[Federal Register: September 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 175)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 51735-51743]
[DOCID:fr11se07-18]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1910

[Docket No. H-010]
RIN 1218-AC17

Emergency Response and Preparedness

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

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: Elements of emergency responder health and safety are
currently regulated by OSHA primarily under the following standards:
The Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard; the
personal protective equipment general requirements standard; the
respiratory protection standard; the permit-required confined space
standard; the fire brigade standard; and the bloodborne pathogens
standard. Some of these standards were promulgated decades ago, and
none was designed as a comprehensive emergency response standard.
Consequently, they do not address the full range of hazards or concerns
currently facing emergency responders, nor do they reflect major
changes in performance specifications for protective clothing and
equipment. Current OSHA standards also do not reflect all the major
improvements in safety and health practices that have already been
accepted by the emergency response community and incorporated into
industry consensus standards.
    OSHA is requesting information and comment from the public to
evaluate what action, if any, the Agency should take to further address
emergency response and preparedness. The Agency will be considering
emergency response and preparedness at common emergencies (e.g., fires
or emergency medical and other rescue situations), as well as large
scale emergencies (e.g., natural and intentional disasters). OSHA's
areas of interest are primarily: personal protective equipment;
training and qualifications; medical evaluation and health monitoring;
and safety management. The agency will also be evaluating the types of
personnel who would constitute either emergency responders or skilled
support employees at such events, as well as the range of activities
that might constitute emergency response and preparedness.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by the following dates:
    Hard copy: Your comments must be submitted (postmarked or sent) by
December 10, 2007.
    Facsimile and electronic transmission: Your comments must be sent
by December 10, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, requests for hearings and
additional materials by any of the following methods:
    Electronically: You may submit comments, requests for hearings, and
attachments electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the

Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions on-line for making
electronic submissions.
    Fax: If your submissions, 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:
You must submit three copies of your comments, requests for hearings
and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. S-023B, 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.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number for this rulemaking (OSHA Docket No. S-023B).
Submissions, 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.

    Docket: To read or download submissions 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 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Press Inquiries: Kevin Ropp, Director,
OSHA Office of Communications, Room N-3647, U.S. Department of Labor,
200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202)
693-1999.
    General and Technical Information: Carol Jones, Acting Director,
Office of Biological Hazards, OSHA Directorate of Standards and
Guidance, Room N-3718, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Request for Data, Information and Comments
    A. The Scope of Emergency Response
    B. Personal Protective Equipment
    C. Training and Qualifications
    D. Medical Evaluation and Health Monitoring
    E. Safety
    F. Additional Information
III. Public Participation
IV. Authority and Signature

I. Background

    There were more than 21 million emergency response incidents in
2002 (see Table 1). Emergency responders include: Firefighters,
emergency medical service personnel, hazardous material employees, and
technical rescue specialists. Law enforcement officers are also usually
considered emergency responders and are often called to assist in
emergency response incidents. OSHA notes, however, that it has not
promulgated standards specifically addressing occupational hazards that
are inherently and uniquely related to law enforcement activities. Many
emergency responders are cross-trained and may serve in multiple roles
depending upon the nature of the emergency incident. The hazards that
emergency responders face will also vary depending upon the type of
incident. In addition to emergency responders, skilled support
employees can also play an important role in emergency response.
Skilled support employees are not emergency responders, but nonetheless
have specialized training that can be important to the safe and
successful resolution of an emergency incident, such as operating heavy
equipment or shutting down electrical power or natural gas.
    Emergency response, which includes firefighting, is one of the most
hazardous occupations in America. The United States Fire Administration
has recently reported that 111 firefighters died in 2003, and that, on
average, 100 firefighters have died each year for the last ten years
(excluding the fatalities attributable to the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001) (Ex. 1-2). Furthermore, the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) reported that during the 10-year period
of 1993-2002, approximately 594,000 firefighters were injured in the
line of duty at emergency response incidents. The average annual rate
of firefighter injuries is more than 59,000 per year for this period
(Ex. 1-2).

 Table 1.--Distribution of 2002 U.S. Emergency Incidents as Reported by
                the National Fire Protection Association
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Emergency response                         Number
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fires...................................................       1,687,500
Medical Aid.............................................      12,903,000
False Alarms............................................       2,116,000
Mutual Aid/Assistance...................................         888,500
Hazmat..................................................         361,000
Other Hazardous (Arcing wires, bomb removal, etc.)......         603,500
All Other (Smoke scares, lock-outs, etc.)...............       2,744,000
                                                         ---------------
    Total...............................................     21,303,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (Source: Ex. 1-3)

    While the preceding statistics concern firefighters, this Request
for Information is intended to gather information about all emergency
responders and skilled support employees. However, injury and illness
rates for other facets of emergency response are difficult to determine
due to the multiple roles of some responders (e.g., many firefighters
are also EMTs) and a lack of specific data (e.g., injury and illness
rates of skilled support employees, such as heavy equipment operators,
arising directly from emergency response activities). OSHA is
interested in receiving information about the number and types of
responder fatalities, injuries, and illnesses incurred during emergency
incidents.
    A recent report by the U.S. Fire Administration, A Needs Assessment
of the U.S. Fire Service, examined the condition of the fire service
and its ability to respond to incidents, both large and small (Ex. 1-
4). The report found that fire departments of all sizes have unmet
needs relating to both their traditional firefighting responsibilities
and their new homeland security-related responsibilities. In addition,
another report by the U.S. Fire Administration and the National Fallen
Firefighters Foundation, Firefighter Life Safety Summit Initial Report,
found that there are many significant health and safety concerns among
the fire service (Ex. 1-5). The report recognized the need for national
standards on training, qualifications, medical and physical fitness, as
well as for emergency response policies and procedures. A series of
three joint reports by the National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH) and the RAND Corporation (RAND) have also recognized
a need for further standards in order to improve the operational
response to terrorist attacks and better protect the health and safety
of emergency responders (Protecting Emergency Responders: Lessons
Learned from Terrorist Attacks; Protecting Emergency Responders (Ex. 1-
6); Volume 2: Community Views of Safety and Health Risks and Personal
Protection Needs; and Protecting Emergency Responders (Ex. 1-7); Volume
3: Safety Management in Disaster and Terrorism Response (Ex. 1-8)).
    Furthermore, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101) and
Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 (HSPD8),
which were established to strengthen the preparedness of the United
States to prevent and respond to threatened or actual domestic
terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies, have changed
the Federal approach to emergency response and preparedness
capabilities at Federal, State, and local entities (Ex. 1-9). In March
of 2004, the Department of Homeland Security published the National
Incident Management System (NIMS) (Ex. 1-10). This system provides a
consistent nationwide approach for Federal, State, local and tribal
governments to work effectively and efficiently together to prepare
for, prevent, respond to, and recover from domestic incidents,
regardless of cause, size, or complexity. Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD5) requires all Federal
agencies to implement NIMS, and also requires Federal agencies to make
the NIMS a required element for receiving State and local preparedness
grant funding (Ex. 1-11). Additionally, in January 2005, the Department
of Homeland Security released the National Response Plan (NRP), which
establishes a comprehensive all-hazards approach to enhance the ability
of the United States to manage domestic

incidents (Ex. 1-12). The NRP incorporates best practices and
procedures from incident management disciplines--homeland security,
emergency management, law enforcement, firefighting, public works,
public health, responder and recovery worker health and safety,
emergency medical services, and the private sector--and integrates them
into a unified structure. The NRP forms the basis of how Federal
departments and agencies will work together and how the Federal
government will coordinate with State, local, and tribal governments
and the private sector during incidents. In addition, the NRP
establishes protocols that are applicable to emergency responders and
skilled support employees in order to help protect the nation from
terrorist attacks and other natural and manmade hazards; save lives;
protect public health, safety, property, and the environment; and
reduce adverse psychological consequences and disruptions to the
American way of life.
    OSHA addresses the elements of emergency responder health and
safety primarily by the following OSHA standards: The hazardous waste
operations and emergency response standard (29 CFR 1910.120); the
personal protective equipment general requirements standard (29 CFR
1910.132); the respiratory protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134); the
permit-required confined space standard (29 CFR 1910.146); the fire
brigade standard (29 CFR 1910.156); and the bloodborne pathogens
standard (29 CFR 1910.1030). These standards were designed to address
the health and safety needs of employees over a broad cross-section of
industries and workplaces. None of these standards was designed as a
comprehensive emergency response standard, and as a result, specific
hazards are addressed in a piecemeal manner, and important concepts in
emergency management are not addressed at all.
    In addition, the OSHA standards do not address the full range of
hazards or concerns currently facing emergency responders. Some of
these standards rely on outdated performance specifications for
protective equipment. For example, the current standard on
firefighters' protective clothing is based on the 1975 edition of the
NFPA 1971 standard. Current OSHA standards do not reflect many of the
major developments in safety and health practices that have already
been accepted by the emergency response community and incorporated into
the consensus standards promulgated by the NFPA and other standards
development organizations. For example, the use of an incident
management system is currently required only by the Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response Standard (29 CFR 1910.120). While the
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard does cover
hazardous materials incidents, it does not cover most types of
emergency incidents (e.g., fires, technical rescue, structural collapse
or natural disasters).
    In addition, coverage issues impact the Agency's activities in
these areas. Many emergency responders are state and local government
employees who are covered by requirements in State or local laws,
either under the authority of an OSHA-approved state plan or through
voluntarily established State protection programs rather than under
Federal rules. In the case of the Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response Standard, State and local employees in States
without an OSHA-approved plan are also covered under an Environmental
Protection Agency standard (40 CFR 311) that incorporates the OSHA
requirements by reference.
    State and local government employees are excluded from OSHA
coverage under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the
``OSH Act''). However, pursuant to Section 18 of the OSH Act, there are
26 States and territories operating their own workplace safety and
health programs under plans approved by OSHA (``State plans''), which
are required to extend their coverage to public sector (State and local
government) employees and employers in those jurisdictions, including
many emergency responders.
    The 21 States and one territory covering both private sector and
State and local government employment have primary responsibility for
the OSHA program in their jurisdictions. All State plans, including the
4 covering only State and local government, are responsible for
adopting and enforcing standards which are ``at least as effective as''
Federal OSHA standards, and for providing compliance assistance to
employers and employees under their jurisdiction. Some State plans have
adopted different or supplemental standards or guidance regarding
emergency response and preparedness that exceed the existing Federal
OSHA standards. Some States have established public employer employee
protection programs without OSHA State Plan approval and funding. Many
other public sector employers still rely on the OSHA standards as an
important guide in safety and health matters, even though they are not
legally required to do so.
    OSHA has significant experience and expertise on matters related to
emergency responder health and safety. OSHA personnel, as well as
personnel from the OSHA-approved State plans, routinely respond to
emergencies to provide technical assistance and assure employee safety.
Following the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center on September
11, 2001, OSHA helped establish a strong and effective public-private
partnership to help ensure protection for the employees at the site. At
the national level, the Department of Labor, OSHA, has been designated
the coordinating agency for employee safety and health under the
National Response Plan (NRP). Additionally, many of the OSHA-approved
State plans are working to establish a parallel role within their State
emergency response structure and have implemented or assisted in the
development of emergency preparedness and homeland security related
initiatives and guidance materials at the State level.
    The Agency has developed a wide range of technical assistance and
guidance documents about the issue of emergency response as well as
emergency responder health and safety (http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/emergencypreparedness/index.html
). The OSHA Training Institute offers a

variety of courses on topics essential to the safety and health of both
uniformed emergency responders and skilled support employees (http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/ote/index.html
). In addition, OSHA, in collaboration

with the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS),
has developed a pre-event hazards awareness course for Disaster Site
Workers who may respond as skilled support employees to natural or man-
made emergencies (e.g., heavy equipment operators, construction
workers, and electrical power or natural gas utility employees). This
course is taught by OSHA Training Institute Education Centers and OSHA-
authorized trainers.
    On August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast of
the southeastern United States; the City of New Orleans was
particularly affected. The emergency response to Hurricane Katrina
underscored the importance of planning and preparedness, as well as the
multidisciplinary nature of emergency response. OSHA expects that the
lessons learned from this incident will be represented in the responses
to this Request for Information alongside the lessons learned from both
more common events as well as other events of national significance.

    OSHA is requesting information and comment from the public to
evaluate what action, if any, the Agency should take to further address
emergency response and preparedness.

II. Request for Data, Information and Comments

    The following questions have been provided to facilitate the
collection of the needed information and to make it easier for the
public to comment on relevant issues. The questions are grouped into
five broad categories: The scope of emergency response; personal
protective equipment; training and qualifications; medical evaluation
and health monitoring; and safety. However, commenters are encouraged
to address any aspect of emergency response and preparedness that they
feel would assist the Agency in considering appropriate action on the
matter. The Agency is particularly interested in ways to incorporate
flexibility into its standards to make them more suited to the demands
of emergency response activities. A detailed response to questions, as
well as your rationale or reasoning for the position, rather than
simply replying ``yes'' or ``no,'' is requested. Also, relevant data
that may be useful to OSHA's deliberations, or in conducting an
analysis of impacts of future Agency actions, should be submitted. In
order to assess the costs, benefits or feasibility of any possible
regulatory intervention, the Agency needs specific quantitative
information on various safety measures being discussed. Therefore, for
those instances where you recommend a specific intervention, any data
in terms of costs and benefits that helps form the recommendation would
be valuable. The usefulness of your response will be increased if they
are tied to the categories and sections. Please label your responses
with the lettered category and question number.

A. The Scope of Emergency Response

    The terms ``emergency response'' and ``emergency responder'' have
been defined and used differently in various government laws and
regulations as well as industry consensus standards and reports.
Additionally, emergency response work is unlike many other types of
employment, in that the actual work site and hazards will vary based
upon the location and nature of the incident. As the Agency considers
the issue of emergency response, it is important to define the scope
and nature of work activities that might be called emergency response
and preparedness, as well as the types of employees and work activities
that might be associated with emergency response and preparedness.
    1. Emergency response and preparedness activities occur at both
common incidents (e.g., fires, car accidents, or structural collapses)
and rare or unexpected incidents (e.g., natural disasters, terrorist
attacks, or special events that require enhanced preparedness). If the
Agency takes action on emergency response and preparedness, should it
consider either all types of emergency incidents (e.g., both common and
rare events) or should certain types of incidents be excluded? If you
believe a limited range is appropriate, what types of incidents or
activities should be included or excluded?
    2. Emergency response and preparedness activities have historically
included a range of events from pre-planning for an emergency, to the
actual emergency response, and, ultimately, to remediation/recovery.
Should OSHA consider the full continuum of activities to be considered
``emergency response and preparedness''? If not, what is an appropriate
range of activities for the Agency to consider, and why?
    3. What are the factors that should indicate when the emergency
response to an event has fully transitioned into remediation/recovery?
    4. What types of work tasks (e.g., interior structural
firefighting, exterior firefighting, pre-hospital emergency medical
work, technical rescue, heavy equipment operation) should be considered
emergency response or skilled support work? What are the hazards
associated with each type of work task? Are there any specific work
tasks that should be excluded from consideration (e.g., work that is
inherently and exclusively performed by law enforcement officers)?
    5. Are there any new data that describe the nature, magnitude, or
impact of emergency response and preparedness operations (e.g., type
and number of incidents, type and quantity of employees considered
emergency responders, financial costs, or occupational injuries,
illnesses, and fatalities) that OSHA should consider when evaluating
the issue of emergency response and preparedness? In particular, are
there relevant data on skilled support employees at emergency incidents
or during preparedness activities?
    6. Many emergency responders are State, county or municipal
employees in States with OSHA-approved safety and health plans who are
subject to the requirements of the State Plan-equivalent of the current
OSHA standards in the same manner as private sector employees. As OSHA
considers the necessity for further action on the safety and health of
emergency responders, are there issues or concerns that are specific to
such employers or employees that the Agency should consider? If your
State has promulgated standards or issued guidance on emergency
response and preparedness that differs from the existing OSHA standards
and guidance, please describe the action taken as well as the impact
and effect on the user community. Are there any concerns specific to
the State agencies administering OSHA approved safety and health plans
regarding OSHA's consideration of action in this area?
    7. In States that do not have OSHA-approved workplace safety and
health plans, to what extent are OSHA standards used as guidance for
emergency responders who are public sector employees or as guidance for
voluntary State public sector protection programs (e.g., personal
protective clothing and equipment, training, and safety procedures)?

B. Personal Protective Equipment

    Since a great deal of emergency response work occurs in an
uncontrolled and dynamic work environment, personal protective
equipment is a particularly important aspect of assuring the responding
employees' health and safety. This section addresses a variety of types
of personal protective equipment that emergency responders might use,
depending on the nature of the hazards they face. The Agency is
particularly interested in determining appropriate national consensus
standards on the design and construction of such equipment as it
considers the issue of emergency response and preparedness.
    8. The current OSHA standard for firefighters' protective clothing
is based upon the 1975 edition of ``NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective
Ensemble for Structural Fire Fighting.'' The NFPA standard specifies
the minimum design, performance, and certification requirements, and
test methods for structural firefighting protective ensembles that
include protective coats, protective trousers, protective coveralls,
helmets, gloves, footwear, and interface components. The OSHA standard
still allows treated fabrics as an acceptable outer shell material in
firefighters' protective clothing, rather than fabrics that are
inherently flame resistant. More recent editions of NFPA 1971, recently
renamed the Standard on Protective Ensemble for Structural Fire
Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting, require the use of fabrics that
are inherently flame

resistant. Inherently flame resistant fabrics are made from fibers
where the flame resistance is an intrinsic property of the material,
whereas treated materials are only made flame resistant by the
application of a secondary chemical that can wear off or wash off over
time (Ex. 1-13). Is the 1975 edition of NFPA 1971 still an appropriate
standard for firefighters' protective clothing? Is the current edition
of the NFPA standard, including the requirement for inherently flame
resistant material, appropriate to consider? Should OSHA consider other
standards, such as those issued by the International Standards
Organization (ISO)?
    9. With the exception of the shipyard fire protection standard (29
CFR 1915.505), OSHA standards do not require the use of a personal
alert safety system (PASS) device by firefighters in order to help
locate missing, trapped, or incapacitated firefighters. Is such a
device necessary and appropriate for firefighters' safety in non-
shipyard situations? If so, under what circumstances is it to be used?
Is the current edition of ``NFPA 1982, Standard on Personal Alert
Safety Systems (PASS)'' an appropriate standard to consider (Ex. 1-14)?
This standard specifies the NFPA minimum design, performance, and
certification requirements and test methods for all PASS to be used by
firefighters and other emergency services personnel who engage in
rescue, firefighting, and other hazardous duties. Are there additional
features of a personnel accountability system, other than these safety
devices, that should be an element of an emergency response system? Are
there emergency response situations, other than firefighting, that
should necessitate the use of a PASS device? Are emergency responders
at your workplace provided with PASS devices? What are the costs of
PASS devices or an alternate system? What is the expected service life
of such a device in your work environment? Are there any data on their
effectiveness?
    10. It has been OSHA policy to enforce the use of ``NFPA 1976,
Standard on Protective Ensemble for Proximity Fire Fighting'' compliant
protective clothing and equipment for proximity firefighting (e.g., jet
fuel fires) (Standard Interpretations 04/03/1997--Appropriate
protective clothing for aircraft firefighting) The NFPA 1976 standard
has recently been subsumed in the NFPA 1971 standard on firefighter's
protective clothing (Ex. 1-13). This standard contains the NFPA minimum
design, performance, and certification requirements and the test
methods for proximity protective ensembles, including protective coats,
protective trousers, protective coveralls, helmets, gloves, footwear,
and interface components. Does the NFPA 1971 standard adequately
protect employees performing such proximity firefighting tasks? If not,
what other standards should OSHA consider?
    11. Under the respiratory protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134),
OSHA requires that all self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) be
certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) (42 CFR part 84). Because NIOSH does not test SCBA for exposure
to heat and flame, is this certification adequate? Would it be
appropriate for all SCBAs used for firefighting or emergency response
to be certified by NIOSH and also certified as compliant with the
current edition of ``NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained
Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) Emergency Services'' (Ex. 1-15)? NFPA 1981
specifies the minimum requirements for the design, performance,
testing, and certification of open-circuit SCBA and combination open-
circuit self-contained breathing apparatus and supplied air respirators
(SCBA/SAR) for fire and emergency services personnel and includes tests
for heat and flame resistance. NIOSH requires this in its new Chemical,
Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) certification (42 CFR part
84). Are the SCBA currently used in your workplace compliant with the
NFPA 1981 standard?
    12. Emergency response to weapons of mass destruction such as
chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agents has
increasingly become viewed as a component of a local emergency
response. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has adopted
NIOSH and NFPA standards for CBRN personal protective equipment (PPE).
For example, DHS requires CBRN chemical protective clothing to meet
``NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for CBRN Terrorism
Incidents'' (Ex. 1-16). This standard specifies the NFPA minimum
requirements for the design, performance, testing, documentation, and
certification of protective ensembles designed to protect fire and
emergency services personnel from chemical/biological terrorism agents.
These standards provide more detailed and stringent performance testing
requirements for PPE than the OSHA Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response Standard (29 CFR 1910.120), which requires only
minimal testing for chemical resistance and garment integrity. Under
what circumstances is protective clothing tested to meet the NIOSH and
NFPA standards necessary (e.g., all emergency responses, or emergency
response to a known or suspected CBRN agent, or only during remediation
or recovery)? Similarly, the Department of Homeland Security has
adopted ``NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for
Hazardous Materials Emergencies'' for use against toxic industrial
chemical (TICs) and toxic industrial materials (TIMs) (Ex. 1-17). Are
there emergency response situations that would necessitate the use of
chemical protective clothing that was certified to NFPA chemical
protective clothing standards, which involves more thorough testing
than chemical protective clothing currently specified under the
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard? Are there
any other standards on chemical protective clothing that OSHA should
consider?
    13. Emergency medical service providers may be exposed to hazards
not common to other employees that have exposure to blood or body
fluids (e.g., jagged metal or broken glass from motor vehicle
accidents). Currently, OSHA's bloodborne pathogens standard (29 CFR
1910.1030) and respiratory protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134)
require personal protective equipment such as gloves, gowns, eye
protection, respirators, and surgical masks. Is there any PPE for pre-
hospital emergency medical service personnel (EMS), not currently
required by the bloodborne pathogens standard or the respiratory
protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134), which may be necessary to
protect EMS employees (e.g., ``NFPA 1999, Standard on Protective
Clothing for Emergency Medical Operations'') (Ex. 1-18)? NFPA 1999
specifies the NFPA minimum design, performance, testing, and
certification requirements for emergency medical clothing used by fire
and EMS personnel during EMS operations. Is such equipment currently
used in your workplace? What would such PPE cost and what is the
expected life of the equipment?
    14. Is there any PPE for emergency responders providing technical
rescue services (e.g., vehicle extrication, high-angle rescue, swift-
water rescue) that may be necessary for protecting employees providing
such services? If so, under what circumstances should the use of such
equipment be considered necessary? Please describe specific tasks and
associated equipment that OSHA should consider. What would such PPE
cost and what is the expected life of the equipment?

    15. Employees performing urban search and rescue (USAR) tasks may
be exposed to a variety of physical hazards from building debris as
well as incidental exposure to thermal, chemical, or biological
hazards. The Department of Homeland Security has adopted ``NFPA 1951,
Standard on Protective Ensemble for Technical Rescue Incidents '' for
emergency responders conducting USAR operations (Ex. 1-19). NFPA 1951
establishes the NFPA minimum requirements for garments, head
protection, gloves, and footwear, for fire and emergency services
personnel operating at technical rescue incidents involving building or
structural collapse, vehicle/person extrication, confined space entry,
trench/cave-in rescue, rope rescue, and similar incidents. What PPE may
be necessary for protecting these emergency responders? Is NFPA 1951 an
appropriate standard for OSHA to consider on the subject? Are there
other standards that OSHA should consider? What equipment is being used
currently in your workplace? What does the PPE cost, and how many
responders are equipped with it? What is the expected life of the
equipment?
    16. Is there any other PPE, not already identified, that may be
necessary for emergency responders or skilled support personnel? What
is the equipment, what would it cost, and how many responders would
need to be equipped with it? What is the expected life of the
equipment?

C. Training and Qualifications

    The knowledge, skills and abilities of emergency responders and
skilled support employees will depend largely on the training and
qualifications for required work tasks. Training and qualifications
typically include both initial training as well as any periodic
training (e.g., annual refresher training) that may be necessary to
maintain an appropriate level of functional capability.
    17. The OSHA Fire Brigade standard (29 CFR 1910.156(c)) contains
broadly worded requirements on training and education and requires the
quality of such training to be ``similar to'' a number of State fire
training schools. Is this standard adequate to ensure firefighters are
appropriately trained to perform required tasks safely? If not, what
level of initial training and qualification is necessary to safely
perform fire fighting tasks? Is ``NFPA 1001, Standard for Fire Fighter
Professional Qualifications'' an appropriate standard to consider (Ex.
1-20)? NFPA 1001 identifies the minimum job performance requirements
for two levels of progression of firefighters whose duties are
primarily structural in nature. Are there other standards or
recommendations that OSHA should consider? What amount and type of
periodic refresher training should be considered the minimum necessary
for firefighters? What is the appropriate format for acquiring this
training? What are the training practices in your workplace?
    18. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), develops the National Standard
Curricula for all levels of EMS personnel. What level of initial
occupational health and safety training and qualification is necessary
to safely perform emergency medical services? Are there any additional
initial training requirements beyond the NHTSA standards appropriate
for OSHA to consider (e.g., training on emergency vehicle operation or
incident scene safety)? What amount and type of periodic refresher
training is necessary for EMS personnel? What are the current training
practices in your workplace?
    19. OSHA does not currently require any specific training for
rescue technicians. What level of initial training and qualification is
necessary to safely perform technical rescue tasks? Is ``NFPA 1006,
Standard for Rescue Technician Professional Qualifications'' an
appropriate standard to consider (Ex. 1-21)? NFPA 1006 establishes the
NFPA minimum requirements necessary for fire service and other
emergency response personnel who perform technical rescue operations.
These include rope rescue, surface water rescue, vehicle and machinery
rescue, confined space rescue, structural collapse rescue, and trench
rescue. Are there other standards or recommendations that OSHA should
consider? What amount and type of annual refresher training should be
considered the minimum necessary for such emergency responders? What is
the appropriate format for acquiring this training (e.g., does this
require travel to a specialized training facility)? What are the
current training practices in your workplace?
    20. Skilled support work at emergency incidents is work that is not
performed by an emergency responder (e.g., firefighter or EMS provider)
but is nonetheless a critical element of a safe and successful
emergency response, such as heavy equipment operation, utility shut-
off, and cutting and removal of iron work. The role of skilled support
employees at emergency incidents is only directly addressed in the
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard (HAZWOPER)
(29 CFR 1910.120), which does not apply to all types of emergency
incidents. The standard requires skilled support employees that are
needed on a temporary basis for immediate emergency support work to be
given an initial briefing on necessary information but does not require
them to receive the full training provisions of the standard (29 CFR
1910.120(q)(4)). What level of initial training and qualification is
necessary to safely perform skilled support jobs? Should specific
training for skilled support personnel, other than the initial
briefing, be considered? Should refresher training on an annual or
other basis for such responders be considered? The OSHA Training
Institute has developed a 16-hour Disaster Site Worker Course
(7600) which emphasizes knowledge, precautions and personal
protection essential to maintaining an employee's personal safety and
health at a disaster site. Should skilled support personnel take the
OSHA Disaster Site Worker training course, or something similar, before
responding to a disaster or is just-in-time training sufficient and
appropriate? What are the current training practices in your workplace?
    21. OSHA standards do not address the training or qualifications
for either emergency responders who operate emergency apparatus or
those personnel who may have to work on an active roadway during an
emergency response (e.g., responding to a car crash). Traffic accidents
involving emergency apparatus, as well as incidents where emergency
responders are struck by passing vehicles at incident scenes,
constitute a major source of injuries for emergency responders (Ex. 1-
22). Is there any training or qualifications on emergency vehicle
safety or incident scene safety (e.g., ``NFPA 1002, Standard for Fire
Apparatus Driver/Operator Professional Qualifications'') that should be
considered for emergency responders as a whole or for individual groups
of emergency responders, such as emergency vehicle drivers (Ex. 1-23)?
What is the appropriate format for acquiring this training? What are
the current training practices in your workplace?
    22. The Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard
(29 CFR 1910.120), which does not apply to all types of emergency
incidents, requires that incident commanders have specialized training
beyond that of other employees. However, the Fire Brigade standard (29
CFR 1910.156) does not

require any additional or specialized training for fire officers that
will manage or supervise the emergency response incident. Should the
training and qualifications for fire officers be different than for
firefighters? If so, what level of training is appropriate for
officers? Is ``NFPA 1021, Standard for Fire Officer Professional
Qualifications,'' an appropriate standard to consider in evaluating
this issue (Ex. 1-24)? NFPA 1021 identifies the performance
requirements necessary to perform the duties of a fire officer and
specifically identifies four levels of training that progress with
increasing rank and increasing responsibility. Are there other
standards or recommendations OSHA should consider? What are the current
training practices in your workplace?
    23. OSHA's Fire Brigade standard (29 CFR 1910.156) does not
distinguish between industrial fire brigades and other types of fire
departments that may respond to a wider range of emergency incidents at
a variety of locations. Should the minimum training and qualifications
for industrial fire brigade members be different than for other
firefighters? If so, what is an appropriate training standard for OSHA
to consider (e.g., ``NFPA 1081, Standard for Industrial Fire Brigade
Member Professional Qualifications'') (Ex. 1-25)? NFPA 1081 identifies
the NFPA minimum job performance requirements necessary to carry out
the duties of an individual who is a member of an organized industrial
fire brigade providing services at a specific facility or site. Are
there other standards or recommendations for fire brigades OSHA should
consider? What are the current training practices in your workplace?
    24. During an emergency response the Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response Standard (29 CFR 1910.120), which does not cover all
emergency incidents, requires that the individual in charge of the
incident command system (ICS) designate a safety official. The safety
official has the authority to alter, suspend, or terminate any
activities that are deemed to be an imminent danger to employees. The
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard does not
establish minimum training and qualifications for a safety official,
but the person must be knowledgeable in the operations being
implemented and able to identify and evaluate hazards with respect to
the operational safety. While the Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response Standard uses the term ``safety official,'' the
National Response Plan (NRP) and National Incident Management System
(NIMS) use the term ``safety officer.'' In practical application, is
there a distinction between these two individuals or do they
essentially perform the same function? The NIMS describes the duties
and functions of the safety officer at an emergency incident as
monitoring incident operations and advising the Incident Commander on
all matters relating to operational safety, including the health and
safety of emergency responder personnel. The NIMS also does not specify
the minimum training and qualifications to assume the role of safety
officer. What are the minimum training and qualifications that a safety
officer needs? Aside from responsibilities at an emergency incident,
should a safety officer have a role in the management of an emergency
response and preparedness program? If so, what should be a safety
officer's non-emergency duties and functions and how would they relate
to emergency response and preparedness?
    25. Recently, there has been a greater emphasis on assuring
continuity of incident management from the local and state responder
level to the national level at incidents of national significance
managed under the National Response Plan (e.g., large natural
disasters). What training at the state and local level, if any, is
necessary to facilitate seamless emergency operations at a joint field
office (JFO) or area field office (AFO)?
    26. What is the best way for OSHA to specify training for a given
emergency response role? For example:
     By specifying a minimum number of hours of training;
     By specifying training content based on job tasks;
     By specifying that training be adequate to demonstrate
specified competencies;
     By a combination of these methods; or
     By some other method.
    Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has been
working on a national credentialing system to verify training and
qualifications. Should the Agency consider credentialing systems in its
evaluation of training and qualifications?

D. Medical Evaluation/Health Monitoring

    Emergency responders work in an environment where they may be
exposed to a variety of physical, chemical, or biological hazards. The
personal protective clothing and equipment that they use, as well as
the inherent nature of their work, can pose an additional physiologic
burden on emergency responders. Medical evaluation and health
monitoring is an important factor in assuring the health and safety of
emergency responders.
    27. OSHA requires that hepatitis B vaccinations be made available
to employees potentially occupationally exposed to blood or other body
fluids in its bloodborne pathogen standard (29 CFR 1910.1030). Are
other vaccinations necessary for emergency responders? If so, which
vaccinations? What would these vaccinations cost? Would they need to be
repeated at some point? Would they be recommended for all emergency
responders or a particular subset? What are the current vaccination
practices in your workplace?
    28. There are currently available vaccinations for anthrax and
smallpox, and other vaccinations could be developed in the future for
diseases such as hepatitis C. Employers can determine, based upon their
own risk assessment, if such vaccines are necessary and should be
offered to their employees. If vaccines other than the hepatitis B
vaccination are determined by the employer to be necessary for
emergency responders, should OSHA consider non-disease specific
administrative and recordkeeping procedures similar to those required
for the hepatitis B vaccine (29 CFR 1910.1030(f))? These procedures
could include requirements that the vaccine be made available at no
cost to the employee, available to the employee at a reasonable time
and place, and subject to appropriate medical screening. Are there any
elements of an assessment process that should be implemented before an
employer can determine that a vaccine is necessary, for example, a
determination by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) or other
appropriate medical recommendation?
    29. Medical evaluations for emergency responders are currently
regulated under the Fire Brigade (29 CFR 1910.156), Respiratory
Protection (29 CFR 1910.134), and Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response (29 CFR 1910.120) standards. The Fire Brigade
Standard requires that employers not permit employees with known heart
disease, epilepsy, or emphysema to perform emergency response work
unless approved by a physician. The respiratory protection standard
requires that a physician or other licensed health care professional
evaluate an employees' ability to use a respirator. Such an evaluation
may consist solely of a medical questionnaire. The Hazardous Waste

Operations and Emergency Response Standard has more extensive
requirements for an annual medical evaluation. Is ``NFPA 1582,
Comprehensive Occupational Medical Program for Fire Departments'' an
appropriate medical evaluation for firefighters (Ex. 1-26)? NFPA 1582
contains descriptive requirements for a comprehensive occupational
medical program to ensure that fire department members are medically
capable of performing their required duties. Are there other medical
evaluation standards that are appropriate for either firefighters or
emergency responders who perform tasks other than firefighting? For
emergency responders who do not perform firefighting tasks, what
elements of a medical evaluation are necessary to assure that they are
physically capable of performing essential job tasks while wearing an
array of possibly physically burdensome personal protective clothing
and equipment? How often should a medical evaluation for emergency
responders be conducted? Please address the following types of medical
evaluation: Pre-placement, return-to-work, annual fitness for duty
evaluation, and periodic medical surveillance. What is the cost to the
employer of these recommended medical evaluations for emergency
responders? How is the medical evaluation of emergency responders
addressed in your workplace?
    30. The physiologic burden caused by performing emergency response
activities and wearing PPE can be extreme (e.g., over-exertion, heat
stress or dehydration). Additionally, cardiovascular fatalities
represent a large percentage of firefighters' fatalities. Is on-scene
rehabilitation and providing appropriate assistance (e.g., monitoring
workers' temperature, blood pressure, hydration levels) an appropriate
method of preventing or reducing the number of these injuries and
fatalities? Is ``NFPA 1584, Rehabilitation of Members Operating at
Incident Scene Operations and Training Exercises'' an appropriate
standard for such practices (Ex. 1-27)? NFPA 1584 describes recommended
practices for developing and implementing an incident scene
rehabilitation program, including: Medical evaluations, re-hydration,
and protection from environmental conditions. Are there other methods
of protection that are available, such as adjusting work/rest regimens
or physical training? Are there other standards or recommendations that
OSHA should consider? Should defibrillators (either a defibrillator or
an automated external defibrillator (AED)) be available at emergency
incident scenes in case an emergency responder or skilled support
worker has a cardiac event? Do you currently have a defibrillator or
AED at emergency events?

E. Safety

    The safety of emergency responders and skilled support employees is
affected by the employer's policies and procedures established to
govern emergency response operations. Also, the tools and equipment
used by emergency responders may affect their ability to detect and
monitor hazards as well as communicate those hazards to others at the
emergency scene.
    31. The use of an incident management system as a means to assure
the health and safety of employees is required by the OSHA Hazardous
Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard (29 CFR 1910.120) for
emergency response to hazardous materials incidents and OSHA's Fire
Brigades in Shipyards standard (29 CFR 1915.505). Is an incident
management system appropriate for managing all other emergency
incidents?
    32. The NIMS specifies that a unified command structure be employed
for all employees at an incident when there are multiple jurisdictions
and agencies involved. Since each employer is responsible for the
health and safety of his or her employees at emergency incidents and
may affect the safety and health of other employers' employees, how can
a safety management structure be developed that incorporates a multi-
employer response that is commanded within a single incident command
system for all types of incidents?
    33. The NIMS describes the duties and functions of the safety
officer at an emergency incident. However, the NIMS does not address
non-emergency functions for the safety officer that may be necessary to
assure the health and safety of emergency responders and skilled
support personnel when an emergency does occur (e.g., assuring training
requirements are met, assuring that protective clothing and equipment
is adequately maintained, or reviewing and updating standard operating
procedures). What are the non-emergency duties and functions that are
necessary to assure the proper management of an emergency response and
preparedness program? Is a designated safety program manager or
administrator needed?
    34. Do emergency responders need hazard detection and monitoring
equipment capabilities, such as 4-gas monitors, thermal imaging
cameras, or chemical, biological, and radiological detection equipment?
If so, for each type of job task what abilities and equipment are
needed? How much would these devices typically cost to own and operate?
What are the devices' expected service life?
    35. Should emergency response organizations establish written
standard operating procedures (SOPs) or standard operating guidelines
(SOGs) for expected emergency response activities? If so, what types of
issues should be addressed in the SOPs or SOGs? How should employers
determine what activities are within the expected range of operations
and what activities might be outside the range of expected planning?
How should employers plan and prepare for special hazards within their
area of operations (e.g., high-rise buildings, industrial facilities,
or open-pit mines)?
    36. How can communication at emergency incidents be maintained? Is
a certain type of communications hardware, such as radio systems, or
handheld radios, needed by all emergency responders? What training in
communications is needed? Is there evidence that portable radios are
necessary for either each individual emergency responder or each team
of emergency responders? If new equipment and training would be
necessary, how much would they cost?
    37. The Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard
(29 CFR 1910.120) gives the incident commander broad authority in
managing risk by determining the scope of operations possible at a
given incident. The ``two in/two out'' provision of the Respiratory
Protection Standard (29 CFR 1910.134 (g)(4)) for interior structural
firefighting implies, but does not directly address, the concept of
risk management. How can OSHA more thoroughly address the concept of
risk management at emergency incidents? What guidance should be given
in weighing the health and safety of emergency responders against
victim's lives, against property loss, or in situations where concerns
about immediate safety may have negative consequences for long-term
health, such as lung damage? How should risk management guidelines
address the various phases of an emergency response from rescue,
incident stabilization, through remediation/recovery? How does your
workplace address the concept of risk management during emergency
response and preparedness activities?
    38. Are there specific features of an occupational health and
safety program not addressed in previous questions that

are necessary for emergency responder health and safety (e.g., any
elements contained in ``NFPA 1500, Fire Department Occupational Safety
and Health Program'' such as life-safety rope systems) (Ex. 1-28)? NFPA
1500 provides the NFPA requirements for a fire service occupational
safety and health program for fire departments. The Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response Standard (29 CFR 1910.120(b))
requires that employers develop and implement a written safety and
health program for their employees involved in hazardous waste
operations (e.g., safety and health training, medical surveillance,
necessary interface between general program and site specific
activities). Would a health and safety program similar to that required
in 29 CFR 1910.120(b) be appropriate for emergency response activities?
    39. Are there any other issues or concerns related to the health or
safety of all emergency responders, or any particular group of
emergency responders, that should be considered? Are there any issues
related to the health and safety of skilled support personnel at
emergency incidents that should be considered?

F. Additional Information

    40. In addition to the specific questions above, the Agency is
seeking general information on the cost of safety and health measures
undertaken by municipal emergency response agencies (e.g., fire
departments) and any other first responders or skilled support
employees. From what levels of government are revenues derived to
support emergency response and preparedness? What other sources of
revenue are available? How are increased costs of operation dealt with
(e.g., reduction in service, increase in response time, or increased
revenue sources)? How are these issues different for smaller emergency
response operations or rural areas than for larger or mid-sized
operations? How often are emergency response operations contracted out
to specialists, either by companies or communities?
    41. Are there any existing OSHA standards, guidelines, or
recommendations that, when viewed in conjunction with other Federal,
State or local codes and/or the recommendation of consensus standards
organizations such as, but not limited to NFPA, ANSI or ASTM, create
conflict or uncertainty in the practice of emergency responding, safety
and health planning, in the selection of protective equipment, in the
procurement of emergency response equipment, or in the provision of
training? If so, what could OSHA do to remedy these situations?

III. Public Participation

    You may submit comments in response to this document by (1) hard
copy, (2) fax transmission (facsimile), or (3) electronically through
the Federal Rulemaking Portal. Because of security-related problems,
there may be a significant delay in the receipt of comments by regular
mail. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> for information
about security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by
express delivery, hand delivery and messenger service.
    All comments and submissions are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office at the above address. Comments and
submissions are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. OSHA

cautions you about submitting personal information such as social
security numbers and birth dates. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at
(202) 693-2350 for information about accessing materials in the docket.
    Electronic copies of this Federal Register notice, as well as news
releases and other relevant documents, are available at OSHA's Web
page: http://www.osha.gov/index.html.

IV. Authority and Signature

    This document was prepared under the direction of Edwin G. Foulke,
Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health,
U.S. Department of Labor. It is issued pursuant to sections 4, 6, and 8
of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657), 29 CFR 1911, and Secretary's Order 5-2002 (67 FR 65008).

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 4th day of September, 2007.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.

Table of Exhibits

1-1 Emergency Response and Preparedness Request for Information
1-2 Fire Fighter Fatalities in the United States in 2003, U.S. Fire
Administration Report FA-283, August 2004
1-3 NFPA Report: Fire Loss in the United States During 2002 and U.S.
Fire Department Profile Through 2002)
1-4 U.S. Fire Administration, A Needs Assessment of the U.S. Fire
Service, (USFA Report FA-240, December 2002 authorized by U.S.
Public Law 106-398, Sec. 33(b))
1-5 U.S. Fire Administration and the National Fallen Firefighters
Foundation, Firefighter Life Safety Summit Initial Report (April
2004)
1-6 NIOSH/RAND Protecting Emergency Responders: Lessons Learned from
Terrorist Attacks; Protecting Emergency Responders
1-7 NIOSH / RAND Volume 2: Community Views of Safety and Health
Risks and Personal Protection Needs
1-8 NIOSH / RAND Volume 3: Safety Management in Disaster and
Terrorism Response
1-9 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8
(HSPD8)
1-10 The National Incident Management System (NIMS)
1-11 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5
(HSPD5)
1-12 National Response Plan
1-13 NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective Ensemble for Structural Fire
Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting
1-14 NFPA 1982, Standard on Personal Alert Safety Systems (PASS)
1-15 NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing
Apparatus (SCBA) Emergency Services
1-16 NFPA 1994, Standard on Protective Ensembles for First
Responders to CBRN Terrorism Incidents
1-17 NFPA 1991, Standard on Vapor-Protective Ensembles for Hazardous
Materials Emergencies
1-18 NFPA 1999, Standard on Protective Clothing for Emergency
Medical Operations
1-19 NFPA 1951, Standard on Protective Ensemble for Technical Rescue
Incidents
1-20 NFPA 1001, Standard for Fire Fighter Professional
Qualifications
1-21 NFPA 1006, Standard for Rescue Technician Professional
Qualifications
1-22 U.S. Fire Administration, Firefighter Fatality Retrospective
Study. April 2002 FA-220
1-23 NFPA 1002, Standard for Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator
Professional Qualifications
1-24 NFPA 1021, Standard for Fire Officer Professional
Qualifications
1-25 NFPA 1081, Standard for Industrial Fire Brigade Member
Professional Qualifications
1-26 NFPA 1582, Comprehensive Occupational Medical Program for Fire
Departments
1-27 NFPA 1584, Rehabilitation of Members Operating at Incident
Scene Operations and Training Exercises
1-28 NFPA 1500, Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health
Program

 [FR Doc. E7-17771 Filed 9-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 71860]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29241]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68312; File No. SR-NSX-2012-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Adoption of Listing Standards for
Compensation Committees and Advisors as Required by Rule 10C-1

November 28, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On September 26, 2012, National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ proposed a rule change to
amend certain of its rules relating to listing standards for
compensation committees and advisors. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on October 17, 2012.\4\
The Commission received no comment letters on this proposal.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68039 (October 10,
2012), 77 FR 63914 (October 17, 2012) (SR-NSX-2012-15).
    \5\ The Commission notes, however, that fourteen comment letters
were received in total concerning similar rule changes proposed by
other national securities exchanges. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 68313, (November 28, 2012) (Notice of Designation of
Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Changes
Relating to Adoption of Listing Standards for Compensation
Committees and Advisors as Required by Rule 10C-1 for BATS Exchange,
Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., The
NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE Arca LLC,
and NYSE MKT LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \6\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day from the publication of notice of filing of this proposed rule
change is December 1, 2012. The Commission is extending the 45-day time
period for Commission action on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to take action on this proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider this proposed rule change, which would
revise the rules relating to compensation committee and compensation
advisor requirements.
    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\7\ designates January 15, 2013, as the date by which the
Commission should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings
to determine whether to disapprove this proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-29241 Filed 12-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 10142]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03769]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0321; FRL--9906-84-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NSPS for Sewage Sludge
Incineration Units (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart LLLL) (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR
No. 2369.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0658), to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq). This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through April 30,
2014. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register (78 FR 35023) on June 11, 2013 during a 60-day comment period.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A
fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated
burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 26,
2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2013-0321, to: (1) EPA online, using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources:
Sewage Sludge Incineration (SSI) Units Subpart LLLL, fulfill the
requirements of sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), which
require EPA to promulgate New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for
solid waste incineration units. The information collection activities
required by the NSPS include: siting requirements, operator training
and qualification requirements, testing, monitoring and reporting
requirements, one-time and periodic reports, and the maintenance of
records. These activities will enable the Designated Administrator to
determine initial compliance with the emission limits for the regulated
pollutants, monitor compliance with operating parameters, and ensure
that facilities conduct the proper planning and operator training.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of SSI units.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart LLLL).
    Estimated number of respondents: 2 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, semiannually, and annually
    Total estimated burden: 798 hours (per year). ``Burden'' is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $447,624 (per year), includes $369,556
annualized total capital/startup or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in respondent and
Agency burden in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. The increase is
due to an adjustment in the estimated number of sources. The previous
ICR estimated two new units subject to the standard during the initial
three-year compliance period. However, recent research indicates there
are still no units subject to the standard at this time. Those same two
new units are expected to become subject during three-year period of
this ICR, and another unit is expected to be modified and therefore
also subject to the NSPS. This change in estimate also results in an
increase in total capital and O&M costs.

Richard T. Westlund,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-03769 Filed 2-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 190)]
[Notices]
[Page 56130-56132]
[DOCID:fr02oc07-101]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2007-28638]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Request for public comment on an extension of a currently
approved collection.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public

comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions
and reinstatement of previously approved collections.
    This document describes one collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 3, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments [identified by DOT Docket ID Number
NHTSA 2007-28638] by any of the following methods:
    If filing comments by September 27, 2007, please use:
     Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for

submitting comments on the Department of Transportation Docket
Management System electronic docket site. No electronic submissions
will be accepted between September 28, 2007, and October 1, 2007.
    If filing comments on or after October 1, 2007, use:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the online instructions for submitting

comments.
    Alternatively, you can file comments using the following methods:
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.dms.dot.gov or http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://dms.dot.gov until September 27, 2007,

or the street address listed above. The DOT docket may be offline at
times between September 28 through September 30 to migrate to the
Federal Docket Management System (FDMS). On October 1, 2007, the
internet access to the docket will be at http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Complete copies of each request for
collection of information may be obtained at no change from Carlita
Ballard, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey, SE., Room W43-439, NVS-131,
Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to
its OMB Control Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information.
    The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must be
included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR
1320.8(d), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected and;
    (iv) How to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following proposed collections of information:
    Title: Petitions for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard (49 CFR part 543).
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0542.
    Form Number: None.
    Affected Public: Motor vehicle manufacturers.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from approval
date.
    Abstract: Manufacturers of passenger vehicle lines may petition the
agency for an exemption from Part 541 requirements, if the line is
equipped with an anti-theft device as standard equipment and meets
agency criteria. Device must be as effective as partsmarking.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 3,164.
    Number of Respondents: 14.
    49 U.S.C. Chapter 331 requires the Secretary of Transportation to
promulgate a theft prevention standard to provide for the
identification of certain motor vehicles and their major replacement
parts to impede motor vehicle theft. 49 U.S.C. 33106 provides for an
exemption to this identification process by petitions from
manufacturers who equip covered vehicles with standard original
equipment antitheft devices, which the Secretary determines are likely
to be as effective in reducing or deterring theft as partsmarking.
NHTSA may exempt a vehicle line from the partsmarking requirements, if
the manufacturer installs an antitheft device as standard equipment on
the entire vehicle line for which it seeks an exemption and NHTSA
determines that the antitheft device is likely to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
partsmarking requirements. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 33106, after
model year (MY) 2000, the number of new exemptions is contingent on a
finding by the Attorney General as part of its long-range review of
effectiveness. After consulting with DOJ, the agency decided it could
continue granting one exemption per model year pending the results of
the long-term review.
    In a final rule published on April 6, 2004, the Federal Motor
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard was extended to include all passenger
cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle rating of
6,000 pounds or less, and to light duty trucks with major parts that
are interchangeable with a majority of the covered major parts of
multipurpose passenger vehicles. Consistent with this DOJ consultation,
the April 6, 2004 final rule amended the general requirements of
Section 543.5 of Chapter 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
allowing a manufacturer to petition NHTSA to grant an exemption for one
additional line of its passenger motor vehicles from the requirements
of the theft prevention standard for each model year after MY 1996. The
final rule became effective September 1, 2006.

    Prior to September 1, 2006, manufacturers were only allowed to
petition NHTSA for high-theft vehicle lines. In its April 6, 2004 final
rule, the agency amended part 543 to allow vehicle manufacturers to
file petitions to exempt all vehicle lines that would become subject to
parts-marking requirements beginning with the effective date of the
final rule. As a result of this amendment, vehicle manufacturers are
allowed to file petitions to exempt all vehicle lines that would become
subject to the parts-marking requirements regardless of their theft
status (high or low). While there are approximately 27 vehicle
manufacturers, since the effective date of the rule, a maximum of 14
petitions for exemption from the parts-marking requirements have been
received by the agency for any single model year. We anticipate this to
remain the average number of yearly responses received by the agency.
    NHTSA estimates that the average hours per submittal will be 226,
for a total annual burden of 3,164. This was an increase from the
previous OMB inventory of 1,130 burden hours. NHTSA estimates that the
cost associated with these burden hours is $36.62 per hour, for a total
cost of approximately $115,866.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Issued on: September 24, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 07-4796 Filed 10-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-M


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 20, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69586-69589]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28103]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0155]

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Small Business Impacts of
Motor Vehicle Safety

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

ACTION: Notice of regulatory review; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA seeks comments on the economic impact of its regulations
on small entities. As required by Section 610 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, we are attempting to identify rules that may have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
We also request comments on ways to make these regulations easier to
read and understand. The focus of this notice is rules that
specifically relate to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles,
trucks, buses, trailers, motorcycles, and motor vehicle equipment.

DATES: You should submit comments early enough to ensure that Docket
Management receives them not later than January 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments [identified by DOT Docket ID Number
NHTSA-2012-0155] by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 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., between

9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information see the Comments heading of the Supplementary
Information section of this document. Note that all comments received
will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita Kavalauskas, Office of
Regulatory Analysis, Office of Regulatory Analysis and Evaluation,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act

A. Background and Purpose

    Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
354), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), requires agencies to conduct periodic
reviews of final rules that have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small business entities. The purpose of the
reviews is to determine whether such rules should be continued without
change, or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with the
objectives of applicable statutes, to minimize any significant economic
impact of the rules on a substantial number of such small entities.

B. Review Schedule

    The Department of Transportation (DOT) published its Semiannual
Regulatory Agenda on November 22, 1999, listing in Appendix D (64 FR
64684) those regulations that each operating administration will review
under section 610 during the next 12 months. Appendix D contained DOT's
10-year review plan for all of its existing regulations. On November
24, 2008, NHTSA published in the Federal Register (73 FR 71401) a
revised 10-year review plan for its existing regulations.
    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, ``we'')
has divided its rules into 10 groups by subject area. Each group will
be reviewed once every 10 years, undergoing a two-stage process--an
Analysis Year and a Review Year. For purposes of these reviews, a year
will coincide with the fall-to-fall publication schedule of the
Semiannual Regulatory Agenda. The newly revised 10-year plan will
assess years 9 and 10 of the old plan in years 1 and 2 of the new plan.
Year 1 (2008) began in the fall of 2008 and will end in the fall of
2009; Year 2 (2009) will begin in the fall of 2009 and will end in the
fall of 2010; and so on.
    During the Analysis Year, we will request public comment on and
analyze each of the rules in a given year's group to determine whether
any rule has a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities and, thus, requires review in accordance with section 610 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. In each fall's Regulatory Agenda, we
will publish the results of the analyses we completed during the
previous year. For rules that have subparts, or other discrete sections
of rules that do have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities, we will announce that we will be conducting a formal
section 610 review during the following 12 months.
    The section 610 review will determine whether a specific rule
should be revised or revoked to lessen its impact on small entities. We
will consider: (1) The continued need for the rule; (2) the nature of
complaints or comments received from the public; (3) the complexity of
the rule; (4) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or
conflicts with other federal rules or with state or local government
rules; and (5) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated or
the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors
have changed in the area affected by the rule. At the end of the Review
Year, we will publish the results of our review. The following table
shows the 10-year analysis and review schedule:

                       National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Section 610 Reviews
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Year                          Regulations to be reviewed       Analysis year    Review year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..........................................  49 CFR 571.223 through 571.500, and            2008            2009
                                              parts 575 and 579.
2..........................................  23 CFR parts 1200 and 1300.........            2009            2010
3..........................................  49 CFR parts 501 through 526 and               2010            2011
                                              571.213.
4..........................................  49 CFR 571.131, 571.217, 571.220,              2011            2012
                                              571.221, and 571.222.
5..........................................  49 CFR 571.101 through 571.110, and            2012            2013
                                              571.135, 571.138 and 571.139.
6..........................................  49 CFR parts 529 through 578,                  2013            2014
                                              except parts 571 and 575.
7..........................................  49 CFR 571.111 through 571.129 and             2014            2015
                                              parts 580 through 588.
8..........................................  49 CFR 571.201 through 571.212.....            2015            2016
9..........................................  49 CFR 571.214 through 571.219,                2016            2017
                                              except 571.217.
10.........................................  49 CFR parts 591 through 595 and               2017            2018
                                              new parts and subparts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulations Under Analysis

    During Year 5, we will continue to conduct a preliminary assessment
of the following: 49 CFR 571.101 through 571.110, and 571.135, 571.138
and 571.139.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Section                               Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
571.101...........................  Controls and displays.
571.102...........................  Transmission shift position
                                     sequence, starter interlock, and
                                     transmission braking effect.
571.103...........................  Windshield defrosting and defogging
                                     systems.
571.104...........................  Windshield wiping and washing
                                     systems.

571.105...........................  Hydraulic and electric brake
                                     systems.
571.106...........................  Brake hoses.
571.107...........................  [Reserved]
571.108...........................  Lamps, reflective devices, and
                                     associated equipment.
571.109...........................  New pneumatic and certain specialty
                                     tires.
571.110...........................  Tire selection and rims and motor
                                     home/recreation vehicle trailer
                                     load carrying capacity information
                                     for motor vehicles with a GVWR of
                                     4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or
                                     less.
571.135...........................  Light vehicle brake systems.
571.138...........................  Tire pressure monitoring systems.
571.139...........................  New pneumatic radial tires for light
                                     vehicles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are seeking comments on whether any requirements in 49 CFR
571.101 through 571.110, and 571.135, 571.138 and 571.139 have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
``Small entities'' include small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations under 50,000. Business entities are generally defined as
small businesses by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code, for
the purposes of receiving Small Business Administration (SBA)
assistance. Size standards established by SBA in 13 CFR 121.201 are
expressed either in number of employees or annual receipts in millions
of dollars, unless otherwise specified. The number of employees or
annual receipts indicates the maximum allowed for a concern and its
affiliates to be considered small. If your business or organization is
a small entity and if any of the requirements in 49 CFR 571.101 through
571.110, and 571.135, 571.138 and 571.139 have a significant economic
impact on your business or organization, please submit a comment to
explain how and to what degree these rules affect you, the extent of
the economic impact on your business or organization, and why you
believe the economic impact is significant.
    If the agency determines that there is a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, it will ask for
comment in a subsequent notice during the Review Year on how these
impacts could be reduced without reducing safety.

II. Plain Language

A. Background and Purpose

    Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1,
1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language.
Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration
of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is
not clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them
in your comments on this document.

B. Review Schedule

    In conjunction with our section 610 reviews, we will be performing
plain language reviews over a ten-year period on a schedule consistent
with the section 610 review schedule. We will review 49 CFR 571.101
through 571.110, and 571.135, 571.138 and 571.139 to determine if these
regulations can be reorganized and/or rewritten to make them easier to
read, understand, and use. We encourage interested persons to submit
draft regulatory language that clearly and simply communicates
regulatory requirements, and other recommendations, such as for putting
information in tables that may make the regulations easier to use.

Comments

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21.)
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including the
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under
ADDRESSES.
    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet
the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data
Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the
guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed
at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. DOT's
guidelines may be accessed at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/DataQualityGuidelines.pdf.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

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

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. In
addition, you should submit two copies, from which you have deleted the
claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the
address given above under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing
information claimed to be confidential business information, you should
include a cover letter setting forth the information specified in our
confidential business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider
comments that Docket Management receives after that date.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments
on the Internet, take the following steps:
    (1) Go to the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at http://regulations.gov.
    (2) FDMS provides two basic methods of searching to retrieve
dockets and docket materials that are available in the system: (a)
``Quick Search'' to search using a full-text search engine, or (b)
``Advanced Search,'' which displays various indexed fields such as the
docket name, docket identification number, phase of the action,
initiating office, date of issuance, document title, document
identification number, type of document, Federal Register reference,
CFR citation, etc. Each data field in the advanced search may be
searched independently or in combination with other fields, as desired.
Each search yields a simultaneous display of all available information
found in FDMS that is relevant to the requested subject or topic.
    (3) You may download the comments. However, since the comments are
imaged documents, instead of word processing documents, the ``pdf''
versions of the documents are word searchable.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

Terry Shelton,
Associate Administrator for the National Center for Statistics and
Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2012-28103 Filed 11-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P