13508 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, 

SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY 

INSURANCE (1950–ll) 

Subpart J—[Amended]. 

■ 1. The authority citation for subpart J 

of part 404 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 201(j), 204(f), 205(a), (b), 

(d)–(h), and (j), 221, 223(i), 225, and 702(a)(5) 

of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(j), 

404(f), 405(a), (b), (d)–(h), and (j), 421, 423(i), 

425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 5, Pub. L. 97–455, 96 

Stat. 2500 (42 U.S.C. 405 note); secs. 5, 6(c)– 

(e), and 15, Pub. L. 98–460, 98 Stat. 1802 (42 

U.S.C. 421 note); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108–203, 

118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note). 

■ 2. Add § 404.937 to read as follows: 

§ 404.937 Protecting the safety of the 

public and our employees in our hearing 

process. 

(a) Notwithstanding any other 

provision in this part or part 422 of this 

chapter, we are establishing the 

procedures set out in this section to 

ensure the safety of the public and our 

employees in our hearing process. 

(b)(1) At the request of any hearing 

office employee, the Hearing Office 

Chief Administrative Law Judge will 

determine, after consultation with the 

presiding administrative law judge, 

whether a claimant or other individual 

poses a reasonable threat to the safety of 

our employees or other participants in 

the hearing. The Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge will find that 

a claimant or other individual poses a 

reasonable threat to the safety of our 

employees or other participants in the 

hearing when he or she determines that 

the individual has made a threat and 

there is a reasonable likelihood that the 

claimant or other individual could act 

on the threat. In making a finding under 

this paragraph, the Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge will consider 

all relevant evidence, including any 

information we have in the claimant’s 

record and any information we have 

regarding the claimant’s or other 

individual’s past conduct. 

(2) If the Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge determines 

that the claimant or other individual 

poses a reasonable threat to the safety of 

our employees or other participants in 

the hearing, the Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge will either: 

(i) Require the presence of a security 

guard at the hearing; or 

(ii) Require that the hearing be 

conducted by video teleconference or by 

telephone. 

(c) If we have banned a claimant from 

any of our facilities, we will provide the 

claimant with the opportunity for a 

hearing that will be conducted by 

telephone. 

(d) The actions of the Hearing Office 

Chief Administrative Law Judge taken 

under this section are final and not 

subject to further review. 

PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL 

SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, 

BLIND, AND DISABLED 

Subpart N—[Amended]. 

■ 3. The authority citation for subpart N 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631, and 1633 

of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

902(a)(5), 1383, and 1383b); sec. 202, Pub. L. 

108–203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note). 

■ 4. Add § 416.1437 to read as follows: 

§ 416.1437 Protecting the safety of the 

public and our employees in our hearing 

process. 

(a) Notwithstanding any other 

provision in this part or part 422 of this 

chapter, we are establishing the 

procedures set out in this section to 

ensure the safety of the public and our 

employees in our hearing process. 

(b)(1) At the request of any hearing 

office employee, the Hearing Office 

Chief Administrative Law Judge will 

determine, after consultation with the 

presiding administrative law judge, 

whether a claimant or other individual 

poses a reasonable threat to the safety of 

our employees or other participants in 

the hearing. The Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge will find that 

a claimant or other individual poses a 

reasonable threat to the safety of our 

employees or other participants in the 

hearing when he or she determines that 

the individual has made a threat and 

there is a reasonable likelihood that the 

claimant or other individual could act 

on the threat. In making a finding under 

this paragraph, the Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge will consider 

all relevant evidence, including any 

information we have in the claimant’s 

record and any information we have 

regarding the claimant’s or other 

individual’s past conduct. 

(2) If the Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge determines 

that the claimant or other individual 

poses a reasonable threat to the safety of 

our employees or other participants in 

the hearing, the Hearing Office Chief 

Administrative Law Judge will either: 

(i) Require the presence of a security 

guard at the hearing; or 

(ii) Require that the hearing be 

conducted by video teleconference or by 

telephone. 

(c) If we have banned a claimant from 

any of our facilities, we will provide the 

claimant with the opportunity for a 

hearing that will be conducted by 

telephone. 

(d) The actions of the Hearing Office 

Chief Administrative Law Judge taken 

under this section are final and not 

subject to further review. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5750 Filed 3–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 3 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0929] 

RIN 1625–ZA29 

Ninth Coast Guard District Sector 

Realignment; Northern Lake Michigan 

and Lake Huron 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final Rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule makes 

nonsubstantive, technical changes to 

Title 33 of the CFR to reflect the 

realignment of boundaries shared 

among Sector Lake Michigan, Sector 

Detroit, and Sector Sault Ste. Marie. 

This action is taken to rebalance 

workload and span of control among 

Ninth District sector commands. These 

changes affect internal Coast Guard 

organization and functioning only and 

will have no substantive effect on 

mariners or other members of the 

public. 

DATES: This final rule is effective at 

12:00:01 EDT on April 1, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2009– 

0929 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2009–0929 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They 

are also available for inspection or 

copying at the Docket Management 

Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

e-mail Mr. Doug McCann, Ninth District 

Resources Planning Branch, U.S. Coast 

Guard, telephone 216–902–6008, e-mail 

douglas.a.mccann@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 13509 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this final 

rule without prior notice and 

opportunity to comment pursuant to 

authority under section 4(a) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 

U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the rule involves 

‘‘agency organization’’ or when the 

agency for good cause finds that those 

procedures are ‘‘impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A), the 

Coast Guard finds that with respect to 

this rule the requirement to publish a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

does not apply because these changes 

merely involve agency organization. 

Also, the Coast Guard finds, under 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B), that good cause exists 

for not publishing an NPRM with 

respect to this rule because it is 

unnecessary. Comments are 

unnecessary because they would not 

change the Coast Guard’s internal 

delegation of authority or duties among 

the Ninth District’s sector commands 

nor would they provide expertise 

regarding Coast Guard functions. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register because these changes affect 

internal Coast Guard organization and 

functioning only and will have no 

substantive effect on the public. 

Background and Purpose 

On July 2, 2007, in order to reflect the 

establishment of the new system of 

sector commands, the Coast Guard 

extensively revised 33 CFR part 3. That 

revision included various changes to the 

Coast Guard’s internal organization to 

include the reassignment of Station 

Charlevoix and Station Alpena from 

Group Sault Ste. Marie to Sectors Lake 

Michigan and Detroit, respectively. That 

reassignment was done in order to have 

all units on Lake Michigan assigned to 

one sector and all units on Lake Huron 

assigned to another. The Coast Guard 

has decided, however, to further adjust 

sector boundaries to provide a more 

balanced workload and span of control 

among Ninth District sectors. An effect 

of this boundary adjustment is that 

Stations Charlevoix and Alpena will be 

reassigned to Sector Sault Ste. Marie. 

In addition to balancing workload and 

span of control, this realignment will 

also enhance planning and coordination 

with our maritime partners. 

Specifically, these changes will align 

Ninth District sectors more closely with 

Customs and Border Protection, 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority, 

and the Tri-County 911 Center servicing 

Charlevoix, Cheboygan, and Emmet 

counties. This alignment is expected to 

improve cooperation, consistency, and 

efficiency in maritime security, safety, 

and environmental response. This rule 

is not intended or expected to require 

any new actions on the part of the 

public. 

Discussion of Rule 

Generally, this rule expands Sector 

Sault Ste. Marie’s Area of Responsibility 

(AOR). Its new AOR will encompass 

Grand Traverse Bay, other northern 

portions of Lake Michigan, and 

additional portions of northern Lake 

Huron. To accomplish this realignment, 

this rule amends 33 CFR 3.45–15, 3.45– 

20, and 3.45–45, which define the 

boundaries of Sector Lake Michigan, 

Sector Detroit, and Sector Sault Ste. 

Marie respectively. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. As this rule involves internal 

agency organization and nonsubstantive changes, it will not impose 

any costs on the public. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. This 

rule does not require a general notice of 

proposed rulemaking and therefore, is 

exempt from the requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Although this rule is exempt, we have 

reviewed this rule for potential 

economic impacts on small entities. We 

found that that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it 

involves internal agency organization 

and non-substantive changes. 

Collection of Information 

This rule calls for no new collection 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this rule under that Order and have 

determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or Tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 or more in any one year. 

Though this rule will not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not effect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

will not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

13510 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have Tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

Tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. Therefore, this rule is 

categorically excluded, under figure 2– 

1, paragraph (34)(b), of the Instruction. 

This rule concerns Coast Guard internal 

functions and organization in that it 

redefines certain sector boundaries. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

categorical exclusion determination are 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 3 

Organization and functions 

(Government agencies). 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 3 as follows: 

PART 3—COAST GUARD AREAS, 

DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE 

INSPECTION ZONES, AND CAPTAIN 

OF THE PORT ZONES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 3 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 14 U.S.C. 92; Pub. L. 107–296, 

116 Stat. 2135; Department of Homeland 

Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. 2(23). 

■ 2. Revise § 3.45–15 to read as follows: 

§ 3.45–15 Sector Lake Michigan Marine 

Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port 

Zone. 

Sector Lake Michigan’s office is 

located in Milwaukee, WI. The 

boundaries of Sector Lake Michigan’s 

Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of 

the Port Zone include all navigable 

waters of the United States and 

contiguous land areas within the 

boundaries of an area starting from a 

point at latitude 44°43′00′′ N, longitude 

84°30′00′′ W, proceeding due west to 

longitude 85°40′00′′ W; thence 

northwest to the eastern shore of Lake 

Michigan at latitude 45°01′00′′ N; thence 

northwest to latitude 45°22′30′′ N, 

longitude 86°19′00′′ W; thence northeast 

to latitude 45°41′00′′ N, longitude 

86°06′00′′ W; thence northwest to 

latitude 46°20′00′′ N, longitude 

87°22′00′′ W; thence west to latitude 

46°20′00′′ N, longitude 90°00′00′′ W; 

thence south to latitude 41°00′00′′ N; 

thence east to the Ohio-Indiana border 

at latitude 41°00′00′′ N, longitude 

84°48′12′′ W; thence north along the 

Ohio-Indiana border to the intersection 

of the Ohio-Indiana-Michigan border at 

latitude 41°41′59′′ N, longitude 

84°48′22′′ W; thence east along the 

Ohio-Michigan border to latitude 

41°42′13′′ N, longitude 84°30′00′′ W; 

thence north to the start point. 

■ 3. Revise § 3.45–20 to read as follows: 

§ 3.45–20 Sector Detroit Marine Inspection 

Zone and Captain of the Port Zone. 

Sector Detroit’s office is located in 

Detroit, MI. The boundaries of Sector 

Detroit’s Marine Inspection Zone and 

Captain of the Port Zone include all 

navigable waters of the United States 

and contiguous land areas within the 

boundaries of an area starting from a 

point at latitude 41°00′00′′ N, longitude 

84°48′12′′ W on the Ohio-Indiana 

boundary, proceeding east to longitude 

82°25′00′′ W; thence north to the 

international boundary in Lake Erie at 

latitude 41°40′36′′ N, longitude 

82°25′00′′ W; thence north along the 

international boundary to latitude 

44°43′00′′ N in Lake Huron; thence due 

west to latitude 44°43′00′′ N, longitude 

84°30′00′′ W; thence south to the 

Michigan-Ohio boundary at latitude 

41°42′13′′ N; thence west along the 

Michigan-Ohio boundary to the OhioMichigan-Indiana boundary at latitude 

41°41′46′′ N, longitude 84°48′22′′ W; 

thence south along the Ohio-Indiana 

boundary to the starting point. 

■ 4. Revise § 3.45–45 to read as follows: 

§ 3.45–45 Sector Sault Ste. Marie Marine 

Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port 

Zone; Marine Safety Unit Duluth. 

Sector Sault Ste. Marie’s office is 

located in Sault Ste. Marie, MI. A 

subordinate unit, Marine Safety Unit 

(MSU) Duluth, is located in Duluth, 

MN. 

(a) Sector Sault Ste. Marie’s Marine 

Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port 

Zone comprise all navigable waters of 

the United States and contiguous land 

areas within an area starting from a 

point at latitude 44°43′00′′ N on the 

international boundary within Lake 

Huron; proceeding due west to 

longitude 85°40′00′′ W; thence 

northwest to the eastern shore of Lake 

Michigan at latitude 45°01′00′′ N; thence 

northwest to latitude 45°22′30′′ N, 

longitude 86°19′00′′ W; thence northeast 

to latitude 45°41′00′′ N, longitude 

86°06′00′′ W; thence northwest to 

latitude 46°20′00′′ N, longitude 

87°22′00′′ W; thence west to the 

Minnesota-North Dakota boundary at 

latitude 46°20′00′′ N, longitude 

96°36′30′′ W; thence north along the 

Minnesota-North Dakota boundary to 

the intersection of the Minnesota-North 

Dakota boundary and the international 

boundary at latitude 49°00′02′′ N, 

longitude 97°13′46′′ W; thence east 

along the international boundary to the 

starting point; and in addition, all the 

area described in paragraph (b) of this 

section. 

(b) The boundaries of the MSU Duluth 

Marine Inspection and Captain of the 

Port Zones comprise all navigable 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 13511 

waters of the United States and 

contiguous land areas within an area 

starting at a point latitude 46°20′00′′ N, 

longitude 88°30′00′′ W, proceeding west 

to the Minnesota-North Dakota 

boundary at latitude 46°20′00′′ N, 

longitude 96°36′30′′ W; thence north 

along the Minnesota-North Dakota 

boundary to the intersection of the 

Minnesota-North Dakota boundary and 

the international boundary at latitude 

49°00′02′′ N, longitude 97°13′46′′ W; 

thence east along the international 

boundary to a point at latitude 47°59′23′′ 

N, longitude 87°35′10′′ W; thence south 

to a point near Manitou Island Light at 

latitude 47°25′09′′ N, longitude 

87°35′10′′ W; thence southwest to a 

point near the shore of Lake Superior at 

latitude 46°51′51′′ N, longitude 

87°45′00′′ W; thence southwest to the 

point of origin. 

Dated: March 7, 2011. 

Kathryn A. Sinniger, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law, United States Coast 

Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5731 Filed 3–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0903; FRL–9278–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Revisions to the Open Burning 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Virginia State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The revisions recodify the open 

burning regulations which are currently 

in the Virginia SIP. There are no 

substantive changes to the rule. EPA is 

approving these revisions to Virginia’s 

open burning regulations in accordance 

with the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 13, 

2011 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse written comment by 

April 13, 2011. If EPA receives such 

comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2010–0903 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: frankford.harold@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0903, 

Harold A. Frankford, Air Protection 

Division, Mailcode 3AP00, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 

0903. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. Copies of the State submittals are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Harold A. Frankford, (215) 814–2108, or 

by e-mail at frankford.harold@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. On September 27, 2010, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a 

formal revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP 

revision consists of the recodification of 

its open burning regulations. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

The recodification moves the 

Commonwealth’s SIP-approved open 

burning regulations from 9VAC5, 

Chapter 140, Part II Article 40 to a new 

9VAC5 Chapter 130, Part I. The 

following table summarizes the current 

and new Virginia Administrative Code 

(VAC) citations for these regulations: 

Regulation title 

Current Virginia 

SIP citation in 

9VAC5 chapter 

40, part II, article 

40 

Revised Virginia 

SIP citation in 

9VAC5 chapter 

130, part I 

Applicability .................................................................................................................................................. 5–40–5600 5–130–10 

Definitions .................................................................................................................................................... 5–40–5610 5–130–20 

Open Burning Prohibitions ........................................................................................................................... 5–40–5620 5–130–30 

Permissible Open Burning ........................................................................................................................... 5–40–5630 5–130–40 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES