the Agency must assess and compare ``overall risks to human health and
the environment'' posed by use of substitutes in the context of
particular applications. EPA requires submission of information
covering a wide range of health and environmental factors. These
include intrinsic properties such as physical and chemical information,
ozone depleting potential, global warming potential, toxicity, and
flammability, and use-specific data such as substitute applications,
process description, environmental release data, exposure data during
use of a substitute, environmental fate and transport, and cost
information. Once a completed submission has been received, a 90 day
review period under the SNAP program will commence. Any substitute
which is a new chemical must also be submitted to the Agency under the
Premanufacture Notice program under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). Alternatives that will be used as sterilants must be filed
jointly with EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs and with SNAP.
    Form Numbers: 1265-07.
    Respondents/affected entities: Manufacturers, importers,
formulators and processors of substitutes for ozone-depleting
substances.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR 82.176).
    Estimated number of respondents: 221 (per year).
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: 6,683 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $476,742, which includes $22,281 annualized
capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The Agency anticipates that the total
estimated respondent burden will stay substantially the same, or
decrease compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB.
    The Agency anticipates a slight increase in the number of
submissions to the SNAP program as a result of increased efforts to
identify and adopt climate-friendly alternatives; however, the Agency
also anticipates that the respondent burden for each individual
submission will decrease. In recent years, many SNAP submissions have
been received for widely-used and well understood chemicals being
applied in new uses. One example of this is the submission of propane
for us in household refrigerators. Additional work is necessary to
ensure the safe use of these chemicals, but new toxicology studies are
not required. The Agency expects that trend to continue. Recent
listings for a number of substitutes have included use conditions, but
these use conditions are consistent with requirements in industry
standards and EPA expects such efforts (e.g., equipment testing and
marking) to be standard industry practice. The Agency also anticipates
a decrease in burden due to fewer respondents keeping records for
alternatives that are acceptable subject to narrowed use limits.

    Dated: March 12, 2014.
Sarah Dunham,
Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-06369 Filed 3-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 57)]
[CORRECTIONS]
[Page 15571]
[DOCID:fr24mr08-108]

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57481; File No. S7-966]

Program for Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilites Pursuant to
Rule 17d-2; Notice of Filing and Order Approving and Declaring
Effective an Amendment to the Plan for the Allocation of Regulatory
Responsibilities Among the American Stock Exchange LLC, the Boston
Stock Exchange, Inc., the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated,
the International Securities Exchange, LLC, Finanacial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc., The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, the New York
Stock Exchange, LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., and the Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, Inc.

Correction

    In notice document E8-5321 beginning on page 14507, in the issue of
Tuesday, March 18, 2008, make the following correction:
    On page 14511, in the last column, in the last two lines, ``April
7, 2008'' should read ``April 8, 2008''.

[FR Doc. Z8-5321 Filed 3-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 145 (Monday, July 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49469-49471]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2023-N-2707]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; State Petitions for Exemption From Preemption

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is
announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection
of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection
provisions of our reporting requirements contained in FDA regulations
governing state petitions for exemption from preemption.

DATES: Either electronic or written comments on the collection of
information must be submitted by September 29, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of September 29, 2023. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for

written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are
received on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2023-N-2707 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; State Petitions for Exemption
from Preemption.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely manner
(see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Showalter, Office of
Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-
12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

State Petitions for Exemption From Preemption--21 CFR 100.1

OMB Control Number 0910-0277--Extension

    This information collection supports FDA regulations. Under section
403A(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21
U.S.C. 343-1(b)), States may petition FDA for exemption from Federal
preemption of State food labeling and standard-of-identity
requirements. Section 100.1(c) (21 CFR 100.1(c)) provides prerequisites
a petition must satisfy for an exemption from preemption. Section
100.1(d) sets forth the information a State is required to submit in
such a petition. The petition may be submitted either as: (1) an
original and one copy or (2) an original and a computer-readable disk
containing the petition. Contents of the disk should be in a standard
format. The petition must be submitted to the Dockets Management Staff
at the address provided in the section ``Written/Paper Submissions.''
The information required under Sec.  100.1 enables FDA to determine
whether the State food labeling or standard-of-identity requirement
satisfies the criteria of section 403A(b) of the FD&C Act for granting
exemption from Federal preemption.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents to this collection of
information are State and local governments who regulate food labeling
and standards of identity.
    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                      21 CFR section; activity                          Number of      responses per     Total annual   Average  burden    Total hours
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses      per  response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.1; petition for exemption from preemption......................               1                1                1               40               40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The reporting burden for Sec.  100.1 is minimal because petitions
for exemption from preemption are seldom submitted by States. In the
next 3 years, we estimate that one or fewer petitions will be submitted
annually.
    Based on a review of the information collection since our last
request for OMB approval, we have made no adjustments to our burden
estimate.

    Dated: July 26, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-16151 Filed 7-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


Jim Ketcham Colwill/ DC/ USEPA/ US 08/ 30/ 2005 03: 42 PM T o John Silvasi/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EP A c c S u b j e c t email for phase II ozone rule docket ( with correction)

Note: Reference to number of units at Dean Mitchell plant corrected below  Forwarded by Jim Ketcham Colwill/ DC/ USEPA/ US on 08/ 30/ 2005 03: 34 PM

Jim Ketcham Colwill/ DC/ USEPA/ US 08/ 30/ 2005 02: 33 PM T o John Silvasi/ RTP/ USEPA/ US c c Kevin Culligan/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ E PA S u b j e c t email for phase II ozone rule docket John,

The following is in reference to the RACT/ NOx SIP call/ CAIR discussion in the draft Response to Comments document:

CAMD has reviewed the 8 units in Illinois and Indiana identified in Doug Grano's list of uncontrolled units, which is based on the 2010 base case spreadsheet that was the basis for the analysis described in the draft Response to Comments. The draft RTC discussion says 8 of the units identified as uncontrolled in 2010 are located in the Chicago area, so it appears that these would be the same units.

CAMD's review indicates that:

 Four of those IL units have documented low NOx burner controls ( 2 at Wood River plant based on EIA data; 2 at Will County plant based on 2005 data reported to EPA).

 One IN unit, Stateline, appears to have LNB based on the emission rate.

 The Dean Mitchell plant in IN, which has 2 units identified as uncontrolled, has not operated for a year and a half and may be permanently shut down according to press reports ( though CAMD has not verified that report).

So, of the 8 EGUs in the Chicago area that originally were identified as uncontrolled, 5 have low NOx burners, 1 may be uncontrolled, and 2 have been shut down for a year and a half.


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on September 30, 2002

                     NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2002-11706

_____________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   Delta Air Lines, Inc.    filed   9/5/2002  for:

XX  Waiver of dormancy condition:

The Department has granted authority to Delta to provide service between
New York and Tokyo and allocated it seven weekly frequencies to operate
this service.  The frequencies are subject to the condition that they
will expire automatically and revert to the Department for reallocation
if they are not used for a period of 90 days.  The Department has
previously granted Delta a waiver of the dormancy condition for this
market and other Japanese markets.   Delta seeks a further waiver of the
90-day dormancy condition for the period through March 31, 2003, so that
this waiver will be coextensive with its other Japan dormancy waivers.
It states that economic conditions do not warrant service at this time.

American Airlines filed an answer and Delta filed a reply.

American Airlines opposes the grant of a dormancy waiver for Delta’s
New York-Tokyo frequencies.  American states that these frequencies are
particularly valuable under the 1998 U.S.-Japan Memorandum of
Understanding since they are part of a limited pool of frequencies that
may be used to serve Tokyo from any U.S. gateway, including the
restricted gateways of New York, Los Angeles and Honolulu.  Further,
American states that Delta has set forth no plans to use these
frequencies.  Under these circumstances, American states these
frequencies should be returned to the unallocated pool, where they will
be available for reallocation to other carriers without Delta claiming
that they should not be reassigned.

Delta replied that American has stated no service plans for the
frequencies and has not offered any reasons why the Department should
reverse its longstanding policy concerning the grant of Japan dormancy
waivers.  Delta states that there is no need to recall Delta's
frequencies at this time since there is ample authority to fund all
current and foreseeable U.S. carrier Japan service plans.  Furthermore,
Delta states that retaining these frequencies will facilitate Delta's
ability to serve the New York-Tokyo market when economic circumstances
permit.  Finally, Delta states that while American has decided to
discard its own Japan frequencies, there is no present need or
justification to revoke Delta's authority.

Applicant rep.:  Robert E. Cohn,<PHONE_NUMBER>   DOT analyst:   Gerald
Caolo,<PHONE_NUMBER>

DISPOSITION

XX  Denied (See Remarks below)

The above action was effective when taken:    September 30, 2002

XX  Action taken by:	Paul L. Gretch, Director

			Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

Remarks:  In March, when we last issued Delta a waiver for these
frequencies through October 1, 2002, we placed the carrier on notice
that “there should be no expectation that an additional request will
similarly be granted.” (Notice of Action Taken, Docket OST-2002-11706,
March 27, 2002)  In the circumstances presented now, and taking into
consideration the record before us, we find that the public interest
would be best served by reassigning these seven frequencies to the
unallocated pool of frequencies so that whenever Delta or another
carrier has firm plans to use them, it may apply for the frequencies
accordingly.

________________________________________________________________________
___________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that

our action was consistent with Department policy; and (2) denial of the
waiver was consistent with the public interest.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp.

 See Notice of Action Taken dated March 27, 2002, Docket OST-2002-11706,
extending the waiver through October 1, 2002.

  The Department has granted dormancy waivers to Delta in the Los
Angeles-Nagoya and Portland-Osaka/Fukuoka markets for the period through
March 31, 2003.  We had also granted a dormancy waiver in the Los
Angeles-Tokyo market but Delta subsequently relinquished its frequencies
for this market and no longer has a waiver for them.  See the Notice of
Action Taken dated March 27, 2002, and Delta's notice dated June 21,
2002, Docket OST-2002-11706.

 Delta's reply was accompanied by a motion for leave to file an
otherwise unauthorized document.  We will grant the motion.

 PAGE   2

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register: December 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 236)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69585-69587]
[DOCID:fr10de07-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0301; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-069-AD;
Amendment 39-15300; AD 2007-25-18]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400 and 747-400D
Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Boeing Model 747-400 and 747-400D series airplanes. For certain
airplanes, this AD requires modifying the stowage bin ladder of zone E,
installing new intercostals, removing existing tie rods, and installing
new tie rods. For certain other airplanes, this AD requires modifying
the lateral shear beam. This AD results from a report indicating that
the overhead lateral shear beam aft of main entry door number 5 reacts
to certain loads from the weight of the center stowage bins of zone E
and additional loads. We are issuing this AD to prevent detachment of
the center stowage bins of zone E at forward load levels less than 9g
during an emergency landing, which could cause injury to passengers
and/or crew and could impede subsequent rapid evacuation.

DATES: This AD is effective December 26, 2007.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 26,
2007.
    We must receive comments on this AD by February 8, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rene Buendia, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We have received a report indicating that a review, at Boeing, of
the airplane interior loads on certain Boeing Model 747-400 and 747-
400D series airplanes without a door 5 crew rest, showed that the
overhead lateral shear beam aft of main entry door number 5 does not
meet the 9g forward loading requirement. As a result, the overhead
lateral shear beam at that door reacts to loads from the weight of the
center stowage bins of zone E and to additional loads due to galleys,
life raft boxes, closets, and partitions (depending on airplane
configuration). This condition, if not corrected, could result in
detachment of the center stowage bins of zone E at forward load levels
less than 9g during an emergency landing, which could cause injury to
passengers and/or crew and could impede subsequent rapid evacuation.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-53-
2498, dated December 19, 2006. For certain airplanes, the service
bulletin describes procedures for modifying the stowage bin ladder of
zone E by installing new tie rod fittings, installing new right and
left intercostals, and removing existing tie rods. For certain other
airplanes, the service bulletin describes procedures for modifying the
lateral shear beam by installing additional stiffeners. Accomplishing
the actions specified in the service information is intended to
adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    No airplanes affected by this AD are on the U.S. Register. We are
issuing this AD because the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop on other products of the(se) same type
design(s) that could be registered in the United States in the future.
This AD requires modifying the stowage bin ladder of zone E, installing
new intercostals, removing existing tie rods, and installing new tie
rods. For certain other airplanes, this AD requires modifying the
lateral shear beam.
    Since no airplanes are affected by this AD, notice and opportunity
for public comment before issuing this AD are unnecessary.

Costs of Compliance

    None of the airplanes affected by this action are on the U.S.
Register. All airplanes affected by this AD are currently operated by
non-U.S. operators under foreign registry; therefore, they are not
directly affected by this AD action. However, we consider this AD
necessary to ensure that the unsafe condition is addressed if any
affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the
future.
    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this AD for any affected

airplane that might be imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the
future.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                                       Work     Average                   Cost per      U.S.-
                       Action                          hours   labor rate     Parts       airplane    registered
                                                                per hour                              airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification of the stowage bin ladder, installation      59          $80      $40,107      $44,827            0
 of intercostals, and replacement of tie rods (for
 Group 1 airplanes).................................
Modification of the lateral shear beam (for Group 2        5           80        5,091        5,491            0
 airplanes).........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    No airplane affected by this AD is currently on the U.S. Register.
Therefore, providing notice and opportunity for public comment is
unnecessary before this AD is issued, and this AD may be made effective
in less than 30 days after it is published in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, we invite
you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
``Docket No. FAA-2007-0301; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-069-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2007-25-18 Boeing: Amendment 39-15300. Docket No. FAA-2007-0301;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-069-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective December 26, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-400 and 747-400D series
airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-53-2498, dated December 19,
2006.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report indicating that the overhead
lateral shear beam aft of main entry door number 5 reacts to certain
loads. We are issuing this AD to prevent detachment of the center
stowage bins of zone E at forward load levels less than 9g during an
emergency landing, which could cause injury to passengers and/or
crew and could impede subsequent rapid evacuation.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Modification, Installation, and Replacement

    (f) Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
applicable actions required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this
AD by doing all the actions in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-53-
2498, dated December 19, 2006.
    (1) For Group 1 airplanes, as identified in the service
bulletin: Modify the stowage bin ladder of zone E, install new right
and left intercostals, and remove existing tie rods and install new
tie rods.
    (2) For Group 2 airplanes, as identified in the service
bulletin: Modify the lateral shear beam.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested,
in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (h) You must use Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-
53-2498, dated December 19, 2006, to perform the actions that are
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The Director
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of
this document in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for a copy of this service information. You
may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 30, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-23851 Filed 12-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P