[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 211 (Thursday, November 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50933-50934]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23843]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2017-0099]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this
provides the public notice that on September 22, 2017, the Rogue Valley
Terminal Railroad Corporation (RVT) petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) for a waiver of compliance from certain provisions
of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part
223, Safety Glazing Standards--Locomotives, Passenger Cars and
Cabooses. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-2017-0099.
    Specifically, RVT seeks a waiver for one diesel-electric switching
locomotive, RVT 82. This locomotive is an EMD Model SW1200 constructed
in 1965. RVT 82 will be used exclusively in common carrier industrial
switching service on RVT non-main tracks and spurs (9.5 miles of track)
and Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc. (CORP) yard limit trackage
(2 miles of track). Speeds shall not exceed 10 miles per hour. All 11.5
miles of trackage are located within the Medford Industrial Park
complex located in White City, Oregon. The glass currently installed on
RVT 82 meets an ASI rating of AS-1. RVT states that the cost of
replacing this glass with FRA-compliant safety glazing at this time
would be prohibitively expensive and uneconomic due to the low volume
of traffic presently handled by RVT.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested parties
desire an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the

appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by December 18, 2017 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 26, 2017.
John K. Alexy,
Director, Office of Safety Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-23843 Filed 11-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 29 (Monday, February 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7585-7586]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3234]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2007-D-0369]

Draft Guidance for Industry on Bioequivalence Recommendations for
Rifaximin Tablets; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of two draft guidances for industry entitled
``Bioequivalence Recommendations for Rifaximin,'' one for the 200-
milligram (mg) strength (rifaximin-200) and one for the 550-mg strength
(rifaximin-550). The recommendations provide specific guidance on the
design of bioequivalence (BE) studies to support abbreviated new drug
applications (ANDAs) for rifaximin tablets.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on the
draft guidances before it begins work on the final versions of the
guidances, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidances by April 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the draft
guidances to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, rm. 2201, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance documents.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidances to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doan T. Nguyen, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research (HFD-600), Food and Drug Administration, 7519
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of June 11, 2010 (75 FR 33311), FDA
announced the availability of a guidance for industry entitled
``Bioequivalence Recommendations for Specific Products,'' which
explained the process that would be used to make product-specific BE
recommendations available to the public on FDA's Web site at  http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm. As described in that guidance, FDA adopted this process as
a means to develop and disseminate product-specific BE recommendations
and provide a meaningful opportunity for the public to consider and
comment on those recommendations. This notice announces the
availability of two draft BE recommendations, one for rifaximin-200 and
one for rifaximin-550.
    Xifaxan (rifaximin) 200-mg tablets, approved by FDA in May 2004,
are indicated for the treatment of patients (>= 12 years of age) with
travelers' diarrhea caused by noninvasive strains of Escherichia coli.
Xifaxan (rifaximin) 550-mg tablets, approved by FDA in March 2010, are
indicated for reduction in risk of hepatic encephalopathy recurrence in
patients >= 18 years of age. Xifaxan, 200 mg, and Xifaxan, 550 mg, are
designated the reference listed drugs (RLDs) and therefore any ANDAs
for generic rifaximin-200 or rifaximin-550 must demonstrate BE to the
relevant RLD prior to approval. There are no approved ANDAs for these
products.
    In November 2011, FDA posted on its Web site a draft guidance for
industry on the Agency's recommendations for BE studies to support
ANDAs for rifaximin-200 (Draft Rifaximin-200 BE Recommendations). FDA
is now issuing a draft guidance for industry on BE recommendations for
generic rifaximin-550 (Draft Rifaximin-550 BE Recommendations).
    In May 2008, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Salix), manufacturer of
the RLD, Xifaxan (200 mg), filed a citizen petition requesting that FDA
refuse to receive for substantive review, or approve, ANDAs for generic
rifaximin-200 unless the ANDAs contain certain data to demonstrate BE
(Docket No. FDA-2008-P-0300). FDA is reviewing the issues raised in the
petition and will consider any comments on the Draft Rifaximin-200 BE
Recommendations before responding to Salix's citizen petition and
finalizing its BE recommendations for rifaximin-200.
    These draft guidances are being issued consistent with FDA's good

guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidances,
when finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on the
design of BE studies to support ANDAs for rifaximin-200 and rifaximin-
550. They do not create or confer any rights for or on any person and
do not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may
be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

II. Comments

    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the documents at
either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: February 7, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-3234 Filed 2-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14839-14840]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6424]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0213; FRL-9283-5]

Delegation of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories; State of Arizona, Maricopa County Air
Quality Department; State of California, Santa Barbara County Air
Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of the 1990 Clean Air Act, EPA
granted delegation of specific national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) to the Maricopa County Air Quality
Department on May 6, 2010, and December 14, 2010, and to the Santa
Barbara County Air Pollution Control District on July 30, 2010. EPA is
proposing to revise the Code of Federal Regulations to reflect the

current delegation status of NESHAP in Arizona and California.

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by April 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0213, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4124<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document concerns the delegation of
unchanged NESHAP to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, and the
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. In the Rules and
Regulations section of this Federal Register, EPA is amending
regulations to reflect the current delegation status of NESHAP in
Arizona and California. EPA is taking direct final action without prior
proposal because the Agency believes this action is not controversial.
If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in a
subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: March 3, 2011.
Deborah Jordan,
Director, Air Division, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-6424 Filed 3-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17486-17488]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05281]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0529; EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0685; FRL-10638-01-R5]

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Emissions Reporting and
Infrastructure SIP Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Wisconsin state implementation plan (SIP)
revising air emissions reporting requirements codified in Chapter 438
of the Wisconsin Administrative Code. Additionally, EPA is proposing to
approve a related infrastructure requirement under section 110 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2012 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) and 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to
ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality
management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities
under the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 24, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0529 or EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0685 at https://www.regulations.gov,
or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, 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, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Olivia Davidson, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected]. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and
facility closures due to COVID-19.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is the background of this SIP submission?

    The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) submitted a
SIP revision on July 13, 2015, addressing infrastructure SIP
requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA proposed approval
of most elements of the submission on February 19, 2016 (81 FR 8460).
The public comment period for our proposed rulemaking closed on March
21, 2016. EPA received two adverse comment letters.
    One commenter stated that ``Compounding the issue of insufficient
monitoring is the fact that the WDNR does not require industrial
facilities to provide and report their annual PM2.5
emissions like they do for PM and PM10. Each facility is in
the best position to know their actual emissions from the previous
year, so not requiring a report at the end of the year makes it even
more difficult to identify any violations. The information needed to
make that assessment would need to be sought out independently for each
facility in the entire state, which requires a great deal more work
than reading a report and comparing it to the limit.'' EPA agreed that
110(a)(2)(F) was not satisfied in the proposed rule.
    Once the final approval of most elements and deferred action of
element F was published, WDNR began the rule making process to update
NR 400.03, 438, and 484.06(4) Wis. Adm. Code and establish
PM2.5 reporting requirements that satisfy the Federal Air
Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) rule. WDNR held a public
comment period on the revised rules from September 27, 2021, through
November 5, 2021, and held a public hearing on October 29, 2021.
Several adverse comments were received on the additional costs that
would be incurred by sources to report annual emissions from units,
operations and activities with de minimus emissions that are not
required to be reported for permitting, and concerns with the
specificity of the record-keeping requirements. As discussed further
below, WDNR broadened language on record-keeping requirements and
included exemptions for de minimus reporting requirements in the final
rule submitted to EPA in response to comments received.
    WDNR made submissions on July 13, 2015, August 8, 2016, and
November 26, 2018, to address infrastructure SIP requirements for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS \1\ and EPA finalized approval of most
elements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS on December 27, 2016 (81
FR 95043). Further, EPA proposed approval of most elements for the 2015
ozone NAAQS on September 30, 2020 (85 FR 61673). EPA did not take
action on Wisconsin's satisfaction of the infrastructure requirements
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 2012 PM2.5 or 2015 ozone
NAAQS. This action addresses section 110(a)(2)(F), also referred to as
``element F'', which pertains to stationary source monitoring and
reporting requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Approving this element would lead to full approval of
Wisconsin's 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The 2016 submission addressed Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) of section 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D), and
110(a)(2)(J), and was approved on February 7, 2017 (82 FR 9515). The
2018 submission addressed section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Prong's 1 and 2
Transport requirements and was approved on October 4, 2019 (84 FR
53061).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Revisions to Emission Reporting Requirements

    On August 3, 2022, WDNR submitted to EPA Board Order AM-31-19 (Rule
AM-31-19), effective in the Wisconsin Administrative Register on August
1, 2022. The submission addresses the identified reporting requirement
deficiencies in NR 438 Wis. Adm. Code and updates administrative
language in NR 400.03 and 484.06(4) Wis. Adm. Code.
    To satisfy the AERR rule, major sources in nonattainment areas and
sources with the potential to emit equal to or greater than 100 tons
per year (tpy) of criteria air pollutants \2\ or ammonia are required
to report annual emissions, and sources with actual emissions of equal
to or greater than 0.5 tpy of lead are required to report annual
emissions of all criteria air pollutants and ammonia regardless of the
magnitude of emissions. The revision of NR 438 ensures compliance with
the AERR rule. More specifically, the revision adds the requirement
that any source directly emitting PM2.5 report annual
emissions, and the reported particulate emissions (including
PM10 and PM2.5) must distinguish between
filterable and condensable particulate matter,\3\ and include fugitive
emissions.\4\ While these reporting requirement thresholds, established
based off the AERR rule,\5\ are determined by the potential to emit,
the revised rule 438 adds the annual reporting requirement of 5 tpy of
actual emissions of primary PM2.5, adding to the existing
actual emission reporting requirements for PM10, Carbon
Monoxide, Lead, Ammonia, Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Dioxide, and Volatile
Organic Carbons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The six criteria pollutants are carbon monoxide, ground-
level ozone, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and sulfur
dioxide.
    \3\ Filterable particulate matter are particles that are
directly emitted by a source as a solid or liquid at stack or
releasee conditions and captured on the filter of a stack test
train, while condensable particulate matter are emissions that are
vapor phase at stack conditions, but which condense and/or react
upon cooling and dilution in the ambient air to form solid or liquid
PM after discharging from the stack. Direct (or primary) particulate
matter is the sum of the filterable and condensable particulate
matter emissions.
    \4\ See NR 438.04(5) in the docket of this rulemaking.
    \5\ See 40 CFR 51, subpart A, and 40 CFR 51.122.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address the comments received regarding emission reporting
exemptions, NR 438.03(1)(am)3-4 have been created to list emission
units, operations, or activities that have de minimus emissions and are
therefore not required to be reported in the annual emissions inventory
report. Further, NR 438.03(4) was revised based on comments received to
broaden the required recordkeeping documents from specifically stated
safety data sheets, technical data sheets, and lab testing results to
records that include information on the composition and

quantity of raw materials and waste, including continuous emissions
monitoring data and audits, and results of stack or performance tests.
    Updates to NR 400.03 and 484.06(4) were included to align with
Federal emissions reporting terminology and the updated emissions
inventory process. The update to NR 400.03 incorporates an acronym
definition used in the revision of NR 438, while the update to NR
484.06 corrected citations amended in NR 438 to reflect EPA's updated
emissions factor database.

B. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System

    Section 110(a)(2)(F) contains several requirements, each of which
are described below.
    States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment,
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or
standards established pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the reports
shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.
    WDNR requires regulated sources to submit various reports,
dependent on applicable requirements and the type of permit issued, to
the Bureau of Air Management Compliance Team. Basic authority for
Wisconsin's Federally mandated Compliance Assurance Monitoring
reporting structure is provided in Wis. Stats. 285.65. NR 438 and NR
439 set forth the minimum emissions reporting requirements that must be
reported to EPA annually, and monitoring and testing requirements,
respectively, for applicable facilities. Considering the proposed
revisions to NR 438, EPA proposes that Wisconsin has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 ozone NAAQS.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve WDNR's request to incorporate by
reference the revisions to NR 400.03, 484.06(4), and 438 contained in
Rule AM-31-19 into Wisconsin's SIP in order to update the emission
reporting requirements. Further, EPA is proposing to approve
110(a)(2)(F) of Wisconsin's infrastructure SIP submission, required
under the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 ozone NAAQS, based on the
updated rule submission. Approving this element would lead to full
approval of Wisconsin's 2012 PM2.5 infrastructure SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference revisions to Wisconsin Administrative Code rules NR 400.03,
NR 438, and NR 484.06(4) Table 4D Row (a), as published in the
Wisconsin Register July 2022 No. 799, effective August 1, 2022,
discussed in section I of this preamble. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 9, 2023.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2023-05281 Filed 3-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38941-38943]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16514]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 7, 2010 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0676; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-095-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet Inc. Model 45 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Learjet Inc. Model 45 airplanes. This proposed AD would require
replacing aluminum fire extinguisher discharge tubes with new, improved
tubes; checking the fire extinguisher container for certain serial
numbers; replacing fire extinguisher containers that have affected
serial numbers; inspecting the pressure indicator on certain fire
extinguisher containers for discrepancies; and performing corrective
action if necessary. This proposed AD results from a report of
accidental discharge of a fire extinguisher container and damage to an
aluminum discharge tube. Investigation revealed that following the
discharge an inaccurate pressure indication, due to the indicator dial
being incorrectly staked, showed that the container was fully charged.
We are proposing this AD to prevent inaccurate pressure readings and
subsequent damage to the discharge tubes during operation, which could
result in failure of the fire extinguisher system and an uncontained
fire in an emergency situation.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 23, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942; telephone
316-946-2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Galstad, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (316)
946-4107.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0676;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-095-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We received a report of accidental discharge of a fire extinguisher
container and damage to an aluminum discharge tube. Investigation
revealed that following the discharge an inaccurate pressure
indication, due to the indicator dial being incorrectly staked, showed
that the container was fully charged. Inaccurate pressure readings, and
subsequent damage to the discharge tubes during operation, could result
in failure of the fire extinguisher system and an uncontained fire in
an emergency situation.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletins 40-26-05 and 45-26-9,
both Revision 2, both dated May 4, 2009. The service information
describes procedures for the following:
     For all airplanes: Installing new o-rings and stainless
steel fire extinguisher discharge tubes and inspect the serial numbers
on the fire extinguisher containers to determine whether any serial
number is specified in Table 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
the applicable service bulletin.
     For airplanes on which no serial number is specified in
Table 1: Inspecting the pressure indicator on the fire extinguisher
container to ensure that the indicator dial is not loose and is staked
in the right location, and do a weight check of the fire extinguisher
container. If the indicator is loose or not staked in the right
location or if the weight check for any container fails, replacing the
affected container.
     For airplanes on which any serial number is specified in
Table 1: Replacing the affected fire extinguisher container, and do a
weight check of the replaced containers. If the weight check for any
replacement container fails, replacing the affected container.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 322 airplanes of
U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take 5 work-hours per
product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Required parts cost would be minimal. Where the service
information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty,
we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs. As we do
not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may
incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of this proposed AD to the U.S. operators to be
$136,850, or $425 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Learjet Inc: Docket No. FAA-2010-0676; Directorate Identifier 2010-
NM-095-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by August 23, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Learjet Inc. Model 45 airplanes,
certificated in any category; as identified in Bombardier Service
Bulletins 40-26-05 and 45-26-9, both Revision 2, both dated May 4,
2009.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26: Fire
protection.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report of accidental discharge of a
fire extinguisher container and damage to an aluminum discharge
tube. Investigation revealed that following the discharge an
inaccurate pressure indication, due to the indicator dial being
incorrectly staked, showed that the container was fully charged. The
Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to prevent
inaccurate pressure readings and subsequent damage to the discharge
tubes during operation, which could result in failure of the fire
extinguisher system and an uncontained fire in an emergency
situation.

Compliance

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

Replacement, Check, Inspection, Corrective Action

    (g) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD:
Replace the aluminum fire extinguisher discharge tubes with new,
improved stainless steel tubes; check the fire extinguisher
container for any serial number specified in Table 1 of Bombardier
Service Bulletins 40-26-05 or 45-26-9, both Revision 2, both dated
May 4, 2009; as applicable; replace any containers that have
affected serial numbers, do a weight check of all containers,
including the replacement container, if applicable; and inspect the
pressure indicator on the containers for discrepancies, by doing all
applicable actions in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletins 40-26-05 or 45-26-9,
both Revision 2, both dated May 4, 2009; as applicable. If any
discrepancy is found, replace the container before further flight in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletins 40-26-05 or 45-26-9, both Revision 2, both dated
May 4, 2009; as applicable.
    (h) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the applicable service information listed in Table 1
of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements in paragraph (g) of this AD.

                                       Table 1--Credit Service Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Bombardier
    Affected serial numbers--         service               Revision--                        Dated--
                                    bulletin--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Model 45 airplanes having           40-26-05  Basic Issue...................  November 24, 2008.
 serial numbers 2001 through
 2114, inclusive.
For Model 45 airplanes having           40-26-05  1.............................  December 22, 2008.
 serial numbers 2001 through
 2114, inclusive.
For Model 45 airplanes having     45[dash]26[das  Basic Issue...................  November 24, 2008.
 serial numbers 006 through 383,             h]9
 inclusive.

For Model 45 airplanes having     45[dash]26[das  1.............................  December 22, 2008.
 serial numbers 006 through 383,             h]9
 inclusive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: James Galstad, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Propulsion
Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801
Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas
67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 29, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-16514 Filed 7-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 66 (Friday, April 7, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16980-16981]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06883]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0844; FRL-9960-87-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Sulfur Dioxide Limits for Saint
Paul Park Refining Co. LLC Facility

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a site-specific state implementation plan revision in
Washington County, Minnesota, for Saint Paul Park Refining Co. LLC
(Saint Paul Park). This revision includes changes to the ownership and
facility name, removal of the ability to burn refinery oil, addition of
a new unit, and updates to the modeling parameters for the facility.
EPA is approving the SIP revision because it meets Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 110(l) requirements.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0844 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the

online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, 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, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For
additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in
the Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: March 22, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2017-06883 Filed 4-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


      MEMORANDUM

      DATE:07/14/2015
      FROM: 		Laura Farris/EPA Region 8
      TO:CLEAN Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602
      SUBJECT:	Eagle County Climate Challenge on 07/13/2015

      SUMMARY:
      Laura Farris participated in a panel discussion on 07/13/2015 on the Clean Power Plan at the Eagle County Climate Challenge. The meeting was held in Edwards, Colorado. The Clean Power Plan was proposed on June 2, 2014.

      ATTENDEES:

EPA
      Laura Farris, EPA Region 8

      External Stakeholders
	Robert Castellino, Climate Colorado
	Piper Foster, Consultant
	Heather Bailey, Energy Strategy and Electric Utility Development
	Shawn Bruckman, Vail Honeywagon
	David Ellenberger, National Wildlife Federation
	John Jimison, Energy Future Coalition
	Dave Finnigan, Climate Change is Elementary
	Ryan Palmer, Eagle County
	Irene Vilar, Americas Latino Eco Festival
	Kat Habrer, TEDxVail
	Phillip Haberman, Denver Public Schools
	Jason Hardy, Mechanical Integrity Coordinator
	Jake McCaffrey, Ownership Culture Initiative
      General public


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44822-44824]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2014-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final Notice.

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

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries
or zone designations, and/or the regulatory floodway (hereinafter
referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the
table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood
hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

DATES: The effective date for each LOMR is indicated in the table
below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been

published in newspapers of local circulation and ninety (90) days have
elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for
Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is
shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard determinations are the basis for
the floodplain management measures that the community is required
either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order
to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP).
    These new or modified flood hazard determinations, together with
the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the
minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that
the community must change any existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community
may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to
policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    These new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to
calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new
buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Chief executive officer of       Community map          Effective date of       Community
          State and county            Location and case No.           community                 repository               modification            No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas:
    Benton (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Bentonville     The Honorable Bob McCaslin,  305 Southwest A         June 26, 2014............       050012
     1408).                           (12-06-3754P).          Mayor, City of               Street, Bentonville,
                                                              Bentonville, 117 West        AR 72712.
                                                              Central Avenue,
                                                              Bentonville, AR 72712.
    Garland (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Hot Springs     The Honorable Ruth Carney,   Hot Springs City Hall   June 26, 2014............       050084
     1408).                           (12-06-3592P).          Mayor, City of Hot           Annex, 111 Opera
                                                              Springs, 133 Convention      Street, Hot Springs
                                                              Boulevard, Hot Springs       National Park, AR
                                                              National Park, AR 71901.     71901.
Maryland: Frederick (FEMA Docket     City of Frederick (14-  The Honorable Randy          Department of           June 23, 2014............       240030
 No.: B-1405).                        03-0540P).              McClement, Mayor, City of    Engineering, 140 West
                                                              Frederick, 101 North Court   Patrick Street,
                                                              Street, Frederick, MD        Frederick, MD 21701.
                                                              21701.
Oklahoma: Oklahoma (FEMA Docket      City of Oklahoma City   The Honorable Mick Cornett,  420 West Main Street,   June 9, 2014.............       405378
 No.: B-1405).                        (13-06-3216P).          Mayor, City of Oklahoma      Suite 700, Oklahoma
                                                              City, 200 North Walker       City, OK 73102.
                                                              Avenue, 3rd Floor,
                                                              Oklahoma City, OK 73102.
Pennsylvania: Bucks (FEMA Docket     Borough of New Hope     Mr. John Burke, Manager,     Borough Hall, 123 New   June 9, 2014.............       420195
 No.: B-1405).                        (14-03-0111P).          Borough of New Hope, 123     Street, New Hope, PA
                                                              New Street, New Hope, PA     18938.
                                                              18938.
Texas:
    Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1408)  City of San Antonio     The Honorable Julian         Department of Public    June 23, 3014............       480045
                                      (14-06-0172P).          Castro, Mayor, City of San   Works, Storm Water
                                                              Antonio, P.O. Box 839966,    Engineering, 1901
                                                              San Antonio, TX 78283.       South Alamo Street,
                                                                                2nd Floor, San
                                                                                Antonio, TX 78204.
    Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1408)  City of San Antonio     The Honorable Julian         Department of Public    June 23, 3014............       480045
                                      (14-06-0677P).          Castro, Mayor, City of San   Works, Storm Water
                                                              Antonio, P.O. Box 839966,    Engineering, 1901
                                                              San Antonio, TX 78283.       South Alamo Street,
                                                                                2nd Floor, San
                                                                                Antonio, TX 78204.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Houston (13-06- The Honorable Annise D.      Public Works and        June 26, 2014............       480296
     1408).                           4399P).                 Parker, Mayor, City of       Engineering
                                                              Houston, P.O. Box 1562,      Department, 611
                                                              Houston, TX 77251.           Walker Street,
                                                                                Houston, TX 77002.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Ed M. Emmett,  Harris County, 10555    June 26, 2014............       480287
     1408).                           of Harris County (13-   Harris County Judge, 1001    Northwest Freeway,
                                      06-4399P).              Preston Street, Suite 911,   Houston, TX 77092.
                                                              Houston, TX 77002.
    Travis (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Samuel T.      Travis County           June 12, 2014............       481026
     1405).                           of Travis County (13-   Biscoe, Travis County        Administration
                                      06-3649P).              Judge, P.O. Box 1748,        Building,
                                                              Austin, TX 78767.            Transportation and
                                                                                Natural Resources
                                                                                Department, 700
                                                                                Lavaca Street, 5th
                                                                                Floor, Austin, TX
                                                                                78701.
Virginia:
    Fairfax (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas    Mr. Edward L. Long, Jr.,     Fairfax County,         June 16, 2014............       515525
     1405).                           of Fairfax County (13-  Fairfax County Executive,    Stormwater Planning
                                      03-2380P).              12000 Government Center      Division, 12000
                                                              Parkway, Fairfax, VA 22035.  Government Center
                                                                                Parkway, Suite 449,
                                                                                Fairfax, VA 22035.
    Spotsylvania (FEMA Docket No.:   Unincorporated areas    Mr. C. Douglas Barnes,       Spotsylvania County,    June 5, 2014.............       510308
     B-1408).                         of Spotsylvania         Spotsylvania County          Environmental
                                      County (13-03-1116P).   Administrator, 9104          Engineering Office,
                                                              Courthouse Road,             9019 Old Battlefield
                                                              Spotsylvania, VA 22553.      Boulevard, Suite 300,
                                                                                Spotsylvania, VA
                                                                                22553.
West Virginia:
    Cabell (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Nancy          Cabell County Office    June 26, 2014............       540016
     1408).                           of Cabell County (13-   Cartmill, President,         of Grants, Planning
                                      03-0925P).              Cabell County Commission,    and Permits, 750 5th
                                                              750 5th Avenue, Suite 300,   Avenue, Suite 314,
                                                              Huntington, WV 25701.        Huntington, WV 25701.
    Cabell (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Village of              The Honorable Paul L.        Village Hall, 721       June 26, 2014............       540017
     1408).                           Barboursville (13-03-   Turman, Sr., Mayor,          Central Avenue,
                                      0925P).                 Village of Barboursville,    Barboursville, WV
                                                              P.O. Box 266,                25504.
                                                              Barboursville, WV 25504.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: July 11, 2014.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-18107 Filed 7-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 45 (Friday, March 6, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 13193]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04752]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2 p.m. on Wednesday, March 11, 2020.

PLACE: The meeting will be held at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners,
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the
matters also may be present.
    In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date,
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website
at https://www.sec.gov.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10),
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    The subject matters of the closed meeting will consist of the
following topics:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    Resolution of litigation claims; and
    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of
adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202)
551-5400.

    Dated: March 4, 2020.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-04752 Filed 3-4-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Attachment 4 for Genentech?s Primary Submission Document for Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0621


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41605-41606]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16665]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72590; File No. SR-BYX-2014-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees for Use of BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.

July 10, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 1, 2014, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to BYX Rules
15.1(a) and (c). Changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal
are effective upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A Member is any registered broker or dealer that has been
admitted to membership in the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify its fee schedule applicable to use
of the Exchange in order to modify the way that, for purposes of tiered
pricing on the Exchange, the Exchange calculates ADAV and average daily
TCV (as such terms are defined below).
    Currently, the Exchange determines the liquidity adding fee that it
will charge to Members based on the Exchange's tiered pricing structure
by excluding from the calculation of ADAV \6\ and average daily TCV \7\
any day that an Exchange System Disruption \8\ occurs as well as the
last Friday in June (the ``Russell Reconstitution Day'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As provided in the fee schedule, ``ADAV'' means average
daily volume calculated as the number of shares added per day on a
monthly basis.
    \7\ As provided in the fee schedule, ``TCV'' means total
consolidated volume calculated as the volume reported by all
exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a consolidated
transaction reporting plan for the month for which the fees apply.
    \8\ As provided in the fee schedule, ``Exchange Systems
Disruption'' means any day that the Exchange's system experiences a
disruption that lasts for more than 60 minutes during regular
trading hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange excludes these days from the calculation of ADAV and
TCV in order to avoid penalizing Members that might otherwise qualify
for certain tiered pricing but that, because of special circumstances
on a particular day, did not participate on the Exchange to the extent
that they might have otherwise participated. Similarly, the Exchange
believes that scheduled early market closes, which typically are the
day before or after a holiday, may preclude some Members from
submitting orders to the Exchange at the same level as they might
otherwise. The Exchange notes that it is not proposing to modify any of
the existing fees or the percentage thresholds at which a Member may
qualify for certain fees pursuant to the tiered pricing structure.
Rather, as mentioned above, the Exchange is proposing to modify its fee
schedule to exclude trading activity occurring on any day with a
scheduled early market close.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\9\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent

with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\10\ in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls. The Exchange notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the proposed changes to the calculation of tiered
pricing for adding liquidity to the Exchange, the Exchange believes
that its proposal is reasonable because, as explained above, it will
help provide Members with a greater level of certainty as to their
level of fees for trading in any month where there is a scheduled early
market close. The Exchange is not proposing to amend the thresholds a
Member must achieve to become eligible for, or the dollar value
associated with, the tiered fees. Eliminating the inclusion of any day
with a scheduled early market close would, in many cases, be excluding
a day that would otherwise lower a Member's ADAV as a percentage of
average daily TCV. Thus, the proposed change will make the majority of
Members more likely to meet the minimum or higher tier thresholds,
incentivizing Members to increase their participation on the Exchange
in order to meet the next highest tier. In addition, the Exchange
believes that the proposed changes to its fee schedule are equitably
allocated among Exchange constituents and not unfairly discriminatory
as the methodology for calculating ADAV and TCV will apply equally to
all Members.
    Volume-based tiers such as the liquidity adding tiers maintained by
the Exchange have been widely adopted, and are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because they are open to all members on an
equal basis and provide higher rebates or lower fees that are
reasonably related to the value to an exchange's market quality
associated with higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels
of liquidity provision and introduction of higher volumes of orders
into the price and volume discovery process. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the proposal is equitably allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory because it is consistent with the overall goals of
enhancing market quality. Further, the Exchange believes that a tiered
pricing model not significantly altered by a day of atypical trading
behavior which allows Members to predictably calculate what their costs
associated with trading activity on the Exchange will be is reasonable,
fair and equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory as it is uniform
in application amongst Members and should enable such participants to
operate their business without concern of unpredictable and potentially
significant changes in expenses.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The
proposed change will help to promote intramarket competition by
avoiding a penalty to Members for days when overall trading activity
might be significantly lower than a typical trading day. As stated
above, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if the deem fee structures to be unreasonable or
excessive.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\12\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-BYX-2014-009 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BYX-2014-009. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BYX-2014-009 and should be
submitted on or before August 6, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16665 Filed 7-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25376-25378]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10810]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0059]

Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories
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 specified in the Standard on
Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
July 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit your comments and attachments
to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2011-0059, U.S. Department
of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service)
are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's
normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2011-0059) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). All comments, including any personal information you provide,
are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information
on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You also may contact Todd Owen at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. 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 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
    This program ensures that information is in the desired format,
reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection instruments
are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information
collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes information
collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of
the OSH Act or for developing information regarding the causes and
prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29
U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain such
information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those
operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent
feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information
(29 U.S.C. 657).
    The Standard entitled ``Occupational Exposure to Hazardous
Chemicals in Laboratories'' (29 CFR 1910.1450; the ``Standard'')
applies to laboratories that use hazardous chemicals in accordance with
the Standard's definitions for ``laboratory use of hazardous
chemicals'' and ``laboratory scale.'' The Standard requires these
laboratories to maintain worker exposures at or below the permissible
exposure limits specified for the hazardous chemicals in 29 CFR part
1910, subpart Z. They do so by developing a written Chemical Hygiene
Plan (CHP) that describes: Standard operating procedures for using
hazardous chemicals; hazard-control techniques; equipment-reliability
measures; worker information-and-training programs; conditions under
which the employer must approve operations, procedures, and activities
before implementation; and medical consultations and examinations. The
CHP also designates personnel responsible for implementing the CHP, and
specifies the procedures used to provide additional protection to
workers exposed to particularly hazardous chemicals.
    Other information collection requirements of the Standard include:
Documenting exposure monitoring results; notifying workers in writing
of these results; presenting specified information and training to
workers; establishing a medical surveillance program for overexposed
workers; providing required information to the physician; obtaining the
physician's written opinion on using proper respiratory equipment; and,
establishing, maintaining, transferring, and disclosing exposure
monitoring and medical records. These collection of information
requirements, including the CHP, control worker overexposure to
hazardous laboratory chemicals, thereby preventing serious illnesses
and death among workers exposed to such chemicals.

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 to
protect workers, 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 proposing to extend the information collection requirements
contained in the Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in
Laboratories Standard (29 CFR 1910.1450). The Agency is requesting to
increase the existing burden hour estimate for the collection of
information requirements in the Standard. In this regard, the Agency is
requesting to adjust the current burden hour estimate from 281,419
hours to 293,706 hours.
    Type of Review: Extension of currently approved collections.
    Title: Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in
Laboratories.
    OMB Number: 1218-0131.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 48,461.
    Frequency: Varies from 3 minutes (.05 hour) to replace the safe
practice manual to 1 hour to develop a new manual.

    Total Responses: 948,634.
    Average Time per Response: Annually; monthly, quarterly, semi-
annually, on occasion
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 293,706
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $41,271,276.

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

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile; or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for this ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0059).
You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or a 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 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 Social Security Numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit
comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User
Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about
materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance in
using the Internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, PhD, MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2010
(75 FR 55355).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on April 28, 2011.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2011-10810 Filed 5-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 241 (Monday, December 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76191-76192]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29762]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Safety Advisory 2013-08]

Operational Tests and Inspections for Compliance With Maximum
Authorized Train Speeds and Other Speed Restrictions

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of safety advisory; Operational tests and inspections
for compliance with maximum authorized train speeds and other speed
restrictions.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing Safety Advisory 2013-08 to stress to railroads
and their employees the importance of compliance with Federal
regulations and applicable railroad operating rules regarding maximum
authorized train speed limits and any relevant speed restrictions. This
safety advisory contains five recommendations to railroads to ensure
that compliance with maximum authorized speeds and other speed
restrictions are addressed by appropriate railroad operating policies
and procedures and to ensure that those policies and procedures are
effectively implemented.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Herrmann, Acting Director,
Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, Office of Railroad Safety,
FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202)
493-6037.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The overall safety of railroad operations
has improved in recent years. However, the recent fatal accident in
Spuyten Duyvil, Bronx, New York, which is the subject of FRA's
Emergency Order No. 29, highlights the need to ensure that speed
restrictions mandated by Federal regulation and those imposed by a
railroad's own operating rules are adhered to. That accident also
demonstrates the importance of operational testing that pertains to
ensuring employee compliance with applicable speed limitations and
restrictions.

Metro-North Spuyten Duyvil Derailment

    On Sunday, December 1, 2013, Metro-North passenger train 8808
(Train 8808) was traveling south from Poughkeepsie, New York, to Grand
Central Terminal in New York City when, at approximately 7:20 a.m., the
train derailed as it approached the Spuyten Duyvil Station. The train
consisted of seven passenger coach cars, including a control cab
locomotive in the lead position, and a conventional locomotive at the
rear of the train, operating in a push-pull configuration (a control
cab locomotive is both a passenger car, in that it has seats for
passengers, and a locomotive, in that it has a control cab from which
the engineer can operate the train). Each of the seven cars derailed
along with the trailing locomotive. As of December 6, the derailment
has resulted in four fatalities and more than 60 reported injuries.
    As is customary, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
has taken the lead role in conducting the investigation of this
accident pursuant to its legal authority. 49 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.; 49
CFR 800.3(a), 831.2(b). FRA is also investigating the accident. As
Train 8808 approached the Spuyten Duyvil Station from the north, it
traveled over a straightaway with a maximum authorized passenger train
speed of 70 mph before reaching a sharp curve in the track where, by
the railroad's own rules, the maximum authorized speed was reduced to
30 mph. A preliminary review of the information on the locomotive event
recorders by NTSB indicates that the train was traveling approximately
82 mph as it entered the curve's 30-mph speed restriction. This means
Train 8808 was exceeding the maximum authorized speed on the
straightaway by 12 mph and traveling nearly three times the railroad's
maximum authorized speed as it entered the curve. Information obtained
from the train's event recorders also indicates that approximately six
seconds before the locomotive came to a stop, the locomotive throttle
was placed in idle and an application of the train's brake system was
made.
    FRA's accident statistics reveal that the railroad industry's
recent safety record with regard to this area of compliance on main
tracks is good, but FRA believes the December 1 accident highlights the
need to remain vigilant in ensuring employee compliance with
operational speed limits and restrictions for trains and locomotives.
As such, FRA intends to focus its inspections on railroad operational
testing activity over the next several months on compliance with
maximum authorized train speeds and relevant speed restrictions. FRA
strongly encourages railroads and other industry members to re-
emphasize the importance of compliance with maximum authorized train
speeds and any applicable speed restrictions, and to conduct
operational testing at a level that will ensure compliance with all
posted speed restrictions.
    Recommended Railroad Action: In light of the recent accident
discussed above, and in an effort to ensure the safety of the Nation's
railroads, their employees, and the general public, FRA recommends that
railroads do each of the following:
    (1) Review the circumstances of the December 1, 2013, Spuyten
Duyvil derailment with each of their operating employees.
    (2) Provide instruction to their employees during training classes
and safety briefings on the importance of compliance with maximum
authorized train speed limits and other speed restrictions. This
training should

include discussion of the railroad's absolute speed limits, speed
restrictions based on physical characteristics, temporary speed
restrictions, and any other restrictions commonly encountered.
    (3) Remind their employees that Federal railroad safety regulation,
at 49 CFR 240.305(a)(2) and 242.403(e)(2), prohibits the operation of a
locomotive or train at a speed which exceeds the maximum authorized
speed by at least 10 mph.
    (4) Evaluate quarterly and 6-month reviews of operational testing
data as required by 49 CFR 217.9. A railroad should consider increasing
the frequency of operational testing where its reviews show any non-
compliance with maximum authorized train speeds. A significant number
of operational tests should be conducted on trains that are required to
reduce speed by more than 20 mph from the maximum authorized train
speed. Operational tests should use the reliable methods available,
such as reviewing locomotive event recorder data and testing by radar
to verify compliance with maximum authorized speeds.
    (5) Reinforce the importance of communication between train
crewmembers located in the controlling locomotive, particularly during
safety critical periods when multiple tasks are occurring (e.g.,
copying mandatory directives, closely approaching or passing fixed
signals and/or cab signals at a reduced speed, approaching locations
where the train's movement authority is being restricted, during radio
conversations with other employees or job briefings about track
characteristics) and during extended periods of inactivity.
    FRA encourages all railroad industry members to take actions
consistent with the preceding recommendations. FRA may modify this
Safety Advisory 2013-08, issue additional safety advisories, or take
other appropriate action necessary to ensure the highest level of
safety on the Nation's railroads, including pursing other corrective
measures under its rail safety authority.

    Issued in Washington, DC on December 10, 2013.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-29762 Filed 12-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P