[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 137 (Thursday, July 16, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43191-43193]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15344]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005; FRL-10011-95-Region 5]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Fort Wayne Reduction
Dump Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; notification of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5 is issuing
a Notice of Intent to Delete Operable Unit 1 (OU1) and Operable Unit 2
(OU2) (the two capped landfill areas) of the Fort Wayne Reduction Dump
Superfund Site (Fort Wayne Reduction Site or Site) located in Fort
Wayne, Indiana, from the National Priorities List (NPL) and requests
public comments on this proposed action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant
to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and the State of Indiana, through the
Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM), have determined
that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than
operation and maintenance, monitoring, and five-year reviews, have been
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions
under Superfund.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 17, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1986-0005, by one of the following methods:
     https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Written comments submitted by mail are temporarily suspended and no
hand deliveries will be accepted. We encourage the public to submit
comments via email or at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1986-0005. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you

consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or email. The https://www.regulations.gov website
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005 and at
https://www.epa.gov/superfund/fort-wayne-dump or you may contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
    The EPA is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Regional
Records Centers for public visitors to reduce the risk of transmitting
COVID-19. In addition, many site information repositories are closed
and information in these repositories, including the deletion docket,
has not been updated with hardcopy or electronic media. For further
information and updates on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us
online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), local area
health departments, and our Federal partners so that we can respond
rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Cibulskis, NPL Deletion
Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5, at (312)
886-1843 or via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 5 announces its intent to delete OU1 and OU2 (the two
capped landfill areas) of the Fort Wayne Reduction Site from the NPL
and requests public comment on this proposed action. The Operable Unit
3 (OU3) (groundwater) portion of the Site will remain on the NPL and is
not being considered for deletion as part of this action.
    The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the
NCP. EPA promulgated the NCP pursuant to Section 105 of CERCLA of 1980,
as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that appear to
present a significant risk to public health, welfare, or the
environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions
financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). This partial
deletion of OU1 and OU2 of the Fort Wayne Reduction Site is proposed in
accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with the Notice of
Policy Change: Partial Deletion of Sites Listed on the National
Priorities List (60 FR 55466), November 1, 1995. As described in 40 CFR
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, portions of a site deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions
warrant such actions.
    EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete OU1 and OU2 of
the Fort Wayne Reduction Site for thirty (30) days after publication of
this document in the Federal Register.
    Section II of this preamble explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III of this preamble discusses the
procedures that EPA is using for this action. Section IV of this
preamble discusses where to access and review information that
demonstrates how the deletion criteria have been met at OU1 and OU2 of
the Fort Wayne Reduction Site.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites, or portions
thereof, may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is
appropriate. In making such a determination pursuant to 40 CFR
300.425(e), EPA will consider, in consultation with the State, whether
any of the following criteria have been met:
    i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
    ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
    iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
    Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to the deletion of OU1 and OU2 (the
two capped landfill areas) of the Fort Wayne Reduction Site from the
NPL:
    (1) EPA consulted with the State of Indiana prior to developing
this Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion.
    (2) EPA has provided the State thirty (30) working days for review
of this notice prior to publication of it today.
    (3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, EPA has
determined that no further response is appropriate for OU1 and OU2 of
the Site other than routine operation and maintenance, monitoring, and
five-year reviews.
    (4) The State of Indiana, through the IDEM, concurred with the
deletion of OU1 and OU2 of the Fort Wayne Reduction Dump Site from the
NPL on June 18, 2020.
    (5) Concurrently with the publication of this Notice of Intent for
Partial Deletion in the Federal Register, an announcement of the
availability of the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion is being
published in a major local newspaper, the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette.
The newspaper notice

announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the Notice of
Intent for Partial Deletion of the Fort Wayne Reduction Site from the
NPL.
    (6) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed partial
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005 and on the EPA's Fort Wayne Reduction Site
web page at https://www.epa.gov/superfund/fort-wayne-dump.
    If comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on
this document, EPA will evaluate and respond appropriately to the
comments before making a final decision to delete OU1 and OU2 of the
Fort Wayne Reduction Site from the NPL. If necessary, EPA will prepare
a Responsiveness Summary to address any significant public comments
received. After the public comment period, if EPA determines it is
still appropriate to delete OU1 and OU2 of the Fort Wayne Reduction
Site from the NPL, the EPA will publish a final Notice of Partial
Deletion in the Federal Register. Public notices, public submissions,
and copies of the Responsiveness Summary, if prepared, will be made
available to interested parties and in the docket listed above.
    Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not itself
create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations.
Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter
EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is
designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist EPA
management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion
of a site or a portion of a site from the NPL does not preclude
eligibility for future response actions, should future conditions
warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion

    The EPA placed copies of a Site-Specific Justification for the
Partial Deletion from the NPL of Operable Units 1 and 2 (Capped
Landfill Areas), Fort Wayne Reduction Dump Superfund Site and other
documents supporting the proposed partial deletion in the deletion
docket. The material provides explanation of EPA's rationale for the
partial deletion and demonstrates how OU1 and OU2 of the Fort Wayne
Reduction Site meet the NPL deletion criteria. This information is made
available for public inspection in the docket at the locations
identified above.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR
54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR,
1987 Comp., p. 193.

    Dated: July 10, 2020.
Kurt Thiede,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2020-15344 Filed 7-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire Thank you for participating in the National Environmental Performance Track Members Survey! As you know, your facility is one of an elite group of top performing facilities that have voluntarily demonstrated a significant commitment to the environment and to the community in which they operate. The U. S. EPA appreciates your time and effort and wants to make sure that your participation in the Performance Track Program continues to be meaningful and rewarding for your facility. The results of this survey will help us to enhance the benefits and services that you value most as a Performance Track member and will help us to identify new benefits.

The survey should take about 15 minutes to complete. EPA's contractor, Abt Associates, is administering the survey and collecting the results. The information you provide will be aggregated with the responses from other facilities and will not be linked to you or your company in any reports or materials developed for EPA, Performance Track members, or the general public. Only summary information of the results will be reported. You can view our privacy policy here.

To begin, enter the User ID provided to you in the email you received from the Performance Track Program announcing this survey.

Login Page Username Passcode Please enter your email address E mail 1) Please pick a job title that best describes your position:

Corporate environmental manager Facility environmental manager Environment, health and safety staff Facility production or operations manager Division manager Owner Other ( Please specify) Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML 2) Which of the following benefits were motivating factors in your facility's decision to join Performance Track? ( Please check all that apply)

Opportunity for a collaborative/ amicable relationship with the U. S. EPA and State environmental agency Recognition from the U. S. EPA Potential for regulatory incentives Low priority for routine inspections Opportunities to network with other top environmental performers Opportunities to improve environmental performance Good will/ Improved reputation resulting from public awareness of your membership in Performance Track Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

No benefits were motivating factors 3) Of the factors you have selected below, please rank the top three in order of their importance to your facility's decision to join Performance Track. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

4) Which of the following benefits are important to your facility's decision to continue its Performance Track membership? ( Please check all that apply)

Opportunity for a collaborative/ amicable relationship with the U. S. EPA and State environmental agency Recognition from the U. S. EPA Potential for regulatory incentives Low priority for routine inspections Opportunities to network with other top environmental performers Opportunities to improve environmental performance Good will/ Improved reputation resulting from public awareness of your membership in Performance Track List any other benefits important to your continuing membership:

Other ( Please specify) Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML Other ( Please specify)

No benefits are important 5) Of the factors you have selected below, please rank the top three in order of their importance to your facility's decision to continue its Performance Track membership. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

6) What benefits might Performance Track provide that would better complement your facility's business goals or mission?

7) Was an improved relationship with or recognition from any of the following entities a motivating factor in your facility's decision to join Performance Track? ( Please check all that apply)

EPA or State environmental agency Community members Customers Employees Corporate management Industry or professional peer group Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

None 8) Of the entities you selected below, please rank the top three in order of the importance an improved relationship with or recognition from them had to your facility's decision to join Performance Track. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table] Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML 9) Is an improved relationship with or recognition from any of the following entities important to your facility's decision to continue its Performance Track membership? ( Please check all that apply)

EPA or State environmental agency Community members Customers Employees Corporate management Industry or professional peer group Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

None 10) Of the entities you selected below, please rank the top three in order of their importance to your facility's decision to continue its Performance Track membership. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

11) Which of the following factors were potential concerns/ drawbacks to your facility's decision to join Performance Track? ( Please check all that apply)

Time and effort to complete the application Difficulty in developing performance commitments Time and effort to monitor progress towards performance commitments Time and effort of completing Annual Performance Report Concern that your EMS did not meet all Performance Track criteria Concern that your public outreach program did not meet the Performance Track criteria Concern that your compliance record did not meet the Performance Track criteria Lack of top management support/ awareness of the Performance Track program Lack of employee support/ awareness of the Performance Track program Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

None Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML 12) Are you aware of, and has your facility used any of the following services currently offered by Performance Track?

I am aware of this service and my facility has used/ participated in it I am aware of this service, but my facility has not used/ participated in it I am not aware of this service EPA national recognition events Articles on member facilites' environmental achievements in trade publications Tele seminars Regional networking events Performance Track mentoring program Roundtables with Regional EPA officials Web based Resource Center Online tools for communicating with the media about your Performance Track membership 13) How useful have the following current Performance Track services been to your facility? Even if you were unaware of or have not used a service, please tell us how useful you believe the service would be.

Very Useful Somewhat Useful Not Useful Don't know EPA national recognition events Articles on member facility's environmental achievements in trade publications Tele seminars Regional networking events Performance Track mentoring program Roundtables with Regional EPA officials Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML Web based Resource Center Online tools for communicating with the media about your Performance Track membership List any other Performance Track service that would be useful to your facility List any other Performance Track service that would be useful to your facility 14) In which of the following regulatory areas would you be interested in receiving regulatory incentives/ flexibility? ( Please check all that apply)

Air Water Waste Toxics Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

None 15) Of the regulatory areas you selected below, please rank the top three most important to you for receiving regulatory incentives/ flexibility. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

16) Which of the following regulatory incentives would be beneficial to your facility? ( Please check all that apply)

Expedited permitting Reduced reporting Reduced monitoring Reduced record keeping Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

None Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML 17) Of the regulatory incentives you selected below, please rank the top three most beneficial to your facility, in order of their importance. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

18) How satisfied are you with the recognition your facility has received for its membership in Performance Track?

Very Satisfied Satisfied Not Satisfied Very Dissatisfied 19) Please provide us with recommendations for ways Performance Track could improve the recognition members receive.

20) Which of the following methods are effective ways for you to receive information about Performance Track services or events? ( Please check all that apply)

Email announcements Phone calls Direct mail Main Performance Track website Members only portion of Performance Track website Trade associations and other networking partners Conferences/ Speaker events Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

21) Of the methods you have selected below, please rank the top three in order of their effectiveness for you to receive information about Performance Track services or events. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table] Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML 22) What types of conferences have you attended in the past 3 years? ( Please check all that apply)

Trade shows/ expos ( primarily dealing with trade related products)

Trade conferences ( primarily dealing with trade related issues)

Environmental related conferences Occupational safety and health conferences Government related/ hosted conferences ( local/ state/ federal)

Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

None 23) [ Skip if answer to 22 = None] Of the conferences you have selected below, for which, if any, was the Performance Track program represented? ( Please check all that apply) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

PTrack was not represented at any of these conferences.

24) [ Skip if answer to 22 or 23 = None] In what part( s) of the conference was Performance Track represented? ( Please check all that apply)

Informational booths Panel discussions Plenary session Keynote speaker Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

Do not remember/ Performance Track was not represented 25) When you go to conferences, in general what do you find are the most effective methods for receiving information about voluntary programs such as Performance Track? ( Please check all that apply)

Informational booths Panel discussions Plenary session Keynote speaker Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

26) To which of the following entities/ stakeholders do you promote or publicize your membership in the Performance Track program? ( Please check all that apply)

State environmental agency Community members Customers Investors Employees Corporate management Trade associations Industry/ professional peers Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

We do not currently promote or publicize our membership 27) Of the entities/ stakeholders you selected below, please rank the top three that you would like most to receive information about your membership in Performance Track, in order of importance. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

28) Which of the following channels are ( or do you feel could be) effective for publicizing your facility's membership in Performance Track? ( Please check all that apply)

Trade magazines Trade conferences Local print news Your company's sales staff Your company's website State/ Federal environmental compliance websites Company staff meetings and special events Corporate hosted events with the participation of the community or public officials Company Newsletters Draft   For Review Of Content; Formatting To Be Done In HTML Company Annual Report Other ( Please specify)

Other ( Please specify)

There are no effective channels/ Publicity is not important 29) Of the sources you have selected below, please rank the top three in order of their effectiveness for publicizing your facility's membership. ( Use each ranking only once; 1 = higher importance.) [ Selected choices will appear in table]

30) Do you have any other suggestions for how the Performance Track Program could improve its services to you and other members?

Submit Thank you for completing the Performance Track Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire!

The U. S. EPA appreciates your efforts. Your responses will be compiled with those of other Performance Track members and will help us to enhance the benefits and services that you value most as a Performance Track member and identify new benefits and services. Performance Track will be announcing the results of this questionnaire and any resulting enhancement to services.

If you have any questions about this questionnaire or about Performance Track Member Services, please don't hesitate to contact Lisa Grogan at grogan. lisa@ epa. gov or phone 202 566 2981. Thank you for being an active PT member!


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 248 (Thursday, December 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78503-78504]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30854]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Request for Comment

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

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and
solicitation of public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 35), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below will be submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The ICR describes the
nature of the information collection and its expected burden. A Federal
Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting public comments
on the following information collection was published on September 5,
2013 (Federal Register/Vol. 78, No. 172/pp. 54729-54730).

DATES: Submit comments to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on
or before January 27, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristie Johnson at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Behavioral Safety
Research (NTI-131), W46-198, Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Dr. Johnson's phone number is
202-366-2755 and her email address is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the burden estimate, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title--NHTSA Distracted Driving Survey Project.
    Type of Request--Regular.
    OMB Clearance Number--2127-0665.
    Form Number--NHTSA Form 1082.
    Respondents--Telephone interviews will be administered to a
national sample of people 16 and older who have access to a residential
landline and/or a personal cell phone.
    Estimated Number of Respondents--30 pretest respondents, 6,000
survey respondents, and 200 non-response bias respondents, for up to 2
administrations of the survey for a total of 12,460 respondents.
    Estimated Time per Response--20 minutes per pretest and main survey
interviews. 10 minutes per non-response interview.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours--2,043 hours x 2
administrations (4,086 hours total).
    Frequency of Collection--The survey will be administered in 2014
and possibly again in 2016.
    Abstract--The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) proposes to collect information from a national random sample
of 6,000 (12,000 total for both administrations) members of the general
public age 16 and older. The sample will be stratified by NHTSA region,
age, and gender. The National Survey on Distracted Driving Attitudes
and Behaviors (NSDDAB) will ask about (a) attitudes, behaviors, and
perceptions related to driving distractions and electronic device use
while driving, and (b) the effectiveness of high visibility enforcement
demonstration programs to increase public awareness of the dangers of,
and legislation related to, distracted and unsafe driving behaviors.
The national survey will be preceded by a pretest administered to 30
respondents. Interview length will average 20 minutes. This approval
will be for the third and fourth administrations of the NSDDAB.
Participation by respondents will be voluntary and anonymous. Cell
phone and non-response bias respondents will have the option to receive
a small monetary incentive. The personally identifiable information
(name and mailing address) used for respondent payment will be held
separately from the respondents' survey responses so that no connection
can be made between the two. All results will be reported in the
aggregate.
    The telephone interviewers will use computer-assisted telephone
interviewing to reduce interview length and minimize recording errors.
A Spanish-language translation and bilingual interviewers will be used
to minimize language barriers to participation. NHTSA will use the
findings from this proposed information collection to build upon and
add to the existing knowledge on distracted driving and to help track
behavior and attitude changes that can be used to tailor distraction
program efforts and to assist States, localities, and communities in
developing and refining distracted driving programs.
    Comments are Invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department of Transportation, including whether the information
will have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. A comment to OMB is most
effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication of this
notice.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).

    Issued on: December 20, 2013.
Jeff Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2013-30854 Filed 12-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28451-28452]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0860]

The 13 Carcinogens Standard; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection
(Paperwork) Requirements

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

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend OMB approval of the information collection requirements
contained in the 13 Carcinogens Standard.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
August 20, 2018.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2012-0012,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N-3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.
Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are
accepted during the Docket Office's normal business hours, 10:00 a.m.
to 3:00 p.m., ET.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2012-0012) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be
made available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further
information on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the above address. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the website. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Christie Garner
at the phone number below in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to obtain
a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Mockler or Christie Garner,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor,
(202) 693-2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small business, and to reduce to
the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The information collection requirements specified in the 13
Carcinogens Standard protect workers from the adverse health effects
that may result from their exposure to the specified carcinogens. The
following is a brief description of the collection of information
requirements contained in the 13 Carcinogens Standard: Establishing and
implementing a medical surveillance program for workers assigned to
enter regulated areas; informing workers of their medical examination
results; and providing workers with access to their medical records.
Further, employers must retain worker medical records for specified
time periods and make them available upon request to OSHA and NIOSH.

II. Special Issues for Comment

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

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the 13 Carcinogens Standard (29
CFR 1910.1003). OSHA is requesting an adjustment increase of 67 hours
(from 1,493 hours to 1,560 hours). The increase is a result of a slight
growth in the number of establishments affected by the Standards from
97 to 101.
    The Agency will summarize any comments submitted in response to
this notice and will include this summary in its request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: 13 Carcinogens Standard (29 CFR 1910.1003).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0085.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 101.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion, annually.
    Total Number of Responses: 2,291.
    Average Time per Response: Time per response ranges from
approximately 5 minutes (for employers to maintain records) to 2 hours
(for worker medical surveillance).
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,560 hours.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $115,370.

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

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0860). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as their social security number
and dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
    Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov website to
submit comments and access the docket is available at the website's
``User Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information
about materials not available from the website, and for assistance in
using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

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

    Signed at Washington, DC, on June 13, 2018.
Loren Sweatt,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2018-13112 Filed 6-18-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 39831]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16961]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Sixth Meeting: Special Committee 231 (SC 231)

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

ACTION: Sixth Meeting Notice of Special Committee 231.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
sixth meeting of the Special Committee 231.

DATES: The meeting will be held September 22nd-September 24th from 9:00
a.m.-5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th
Street NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or
Sophie Bousquet, Program Director, RTCA, Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(202) 330-0663.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the Special Committee 231. The agenda
will include the following:

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

1. Welcome/Introduction
2. Administrative Remarks
3. Agenda Review
4. Summary of Working Group activities
5. Other Business
6. Date and Place of Next Meeting

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

1. Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Session

Thursday, September 24, 2015

1. Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Session

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 7, 2015.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, Program Oversight and
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-16961 Filed 7-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P