Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules 2801 

1 83 FR 17349. 

2See our detailed discussion below that involves 

an evaluation of the supplemental information 

submitted by the LDEQ to EPA, partly in response 

to a public comment received on the original 

Federal Register action at 83 FR 17349, April 19, 

2018 proposal. 

regulations already in place for oil spill 

response, industry initiatives such as 

the American Chemistry Council’s 

Responsible Care and the American 

Waterways Operators’ Responsible 

Carrier programs, and the sustainability 

policies of individual companies, CTAC 

was unable to identify large gaps in 

hazardous substance spill response 

planning for vessels that would be 

improved by the 1999 proposed 

rulemaking. 

III. Withdrawal 

The Coast Guard is withdrawing its 

proposed rulemaking in order to better 

analyze the current spill response 

capabilities of the chemical industry 

and gaps in the current regulatory 

regime before conducting any further 

rulemaking on hazardous substance 

response plans for tank vessels. While 

the Coast Guard remains committed to 

fulfilling its OPA 90 mandate, we 

believe the proposed rules are no longer 

appropriate in their 1999 form. 

The Coast Guard has determined that 

withdrawing the proposed rule is 

appropriate based on findings that the 

1999 proposed rules are no longer 

applicable to the current state of spill 

response in the chemical industry. 

Accordingly, the Coast Guard is 

withdrawing the ‘‘Tank Vessel Response 

Plans for Hazardous Substances’’ 

proposed rulemaking published March 

22, 1999 (64 FR 13734). 

IV. Executive Order 13771 

The withdrawal of the NPRM 

qualifies as a deregulatory action under 

Executive Order 13771 (Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs), which directs agencies to reduce 

regulation and control regulatory costs 

and provides that ‘‘for every one new 

regulation issued, at least two prior 

regulations be identified for elimination, 

and that the cost of planned regulations 

be prudently managed and controlled 

through a budgeting process.’’ See the 

OMB Memorandum titled ‘‘Guidance 

Implementing Executive Order 13771, 

Titled ‘Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs’ ’’ (April 5, 

2017). 

Dated: February 4, 2019. 

Anthony J. Vogt, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant 

Commandant for Response Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2019–01593 Filed 2–7–19; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0558; FRL–9988–27– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plan, Louisiana; 

Attainment Demonstration for the St. 

Bernard Parish 2010 SO2 Primary 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

Nonattainment Area; Supplemental 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: In this supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is supplementing our proposed approval 

document, concerning the 2010 Sulfur 

Dioxide (SO2) Primary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

Nonattainment Area State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for 

St. Bernard Parish. The EPA is also 

reopening the public comment period. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 11, 2019. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2017–0558, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact Mr. Robert Imhoff, (214) 665– 

7262, imhoff.robert@epa.gov. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available at 

either location (e.g., CBI). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert Imhoff, (214) 665–7262; 

imhoff.robert@epa.gov. To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment with Mr. Robert Imhoff. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On April 19, 2018, we published a 

proposed rulemaking action to approve 

the 2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS 

Nonattainment Area SIP revision for St. 

Bernard Parish, submitted by the State 

of Louisiana on November 9, 2017 and 

first supplemented on February 8, 

2018.1 The April 19, 2018 action 

proposed approval of the following CAA 

SIP elements: The attainment 

demonstration for the SO2 NAAQS and 

enforceable emissions limits, which 

included an Agreed Order on Consent 

(AOC) dated February 2, 2018 for the 

Rain CII Carbon, LLC. (Rain) facility; the 

reasonable further progress (RFP) plan; 

the reasonably available control 

measures (RACM) and reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) 

demonstration; the emission 

inventories; and the contingency 

measures. We also proposed to find that 

the State had demonstrated that its 

current Nonattainment New Source 

Review (NNSR) program covered the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS; therefore, no revision 

to the SIP was required for the NNSR 

element. 

Comments on the proposal were 

required to be received by May 21, 2018. 

We received timely comments on the 

proposal, and as stated further below, 

we will address all comments received 

on the original proposal and on this 

supplemental action in our final action.2

II. Additional Information Submitted 

by Louisiana 

After the close of the public comment 

period to the April 19, 2018 proposal, 

the Louisiana Department of 

Environmental Quality (LDEQ) 

submitted additional information to 


Pmangrum on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
2802 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules 

3Letter from Secretary Brown to Anne Idsal, 

August 24, 2018, St. Bernard 2008 Sulfur Dioxide 

State Implementation Plan Supplemental 

Information and Executed Administrative Order on 

Consent (AOC) included in the docket for this 

action. 

4See the April 24, 2018 letter (in the docket to 

this action) from Senator Cassidy to EPA that 

referred to Rain’s need to modify the February 2, 

2018 AOC. 

5See April 27, 2018 Letter from Secretary Chuck 

Carr Brown to Rain in the docket for this action. 

6See Email from Vivian Aucoin to Michael 

Feldman September 28, 2018 in the docket to this 

action. 

7See Email Erik Snyder to Vivian Aucoin 

September 11, 2018 with attachment in the docket 

to this action ‘‘Chalmette_LDEQ_7_2018_Sources 

emissions verifications—R6.xlsx’’. 

8See Email from Vennetta Hayes to Robert Imhoff 

October 9, 2018 in the docket to this action. 

EPA on August 24, 2018.3 The 

additional information was submitted to 

us partly in response to a public 

comment received on the April 19, 2018 

proposal by United States Senator from 

Louisiana, Bill Cassidy.4 In particular, 

Senator Cassidy submitted a comment 

letter that expressed concern that Rain 

would need to modify the February 

2018 AOC entered between Rain and 

LDEQ as Rain did not believe that it 

could meet the limits set forth in the 

AOC without an additional extension to 

the compliance dates. In response to the 

comment, and in order to determine 

feasible emission limits for operations 

during transitions from exhaust flow 

through the hot stack to flow through 

the heat recovery boiler (referred to as 

the cold stack), LDEQ granted an 

extension of the deadline of the 

February 2018 AOC on April 27, 2018.5

LDEQ then issued a revised AOC on 

August 2, 2018. A model analysis was 

submitted to EPA on August 24, 2018 6

to specifically demonstrate attainment 

of the NAAQS with the revised limits in 

the August 2018 AOC. EPA reviewed 

the new modeling analysis 7 and found 

some errors and omissions. In response, 

LDEQ submitted an updated modeling 

analysis on October 9, 2018.8 The AOC 

(signed by LDEQ and Rain August 2, 

2018 and submitted to EPA on August 

24, 2018), and the October 9, 2018 

modeling files (also submitted by LDEQ) 

serve as a supplement to the November 

9, 2017 and February 8, 2018 SIP 

submittals and are intended to address 

the public comment by incorporating 

certain additional AOC revisions (dated 

8/2/2018) and supporting modeling into 

the 2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS 

Nonattainment Area SIP revision for St. 

Bernard Parish. 

III. Public Comment 

The EPA is reopening the public 

comment period. Comments are due 

March 11, 2019. The reopening of the 

comment period is strictly limited to 

additional supplemental information 

submitted by Louisiana on August 24, 

2018 and October 9, 2018, and our 

additional analysis contained in this 

supplemental action and Supplemental 

Technical Support Document (TSD) 

now available in the docket. The 

supplemental information submitted to 

us seeks to address, in part, a public 

comment received on our original April 

19, 2018 proposal action. The EPA will 

address all comments received on the 

original April 19, 2018 proposal and on 

this SNPRM in our final action. 

IV. EPA’s Evaluation and Analysis 

We have reviewed the supplemental 

information submitted by LDEQ on 

August 24, 2018, and October 9, 2018 to 

further assist in our evaluation of the 

state’s previous November 9, 2017 (as 

supplemented on February 8, 2018) SIP 

submittal and the public comment 

received by Senator Cassidy. As 

explained above, the revised AOC made 

changes in response to comments 

received regarding Rain’s ability to meet 

transitional emissions limits. We have 

included our detailed evaluation and 

additional analysis of the revisions 

contained in the August 2, 2018 AOC 

and supporting modeling in a 

supplement to the TSD which may be 

found in the docket and titled as 

‘‘Supplement to Technical Support 

Document for Approval and 

Promulgation of Implementation Plans; 

Louisiana; Attainment Demonstration 

for the St. Bernard Parish 2010 SO2

Primary National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard Nonattainment Area.’’ The 

TSD examines LDEQ’s supplemental 

modeling reflecting the changes in 

Rain’s AOC and the updates to the 

contributing sources inventory. See the 

TSD supplement for a complete 

discussion of our evaluation and 

analysis. 

A. Emissions Data and Limits 

There were two main changes in the 

emissions data and limits used in the 

October 9, 2018 supplemental modeling 

from the original SIP modeling in the 

proposal. The first is due to the revision 

of the AOC for Rain reflecting 

conditions consistent with the design 

throughput for the facility and the 

second is to reflect recent revisions to 

permits for the contributing sources. 

The August 2, 2018 AOC incorporated 

updated information from the facility 

regarding the emission rates, 

temperatures, and flowrates to be 

expected from the facility for the 

various operating scenarios. Since these 

parameters differed from those in the 

previous AOC, additional modeling to 

demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS 

was conducted. The August 2, 2018 

AOC has a compliance date of August 

2, 2018. 

TABLE 1—CONTROL CHART OF THE SO2 EMISSION LIMITS IN POUNDS PER HOUR FOR THE RAIN COLD AND HOT STACKS

Stage Cold stack conditions for stage as measured by CEMS 

Cold stack 

SO2 limits 

pounds per 

hour 

(lb/hr) 

Hot stack SO2 limits (lb/hr) and 

associated hot stack parameters 

Cold Stack Standalone Low.During normal, steady state operations, and damper to EQT 

0004 is closed, Stack flow rate ≥46,000 ACFM and 

<90,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥150 °F.

200 0 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate = 0. 

Cold Stack Standalone Medium Low.During normal, steady state operations, and damper to EQT 

0004 is closed, If Stack flow rate ≥90,000 ACFM and 

<120,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥210 °F.

380 0 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate = 0. 

Cold Stack Standalone Medium 

High.

During normal, steady state operations, and damper to EQT 

0004 is closed, Stack flow rate ≥120,000 ACFM and 

<140,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥210 °F.

420 0 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate = 0. 

Cold Stack Standalone High.During normal, steady state operations, and damper to EQT 

0004 is closed, Stack flow rate ≥140,000 ACFM, Stack 

temperature ≥210 °F.

510 0 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate = 0. 


Pmangrum on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules 2803 

9September 11, 2018 Email From: Snyder, Erik to 

Vivian. Aucoin with attachment ‘‘Chalmette_LDEQ_

7_2018_Sources emissions verifications—R6.xlsx’’ 

in the docket for this action. 

TABLE 1—CONTROL CHART OF THE SO2 EMISSION LIMITS IN POUNDS PER HOUR FOR THE RAIN COLD AND HOT

STACKS—Continued 

Stage Cold stack conditions for stage as measured by CEMS 

Cold stack 

SO2 limits 

pounds per 

hour 

(lb/hr) 

Hot stack SO2 limits (lb/hr) and 

associated hot stack parameters 

1 ............................... Stack flow rate is >0 ACFM and <45,000 ACFM or Temperature <60 °F.4.5 1,600 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate 

≥400,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥1,600 

°F. 

2 ............................... Stack gas flow rate ≥45,000 ACFM and <60,000 ACFM, 

Temperature ≥110 °F.

49.5 1,400 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate 

≥375,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥1,600 

°F. 

3 ............................... Stack gas flow rate ≥60,000 ACFM and <85,000 ACFM, 

Temperature ≥150 °F.

90 1,200 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate 

≥375,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥1,600 

°F. 

4 ............................... Transition Stage 4: When the flue gas flow rate ≥85,000 

ACFM and <110,000 ACFM: Temperature ≥160 °F.

108 ≤1,000 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate 

≥310,000 ACFM, Temperature ≥1,600 

°F. 

5 ............................... Transition Stage 5: When the flue gas flow rate ≥110,000 

ACFM and <140,000 ACFM: Temperature ≥210 °F.

171 900 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate ≥310,000 

ACFM, Temperature ≥1,600 °F. 

6 ............................... Transition Stage 6: When the flue gas flow rate ≥140,000 

ACFM: Temperature ≥210 °F.

189 800 lb/hr, Hot Stack flow rate ≥220,000 

ACFM, Temperature ≥1,400 °F. 

Hot Stack Standalone.Non-transition operations: When the damper to EQT 0003 is 

closed.

0 2,020 lb/hr. 

The emission rates used in the 

previous modeling for contributing 

sources were accurate and complete at 

the time they were compiled in 2017. 

Because of subsequent permit 

modifications in 2018 for the Valero and 

Chalmette refineries, the do not 

accurately reflect current allowable 

emission rates. EPA and LDEQ 

consulted on updates to the original 

allowable rates for the contributing 

sources.9 LDEQ used the updated 

current allowable emission rates in their 

modeling. The revised contributing 

source inventory contained sources, not 

including Rain, totaling 4,435 tons per 

year compared to the previous inventory 

which contained 6,382 tons per year. 

B. Summary of Results 

LDEQ’s October 2018 modeling 

analysis, including the revised August 

2, 2018 AOC emission limits for the 

Rain facility, resulted in concentrations 

below the level of the 1-hour primary 

SO2 NAAQS. The EPA has reviewed 

Louisiana’s supplemental modeling and 

agrees that Louisiana’s supplemental 

materials, along with the new AOC 

limits (August 2, 2018), result in 

demonstrating attainment of the 1-hour 

SO2 primary NAAQS before the 

attainment deadline of October 4, 2018. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF EPA MODEL RESULTS WITH NUMBER OF OPERATING SCENARIOS MODELED, 

IF GREATER THAN ONE

Operational status Design value 

μg/m3

Cold Stack Normal Operations (Low) .................................................................................................................................................. 189.8 

Cold Stack Normal Operations (Medium Low) .................................................................................................................................... 189.8 

Cold Stack Normal Operations (Medium High) ................................................................................................................................... 183.9 

Cold Stack Normal Operations (High) ................................................................................................................................................. 190.8 

Hot Stack Normal Operations .............................................................................................................................................................. 176.6 

Transition (Six Scenarios) ................................................................................................................................................................... 185.6 

Rain Property ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 160.5 

Valero Property .................................................................................................................................................................................... 147.7 

Chalmette Refinery Property ............................................................................................................................................................... 130.3 

The result of our evaluation and 

analysis of the supplemental 

information continues to support the 

proposed approval of the SIP revisions 

identified in the Federal Register at 83 

FR 17349, April 19, 2018, proposal. 

V. Supplemental Proposal Action 

On April 19, 2018, EPA originally 

proposed to approve the 2010 SO2

Nonattainment Area SIP revision for St. 

Bernard Parish, as submitted by the 

State of Louisiana on November 9, 2017 

and supplemented on February 8, 2018. 

In this supplemental proposal, EPA is 

proposing to approve LDEQ’s August 

24, 2018 and October 9, 2018 

supplements to the November 9, 2017 

SIP and February 8, 2018 submittals that 

were provided partly in response to a 

comment received on our April 19, 2018 

proposal (83 FR 17349). Specifically, we 

are proposing to approve the August 2, 

2018 AOC as a source-specific SIP 

revision that serves to replace the 

original February 2018 AOC. We 

propose to find that the supplemental 

October 9, 2018 modeling provides 

continued support for a proposed 

approval of the attainment 

demonstration that was originally 

submitted in November 2017. EPA 

solicits comments on this SNPRM, with 


Pmangrum on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
2804 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules 

respect to only the specific information 

raised in this supplemental proposal— 

that being (a) the modifications from the 

original modeling required for the 

supplemental October 9, 2018 modeling, 

i.e., the revised stack parameters and 

emissions for Rain and the contributing 

source inventory and (b) the revised 

August 2018 AOC. EPA is not reopening 

the comment period on any other aspect 

of the April 19, 2018 proposal, as there 

was an opportunity to comment 

provided at the time of that proposal on 

all other elements of the submittals and 

those elements remain unchanged from 

the original proposal. The purpose of 

this SNPRM is limited to an evaluation 

of LDEQ’s August 24, 2018 submission 

of the AOC and supporting October 

2018 modeling, as well as the 

supplement to the TSD, all of which are 

contained in the docket for this 

rulemaking. We are reopening the 

comment period until March 11, 2019. 

The scope of this supplemental 

document and the reopening of the 

comment period is strictly limited to 

only the supplemental information. The 

EPA will not respond to comments 

received during the reopened comment 

period outside the above-defined scope. 

This action will allow interested 

persons additional time to review the 

supplemental information to prepare 

and submit relevant comments. The 

EPA will address all comments received 

on the original proposal and on this 

supplemental action in our final action. 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

In this action, we are proposing to 

include in a final rule regulatory text 

that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with the 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

revisions to the Louisiana sourcespecific requirements as described in 

the Proposed Action section above. We 

have made, and will continue to make, 

these documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at the EPA Region 6 office (please 

contact Mr. Robert Imhoff for more 

information). 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Act, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Act. Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Act; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the proposed 

rulemaking does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

Reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: December 20, 2018. 

Anne Idsal, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2018–28171 Filed 2–7–19; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 563 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0177] 

RIN 2127–AK86 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards; Event Data Recorders 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: NHTSA withdraws its 

December 13, 2012 notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) that proposed a 

new Federal motor vehicle safety 

standard (FMVSS) mandating 

installation of an Event Data Recorder 

(EDR) that meets NHTSA’s current EDR 

standard in most light vehicles. At the 

time NHTSA published the NPRM, the 

agency noted that a significant number 

of light vehicles were being sold 

without EDRs, and said it believed a 

mandate was needed. Today, EDRs are 

installed on nearly all new light 

vehicles. In light of these changed 

circumstances, NHTSA believes that a 

mandate for today’s EDRs is no longer 

necessary and withdrawal of the NPRM 

is therefore warranted. 

DATES: The NPRM ‘‘Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standards; Event Data 

Recorders,’’ RIN 2127–AK86, published 

December 13, 2012 (77 FR 74144), is 

withdrawn as of February 8, 2019. 

ADDRESSES: Electronic Access: You can 

view and download related documents 

and public comments by going to the 

website https://www.regulations.gov. 

Enter the docket number NHTSA–2012– 

0177 in the search field. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical issues, contact Ms. Carla Rush, 

Office of Crashworthiness Standards, 

Telephone: 202–366–4583, Facsimile: 

202–493–2739. For legal issues, contact 

Mr. Daniel Koblenz, Office of Chief 

Counsel, Telephone: 202–366–2992, 

Facsimile: 202–366–3820. The mailing 

address for these officials is: National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 


Pmangrum on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS