179B Guidance
December 1, 2020

Finalizing the 179B guidance as drafted has serious economic implications for the Northern Wasatch Front nonattainment area in Utah which may not be able to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

 Did OMB ask that changes be made to the guidance before issuing it?
 Did OMB ask that the statements be removed regarding the international contribution relative to the domestic contribution to local ozone?
 Did OMB ask that statements referring to not doing a demonstration or only doing a retrospective demonstration for a Marginal ozone nonattainment area be removed?
 Does the guidance fall under the newly promulgated 40 CFR Part 2 Subpart D "Guidance Procedures"?
 In light of the Guidance Procedures rule, how does EPA view these inconsistencies with the Clean Air Act text which has only the "but for" test?
 Does EPA plan to issue the guidance?  Will it be issued with or without changes to the draft?
 If EPA plans to issue it, in what time frame?

In accordance with the "Guidance Procedures" rule, 179B guidance should not set up hurdles outside the statutory text of the Clean Air Act.  Changes requested to the guidance:
 Remove two statements on Page 39 of the draft discussing modeling:
 "The range of results should demonstrate that international anthropogenic sources were large contributors relative to U.S. contributions on exceedance days."
 "When results show that international contributions are larger on exceedance days and meaningfully larger than domestic contributions, the weight of evidence will be more compelling."

 Remove/change the following items regarding demonstrations for Marginal ozone nonattainment areas:
 Page 12 of the draft guidance: "The air agency is not required to develop an attainment demonstration for an O3 nonattainment area classified as Marginal, and therefore EPA does not expect to receive section 179B(a) prospective demonstrations for such areas."
 Two boxes from the flow sheet in section 4.2.3 of the guidance, the second and third boxes on the top row, "Is the area an ozone nonattainment area classified as Marginal?" and "STOP:  A Marginal ozone area does not need to submit an attainment plan, and therefore a section 179B(a) demonstration would not be necessary."  Instead, have the flow sheet go directly from the first box "An area has been designated as nonattainment for a NAAQS" to the box immediately below it, "Can the area attain the standard by the attainment date based on . . . ."
Preliminary modeling done by Ramboll at the request of the Utah Petroleum Association shows that 10 ppb of local ozone originates from international anthropogenic emissions.
 The portion of locally generated anthropogenic ozone in this area is less than 20% of the total, with much coming from motor vehicles.
 Ozone precursor emissions have already been reduced by 37% through the PM2.5 State Implementation Plan, with controls costing approximately $100 million in the Salt Lake City airshed alone.  Despite these controls, ambient ozone concentrations have not reduced.  Further controls are not anticipated to improve ozone levels but may stifle economic recovery.
 Without reliance on the 179B provisions, the Wasatch Front area may not be able to meet Clean Air Act requirements; no amount of emission reductions from controllable sources will reduce ozone enough to attain the current standard.  Thus, the guidance on use of 179B provisions should provide as much flexibility as possible and not impose extra hurdles not supported by the statutory text.


[Federal Register: August 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 163)]
[Notices]
[Page 52061-52063]
[DOCID:fr24au10-119]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-7165; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-
17194; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0174]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal

Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for 37 individuals. FMCSA has
statutory authority to exempt individuals from the vision requirement
if the exemptions granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has
concluded that granting these exemption renewals will provide a level
of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety
maintained without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective September 21, 2010. Comments must be
received on or before September 23, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-7165; FMCSA-
2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-17194; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-
2008-0174, using any of the following methods.
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 37 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 37 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

John W. Arnold, Derric D. Burrell, Jack D. Clodfelter, Tommy J. Cross,
Jr., Stephen R. Daugherty, Eric L. Dawson, III, Richard L. Derick,
Craig E. Dorrance, Joseph A. Dunlap, Calvin J. Eldridge, Shawn B.
Gaston, James F. Gereau, Eric M. Giddens, Sr., Ronald E. Goad, Esteban
G. Gonzalez, Reginald I. Hall, Gary J. Hambrick, James O. Hancock,
Sherman W. Hawk, Jr., Lance G. James, Robert C. Jeffres, Alfred C.
Jewell, Jr., Leslie A. Landschoot, John C. Lewis, Lewis V. McNeice,
Kevin J. O'Donnell, Gregory M. Preves, James M. Rafferty, Paul C.
Reagle, Sr., Daniel Salinas, Lee R. Sidwell, David L. Slack, David M.
Smith, James C. Smith, Roger R. Strehl, Jeffrey D. Wilson, Richard A.
Yeager.

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

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 37 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (65 FR 20245; 65 FR 57230; 67 FR 57266; 69 FR 52741; 71 FR
53489; 73 FR 51337; 65 FR 33406; 65 FR 57234; 67 FR 46016; 67 FR 57267;
69 FR 51346; 71 FR 50970; 69 FR 17263; 69 FR 31447; 71 FR 27033; 73 FR
48269; 71 FR 43556; 73 FR 52451; 71 FR 32183; 71 FR 41310; 73 FR 52451;
73 FR 35194; 73 FR 48273; 73 FR 38497; 73 FR 48271). Each of these 37
applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted
evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues to meet
the standard specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision
impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety
while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two
years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate

commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for
each renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by September 23, 2010.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 37 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: August 17, 2010.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-21009 Filed 8-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65849-65850]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25831]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2012-0009]

The Asbestos in Shipyards Standard; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's 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 the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Asbestos in
Shipyards Standard.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
January 28, 2020.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2012-0009,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N-3653, 200
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express
mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the OSHA
Docket Office's normal business hours, 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., ET.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2012-0009) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, such as social security numbers and dates of birth, are placed
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information on submitting
comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the section of
this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the above address. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the website. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney or
Seleda Perryman at<PHONE_NUMBER> to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Seleda Perryman,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, the reporting burden (time and
costs) is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood,
and OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the 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
OSHA to obtain such information with a minimum burden upon employers,
especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce to the
maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining
said information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The information collection requirements specified in the Asbestos
in Shipyards Standard (29 CFR 1915.1001) protect workers from the

adverse health effects that may result from occupational exposure to
asbestos. The major information collection requirements in the standard
include: Implementing an exposure monitoring program that informs
workers of their exposure-monitoring results; ensuring notification of
on-site employers, at multi-employer worksites, when establishing
regulated areas for work performed with asbestos-containing materials
(ACMs) and/or presumed asbestos-containing materials (PACMs), of the
requirements for such regulated areas, and the measures necessary to
protect workers from overexposure; providing medical surveillance for
workers potentially exposed to ACMs and/or PACMs, including
administering a worker medical questionnaire, providing information to
the examining physician, and providing the physician's written opinion
to the worker; and maintaining records of objective data used for
exposure determinations, worker exposure monitoring and medical
surveillance records, training records, the record (i.e., information,
data, and analyses) used to demonstrate that PACMs do not contain
asbestos, and notifications made, as well as received by building or
facility owners regarding the content of ACMs and/or PACMs.

II. Special Issues for Comment

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

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is proposing an increase in the information collection
requirements contained in the Asbestos in Shipyards Standard. The
adjustment is primarily the result of the increase of the number of
establishments in shipyards. The agency is requesting an increase of 47
hours in the current burden hour total (from 1,189 hours to 1,235
hours). The agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to
this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Asbestos in Shipyards Standard (29 CFR 1915.1001).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0195.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits; Federal Government;
State, Local or Tribal Government.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Various.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,235.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $44,578.

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

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the agency name
and the OSHA docket number (Docket No. OSHA-2012-0009) for the ICR. You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify electronic comments by
your name, date, and the docket number so the agency can attach them to
your comments.
    Due to 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
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
    Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov website to
submit comments and access the docket is available at the website's
``User Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information
about materials not available through the website, and for assistance
in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

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

    Signed at Washington, DC, on November 22, 2019.
Loren Sweatt,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety
and Health.
[FR Doc. 2019-25831 Filed 11-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P