<IP_ADDRESS> Heat/cool the GC oven to its starting set point.
    <IP_ADDRESS> If using a GC/MS system, it can be operated in either
MS-Scan or MS-SIM mode (depending on required sensitivity levels and
the type of mass spectrometer selected). As soon as trap desorption
and transfer of analytes into the GC column triggers the start of
the GC/MS analysis, collect mass spectral data over a range of
masses from 35 to 300 amu. Collect at least 10 data points per
eluting chromatographic peak in order to adequately integrate and
quantify target compounds.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Use secondary ion quantitation only when there are
sample matrix interferences with the primary ion. If secondary ion
quantitation is performed, flag the data and document the reasons
for the alternative quantitation procedure.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Data reduction is performed by the instruments post
processing program that is automatically accessed after data
acquisition is completed at the end of the GC run. The concentration
of each target compound is calculated using the previously
established response factors for the CCV analyzed in Section
<IP_ADDRESS>.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Whenever the thermal desorption--GC/MS analytical
method is changed or major equipment maintenance is performed, you
must conduct a new five-level calibration (see Section 10.6.3).
System calibration remains valid as long as results from subsequent
CCV are within 30 percent of the most recent 5-point calibration
(see Section 10.9.5). Include relevant CCV data in the supporting
information in the data report for each set of samples.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Document, flag and explain all sample results that
exceed the calibration range. Report flags and provide documentation
in the analytical results for the affected sample(s).

12.0 Data Analysis, Calculations, and Reporting

12.1 Recordkeeping Procedures for Sorbent Tubes

    12.1.1 Label sample tubes with a unique identification number as
described in Section 6.3.
    12.1.2 Keep records of the tube numbers and sorbent lots used
for each sampling period.
    12.1.3 Keep records of sorbent tube packing if tubes are
manually prepared in the

laboratory and not supplied commercially. These records must include
the masses and/or bed lengths of sorbent(s) contained in each tube,
the maximum allowable temperature for that tube and the date each
tube was packed. If a tube is repacked at any stage, record the date
of tube repacking and any other relevant information required in
Section 12.1.
    12.1.4 Keep records of the conditioning and blanking of tubes.
These records must include, but are not limited to, the unique
identification number and measured background resulting from the
tube conditioning.
    12.1.5 Record the location, dates, tube identification and times
associated with each sample collection. Record this information on a
Chain of Custody form that is sent to the analytical laboratory.
    12.1.6 Field sampling personnel must complete and send a Chain
of Custody to the analysis laboratory (see Section 8.6.4 of Method
325A for what information to include and Section 17.0 of this method
for an example form). Duplicate copies of the Chain of Custody must
be included with the sample report and stored with the field test
data archive.
    12.1.7 Field sampling personnel must also keep records of the
unit vector wind direction, sigma theta, temperature and barometric
pressure averages for the sampling period. See Section 8.3.4 of
Method 325A.
    12.1.8 Laboratory personnel must record the sample receipt date,
and analysis date.
    12.1.9 Laboratory personnel must maintain records of the
analytical method and sample results in electronic or hardcopy in
sufficient detail to reconstruct the calibration, sample, and
quality control results from each sampling period.

12.2 Calculations

    12.2.1 Complete the calculations in this section to determine
compliance with calibration quality control criteria (see also Table
17.1).
    <IP_ADDRESS> Response factor (RF). Calculate the RF using Equation
12.1:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.035

Where:

As = Peak area for the characteristic ion of the analyte.
Ais = Peak area for the characteristic ion of the
internal standard.
Ms = Mass of the analyte.
Mis = Mass of the internal standard.

    <IP_ADDRESS> Standard deviation of the response factors
(SDRF). Calculate the SDRF using Equation 12.2:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.036

Where:

RFi = RF for each of the calibration compounds.
RF = Mean RF for each compound from the initial calibration.
n = Number of calibration standards.

    <IP_ADDRESS> Percent deviation (%DEV). Calculate the %DEV using
Equation 12.3:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.037

Where:

SDRF = Standard deviation.
RF = Mean RF for each compound from the initial calibration.

    <IP_ADDRESS> Relative percent difference (RPD). Calculate the RPD
using Equation 12.4:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.038

Where:

R1, R2 = Values that are being compared (i.e., response factors in
CCV).

    12.2.2 Determine the equivalent concentration of compounds in
atmospheres as follows.
    12.2.3 Correct target concentrations determined at the sampling
site temperature and atmospheric pressure to standard conditions (25
[deg]C and 760 mm mercury) using Equation 12.5 (Reference 21).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.039

Where:

tss = The average temperature during the collection
period at the sampling site (K).
Pss = The average pressure at the sampling site during
the collection period (mm Hg).
U = The diffusive uptake rate (sampling rate) (mL/min).

    12.2.4 For passive sorbent tube samples, calculate the
concentration of the target compound(s) in the sampled air, in
[mu]g/m3 by using Equation 12.6 (Reference 22).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.040

Where:

Cm = The concentration of target compound in the air
sampled ([mu]g/m3).
mmeas = The mass of the compound as measured in the
sorbent tube ([mu]g).
UNTP = The diffusive uptake rate corrected for local
conditions (sampling rate) (mL/min).
t = The exposure time (minutes).

    Note:  Diffusive uptake rates for common VOCs, using carbon
sorbents packed into sorbent tubes of the dimensions specified in
Section 6.1, are listed in Table 12.1. Adjust analytical conditions
to keep expected sampled masses within range (see Sections <IP_ADDRESS>
to <IP_ADDRESS>). Best possible method detection limits are typically in
the order of 0.1 ppb for 1,3-butadiene and 0.05 ppb for volatile
aromatics such as benzene for 14-day monitoring. However, actual
detection limits will depend upon the analytical conditions
selected.

          Table 12.1--Validated Sorbents and Uptake Rates (mL/min) for Selected Clean Air Act Compounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Compound              Carbopack\TM\  X\a\      Carbograph\TM\ 1 TD            Carbopack\TM\  B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,1-Dichloroethene...............    0.57   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.14
3-Chloropropene..................    0.51   not available..............  not available.
                                                   0.3
1,1-Dichloroethane...............    0.57   not available..............  not available.
                                                   0.1
1,2-Dichloroethane...............    0.57   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.08
1,1,1-Trichloroethane............    0.51   not available..............  not available.
                                                   0.1
Benzene..........................    0.67   0.63  0.07\b\..  0.63  0.07\b\.
                                                  0.06
Carbon tetrachloride.............    0.51   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.06
1,2-Dichloropropane..............    0.52   not available..............  not available.
                                                   0.1
Trichloroethene..................     0.5   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.05
1,1,2-Trichloroethane............    0.49   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.13
Toluene..........................    0.52   0.56  0.06\c\..  0.56  0.06\c\.
                                                  0.14
Tetrachloroethene................    0.48   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.05
Chlorobenzene....................    0.51   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.06
Ethylbenzene.....................    0.46   not available..............  0.50\c\.
                                                  0.07
m,p-Xylene.......................    0.46   0.47  0.04\c\..  0.47  0.04\c\.
                                                  0.09
Styrene..........................     0.5   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.14
o-Xylene.........................    0.46   0.47  0.04\c\..  0.47  0.04\c\.
                                                  0.12
p-Dichlorobenzene................    0.45   not available..............  not available.
                                                  0.05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Reference 3, McClenny, J. Environ. Monit. 7:248-256. Based on 24-hour duration.
\b\ Reference 24, BS EN 14662-4:2005 (incorporated by reference--see Sec.   63.14). Based on 14-day duration.
\c\ Reference 25, ISO 16017-2:2003(E) (incorporated by reference--see Sec.   63.14). Based on 14-day duration.

13.0 Method Performance

    The performance of this procedure for VOC not listed in Table
12.1 is determined using the procedure in Addendum A of this Method
or by one of the following national/international standard methods:
ISO 16017-2:2003(E), ASTM D6196-03 (Reapproved 2009), or BS EN
14662-4:2005 (all incorporated by reference--see Sec.  63.14).
    13.1 The valid range for measurement of VOC is approximately 0.5
[micro]g/m\3\ to 5 mg/m\3\ in air, collected over a 14-day sampling
period. The upper limit of the useful range depends on the split
ratio selected (Section 11.3.1) and the dynamic range of the
analytical system. The lower limit of the useful range depends on
the noise from the analytical instrument detector and on the blank
level of target compounds or interfering compounds on the sorbent
tube (see Section 13.3).
    13.2 Diffusive sorbent tubes compatible with passive sampling
and thermal desorption methods have been evaluated at relatively
high atmospheric concentrations (i.e., mid-ppb to ppm) and published
for use in workplace air and industrial/mobile source emissions
(References 15-16, 21-22).
    13.3 Best possible detection limits and maximum quantifiable
concentrations of air pollutants range from sub-part-per-trillion
(sub-ppt) for halogenated species such as CCl4 and the freons using
an electron capture detector (ECD), SIM Mode GC/MS, triple quad MS
or GC/TOF MS to sub-ppb for volatile hydrocarbons collected over 72
hours followed by analysis using GC with quadrupole MS operated in
the full SCAN mode.
    13.3.1 Actual detection limits for atmospheric monitoring vary
depending on several key factors. These factors are:
     Minimum artifact levels.
     GC detector selection.
     Time of exposure for passive sorbent tubes.
     Selected analytical conditions, particularly column
resolution and split ratio.

14.0 Pollution Prevention

    This method involves the use of ambient concentrations of
gaseous compounds that post little or no danger of pollution to the
environment.

15.0 Waste Management

    Dispose of expired calibration solutions as hazardous materials.
Exercise standard laboratory environmental practices to minimize the
use and disposal of laboratory solvents.

16.0 References

1. Winberry, W. T. Jr., et al., Determination of Volatile Organic
Compounds in Ambient Air Using Active Sampling onto Sorbent Tubes:
Method TO-17r, Second Edition, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, January 1999. http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/airtox.html#compendium
2. Ciccioli, P., Brancaleoni, E., Cecinato, A., Sparapini, R., and
Frattoni, M., ``Identification and Determination of Biogenic and
Anthropogenic VOCs in Forest Areas of Northern and Southern Europe
and a Remote Site of the Himalaya Region by High-resolution GC-MS,''
J. of Chrom., 643, pp 55-69, 1993.
3. McClenny, W.A., K.D. Oliver, H.H. Jacumin, Jr., E.H. Daughtrey,
Jr., D.A. Whitaker. 2005. 24 h diffusive sampling of toxic VOCs in
air onto Carbopack\TM\ X solid adsorbent followed by thermal

desorption/GC/MS analysis--laboratory studies. J. Environ. Monit.
7:248-256.
4. Markes International (www.markes.com/publications): Thermal
desorption Technical Support Note 2: Prediction of uptake rates for
diffusive tubes.
5. Ciccioli, P., Brancaleoni, E., Cecinato, A., DiPalo, C.,
Brachetti, A., and Liberti, A., ``GC Evaluation of the Organic
Components Present in the Atmosphere at Trace Levels with the Aid of
CarbopackTM B for Preconcentration of the Sample,'' J. of
Chrom., 351, pp 433-449, 1986.
6. Broadway, G. M., and Trewern, T., ``Design Considerations for the
Optimization of a Packed Thermal Desorption Cold Trap for Capillary
Gas Chromatography,'' Proc. 13th Int'l Symposium on Capil. Chrom.,
Baltimore, MD, pp 310-320, 1991.
7. Broadway, G. M., ``An Automated System for use Without Liquid
Cryogen for the Determination of VOC's in Ambient Air,'' Proc. 14th
Int'l. Symposium on Capil. Chrom., Baltimore, MD, 1992.
8. Gibitch, J., Ogle, L., and Radenheimer, P., ``Analysis of Ozone
Precursor Compounds in Houston, Texas Using Automated Continuous
GCs,'' in Proceedings of the Air and Waste Management Association
Conference: Measurement of Toxic and Related Air Pollutants, Air and
Waste Management Association, Pittsburgh, PA, May 1995.
9. Vandendriessche, S., and Griepink, B., ``The Certification of
Benzene, Toluene and m-Xylene Sorbed on Tenax[supreg] TA in Tubes,''
CRM-112 CEC, BCR, EUR12308 EN, 1989.
10. MDHS 2 (Acrylonitrile in Air), ``Laboratory Method Using Porous
Polymer Adsorption Tubes, and Thermal Desorption with Gas
Chromatographic Analysis,'' Methods for the Determination of
Hazardous Substances (MDHS), UK Health and Safety Executive,
Sheffield, UK.
11. MDHS 22 (Benzene in Air), ``Laboratory Method Using Porous
Polymer Adsorbent Tubes, Thermal Desorption and Gas
Chromatography,'' Method for the Determination of Hazardous
Substances (MDHS), UK Health and Safety Executive, Sheffield, UK.
12. MDHS 23 (Glycol Ether and Glycol Acetate Vapors in Air),
``Laboratory Method Using Tenax[supreg] Sorbent Tubes, Thermal
Desorption and Gas Chromatography,'' Method for the Determination of
Hazardous Substances (MDHS), UK Health and Safety Executive,
Sheffield, UK.
13. MDHS 40 (Toluene in air), ``Laboratory Method Using Pumped
Porous Polymer Adsorbent Tubes, Thermal Desorption and Gas
Chromatography,'' Method for the Determination of Hazardous
Substances (MDHS), UK Health and Safety Executive, Sheffield, UK.
14. MDHS 60 (Mixed Hydrocarbons (C to C) in Air), ``Laboratory
Method Using Pumped Porous Polymer 3 10 and Carbon Sorbent Tubes,
Thermal Desorption and Gas Chromatography,'' Method for the
Determination of Hazardous Substances (MDHS), UK Health and Safety
Executive, Sheffield, UK.
15. Price, J. A., and Saunders, K. J., ``Determination of Airborne
Methyl tert-Butyl Ether in Gasoline Atmospheres,'' Analyst, Vol.
109, pp. 829-834, July 1984.
16. Coker, D. T., van den Hoed, N., Saunders, K. J., and Tindle, P.
E., ``A Monitoring Method for Gasoline Vapour Giving Detailed
Composition,'' Ann. Occup, Hyg., Vol 33, No. 11, pp 15-26, 1989.
17. DFG, ``Analytische Methoden zur prufing gesundheitsschadlicher
Arbeistsstoffe,'' Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Verlag Chemie,
Weinheim FRG, 1985.
18. NNI, ``Methods in NVN Series (Luchtkwaliteit;
Werkplekatmasfeer),'' Nederlands Normailsatie--Institut, Delft, The
Netherlands, 1986-88.
19. ``Sampling by Solid Adsorption Techniques,'' Standards
Association of Australia Organic Vapours, Australian Standard 2976,
1987.
20. Woolfenden, E. A., ``Monitoring VOCs in Air Using Pumped
Sampling onto Sorbent Tubes Followed by Thermal Desorption-capillary
GC Analysis: Summary of Reported Data and Practical Guidelines for
Successful Application,'' J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc., Vol. 47,
1997, pp. 20-36.
21. Validation Guidelines for Air Sampling Methods Utilizing
Chromatographic Analysis, OSHA T-005, Version 3.0, May 2010, http://www.osha.gov/dts/sltc/methods/chromguide/chromguide.pdf.
22. ASTM D4597-10, Standard Practice for Sampling Workplace
Atmospheres to collect Gases or Vapors with Solid Sorbent Diffusive
Samplers.
23. Martin, http://www.hsl.gov.uk/media/1619/issue14.pdf.
24. BS EN 14662-4:2005, Ambient air quality--Standard method for the
measurement of benzene concentrations--Part 4: Diffusive sampling
followed by thermal desorption and gas chromatography.
25. ISO 16017-2:2003(E): Indoor, ambient and workplace air--Sampling
and analysis of volatile organic compounds by sorbent tube/thermal
desorption/capillary gas chromatography--Part 2: Diffusive sampling.

17.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts and Validation Data

                        Table 17.1--Summary of GC/MS Analysis Quality Control Procedures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Parameter                       Frequency           Acceptance criteria       Corrective action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bromofluorobenzene Instrument Tune     Daily\a\ prior to        Evaluation criteria      (1) Retune and or
 Performance Check.                     sample analysis.         presented in Section    (2) Perform
                                                                 9.5 and Table 9.2.       Maintenance.
Five point calibration bracketing the  Following any major      (1) Percent Deviation    (1) Repeat calibration
 expected sample concentration.         change, repair or        (%DEV) of response       sample analysis.
                                        maintenance or if        factors 30%.               check.
                                        meet method             (2) Relative Retention   (3) Prepare new
                                        requirements.            Times (RRTs) for         calibration standards
                                        Recalibration not to     target peaks 0.06 units from    repeat analysis.
                                                                 mean RRT.
Calibration Verification (CCV Second   Following the            The response factor      (1) Repeat calibration
 source calibration verification        calibration curve.       30% DEV      check.
 check).                                                         from calibration curve  (2) Repeat calibration
                                                                 average response         curve.
                                                                 factor.
Laboratory Blank Analysis............  Daily \a\ following      (1) <=0.2 ppbv per       (1) Repeat analysis
                                        bromofluoro- benzene     analyte or <=3 times     with new blank tube.
                                        and calibration check;   the LOD, whichever is   (2) Check system for
                                        prior to sample          greater.                 leaks, contamination.
                                        analysis.               (2) Internal Standard    3) Analyze additional
                                                                 (IS) area response       blank.
                                                                 40% and IS
                                                                 Retention Time (RT)
                                                                 0.33 min.
                                                                 of most recent
                                                                 calibration check.
Blank Sorbent Tube Certification.....  One tube analyzed for    <0.2 ppbv per VOC        Reclean all tubes in
                                        each batch of tubes      targeted compound or 3   batch and reanalyze.
                                        cleaned or 10 percent    times the LOD,
                                        of tubes whichever is    whichever is greater.
                                        greater.
Samples--Internal Standards..........  All samples............  IS area response 40% and IS RT      invalidation.
                                                                 0.33 min.
                                                                 of most recent
                                                                 calibration validation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Every 24 hours.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.041

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.042

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.043

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.044

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
    ADDENDUM A to Method 325B--Method 325 Performance Evaluation

A.1 Scope and Application

    A.1.1 To be measured by Methods 325A and 325B, each new target
volatile organic compound (VOC) or sorbent that is not listed in
Table 12.1 must be evaluated by exposing the selected sorbent tube
to a known concentration of the target compound(s) in an exposure
chamber following the procedure in this Addendum or by following the
procedures in the national/international standard methods: ISO
16017-2:2003(E),

ASTM D6196-03 (Reapproved 2009), or BS EN 14662-4:2005 (all
incorporated by reference--see Sec.  63.14), or reported in peer-
reviewed open literature.
    A.1.2 You must determine the uptake rate and the relative
standard deviation compared to the theoretical concentration of
volatile material in the exposure chamber for each of the tests
required in this method. If data that meet the requirement of this
Addendum are available in the peer reviewed open literature for VOCs
of interest collected on your passive sorbent tube configuration,
then such data may be submitted in lieu of the testing required in
this Addendum.
    A.1.3 You must expose sorbent tubes in a test chamber to parts
per trillion by volume (pptv) and low parts per billion by volume
(ppbv) concentrations of VOCs in humid atmospheres to determine the
sorbent tube uptake rate and to confirm compound capture and
recovery.

A.2 Summary of Method

    Note:  The technique described here is one approach for
determining uptake rates for new sorbent/sorbate pairs. It is
equally valid to follow the techniques described in any one of the
following national/international standards methods: ISO 16017-
2:2003(E), ASTM D6196-03 (Reapproved 2009), or BS EN 14662-4:2005
(all incorporated by reference--see Sec.  63.14).

    A.2.1 Known concentrations of VOC are metered into an exposure
chamber containing sorbent tubes filled with media selected to
capture the volatile organic compounds of interest (see Figure A.1
and A.2 for an example of the exposure chamber and sorbent tube
retaining rack). VOC are diluted with humid air and the chamber is
allowed to equilibrate for 6 hours. Clean passive sampling devices
are placed into the chamber and exposed for a measured period of
time. The passive uptake rate of the passive sampling devices is
determined using the standard and dilution gas flow rates. Chamber
concentrations are confirmed with whole gas sample collection and
analysis or direct interface volatile organic compound measurement
methods.
    A.2.2 An exposure chamber and known gas concentrations must be
used to challenge and evaluate the collection and recovery of target
compounds from the sorbent and tube selected to perform passive
measurements of VOC in atmospheres.

A.3 Definitions

    A.3.1 cc is cubic centimeter.
    A.3.2 ECD is electron capture detector.
    A.3.3 FID is flame ionization detector.
    A.3.4 LED is light-emitting diode.
    A.3.5 MFC is mass flow controller.
    A.3.6 MFM is mass flow meter.
    A.3.7 min is minute.
    A.3.8 ppbv is parts per billion by volume.
    A.3.9 ppmv is parts per million by volume.
    A.3.10 PSD is passive sampling device.
    A.3.11 psig is pounds per square inch gauge.
    A.3.12 RH is relative humidity.
    A.3.13 VOC is volatile organic compound.

A.4 Interferences

    A.4.1 VOC contaminants in water can contribute interference or
bias results high. Use only distilled, organic-free water for
dilution gas humidification.
    A.4.2 Solvents and other VOC-containing liquids can contaminate
the exposure chamber. Store and use solvents and other VOC-
containing liquids in the exhaust hood when exposure experiments are
in progress to prevent the possibility of contamination of VOCs into
the chamber through the chamber's exhaust vent.

    Note:  Whenever possible, passive sorbent evaluation should be
performed in a VOC free laboratory.

    A.4.3 PSDs should be handled by personnel wearing only clean,
white cotton or powder free nitrile gloves to prevent contamination
of the PSDs with oils from the hands.
    A.4.4 This performance evaluation procedure is applicable to
only volatile materials that can be measured accurately with direct
interface gas chromatography or whole gas sample collection,
concentration and analysis. Alternative methods to confirm the
concentration of volatile materials in exposure chambers are subject
to Administrator approval.

A.5 Safety

    A.5.1 This procedure does not address all of the safety concerns
associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of
this standard to establish appropriate field and laboratory safety
and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory
limitations prior to use.
    A.5.2 Laboratory analysts must exercise appropriate care in
working with high-pressure gas cylinders.

A.6 Equipment and Supplies

    A.6.1 You must use an exposure chamber of sufficient size to
simultaneously expose a minimum of eight sorbent tubes.
    A.6.2 Your exposure chamber must not contain VOC that interfere
with the compound under evaluation. Chambers made of glass and/or
stainless steel have been used successfully for measurement of known
concentration of selected VOC compounds.
    A.6.3 The following equipment and supplies are needed:
     Clean, white cotton or nitrile gloves;
     Conditioned passive sampling device tubes and diffusion
caps; and
     NIST traceable high resolution digital gas mass flow
meters (MFMs) or flow controllers (MFCs).

A.7 Reagents and Standards

    A.7.1 You must generate an exposure gas that contains between 35
and 75 percent relative humidity and a concentration of target
compound(s) within 2 to 5 times the concentration to be measured in
the field.
    A.7.2 Target gas concentrations must be generated with certified
gas standards and diluted with humid clean air. Dilution to reach
the desired concentration must be done with zero grade air or
better.
    A.7.3 The following reagents and standards are needed:
     Distilled water for the humidification;
     VOC standards mixtures in high-pressure cylinder
certified by the supplier (Note: The accuracy of the certified
standards has a direct bearing on the accuracy of the measurement
results. Typical vendor accuracy is 5 percent accuracy
but some VOC may only be available at lower accuracy (e.g., acrolein
at 10 percent)); and
     Purified dilution air containing less than 0.2 ppbv of
the target VOC.

A.8 Sample Collection, Preservation and Storage

    A.8.1 You must use certified gas standards diluted with humid
air. Generate humidified air by adding distilled organic free water
to purified or zero grade air. Humidification may be accomplished by
quantitative addition of water to the air dilution gas stream in a
heated chamber or by passing purified air through a humidifying
bubbler. You must control the relative humidity in the test gas
throughout the period of passive sampler exposure.

    Note:  The RH in the exposure chamber is directly proportional
to the fraction of the purified air that passes through the water in
the bubbler before entering the exposure chamber. Achieving uniform
humidification in the proper range is a trial-and-error process with
a humidifying bubbler. You may need to heat the bubbler to achieve
sufficient humidity. An equilibration period of approximately 15
minutes is required following each adjustment of the air flow
through the humidifier. Several adjustments or equilibration cycles
may be required to achieve the desired RH level.

    Note: You will need to determine both the dilution rate and the
humidification rate for your design of the exposure chamber by trial
and error before performing method evaluation tests.

    A.8.2 Prepare and condition sorbent tubes following the
procedures in Method 325B Section 7.0.
    A.8.3 You must verify that the exposure chamber does not leak.
    A.8.4 You must complete two evaluation tests using a minimum of
eight passive sampling tubes in each test with less than 5-percent
depletion of test analyte by the samplers.
    A.8.4.1 Perform at least one evaluation at two to five times the
estimated analytical detection limit or less.
    A.8.4.2 Perform second evaluation at a concentration equivalent
to the middle of the analysis calibration range.
    A.8.5 You must evaluate the samplers in the test chamber
operating between 35 percent and 75 percent RH, and at 25  5 [deg]C. Allow the exposure chamber to equilibrate for 6
hours before starting an evaluation.
    A.8.6 The flow rate through the chamber must be <=0.5 meter per
second face velocity across the sampler face.
    A.8.7 Place clean, ready to use sorbent tubes into the exposure
chamber for predetermined amounts of time to evaluate collection and
recovery from the tubes. The exposure time depends on the
concentration of volatile test material in the chamber and the
detection limit required for the sorbent tube sampling application.
Exposure time

should match sample collection time. The sorbent tube exposure
chamber time may not be less than 24 hours and should not be longer
than 2 weeks.
    A.8.7.1 To start the exposure, place the clean PSDs equipped
with diffusion caps on the tube inlet into a retaining rack.
    A.8.7.2 Place the entire retaining rack inside the exposure
chamber with the diffusive sampling end of the tubes facing into the
chamber flow. Seal the chamber and record the exposure start time,
chamber RH, chamber temperature, PSD types and numbers, orientation
of PSDs, and volatile material mixture composition (see Figure A.2).
    A.8.7.3 Diluted, humidified target gas must be continuously fed
into the exposure chamber during cartridge exposure. Measure the
flow rate of target compound standard gas and dilution air to an
accuracy of 5 percent.
    A.8.7.4 Record the time, temperature, and RH at the beginning,
middle, and end of the exposure time.
    A.8.7.5 At the end of the exposure time, remove the PSDs from
the exposure chamber. Record the exposure end time, chamber RH, and
temperature.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.045

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.046

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.047

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

A.9 Quality Control

    A.9.1 Monitor and record the exposure chamber temperature and RH
during PSD exposures.
    A.9.2 Measure the flow rates of standards and purified humified
air immediately following PSD exposures.

A.10 Calibration and Standardization

    A.10.1 Follow the procedures described in Method 325B Section
10.0 for calibration.
    A.10.2 Verify chamber concentration by direct injection into a
gas chromatograph calibrated for the target compound(s) or by
collection of an integrated SUMMA canister followed by analysis
using a preconcentration gas chromatographic method such as EPA
Compendium Method TO-15, Determination of VOCs in Air Collected in
Specially-Prepared Canisters and Analyzed By GC/MS.
    A.10.2.1 To use direct injection gas chromatography to verify
the exposure chamber concentration, follow the procedures in Method
18 of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A-6. The method ASTM D6420-99
(Reapproved 2010) (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  63.14) is an
acceptable alternative to EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60).

    Note:  Direct injection gas chromatography may not be
sufficiently sensitive for all compounds. Therefore, the whole gas
preconcentration sample and analysis method may be required to
measure at low concentrations.

    A.10.2.2 To verify exposure chamber concentrations using SUMMA
canisters,

prepare clean canister(s) and measure the concentration of VOC
collected in an integrated SUMMA canister over the period used for
the evaluation (minimum 24 hours). Analyze the TO-15 canister sample
following EPA Compendium Method TO-15.
    A.10.2.3 Compare the theoretical concentration of volatile
material added to the test chamber to the measured concentration to
confirm the chamber operation. Theoretical concentration must agree
with the measured concentration within 30 percent.

A.11 Analysis Procedure

    Analyze the sorbent tubes following the procedures described in
Section 11.0 of Method 325B.

A.12 Recordkeeping Procedures for Sorbent Tube Evaluation

    Keep records for the sorbent tube evaluation to include at a
minimum the following information:
    A.12.1 Sorbent tube description and specifications.
    A.12.2 Sorbent material description and specifications.
    A.12.3 Volatile analytes used in the sampler test.
    A.12.4 Chamber conditions including flow rate, temperature, and
relative humidity.
    A.12.5 Relative standard deviation of the sampler results at the
conditions tested.
    A.12.6 95 percent confidence limit on the sampler overall
accuracy.
    A.12.7 The relative accuracy of the sorbent tube results
compared to the direct chamber measurement by direct gas
chromatography or SUMMA canister analysis.

A.13 Method Performance

    A.13.1 Sorbent tube performance is acceptable if the relative
accuracy of the passive sorbent sampler agrees with the active
measurement method by 10 percent at the 95 percent
confidence limit and the uptake ratio is equal to greater than 0.5
mL/min (1 ng/ppm-min).

    Note:  For example, there is a maximum deviation comparing
Perkin-Elmer passive type sorbent tubes packed with Carbopack\TM\ X
of 1.3 to 10 percent compared to active sampling using the following
uptake rates.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     1,3-butadiene         Estimated                               Estimated
                                   uptake rate  mL/     detection limit     Benzene  uptake   detection limit (2
                                          min              (2 week)          rates mL/min            week)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbopack\TM\ X (2 week)........  0.61             0.1 ppbv            0.67 \a\           0.05 ppbv
                                           0.11 \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ McClenny, W.A., K.D. Oliver, H.H. Jacumin, Jr., E.H. Daughtrey, Jr., D.A. Whitaker. 2005. 24 h diffusive
  sampling of toxic VOCs in air onto Carbopack\TM\ X solid adsorbent followed by thermal desorption/GC/MS
  analysis--laboratory studies. J. Environ. Monit. 7:248-256.

    A13.2 Data Analysis and Calculations for Method Evaluation
    A.13.2.1 Calculate the theoretical concentration of VOC
standards using Equation A.1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.048

Where:

Cf = The final concentration of standard in the exposure
chamber (ppbv).
FRi = The flow rate of the target compound I (mL/min).
FRt = The flow rate of all target compounds from separate
if multiple cylinders are used (mL/min).
FRa = The flow rate of dilution air plus moisture (mL/
min).
Cs = The concentration of target compound in the standard
cylinder (parts per million by volume).

    A.13.2.3 Determine the uptake rate of the target gas being
evaluated using Equation A.2.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.049

Where:

Mx = The mass of analyte measured on the sampling tube
([eta]g).
Ce = The theoretical exposure chamber concentration
([eta]g/mL).
Tt = The exposure time (minutes).

    A.13.2.4 Estimate the variance (relative standard deviation
(RSD)) of the inter-sampler results at each condition tested using
Equation A.3. RSD for the sampler is estimated by pooling the
variance estimates from each test run.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.050

Where:

Xi = The measured mass of analyte found on sorbent tube
i.
Xi = The mean value of all Xi.
n = The number of measurements of the analyte.

    A.13.2.4 Determine the percent relative standard deviation of
the inter-sampler results using Equation A.4.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.051

    A.13.2.5 Determine the 95 percent confidence interval for the
sampler results using Equation A.5. The confidence interval is
determined based on the number of test runs performed to evaluate
the sorbent tube and sorbent combination. For the minimum test
requirement of eight samplers tested at two concentrations, the
number of tests is 16 and the degrees of freedom are 15.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.052

Where:

[Delta]95% = 95 percent confidence interval.
%RSD = percent relative standard deviation.
t0.95 = The Students t statistic for f degrees of freedom
at 95 percent confidence.
f = The number of degrees of freedom.
n = Number of samples.

    A.13.2.6 Determine the relative accuracy of the sorbent tube
combination compared to the active sampling results using Equation
A.6.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01DE15.053

Where:
RA = Relative accuracy.
Xi = The mean value of all Xi.
Xi = The average concentration of analyte measured by the
active measurement method.
[Delta]95% = 95 percent confidence interval.

A.14 Pollution Prevention

    This method involves the use of ambient concentrations of
gaseous compounds that post little or no pollution to the
environment.

A.15 Waste Management

    Expired calibration solutions should be disposed of as hazardous
materials.

A.16 References

    1. ISO TC 146/SC 02 N 361 Workplace atmospheres--Protocol for
evaluating the performance of diffusive samplers.

[FR Doc. 2015-26486 Filed 11-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2582-2583]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01421]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2007-0043]

TUV SUD America, Inc.: Grant of Expansion of Recognition

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces its final decision to expand
the scope of recognition for TUV SUD America, Inc., as a Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL).

DATES: The expansion of the scope of recognition becomes effective on
February 7, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW, Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; phone: (202)
693-2110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>OSHA's web page includes
information about the NRTL Program (see http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Notice of Final Decision

    OSHA hereby gives notice of the expansion of the scope of
recognition of TUV SUD America, Inc. (TUVAM), as a NRTL. TUVAM's
expansion covers the addition of two test standards to the scope of
recognition.
    OSHA recognition of a NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements specified by 29 CFR 1910.7. Recognition is an
acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety
testing and certification of the specific products covered within its
scope of recognition, and is not a delegation or grant of government
authority. As a result of recognition, employers may use products
properly approved by the NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require
testing and certification of the products.
    The Agency processes applications by a NRTL for initial
recognition, or for

expansion or renewal of this recognition, following requirements in
Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires that the Agency
publish two notices in the Federal Register in processing an
application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the application and
provides a preliminary finding and, in the second notice, the Agency
provides the final decision on the application. These notices set forth
the NRTL's scope of recognition or modifications of that scope. OSHA
maintains an informational web page for each NRTL that details the
scope of recognition. These pages are available from the Agency's
website at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    TUVAM submitted an application, dated June 12, 2017 (OSHA-2007-
0043-0023), to expand the recognition to include two additional test
standards. OSHA staff performed a comparability analysis and reviewed
other pertinent information. OSHA did not perform any on-site reviews
in relation to this application.
    OSHA published the preliminary notice announcing TUVAM's expansion
application in the Federal Register on July 24, 2018 (83 FR 35022). The
Agency requested comments by August 8, 2018, and received one comment
(OSHA-2007-0043-0025) in support of the application. OSHA now is
proceeding with this final notice to grant expansion of TUVAM's scope
of recognition.
    To obtain or review copies of all public documents pertaining to
the TUVAM's application, go to www.regulations.gov or contact the
Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210. Docket No. OSHA-2007-0043 contains all materials
in the record concerning TUVAM's recognition.

II. Final Decision and Order

    OSHA staff examined TUVAM's expansion application, its capability
to meet the requirements of the test standards, and other pertinent
information. Based on a review of this evidence, OSHA finds that TUVAM
meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of recognition,
subject to the limitation and conditions outlined in this notice. OSHA,
therefore, is proceeding with this final notice to grant TUVAM's scope
of recognition. OSHA limits the expansion of TUVAM's recognition to
testing and certification of products for demonstration of conformance
to the test standards listed in Table 1.

  Table 1--List of Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in TUVAM's
                        NRTL Scope of Recognition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 924.................................  Standard for Emergency Lighting
                                          and Power Equipment.
UL 2108................................  Standard for Low Voltage
                                          Lighting Systems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA's recognition of any NRTL for a particular test standard is
limited to equipment or materials for which OSHA standards require
third-party testing and certification before using them in the
workplace. Consequently, if a test standard also covers any products
for which OSHA does not require such testing and certification, a
NRTL's scope of recognition does not include these products.
    The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) may approve the
test standards listed above as American National Standards. However,
for convenience, we may use the designation of the standards-developing
organization for the standard as opposed to the ANSI designation. Under
the NRTL Program's policy (see OSHA Instruction CPL 1-0.3, Appendix C,
paragraph XIV), any NRTL recognized for a particular test standard may
use either the proprietary version of the test standard or the ANSI
version of that standard. Contact ANSI to determine whether a test
standard is currently ANSI-approved.

A. Conditions

    In addition to those conditions already required by 29 CFR 1910.7,
TUVAM must abide by the following conditions of the recognition:
    1. TUVAM must inform OSHA as soon as possible, in writing, of any
change of ownership, facilities, or key personnel, and of any major
change in operations as a NRTL, and provide details of the change(s);
    2. TUVAM must meet all the terms of its recognition and comply with
all OSHA policies pertaining to this recognition; and
    3. TUVAM must continue to meet the requirements for recognition,
including all previously published conditions on TUVAM's scope of
recognition, in all recognized areas.
    Pursuant to the authority in 29 CFR 1910.7, OSHA hereby expands the
scope of recognition of TUVAM, subject to the limitation and conditions
specified above.

III. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25,
2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on February 1, 2019.
Loren Sweatt,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2019-01421 Filed 2-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register: August 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 157)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 49879-49882]
[DOCID:fr16au10-33]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 578

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0114; Notice 1]
RIN 2127-AK78

Civil Penalties

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to increase the maximum civil penalty
amounts for violations covering a related series of violations of the
Vehicle Safety Act and violations of the odometer standard with intent
to defraud. This action would be taken pursuant to the Federal Civil
Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by the
Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, which requires us to review
and, as warranted, adjust penalties based on inflation at least every
four years.

DATES: Comments on the proposal are due September 15, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments electronically [identified by DOT
Docket ID Number NHTSA-2010-0114] by visiting the following Web site:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
    Alternatively, you can file comments using the following methods:
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, 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 Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.dms.dot.gov or http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Lang, Office of Chief Counsel,
NHTSA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In order to preserve the remedial impact of civil penalties and to
foster compliance with the law, the Federal Civil Monetary Penalty
Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461, Notes, Pub. L. 101-
410), as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (Pub.
L. 104-134) (referred to collectively as the ``Adjustment Act'' or, in
context, the ``Act''), requires us and other Federal agencies to adjust
civil penalties for inflation. Under the Adjustment Act, following an
initial adjustment that was capped by the Act, these agencies must make
further adjustments, as warranted, to the amounts of penalties in
statutes they administer at least once every four years.
    NHTSA's initial adjustment of civil penalties under the Adjustment
Act was published on February 4, 1997. 62 FR

5167. At that time, we codified the penalties under statutes
administered by NHTSA, as adjusted, in 49 CFR part 578, Civil
Penalties. On July 14, 1999, we further adjusted certain penalties. 64
FR 37876. In 2000, the Transportation Recall Enhancement,
Accountability and Documentation (``TREAD'') Act increased the maximum
penalties under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act as
amended (also referred to as the ``Motor Vehicle Safety Act'' or
``Safety Act''). We codified those amendments in part 578 on November
14, 2000. 65 FR 68108. On August 7, 2001, we also adjusted certain
penalty amounts pertaining to odometer tampering and disclosure
requirements and vehicle theft prevention. 66 FR 41149. On September
28, 2004, we adjusted the maximum penalty amounts for a related series
of violations involving the agency's provisions governing vehicle
safety, bumper standards, and consumer information. 69 FR 57864. On
September 8, 2005, the agency adjusted its penalty amounts for
violations of its vehicle theft protection standards and those
involving a related series of odometer-related violations. 70 FR 53308.
On May 16, 2006, the agency adjusted its penalty amounts for violations
of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and codified amendments made to the
Motor Vehicle Safety Act by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act--A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), 119 Stat.
1144, 1942-43 (Aug. 10, 2005). 71 FR 28279. On February 25, 2008, the
agency made adjustments to penalty amounts for odometer-related
violations and violations of certain administrative provisions of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act. 73 FR 9955. Most recently, on
February 2, 2010, the agency adjusted penalty amounts for violations of
the school bus safety provisions, bumper standards provisions, consumer
information requirements and odometer tampering and disclosure
requirements. 75 FR 5246.
    We have reviewed the civil penalty amounts in 49 CFR part 578 and,
in this notice, propose to adjust certain penalties under the
Adjustment Act. The civil penalties that we propose to adjust are
available for a related series of violations of the Motor Vehicle
Safety Act and violations of the odometer standard with intent to
defraud.

Method of Calculation--Proposed Adjustments

    Under the Adjustment Act, we first calculate the inflation
adjustment for each applicable civil penalty by arithmetically
increasing the maximum civil penalty amount per violation by a cost-of-
living adjustment. Section 5(b) of the Adjustment Act defines the
``cost-of-living'' adjustment as:
    The percentage (if any) for each civil monetary penalty by which--
    (1) the Consumer Price Index for the month of June of the calendar
year preceding the adjustment exceeds
    (2) the Consumer Price Index for the month of June of the calendar
year in which the amount of such civil monetary penalty was last set or
adjusted pursuant to law.
    Because the proposed adjustment is intended to be effective before
December 31, 2010, the ``Consumer Price Index [CPI] for the month of
June of the calendar year preceding the adjustment'' is the CPI for
June 2009. This figure, based on the Adjustment Act's requirement of
using the CPI ``for all-urban consumers published by the Department of
Labor,'' is 646.1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Individuals interested in deriving the CPI figures used by
the agency may visit the Department of Labor's Consumer Price Index
Home Page at http://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm. Scroll down to ``Most
Requested Statistics'' and select the ``All Urban Consumers (Current
Series)'' option, select the ``U.S. ALL ITEMS 1967=100-CUUR0000AA0''
box, and click on the ``Retrieve Data'' button.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA proposes to adjust the penalty for a related series of
violations of the Safety Act, in general, as well as Section 30166
violations. These amounts were last adjusted in 2006 (CPI = 607.8).
Accordingly, the factor that we use to calculate these proposed
increases is 1.06 (646.1/607.8).
    NHTSA also proposes to adjust the odometer law's maximum penalty
for intent to defraud. This amount was last adjusted in 1999 (CPI =
497.9). Accordingly, the factor that we use to calculate this proposed
increase is 1.30 (646.1/497.9).
    Next, using these inflation factors, increases above the current
maximum penalty levels are calculated and are then subject to a
specific rounding formula set forth in Section 5(a) of the Adjustment
Act. 28 U.S.C. 2461, Notes. Under that formula:
    Any increase shall be rounded to the nearest:
    (1) Multiple of $10 in the case of penalties less than or equal to
$100;
    (2) multiple of $100 in the case of penalties greater than $100 but
less than or equal to $1,000;
    (3) multiple of $1,000 in the case of penalties greater than $1,000
but less than or equal to $10,000;
    (4) multiple of $5,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$10,000 but less than or equal to $100,000;
    (5) multiple of $10,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$100,000 but less than or equal to $200,000; and
    (6) multiple of $25,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$200,000.

Proposed Amendments to Maximum Penalties

Change to Maximum Penalty (a Related Series of Violations) Under the
Motor Vehicle Safety Act in General (49 CFR 578.6(a)(1)) and Section
30166 (49 CFR 578.6(a)(3))

    The maximum civil penalty for a related series of violations under
the Safety Act, or a regulation issued thereunder, is $16,375,000 as
specified in 49 CFR 578.6(a)(1). The underlying statutory provision is
49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(1). The maximum civil penalty for a violation of 49
U.S.C. 30166, or a regulation issued thereunder, is $16,375,000 as
specified in 49 CFR 578.6(a)(3). The underlying statutory provision is
49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(3).
    Applying the appropriate inflation factor (1.06) raises each of the
$16,375,000 penalties to $17,357,500, an increase of $982,500. Under
the rounding formula, any increase in a penalty's amount shall be
rounded to the nearest $25,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$200,000. Accordingly, we propose that Section 578.6(a)(1) and Section
578.6(a)(3) each be amended to increase the maximum civil penalty for a
related series of violations from $16,375,000 to $17,350,000.

Change to Maximum Penalty for Violation With Intent To Defraud Under
the Odometer Standards Provision, 49 U.S.C. Chapter 327 (49 CFR
578.6(f)(2))

    The maximum civil penalty for a violation of the odometer statute,
49 U.S.C. Chapter 327, or a regulation or order, with intent to defraud
is three times the actual damages or $2,000, whichever is greater, as
specified in 49 CFR 578.6(f)(2). The underlying statutory provision is
49 U.S.C. 32709. Applying the appropriate inflation factor (1.30)
raises the $2,000 figure to $2,600, an increase of $600. Under the
rounding formula, any increase in a penalty's amount shall be rounded
to the nearest multiple of $1,000 in the case of penalties greater than
$1,000, but less than or equal to $10,000. In this case, the increase
would be $1,000. Accordingly, we propose that Section 578.6(f)(2) be
amended to increase the maximum civil penalty for a violation of the
statute or a regulation prescribed or order issued thereunder with
intent to defraud from three times the actual damages or $2,000,
whichever is greater, to three times the actual damages or $3,000,
whichever is greater.

Effective Date

    The amendments would be effective 30 days after publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register. The adjusted penalties would apply
to violations occurring on and after the effective date.

Request for Comments

How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including the
attachments, to Docket Management at the beginning of this document,
under ADDRESSES. You may also submit your comments electronically to
the docket following the steps outlined under ADDRESSES.

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit the following to the Chief Counsel
(NCC-110) at the address given at the beginning of this document under
the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) A complete copy of the
submission; (2) a redacted copy of the submission with the confidential
information removed; and (3) either a second complete copy or those
portions of the submission containing the material for which
confidential treatment is claimed and any additional information that
you deem important to the Chief Counsel's consideration of your
confidentiality claim. A request for confidential treatment that
complies with 49 CFR part 512 must accompany the complete submission
provided to the Chief Counsel. For further information, submitters who
plan to request confidential treatment for any portion of their
submissions are advised to review 49 CFR part 512, particularly those
sections relating to document submission requirements. Failure to
adhere to the requirements of part 512 may result in the release of
confidential information to the public docket. In addition, you should
submit two copies from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given at the
beginning of this document under ADDRESSES.

Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated at
the beginning of this notice under DATES. In accordance with our
policies, to the extent possible, we will also consider comments that
Docket Management receives after the specified comment closing date. If
Docket Management receives a comment too late for us to consider in
developing the proposed rule, we will consider that comment as an
informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address and times given near the beginning of this document under
ADDRESSES.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments
on the Internet, go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the on-
line instructions provided.
    You may download the comments. The comments are imaged documents,
in either TIFF or PDF format. Please note that even after the comment
closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in the
Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late
comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search the
Docket for new material.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed
under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This
action is limited to the proposed adoption of adjustments of civil
penalties under statutes that the agency enforces, and has been
determined to be not ``significant'' under the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We have also considered the impacts of this notice under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that a final rule based on this
proposal will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The following provides the factual basis for
this certification under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    The Small Business Administration (SBA) regulations define a small
business in part as a business entity ``which operates primarily within
the United States.'' 13 CFR 121.105(a). SBA's size standards were
previously organized according to Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC) Codes. SIC Code 336211 ``Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing''
applied a small business size standard of 1,000 employees or fewer. SBA
now uses size standards based on the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS), Subsector 336--Transportation Equipment
Manufacturing, which provides a small business size standard of 1,000
employees or fewer for automobile manufacturing businesses. Other motor
vehicle-related industries have lower size requirements that range
between 500 and 750 employees.
    Many small businesses are subject to the penalty provisions of
Title 49 U.S.C. Chapters 301 (motor vehicles in general and Section
30166) and 327 (odometer requirements); therefore, small businesses may
be affected by the proposed adjustments in this NPRM. Entities that are
potentially affected by the proposed amendments vary by statute and may
include manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment,
sellers of vehicles and equipment, repair shops and others.
    The proposed adjustment to penalty amounts in 49 U.S.C.
30165(a)(1), relating to motor vehicle safety, in general, and in 49
U.S.C. 30165 (a)(3), relating to Section 30166, potentially impacts
numerous entities including manufacturers, sellers and importers of
motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. We do not have data on how
many other entities within the ambit of 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(1) and
(a)(3) are small businesses, but the number is considerable.
    The proposed adjustment to penalty amounts in Chapter 327 relating
to odometer requirements potentially impacts a number of small
businesses including repair businesses, used car dealers, businesses
that are lessors of

vehicles, auction houses, and entities making devices that could change
an odometer's mileage. Although we do not have information on how many
of these entities are small businesses, we believe a large percentage
are small businesses.
    As noted throughout this preamble, this proposed rule on civil
penalties would only increase the maximum penalty amounts that the
agency could obtain for certain violations of provisions related to
motor vehicle safety, in general, Section 30166 violations, and
odometer violations with intent to defraud. This proposed rule does not
set the amount of penalties for any particular violation or series of
violations. Under the statute for motor vehicle safety, the penalty
provision requires the agency to take into account the size of a
business when determining the appropriate penalty in an individual
case. See 49 U.S.C. 30165(c). The statute for odometers does not
directly address small business size as a consideration, but does
require consideration of ``any effect on the ability to continue doing
business.'' 49 U.S.C. 32709(a)(3)(B). The agency would consider the
size of the business in such a calculation.
    The penalty adjustments that are being proposed would not affect
our civil penalty policy under the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA). See 62 FR 37115 (July 10, 1997). As
a matter of policy, we intend to continue to consider the
appropriateness of the penalty amount to the size of the business
charged.
    Because this proposed regulation would not establish penalty
amounts, it will not have a significant economic impact on small
businesses.
    Small organizations and governmental jurisdictions would not be
significantly affected as the price of motor vehicles and equipment
ought not to change as the result of this proposed rule. As explained
above, this action is limited to the proposed adoption of a statutory
directive, and has been determined to be not ``significant'' under the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires NHTSA 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.'' Under Section 6 of Executive Order 13132, the agency may
not issue a regulation with Federalism implications that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by
statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local
governments, the agency consults with State and local governments, or
the agency consults with State and local officials early in the process
of developing the proposed regulation.
    This proposed rule 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.
Thus, the requirements of Section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-4, requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the cost, benefits and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually. Because this proposed rule will not have a $100
million effect, no Unfunded Mandates assessment will be prepared.

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule does not have a retroactive or preemptive
effect. Judicial review of a rule based on this proposal may be
obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not require that a
petition for reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial review.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, we state
that there are no requirements for information collection associated
with this rulemaking action.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 578

    Motor vehicle safety, Penalties.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 578 is proposed to
be amended as set forth below.

PART 578--CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES

    1. The authority citation for 49 CFR part 578 is amended to read as
follows:

    Authority:  Pub. L. 101-410, Pub. L. 104-134, 49 U.S.C. 30165,
30170, 30505, 32308, 32309, 32507, 32709, 32710, 32912, and 33115 as
amended; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Section 578.6, paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3) and (f)(2) are revised
to read as follows:

PART 578--CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES

Sec.  578.6  Civil penalties for violations of specified provisions of
Title 49 of the United States Code.

    (a) * * *
    (1) In general. A person who violates any of sections 30112, 30115,
30117 through 30122, 30123(a), 30125(c), 30127, or 30141 through 30147
of Title 49 of the United States Code or a regulation prescribed under
any of those sections is liable to the United States Government for a
civil penalty of not more than $6,000 for each violation. A separate
violation occurs for each motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle
equipment and for each failure or refusal to allow or perform an act
required by any of those sections. The maximum civil penalty under this
paragraph for a related series of violations is $17,350,000.
* * * * *
    (3) Section 30166. A person who violates section 30166 of Title 49
of the United States Code or a regulation prescribed under that section
is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty for
failing or refusing to allow or perform an act required under that
section or regulation. The maximum penalty under this paragraph is
$6,000 per violation per day. The maximum penalty under this paragraph
for a related series of daily violations is $17,350,000.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) A person that violates 49 U.S.C. Chapter 327 or a regulation
prescribed or order issued thereunder, with intent to defraud, is
liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of three
times the actual damages or $3,000, whichever is greater.
* * * * *

    Issued on: August 10, 2010.
O. Kevin Vincent,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2010-20094 Filed 8-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 74 (Wednesday, April 17, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16013-16014]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07674]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0528; FRL-9991-66-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Synthetic Fiber Production
Facilities (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Synthetic Fiber
Production Facilities (EPA ICR Number 1156.14, OMB Control Number 2060-
0059), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
April 30, 2019. Public comments were previously requested, via the
Federal Register, on May 30, 2018 during a 60-day comment period. This
notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 17, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0528, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to [email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    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: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected].

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.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Synthetic
Fiber Production Facilities (40 CFR part 60, subpart HHH) were proposed
on November 23, 1982, promulgated on April 5, 1984, and amended on
October 17, 2000. These regulations apply to both existing and new
synthetic fiber production plants with a solvent-spun, synthetic fiber
process that produce more than 500 megagrams (Mgs) of fiber per year
that commenced construction or reconstruction after the date of
proposal. The provisions of this subpart do not apply to any facility
that uses the reaction spinning process to produce spandex fiber, or
the viscose process to produce rayon fiber, or to facilities that
commence modification, but not reconstruction, after the date of
proposal. This information is being collected to assure compliance with
40 CFR part 60, subpart HHH.
    In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of
all affected facilities subject to NSPS.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Synthetic fiber production plants
with a solvent-spun, synthetic fiber process that produce more than 500
megagrams (Mgs) of fiber per year.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart HHH).
    Estimated number of respondents: 22 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, semiannually, and quarterly.

    Total estimated burden: 1,880 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $380,000 (per year), which includes $165,000
in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in burden for this ICR
compared to the previous ICR. This situation is due to two
considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the past
three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years; and (2) the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative
or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall
burden.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-07674 Filed 4-16-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34074-34075]
[FR Doc No: E9-16591]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2005-21254]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
7 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from
the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not compromise
safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemption renewals
will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than,
the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective August 10, 2009. Comments must be
received on or before August 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2005-21254, using any of the
following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, 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 Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 7 individuals who have requested a renewal of
their exemption in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 7 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Andrew B. Clayton
Dean A. Maystead
Thomas D. Reynolds
Kenneth D. Daniels
Donald L. Murphy
Donald M. Jenson
Carl V. Murphy, Jr.

    These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual have a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the
medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3)
that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and
retain a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless rescinded
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer

than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two-year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 7 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (70 FR 30999; 70 FR 46567; 72 FR 40359). Each of these 7
applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted
evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues to meet
the standard specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision
impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety
while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two
years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by August 13, 2009.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 7 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each
case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to
its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all of these drivers, are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: July 7, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-16591 Filed 7-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 214 (Wednesday, November 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65655-65656]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26328]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9918-89-OECA]

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Request for nominations to the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC).

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) invites
nominations from a diverse range of qualified candidates to be
considered for appointment to its National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC). The NEJAC was chartered to provide advice
regarding broad, cross-cutting issues related to environmental justice.
This notice solicits nominations to fill approximately eight (8) new
vacancies for terms through September 2017. To maintain the
representation outlined by the charter, nominees will be selected to
represent: Academia, grassroots community-based organizations, non-
governmental/environmental organizations; local government agencies;
business and industry and tribal governments and indigenous
organizations. Vacancies are anticipated to be filled by May 2015.

Sources in addition to this Federal Register Notice also may be
utilized in the solicitation of nominees.

DATES: Nominations should be submitted in time to arrive no later than
November 22, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit nominations electronically with the subject line
``NEJAC Membership 2015'' to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You also may submit
nominations by mail to: Jasmin Muriel, NEJAC Program Manager, Office of
Environmental Justice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW. (MC 2201A), Washington, DC 20460. Non-
electronic submissions must follow the same format and contain the same
information. The Office of Environmental Justice will acknowledge
receipt of nominations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherri P. White, Designated Federal
Officer for the NEJAC, U.S. EPA; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (202)
564-1624.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NEJAC is a federal advisory committee
chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law
92-463. EPA established the NEJAC in 1993 to provide independent
consensus advice to the EPA Administrator about a broad range of
environmental issues related to environmental justice. The NEJAC
conducts business in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) (5 U.S.C. App. 2) and related regulations.
    The Council consists of 27 members (including a Chairperson)
appointed by EPA's Administrator. Members serve as non-federal
stakeholders representing: Four (4) from academia, three (3) from
business and industry; six (6) from community based organizations; six
(6) from non-governmental/environmental organizations; four (4) from
state and local governments; and four (4) from tribal governments and
indigenous organizations, of which one member serves as a liaison to
the National Tribal Caucus. Members are appointed for three (3)-year
terms with the possibility of reappointment to a second term.
    The NEJAC usually meets face-to-face twice a year, generally in the
Spring and the Fall. Additionally, members may be asked to participate
in teleconference meetings or serve on Work Groups to develop
recommendations, advice letters, and reports to address specific policy
issues. The average workload for members is approximately 5 to 8 hours
per month. EPA provides reimbursement for travel and other incidental
expenses associated with official government business.
    Nominations: Any interested person and/or organization may nominate
qualified individuals for membership. The EPA values and welcomes
diversity. In an effort to obtain nominations of diverse candidates,
the agency encourages nominations of women and men of all racial and
ethnic groups. All nominations will be fully considered, but applicants
need to be aware of the specific representation sought as outlined in
the Summary above. In addition, EPA is seeking nominees with knowledge
in community sustainability, public health and health disparities,
climate change adaptation, land use and equitable development,
environmental sociology and social science, and environmental
financing.
    Other criteria used to evaluate nominees will include:
     The background and experience that would help members
contribute to the diversity of perspectives on the committee (e.g.,
geographic, economic, social, cultural, educational background,
professional affiliations, and other considerations;
     Demonstrated experience with environmental justice and
community sustainability issues at the national, state, or local level;
     Excellent interpersonal and consensus-building skills;
     Ability to volunteer time to attend meetings 2-3 times a
year, participate in teleconference meetings, develop policy
recommendations to the Administrator, and prepare reports and advice
letters;
     Willingness to commit time to the committee and
demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively on
committees.
    How to Submit Nominations: Any interested person or organization
may nominate qualified persons to be considered for appointment to this
advisory committee. Individuals are encouraged to self-nominate.
    Nominations can be submitted in electronic format (preferred)
following the template available at http://epa.gov/environmentaljustice/nejac/index.html#Membership. To be considered, all
nominations should include:
     Current contact information for the nominee, including the
nominee's name, organization (and position within that organization),
current business address, email address, and daytime telephone number.
     Brief Statement describing the nominees interest in
serving on the NEJAC.
     R[eacute]sum[eacute] and a short biography (no more than 2
paragraphs) describing the professional and educational qualifications
of the nominee, including a list of relevant activities, and any
current or previous service on advisory committees.
     Letter[s] of recommendation from a third party supporting
the nomination. Letter[s] should describe how the nominee's experience
and knowledge will bring value to the work of the NEJAC.
    Other sources, in addition to this Federal Register notice, may
also be utilized in the solicitation of nominees. To help the EPA in
evaluating the effectiveness of its outreach efforts, please tell us
how you learned of this opportunity.

    Dated: October 29, 2014.
Matthew Tejada,
Director, Office of Environmental Justice, U.S. EPA.
[FR Doc. 2014-26328 Filed 11-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 161 (Thursday, August 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50618-50619]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20428]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14657-000]

Appalachian Mountain Club; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879, December 17,
1987), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for
the Zealand Falls Hydroelectric Project, located on the on Whitewall
Brook, in the Town of Bethlehem, Grafton County, New Hampshire and has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. The project
occupies 0.66 acres of federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service.
    The EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental
impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with
appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a
major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the
human environment.
    A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.ferc.govusing the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY).
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    For further information, contact John Baummer at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 12, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-20428 Filed 8-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P