### 60405 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules

whether to accept a petition based on the stage of the rulemaking process at which the request is made and the merits of the petition. A substantively meritorious petition may be denied if the petition comes so late in the process that adequate notice and comment cannot be accommodated within the statutory time frame of the rulemaking process. The mere fact that an interested party was unaware of this proceeding or of any particular exemptions proposed in this proceeding is not a valid justification for a late submission. If a petition is accepted, the Register will publish the proposal in the Federal Register and announce deadlines for comments. If a petition is denied, the Register will set forth the reasons for the denial in a letter to the petitioner. All petitions and responses will become part of the public record in this rulemaking process.

Dated: September 23, 2011. Maria A. Pallante, Register of Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2011–25106 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 1410–30–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0561; FRL–9469–2]**

**Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Santa Barbara**  **Air Pollution Control District, Sacramento Municipal Air Quality**  **Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Santa Barbara Air Pollution Control District (SBAPCD), Sacramento Municipal Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from solvent cleaning machines and solvent cleaning operations and oil and gas production wells. We are proposing to approve local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

**DATES :**  Any comments on this proposal must arrive by October 31, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2011–0561, by one of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov

, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http:// www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at http:// www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the **FOR**
**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3576, borgia.adrianne@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  This proposal addresses the following local rules: SBAPCD Rule 321, ‘‘Solvent Cleaning Machines and Solvent Cleaning’’, SMAQMD Rule 466, ‘‘Solvent Cleaning’’, SCAMQD Rule 1171, ‘‘Solvent Cleaning Operations’’ and SCAMQD Rule 1148.1, ‘‘Oil and Gas Production Wells.’’ In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register , we are approving these local rules in a direct final action without prior proposal because we believe these SIP revisions are not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final action.

Dated: September 7, 2011. Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011–24689 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY** 

**Coast Guard**

**46 CFR Part 160**

**[Docket No. USCG–2011–0076]**

**RIN 1625–AB60**

**Inflatable Personal Flotation Devices**

**AGENCY :**  Coast Guard, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking.

**SUMMARY :**  On March 30, 2011, the Coast Guard published a direct final rule that notified the public of the Coast Guard’s intent to harmonize structural and performance standards for inflatable recreational personal flotation devices (PFDs) with current voluntary industry consensus standards, and to slightly modify regulatory text in anticipation of a future rulemaking addressing the population for which inflatable recreational PFDs are approved (76 FR 17561). As discussed below, we have received an adverse comment on the direct final rule, and have withdrawn the direct final rule in a notice of withdrawal published separately in this issue of the Federal Register. The Coast Guard seeks comment on the issues raised by the commenters and proposes to make the same changes to the current regulatory text, as modified below.