SUBJ: Meeting Notes  Philip Morris USA FROM: Jan Matuszko, Tobacco Study Lead TO: Project Record DATE: May 31, 2005 On March 15, 2005, EPA met with representatives of Philip Morris U. S. A. Phillip Morris USA is a tobacco products processing company that EPA contacted when it initiated its study of the tobacco industry. Attendees included:

John Pickelhaupt, Philip Morris U. S. A. ( 804) 274 5743 Tyrone Murray, Philip Morris, U. S. A. ( 804) 274 3397 Brooks M.. Smith, Hunton and Williams ( 804) 787 8086 Mary T. Smith, EPA ( 202) 566 1000 Jan Matuszko, EPA ( 202) 566 1035 Carey Johnston, EPA ( 202) 566 1014 Lynn Zipf, EPA ( 202) 566 1429 James Covington, EPA ( 202) 566 1034 The purpose of the meeting was to discuss EPA's study of the tobacco products processing industry and Philip Morris'operations. In particular, EPA wanted to gain a better understanding of the processes used, wastewater generation, and wastewater controls and discharge requirements. The following reflect the information exchanged during our meeting.

Philip Morris is the industry leader in the domestic cigarette market. They manufacture Marlboro, Virginia Slims, Benson and Hedges, Merit, Parliament as well as others. They operate two cigarette manufacturing facilities in the U. S: the Cabarrus, NC facility and the Chester, VA facility. The Chester facility also serves as the home for their research and development. They also operate a Park 500 facility in Richmond, Virginia which is a sheet processing facility.

Both of Philip Morris' cigarette manufacturing facilities discharge to Publically Owned Treatment Works ( POTWs). The Cabarrus facility discharges to the Cabarrus Water and Sewer Authority and the Chester facility discharges to the City of Richmond. The Cabarras facility has a mixing basin for equalization prior to discharge and is required to monitor monthly. They have six different outfalls originating from: the administrative building; the boiler plant; research and development; cigarette manufacturing and sanitary wastewater combined. The Chester facility has no wastewater treatment prior to discharge and is required to monitor quarterly. They have a BOD and TSS surcharge. The Park 500 facility processes tobacco byproducts. They accept bales of tobacco, remove the stems, and turn the tobacco into " sheets" that are then used in cigarette manufacturing. They discharge wastewater directly to the James river. They received a new discharge permit in June, 2004. The Park 500 facility operates primary treatment, secondary treatment, and polishing. After passing through a bar screen, wastewater is treated in a conventional activated sludge basin and then sent to clarifiers. Following the clarifiers, the wastewater is treated with chlorine and then polished with ferric prior to discharge. The wastewater has high levels of refractory nitrogen. In order to meet their nutrient discharge limitations, they have changed the way they operate the activated sludge system to create anoxic and anaerobic zones in the basin. This facility also generates wastewater from administration and research and development activities.

Philip Morris also " manufactures" their own process water at all three facilities. They draw water from the river, clarify it, and treat with aluminum. In addition, they practice basic water conservation practices such as evaluations and reduced usage in wash up/ clean up.

Philip Morris also noted they manufacture " Accord" which is a non lit product. The cigarette rod is not burned. The flavor is distributed through heating. This is a pilot project and more information is available on their web site.


[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 51296-51297]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-76]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Notice of Adjustment of Countywide Per Capita Impact Indicator

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: FEMA gives notice that the countywide per capita impact
indicator under the Public Assistance program for disasters declared on
or after October 1, 2009, will be decreased.

DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2009, and applies to major disasters
declared on or after October 1, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James A. Walke, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-
3834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Response and Recovery Directorate Policy No.
9122.1 provides that FEMA will adjust the countywide per capita impact
indicator under the Public Assistance program to reflect annual changes
in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the
Department of Labor.
    FEMA gives notice of a decrease in the countywide per capita impact
indicator to $3.23 for all disasters declared on or after October 1,
2009.
    FEMA bases the adjustment on a decrease in the Consumer Price Index
for All Urban Consumers of 1.5 percent for the 12-month period ended in
August 2009. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of
Labor released the information on September 16, 2009.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Public
Assistance Grants.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-24071 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8747-8749]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02973]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0086]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hackensack River, Little Snake
Hill, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the operating schedule that
governs the Amtrak Portal Bridge across the Hackensack River, mile 5.0
at Little Snake Hill, New Jersey. The bridge owner, National Railroad
Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), submitted a request to require a
greater advance notice for bridge openings, to increase the time
periods the bridge remains in the closed position, and to reduce bridge
openings during the morning and evening commuter rush hours. It is
expected that this change to the regulations will better serve the
needs of the community while continuing to meet the reasonable needs of
navigation.

DATES: This rule is effective March 19, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Type USCG-
2019-0086 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, First Coast Guard District, Project
Officer, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security

FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On March 15, 2019, the Coast Guard also published a temporary
deviation with a request for comments (84 FR 9459), to test a proposed
schedule. Five comments were received during the test period and those
comments were addressed in the aforementioned NPRM.
    On October 7, 2019, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hackensack
River, Little Snake Hill, NJ,'' in the Federal Register (84 FR 53350).
In the NPRM, incorrect number of openings was provided. The correct
number is provided below in Section III. We received three comments in
response to the NPRM.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under the authority of 33
U.S.C. 499. The Amtrak Portal Bridge at mile 5.0 over the Hackensack
River at Little Snake Hill, New Jersey, has a vertical clearance of 23
feet at mean high water and 28 feet at mean low water. Horizontal
clearance is approximately 99 feet. The waterway users include
recreational and commercial vessels, including tugboat/barge
combinations.
    The existing drawbridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR
117.723(e). In December of 2018, the owner of the bridge, National
Railroad Passenger Corporation, requested a change to the drawbridge
operation regulations because the volume of train traffic across the
bridge during the peak commuting hours makes bridge openings
impractical under the current schedule. As a result, bridge openings
that occur during peak commuter train hours cause significant delays to
commuter rail traffic. The owner proposed that the bridge opening
schedule be revised so the bridge need not open for the passage of
vessel traffic, Monday through Friday, from 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from
3 p.m. to 8 p.m. At all other times the bridge shall open on signal if
at least 24 hour notice is given.
    The Coast Guard reached out to the maritime stakeholders with the
requested change proposed by the bridge owner. A stakeholder provided a
general objection to the change in the original request.
    In the NPRM, the Coast Guard mistakenly reported that there were
three requests to open from March 14, 2019 through July 12, 2019. There
were actually only two requests to open during this period.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard provided 60 days for comment regarding this rule
and three comments in the docket were received, with one comment
received after the December 6, 2019, closing date. Two of comments
supported the rulemaking but recommended greater advance notice (24 &
48 hours, respectively), increasing each peak commuting hour time
periods by one hour and completely banning bridge openings during these
commuter time periods. A third commenter recommended a four-hour
advance notice for tide-restricted vessels. In addition, one commenter
recommended changing the language from ``need not open'' to ``shall not
open.'' The Coast Guard disagrees with these suggestions. As a result
of the aforementioned reach out to maritime stakeholders, and in
agreement with Amtrak, all concerned agreed a two-hour advance notice
would be sufficient time for the bridge owner to assemble a team of
technicians for the scheduled opening and address any mechanical and
electrical issues that might arise. There is active commercial and
recreational traffic on this waterway with the bridge logs indicating
two requests to open from October 7, 2019, through December 6, 2019,
during the NPRM comment period; therefore any permanent closure of the
bridge is not an option. If the word ``need'' be replaced with
``shall,'' this would make passage prohibitive, due to the safety of
navigation for vessels affected by tide influence and the
permissibility of emergency vessels or vessels in an emergency
situation (33 CFR 117.31) to pass. One commenter recommended
permanently leaving the bridge closed with an agreement by Amtrak to
replace it with a new fixed bridge with a vertical clearance of 25
feet. A Coast Guard Bridge Permit was issued to Amtrak approving a new
fixed bridge with 50ft of vertical clearance.
    There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the
proposed rule in the NPRM.
    The final rule provides the draw need not open for the passage of
vessel traffic from 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Additional bridge openings shall be provided for tide restricted
commercial vessels between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. and between 5 p.m. and 6
p.m., if at least a two-hour advance notice is given by calling the
number posted at the bridge. At all other times the bridge shall open
on signal if at least two-hour advance notice is given. It is the Coast
Guard's opinion that this rule meets the reasonable needs of marine and
rail traffic.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protesters.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    The Coast Guard believes this rule is not a significant regulatory
action. The bridge will still open for all vessel traffic after a two-
hour advance notice is given, except during the morning and afternoon
commuter rush hour periods, where a one-hour time period will allow
passage of commercial vessels. The vertical clearance under the bridge
in the closed position is relatively high enough to accommodate most
vessel traffic during the time periods the draw is closed during the
morning and evening commuter rush hours. We believe that this change to
the drawbridge operation regulations at 33 CFR 117.723(e) will meet the
reasonable needs of navigation.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comment from the Small Business
Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small entities.
    The bridge provides 23 feet of vertical clearance at mean high
water that should accommodate all the present vessel traffic except
deep draft vessels. The bridge will continue to open on signal for any
vessel provided at least two-hour advance notice is given. While some
owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the bridge may be
small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or
operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f) andhave determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have
a significant effect on the human environment. This rule promulgates
the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. This action is
categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph L49, of
Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning
Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.723(e) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.723  Hackensack River.

* * * * *
    (e) The draw of the Amtrak Portal Bridge, mile 5.0, at Little Snake
Hill, New Jersey, need not open for the passage of vessel traffic from
5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. Additional bridge openings
shall be provided for tide restricted commercial vessels between 7 a.m.
and 8 a.m. and between 5 p.m. and 6 p.m., if at least a two-hour
advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge. At
all other times the bridge shall open on signal if at least two-hour
advance notice is given.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 30, 2020.
A.J. Tiongson,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2020-02973 Filed 2-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23297-23300]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09698]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0858]

Permit-Required Confined Spaces; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Collection of Information
(Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
collection of information requirements contained in the Standard on
Permit-Required Confined Spaces (29 CFR 1910.146).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
June 26, 2015.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When

using this method, you must submit your comments and attachments to the
OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2011-0858, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand,
express mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the
Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15
a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2011-0858) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be
made available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further
information on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You also may contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collection of
information requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The purpose of the collection of information requirements specified
in the Permit-Required Confined Spaces Standard is to ensure that
employers systematically evaluate the dangers in permit spaces before
entry is attempted, and to ensure that adequate measures are taken to
make the spaces safe for entry. Section 1910.146(c)(2) requires the
employer to post danger signs to inform exposed employees of the
existence and location of, and the dangers posed by, permit spaces.
    Section 1910.146(c)(4) requires the employer to develop and
implement a written ``permit-space program'' when the employer decides
that its employees will enter permit spaces. The written program is to
be made available for inspection by employees and their authorized
representatives. Section 1910.146(d) provides the employer with the
requirements of a permit-required confined space program.
    Section 1910.146(c)(5)(i)(E) requires that the determinations and
supporting data specified by paragraphs (c)(5)(i)(A), (c)(5)(i)(B), and
(c)(5)(i)(C) of this section are documented by the employer and are
made available to each employee who enters a permit space or to that
employee's authorized representative.
    Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(H) of Sec.  1910.146, the employer is
required to verify that the space is safe for entry and that the pre-
entry measures required by paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this section have
been taken, using a written certification that contains the date, the
location of the space, and the signature of the person providing the
certification. The certification is to be made before entry and is
required to be made available to each employee entering the space or to
that employee's authorized representative.
    Section 1910.146(c)(7)(iii) requires the employer to document the
basis for determining that all hazards in a permit space have been
eliminated using a certification that contains the date, the location
of the space, and the signature of the person making the determination.
The certification is to be made available to each employee entering the
space or to that employee's authorized representative.
    Section 1910.146(c)(8)(i) requires that the employer inform the
contractor that the workplace contains permit spaces and that permit
space entry is allowed only through compliance with a permit space
program meeting the requirements of this section. Section
1910.146(c)(8)(ii) requires that the employer apprise the contractor of
the elements, including the hazards identified and the host employer's
experience with the space, that make the space in question a permit
space. Section 1910.146(c)(8)(iii) requires that the employer apprise
the contractor of any precautions or procedures that the host employer
has implemented for the protection of employees in or near permit
spaces where contractor personnel will be working. Section
1910.146(c)(8)(v) requires the employer to debrief the contractor at
the conclusion of the entry operations regarding the permit space
program followed and regarding any hazards confronted or created in
permit spaces during entry operations.
    Section 1910.146(c)(9)(iii) requires that the contractor inform the
host employer of the permit space program that the contractor will
follow and of any hazards confronted or created in permit spaces,
either through a debriefing or during the entry operation.
    Section 1910.146(d)(5)(vi) requires the employer to immediately
provide each authorized entrant or that employee's authorized
representative with the results of any testing conducted in accord with
paragraph (d) of the Standard.
    Section 1910.146(d)(14) requires employers to review the permit
space program, using the canceled permits retained under paragraph
(e)(6) within 1 year after each entry and revise the program as
necessary, to ensure that employees participating in entry operations
are protected from permit space hazards.
    Section 1910.146(e)(1) requires the employer to document the
completion of measures required by paragraph (d)(3) by preparing an
entry permit before employee entry is authorized. Paragraph (f) of
Sec.  1910.146 specifies the information to be included on the entry
permit. Paragraph (e)(3) requires that the employer make the completed
permit available at the time of entry to all authorized entrants by
posting the permit at the entry portal or by any

other equally effective means, so that the entrants can confirm that
pre-entry preparations have been completed. Paragraph (e)(6) requires
the employer to retain each canceled entry permit for at least one
year; any problems encountered during an entry operation must be noted
on the pertinent permit so that revisions to the permit space program
can be made.
    Section 1910.146(g)(4) requires that the employer certify that the
training required by paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) has been
accomplished by preparing a written certification record.
    Section 1910.146(h)(3) requires the employer to ensure that all
authorized entrants communicate with the attendant as necessary to
enable the attendant to monitor entrant status and to enable the
attendant to alert entrants of the need to evacuate the space as
required by paragraph (l)(6) of the Standard. Section 1910.146(h)(4)
requires the employer to ensure that all authorized entrants alert the
attendant whenever the entrant recognizes any warning sign or symptom
of exposure to a dangerous situation (paragraph ((h)(4)(i)), or the
entrant detects a prohibited condition (paragraph (h)(4)(ii)).
    Section 1910.146(i)(5) requires the employer to ensure that each
attendant communicate with authorized entrants as necessary to monitor
entrant status and to alert entrants of the need to evacuate the space
under the conditions specified in paragraphs (i)(6)(i)-(i)(6)(iv) of
the Standard. Section 1910.146(i)(7) requires the employer to ensure
that the attendant summon rescue and other emergency services as soon
as the attendant determines that authorized entrants may need
assistance to escape from permit space hazards. Section 1910.146(i)(8)
requires that the employer ensure that the attendant warn unauthorized
persons that they must stay away from the permit space (paragraph
(i)(8)(i)); advise unauthorized persons that they must exit immediately
if they have entered the permit space (paragraph (i)(8)(ii)); and
inform authorized entrants and the entry supervisor if unauthorized
persons have entered the permit space (paragraph (i)(8)(iii)).
    Section 1910.146(j)(2) requires the employer to ensure that each
entry supervisor verifies, by checking that the appropriate entries
have been made on the permit, that all tests specified by the permit
have been conducted and that all procedures and equipment specified by
the permit are in place before endorsing the permit and allowing entry
to begin.
    Section 1910.146(k)(1)(i) requires the employer to evaluate a
prospective rescuer's ability to respond to a rescue summons in a
timely manner, considering the hazard(s) identified; Section
1910.146(k)(1)(ii) requires the employer to evaluate a prospective
rescue service's ability, in terms of proficiency with rescue-related
tasks and equipment, to function appropriately while rescuing entrants
from the particular permit space or types of permit spaces identified.
Section 1910.146(k)(1)(iv) requires that the employer inform each
rescue team or service of the hazards they may confront when called on
to perform rescue at the site. Section 1910.146(k)(1)(v) requires that
the employer provide the rescue team or service selected with access to
all permit spaces from which rescue may be necessary so that the rescue
service can develop appropriate rescue plans.
    Section 1910.146(k)(4) requires that if an injured entrant is
exposed to a substance for which a ``Material Safety Data Sheet''
(MSDS) [now referred to as an SDS (Safety Data Sheet)] or other similar
written information is required to be kept at the worksite, that the
employer make the MSDS or written information available to the medical
facility treating the exposed entrant.
    Section 1910.146(l)(1) requires that employers consult with
affected employees and their authorized representatives on the
development and implementation of all aspects of the permit space
program required by paragraph (c). Section 1910.146(l)(2) requires that
employers make all information required to be developed by this section
available to affected employees and their authorized representatives.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed collection of information
requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's
functions, including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the collection of information requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    The Agency is requesting an adjustment increase of 78,602 burden
hours (from 1,433,443 to 1,512,045 burden hours). The Agency's
estimates, based on updated data, that the number of establishments and
workers affected by the Standard have decreased; however, this
reduction is partially off-set by the inclusion of burden hours and
costs associated with the newly-identified collection of information
requirement related to annual review of the written permit space entry
program and cancelled permits.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Permit-Required Confined Spaces (29 CFR 1910.146).
    OMB Number: 1218-0203.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 1,303,846.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Total Responses: 7,977,651.
    Average Time per Response: Varies from one minute (.02 hour) to
maintain a certificate to 16 hours to develop a written permit-space
entry program.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,512,045.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile; or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for this ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0858).
You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as their social security number
and date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this Web
site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not
available from the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet
to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on April 22, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015-09698 Filed 4-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 16496]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05952]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14443-000]

Consolidated Irrigation Company; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On July 30, 2011, the Consolidated Irrigation Company of Preston,
Idaho, filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to
section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the
feasibility of the Consolidated Irrigation Glendale Conduit Hydro
Project (Glendale Conduit Project or project) to be located on Mink and
Cub Creeks, near Preston, in Franklin County, Idaho. The project would
not occupy any Federal lands. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit,
if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) An
existing screened intake on Mink Creek; (2) an existing screened intake
on Cub Creek; (3) a new pipeline and penstock consisting of 8,520 feet
of 24-inch-diameter, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe, 4,340 feet
of 30-inch-diameter HDPE pipe, and 4,060 feet of 36-inch-diameter HDPE
pipe; (4) a powerhouse containing a 500-kilowatt turbine-generator; (5)
a 1,700-foot-long, underground 12-kilovolt transmission cable
connecting to an existing transmission line owned by Rocky Mountain
Power; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The estimated annual generation
of the Glendale Conduit Project would be 2,526 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Lyle Porter, President, Consolidated
Irrigation Company, 33 South 1st East, Preston, ID 83263; phone: (208)
852-2364.
    FERC Contact: Joseph Hassell; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14443) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 7, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-05952 Filed 3-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47570-47572]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19495]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0830; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-026-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model C90GTi (King Air)
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of incorrect gauge
wires used in certain wiring bundles for the cockpit electrical power
for backlighting and instrument panel components. This proposed AD
would require replacing incorrect gauge wires in certain electrical
power wiring bundles, inspecting associated wiring bundles and
components for heat damage, and taking all necessary corrective
actions. We are proposing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 24,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, 10511 E. Central Ave., Wichita, Kansas
67206; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
(316) 676-3327; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet:
www.hawkerbeechcraft.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Rejniak, Aerospace Engineer,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Room
100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-0830;
Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-026-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,

economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed 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 proposed AD.

Discussion

    We received a report that a Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model
C90GTi (King Air) airplane experienced an in-flight lighting failure of
the pilot panel, audio panel, flight guidance control panel, and
display control panel lighting.
    Investigation revealed that incorrect gauge wires were used by the
wiring fabricators in the wiring bundles for the pilot backlighting and
instrument panel components. The specific pilot backlighting systems
directly affected by the incorrect gauge wiring bundles are the
backlighting for the pilot panel (reversionary switching, radio tuning
unit, multifunction display (MFD), pilot yoke lights, pilot's primary
flight display (PFD)), audio panel, flight guidance control panel, and
display control panel. The instrument panel components affected include
the MFD and the co-pilot's PFD.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in smoke in the
cockpit and possibly cause wiring failure for the power to the
airplane's cockpit lighting, the MFD, the co-pilot's PFD, and their
respective systems. Failure of the wiring for the power to the
airplane's cockpit backlighting, the MFD, and the co-pilot's PFD
systems could also result in potential damage to surrounding wires and
components.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No. SB 24-
4050, dated November 2010. The service bulletin describes procedures
for replacing incorrect gauge wires in the electrical power wiring
bundles, inspecting the associated wire bundles and components for heat
damage, and taking any necessary corrective actions.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 85 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                 Action                          Labor cost           Parts cost      product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace incorrect gauge wires and        15 work-hours x $85 per             $50          $1,325        $112,625
 damaged components.                      hour = $1,275.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

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

Hawker Beechcraft Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2012-0830; Directorate
Identifier 2012-CE-026-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by September 24, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model C90GTi
(King Air) airplanes, serial numbers LJ-1847, and LJ-1853 through
LJ-1997, that are certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 24; Electric power.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of incorrect gauge wires used in
the wiring bundles for the cockpit electrical power for backlighting
and instrument panel components. We are issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the wiring for the power to the airplane's cockpit
backlighting and instrument panel components. Failure of the wiring
for the airplane's cockpit backlighting and instrument panel
components could cause smoke in the cockpit, loss of power to the
multifunction display, the co-pilot's primary flight display,
cockpit lighting, and potential damage to surrounding wires and
components.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Replace Cockpit Electrical Power Wires

    Within the next 50 hours time-in-service after the effective
date of this AD or within the next 6 calendar months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do the
replacements specified below following the Accomplishment
Instructions in Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No. SB
24-4050, dated November 2010:
    (1) Replace wire part number (P/N) CB41-J11-1 on the A124 fuel
control panel assembly with a new wire P/N M22759/16-14-9.
    (2) Replace wire P/N J26-4-CB308 on the co-pilot primary flight
display (PFD), and wire P/N J27-5-CB272 on the multifunction display
(MFD), with a new wire P/N M22759/16-16-9.

(h) Inspect Associated Wire Bundles and Components

    While doing the replacements required in paragraphs (g)(1) and
(g)(2) of this AD at the compliance time specified in paragraph (g)
of this AD, visually inspect the associated wire bundles and
components for heat damage. Do the inspections following the
Accomplishment Instructions in Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. SB 24-4050, dated November 2010.

(i) Repair or Replace Damaged Wires and/or Components

    Before further flight after the inspection required in paragraph
(h) of this AD, repair or replace any heat damaged wires or
components following the Accomplishment Instructions in Hawker
Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No. SB 24-4050, dated November
2010.

(j) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits are permitted with the following
limitation: Visual flight rules (VFR) day conditions only.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Richard Rejniak,
Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100,
Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, 10511 E. Central Ave., Wichita,
Kansas 67206; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (316)
676-3222 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: www.hawkerbeechcraft.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 3, 2012.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-19495 Filed 8-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 23, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32848-32850]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12923]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0369; FRL-10024-69-Region 9]

Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Maricopa County Air Quality
Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department's
(MCAQD) Rule 510 as part of the Arizona State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These rule revisions concern revisions to the maximum levels of
ambient air pollution for the protection of public health and welfare.
We are proposing to approve this rule to regulate these emissions under
the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2021-0369 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish

any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4152<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date it
was amended and submitted by the MCAQD.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local agency                Rule No.                 Title                 Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQD.............................             510  Air Quality Standards.......      12/11/2019      12/20/2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MCAQD's December 20, 2019 SIP revision submittal became complete by
operation of law on June 20, 2020.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved an earlier version of MCAQD Rule 510 into the SIP on
November 9, 2009.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 74 FR 57612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

    MCAQD Rule 510 articulates the maximum levels of ambient air
pollutants for the protection of public health and welfare. The
revisions to MCAQD Rule 510 update the standards by lowering them to
match the current National Ambient Air Quality Standards set forth in
40 CFR part 50. MCAQD references the standards in Rule 510 in its air
quality permitting rules. Additionally, the rule requires public
notification of ambient air quality. The EPA's technical support
document (TSD) has more information about the rule.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?

    Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)),
must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment
and reasonable further progress (RFP) or other CAA requirements (see
CAA section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control
requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or
greater emissions reductions (see CAA section 193).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    These rules are consistent with CAA requirements and relevant
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP revisions. We propose
approval of Rule 510 because it is more stringent than the version
currently in the SIP and will not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and RFP, as required by CAA sections
110(l) and 193. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rule because it fulfills all relevant
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
until July 23, 2021. If we take final action to approve the submitted
rules, our final action will incorporate the rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the MCAQD rule described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state
regulations as meeting federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

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

    Dated: June 10, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-12923 Filed 6-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P