Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 230 / Wednesday, December 1, 2004 / Proposed Rules 69863

and reconciled to records of keys made, 

issued, and destroyed. Investigations are 

performed for all keys unaccounted for, 

with the investigation being 

documented. 

(u) Table games computerized key 

security systems. (1) Computerized key 

security systems which restrict access to 

the table game drop and count keys 

through the use of passwords, keys or 

other means, other than a key custodian, 

must provide the same degree of control 

as indicated in the aforementioned key 

control standards; refer to paragraphs 

(m), (n), (p) and (r) of this section. Note: 

This standard does not apply to the 

system administrator. The system 

administrator is defined in paragraph 

(u)(2)(ii) of this section. 

(2) For computerized key security 

systems, the following additional table 

game key control procedures apply: 

(i) Management personnel 

independent of the table game 

department assign and control user 

access to keys in the computerized key 

security system (i.e., system 

administrator) to ensure that table game 

drop and count keys are restricted to 

authorized employees. 

(ii) In the event of an emergency or 

the key box is inoperable, access to the 

emergency manual key(s) (a.k.a. 

override key), used to access the box 

containing the table game drop and 

count keys, requires the physical 

involvement of at least three persons 

from separate departments, including 

management. The date, time, and reason 

for access, must be documented with 

the signatures of all participating 

employees signing out/in the emergency 

manual key(s). 

(iii) The custody of the keys issued 

pursuant to paragraph (u)(2)(ii) of this 

section requires the presence of two 

persons from separate departments from 

the time of their issuance until the time 

of their return. 

(iv) Routine physical maintenance 

that requires accessing the emergency 

manual key(s) (override key) and does 

not involve the accessing of the table 

games drop and count keys, only 

requires the presence of two persons 

from separate departments. The date, 

time and reason for access must be 

documented with the signatures of all 

participating employees signing out/in 

the emergency manual key(s). 

(3) For computerized key security 

systems controlling access to table 

games drop and count keys, accounting/

audit personnel, independent of the 

system administrator, will perform the 

following procedures: 

(i) Daily, review the report generated 

by the computerized key security 

system indicating the transactions 

performed by the individual(s) that 

adds, deletes, and changes user’s access 

within the system (i.e., system 

administrator). Determine whether the 

transactions completed by the system 

administrator provide an adequate 

control over the access to the table 

games drop and count keys. Also, 

determine whether any table games 

drop and count key(s) removed or 

returned to the key cabinet by the 

system administrator was properly 

authorized. 

(ii) For at least one day each month, 

review the report generated by the 

computerized key security system 

indicating all transactions performed to 

determine whether any unusual table 

games drop and count key removals or 

key returns occurred. 

(iii) At least quarterly, review a 

sample of users that are assigned access 

to the table games drop and count keys 

to determine that their access to the 

assigned keys is adequate relative to 

their job position. 

(iv) All noted improper transactions 

or unusual occurrences are investigated 

with the results documented. 

(4) Quarterly, an inventory of all 

count room, table game drop box 

release, storage rack and contents keys 

is performed, and reconciled to records 

of keys made, issued, and destroyed. 

Investigations are performed for all keys 

unaccounted for, with the investigations 

being documented. 

(v) Emergency drop procedures.

Emergency drop procedures shall be 

developed by the Tribal gaming 

regulatory authority, or the gaming 

operation as approved by the Tribal 

gaming regulatory authority. 

(w) Equipment standards for gaming 

machine count. (1) A weigh scale 

calibration module shall be secured so 

as to prevent unauthorized access (e.g.,

prenumbered seal, lock and key, etc.). 

(2) A person independent of the cage, 

vault, gaming machine, and count team 

functions shall be required to be present 

whenever the calibration module is 

accessed. Such access shall be 

documented and maintained. 

(3) If a weigh scale interface is used, 

it shall be adequately restricted so as to 

prevent unauthorized access 

(passwords, keys, etc.). 

(4) If the weigh scale has a zero 

adjustment mechanism, it shall be 

physically limited to minor adjustments 

(e.g., weight of a bucket) or physically 

situated such that any unnecessary 

adjustments to it during the weigh 

process would be observed by other 

count team members. 

(5) The weigh scale and weigh scale 

interface (if applicable) shall be tested 

by a person or persons independent of 

the cage, vault, and gaming machine 

departments and count team at least 

quarterly. At least annually, this test 

shall be performed by internal audit in 

accordance with the internal audit 

standards. The result of these tests shall 

be documented and signed by the 

person or persons performing the test. 

(6) Prior to the gaming machine count, 

at least two employees shall verify the 

accuracy of the weigh scale with varying 

weights or with varying amounts of 

previously counted coin for each 

denomination to ensure the scale is 

properly calibrated (varying weights/

coin from drop to drop is acceptable). 

(7) If a mechanical coin counter is 

used (instead of a weigh scale), the 

Tribal gaming regulatory authority, or 

the gaming operation as approved by the 

Tribal gaming regulatory authority, shall 

establish and the gaming operation shall 

comply, with procedures that are 

equivalent to those described in 

paragraphs (u)(4), (u)(5), and (u)(6) of 

this section. 

(8) If a coin meter count machine is 

used, the count team member shall 

record the machine number 

denomination and number of coins in 

ink on a source document, unless the 

meter machine automatically records 

such information. 

(i) A count team member shall test the 

coin meter count machine prior to the 

actual count to ascertain if the metering 

device is functioning properly with a 

predetermined number of coins for each 

denomination. 

(ii) [Reserved]

Signed in Washington, DC, this 19th day of 

November, 2004. 

Philip N. Hogen, 

Chairman. 

Nelson Westrin, 

Vice-Chairman. 

Cloyce Choney, 

Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 04–26041 Filed 11–30–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7565–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52

[R10–OAR–2004–OR–0001; FRL–7839–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Oregon; 

Removal of Perchloroethylene Dry 

Cleaning Systems Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

69864 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 230 / Wednesday, December 1, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

1 69 FR 4652, January 30, 2004.

2 69 FR 12398, March 16, 2004.

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is 

proposing to approve a revision to the 

Oregon State Implementation Plan and 

repeal rules which are no longer 

required by the Clean Air Act. The 

revision consists of the repeal of 

Oregon’s control technology guidelines 

for perchloroethylene (perc) dry 

cleaning systems. Perc is a solvent 

commonly used in dry cleaning, 

maskant operations, and degreasing 

operations. In 1996, EPA excluded perc 

from the Federal definition of volatile 

organic compounds for the purpose of 

preparing state implementation plans to 

attain the national ambient air quality 

standards for ozone under title I of the 

Clean Air Act. Emissions from perc dry 

cleaners continue to be regulated as 

hazardous air pollutants under the 

National Emissions Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants.

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. R10–OAR–

2004–OR–0001, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Colleen Huck, Office of Air, 

Waste and Toxics, AWT–107, EPA, 

Region 10, 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, 

Washington 98101. 

• Hand Delivery: Colleen Huck, 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT–

107, 9th Floor, EPA, Region 10, 1200 

Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Colleen Huck at telephone number: 

(206) 553–1770, e-mail address: 

Huck.Colleen@epa.gov; or Donna 

Deneen at telephone number: (206) 553–

6706, e-mail address: 

Deneen.Donna@epa.gov, fax number: 

(206) 553–0110, or the above EPA, 

Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

direct final action, of the same title, 

which is located in the Rules and 

Regulations section of this Federal 

Register. EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP revision as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because EPA 

views this as a noncontroversial SIP 

revision and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the preamble to 

the direct final rule. If EPA receives no 

adverse comments, EPA will not take 

further action on this proposed rule. 

If EPA receives adverse comments, 

EPA will withdraw the direct final rule 

and it will not take effect. EPA will 

address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

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, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment.

Dated: October 29, 2004. 

Richard Albright, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

[FR Doc. 04–26475 Filed 11–30–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63 

[OAR–2002–0056; FRL–7844–8] 

RIN 2060–AJ65 

Proposed National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants; and, in the Alternative, 

Proposed Standards of Performance 

for New and Existing Stationary 

Sources, Electric Utility Steam 

Generating Units: Notice of Data 

Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of data availability 

(NODA). 

SUMMARY: EPA issued a proposed Clean 

Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) concerning coaland oil-fired electric utility steam 

generating units (power plants) on 

January 30, 2004,1 and a supplemental 

proposal on March 16, 2004.2 The 

proposed CAMR represents the firstever Federal action to regulate mercury 

(Hg) from this source category. The 

proposed rule presents two primary 

alternative approaches to regulating Hg 

and nickel (Ni) from power plants. EPA 

received numerous comments on its 

proposed regulatory approaches, 

including comments on the modeling 

results EPA obtained using the 

Integrated Planning Model (IPM), which 

is a model that predicts how the power 

sector will respond to a particular 

regulatory approach, and comments 

addressing the speciation of Hg. EPA is 

currently evaluating those comments to 

determine how the new data and 

information received in the comments, 

as described below, may affect the 

benefit-cost analysis and regulatory 

options under consideration. Although 

we recognize that the public has access 

to the comments in the rulemaking 

docket, we are issuing the NODA, in 

part, because the Agency received over 

680,000 public comments, including 

almost 5,000 unique comments, and the 

comments present new data and 

information that are relevant to the two 

primary regulatory approaches 

addressed in the proposed CAMR.

We are also issuing the NODA to seek 

input on our benefits methodology, 

which has been preliminarily revised 

since the CAMR was proposed. An 

analysis of benefits and costs is 

consistent with principles of good 

government and the provisions of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866. Based on 

comments received on the proposal and 

in furtherance of our obligations under 

EO 12866, we have preliminarily 

revised our approach to analyzing the 

benefits of reducing Hg emissions from 

power plants, and we are seeking 

comment on that revised approach, 

which is described in Section III below. 

Some of the commenters suggested 

approaches that differ from EPA’s 

proposed revised benefits methodology. 

We identify those comments in Section 

III, as well as other comments that we 

received that provide analyses relevant 

to our refined benefits methodology.

DATES: Comments on the NODA must be 

received on or before January 3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the NODA 

should be submitted to Docket ID No. 

OAR–2002–0056. Comments may be 

submitted by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov.