Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48751 

(U.S./Canada) or (602) 365–3099 

(International Direct). You may review copies 

of the referenced service information at the 

FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803. For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call (781) 238–7125. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

August 1, 2011. 

Peter A. White, 

Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20170 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 573 

[Docket No. FDA–2011–F–0549] 

Lanxess Corp.; Filing of Food Additive 

Petition (Animal Use); Calcium 

Formate 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notice of petition. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is announcing 

that Lanxess Corp. has filed a petition 

proposing that the food additive 

regulations be amended to provide for 

the safe use of calcium formate in 

poultry and swine feed as a nutrient and 

digestive aid. 

DATES: Submit either electronic or 

written comments on the petitioner’s 

environmental assessment by September 

8, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic 

comments to: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submit written 

comments to the Division of Dockets 

Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug 

Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 

1061, Rockville, MD 20852. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Isabel W. Pocurull, Center for Veterinary 

Medicine, Food and Drug 

Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., 

Rockville, MD 20855, 240–453–6853, email: isabel.pocurull@fda.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), 

notice is given that a food additive 

petition (FAP 2261) has been filed by 

Lanxess Corp. (Lanxess), 111 RIDC Park 

West Dr., Pittsburgh, PA 15275–1112. 

The petition proposes to amend the food 

additive regulations in part 573 Food 

Additives Permitted in Feed and 

Drinking Water of Animals (21 CFR part 

573) to provide for the safe use of 

calcium formate in poultry and swine 

feed as a nutrient and digestive aid. 

The potential environmental impact 

of this action is being reviewed. To 

encourage public participation 

consistent with regulations issued under 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(40 CFR 1501.4(b)), the Agency is 

placing the environmental assessment 

submitted with the petition that is the 

subject of this notice on public display 

at the Division of Dockets Management 

(see DATES and ADDRESSES) for public 

review and comment. 

Interested persons may submit to the 

Division of Dockets Management (see 

ADDRESSES) either electronic or written 

comments regarding this document. It is 

only necessary to send one set of 

comments. It is no longer necessary to 

send two copies of mailed comments. 

Identify comments with the docket 

number found in brackets in the 

heading of this document. Received 

comments may be seen in the Division 

of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 

FDA will also place on public display 

any amendments to, or comments on, 

the petitioner’s environmental 

assessment without further 

announcement in the Federal Register. 

If, based on its review, the Agency finds 

that an environmental impact statement 

is not required, and this petition results 

in a regulation, the notice of availability 

of the Agency’s finding of no significant 

impact and the evidence supporting that 

finding will be published with the 

regulation in the Federal Register in 

accordance with 21 CFR 25.51(b). 

Dated: August 3, 2011. 

Bernadette Dunham, 

Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20126 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0489] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zones; Captain of the Port 

Lake Michigan Zone 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Based on a review of safety 

and security zones around critical 

infrastructure in the Chicago area, the 

Captain of the Port Sector Lake 

Michigan has determined that to better 

protect such infrastructure, while also 

mitigating burdens on waterway users, 

it is necessary to amend these security 

zones in our regulations. Specifically, 

the Coast Guard proposes to reduce the 

size of an existing security zone, 

disestablish another security zone, and 

create three new security zones. 

DATES: Comments and related materials 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

September 8, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number USCG–2011–0489 to the Docket 

Management Facility at the U.S. 

Department of Transportation. To avoid 

duplication, please use only one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Online: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Mail: 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– 

0001. 

(3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on 

the Ground Floor of the West Building, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The telephone 

number is 202–366–9329. 

(4) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call MST1 Brenden Otjen Coast 

Guard Marine Safety Unit, Willowbrook, 

IL at (630) 986–2155. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation (DOT) 

to use the Docket Management Facility. 

Please see ‘‘Privacy Act’’ paragraph 

below. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2011–0489), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48752 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. We recommend that you 

include your name and a mailing 

address, an e-mail address, or a phone 

number in the body of your document 

so that we can contact you if we have 

questions regarding your submission. 

You may submit your comments and 

material by electronic means, mail, fax, 

or delivery to the Docket Management 

Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; 

but please submit your comments and 

material by only one means. If you 

submit them by mail or delivery, submit 

them in an unbound format, no larger 

than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for 

copying and electronic filing. If you 

submit them by mail and would like to 

know that they reached the Facility, 

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period. We may 

change this proposed rule in view of 

them. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Enter the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2011–0489) in the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search. ’’ 

You may also visit either the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the DOT West 

Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, D.C. 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays; or the U.S. 

Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit 

Chicago, 555A Plainfield Rd., 

Willowbrook, IL 60527, between 8 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can 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 a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one to the Docket Management 

Facility at the address under ADDRESSES

explaining why one would be 

beneficial. If we determine that one 

would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 

one at a time and place announced by 

a later notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

The Coast Guard recently worked 

with local governmental agencies to 

review the safety and security zones 

around critical infrastructure in the 

Chicago area. Based on this review, the 

Captain of the Port Sector Lake 

Michigan had determined that to better 

protect critical infrastructure while also 

mitigating burdens on waterway users it 

is necessary to reduce the size of an 

existing security zone, disestablish an 

existing security zone, and establish 

three new security zones. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preceding paragraph, the Captain of the 

Port Sector Lake Michigan proposes to 

amend 33 CFR 165.904 and 910. 

Specifically, this proposed rule would 

reduce the size of the safety and security 

zone entitled Lake Michigan at Chicago 

Harbor & Burnham Park Harbor-Safety 

and Security Zone, which is located at 

33 CFR 165.904. The revised zone will 

be significantly reduced in size due to 

the disestablishment of Meigs Airfield 

and the need to secure only Burnham 

Park harbor during high profile visits 

that require security zone enforcement. 

This proposed reduction of the Chicago 

Harbor & Burnham Park Harbor-Safety 

and Security Zone would result in the 

zone encompassing all U.S. navigable 

waters of Lake Michigan within 

Burnham Park Harbor shoreward of a 

line across the entrance of the harbor 

connecting coordinates 41°51′09′′ N, 

87°36′36′′ W and 41°51′11′′ N, 87°36′22′′ 

W. 

In addition to reducing the size of the 

security zone described in § 165.904(a), 

this proposed rule would also 

disestablish a security zone. 

Specifically, this proposed rule would 

disestablish the security zone in 33 CFR 

165.910(a)(1) entitled Security Zones; 

Captain of the Port Lake Michigan; Navy 

Pier Northside. 

Finally, this proposed rule would 

establish three new security zones in 33 

CFR 165.910. The first new security 

zone would be located in the vicinity of 

the Jardine Water Treatment Plant, 

Chicago, Illinois. The Jardine Water 

Filtration Plant security zone would 

encompass all U.S. navigable waters of 

Lake Michigan within an arc of a 100- 

yard radius with its center located on 

the approximate position 41°53′46′′ N, 

87°36′23′′ W. 

The second new security zone would 

be located in the vicinity of the Wilson 

Avenue Crib, Chicago, Illinois. It would 

encompass all U.S. navigable waters of 

Lake Michigan within the arc of a circle 

with a 100-yard radius with its center in 

approximate position 41°58′00′′ N, 

87°35′30′′ W. 

The third new security zone would be 

located in the vicinity of the new Four 

Mile Intake Crib in Chicago, Illinois. It 

would encompass all U.S. navigable 

waters of Lake Michigan within the arc 

of a circle with a 100-yard radius with 

its center in approximate position 

41°52′40′′ N, 87°32′45′′ W. 

In accordance with 33 CFR 165.33, no 

person or vessel would be able to enter 

or remain in one of the security zones 

discussed in this proposed rule without 

permission of the Captain of the Port 

Sector Lake Michigan. The Captain of 

the Port Sector Lake Michigan, at his or 

her discretion, may permit persons and 

vessels to enter the security zones 

addressed in this proposed rule. For 

instance, the Captain of the Port Sector 

Lake Michigan may permit those U.S. 

Coast Guard certificated passenger 

vessels that normally load and unload 

passengers at the north side of Navy Pier 

to operate in the Jardine Water Filtration 

Plant security zone. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed 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 proposed 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. We conclude that this proposed 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

because we anticipate that it would 

have minimal impact on the economy, 

would not interfere with other agencies, 

would not adversely alter the budget of 

any grant or loan recipients, and would 

not raise any novel legal or policy 

issues. The security zones amended and 

established by this proposed rule would 

be relatively small and enforced for 

relatively short time. Also, each security 

zone is designed to minimize its impact 

on navigable waters. Furthermore, each 

security zone has been designed to 

allow vessels to transit unrestricted to 

portions of the waterways not affected 

by the security zones. Thus, restrictions 

on vessel movements within that 

particular area are expected to be 

minimal. Under certain conditions, 

moreover, vessels may still transit 

through each security zone when 

permitted by the Captain of the Port, 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48753 

Sector Lake Michigan. On the whole, 

the Coast Guard expects insignificant 

adverse impact to mariners from the 

activation of these security zones. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

whether this proposed 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. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This proposed rule would affect 

the following entities, some of which 

might be small entities: the owners and 

operators of vessels intending to transit 

or anchor in the security zones 

addressed in this proposed rule. These 

security zones would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons: the security zones 

in this proposed rule would be in small 

areas surrounding the intake cribs or 

areas near shore to Chicago’s water 

filtration plants; the security zones have 

been designed to allow traffic to pass 

safely around these zones whenever 

possible. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If this proposed rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance, please contact 

the Waterways Management 

Department, Coast Guard Marine Safety 

Unit Chicago, Willowbrook, IL at (630) 

986–2155. The Coast Guard will not 

retaliate against small entities that 

question or object to this rule or any 

policy or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed 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 proposed 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 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this proposed rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not affect 

the 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 proposed 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 proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This proposed rule is not an 

economically significant rule and does 

not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD and Department of 

Homeland Security Management 

Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is not likely to have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This proposed rule 

involves the establishing, 

disestablishing, and changing of 

security zones and therefore, is 

categorically excluded under paragraph 

34(g) of the Instruction. A preliminary 

environmental analysis check list 

supporting this preliminary 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48754 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

determination is available in the docket 

where indicated under ADDRESSES. We 

seek any comments or information that 

may lead to the discovery of a 

significant environmental impact from 

this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and record keeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 

701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 

CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Amend § 165.904 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 165.904 Lake Michigan at Chicago 

Harbor & Burnham Park Harbor—Safety and 

Security Zone. 

(a) Location. All waters of Lake 

Michigan within Burnham Park Harbor 

shoreward of a line across the entrance 

of the harbor connecting coordinates 

41°51′09′′ N, 87°36′36′′ W and 41°51′11′′ 

N, 87°36′22′′ W. 

* * * * * 

3. In § 165.910, revise paragraph 

(a)(1),(a)(1)(i) and add paragraphs (a)(10) 

and (a)(11) to read as follows: 

§ 165.910 Security Zones; Captain of the 

Port Lake Michigan. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Jardine Water Filtration Plant. 

(i) Location. All waters of Lake 

Michigan within the arc of a 100-yard 

radius with its center located on the 

north wall of Jardine Water Filtration 

Plant, approximate position 41°53′46′′ 

N, 87°36′23′′ W; (NAD 83) 

* * * * * 

(10) Wilson Avenue Intake Crib. All 

waters of Lake Michigan within the arc 

of a circle with a 100-yard radius of the 

Wilson Avenue Crib with its center in 

approximate position 41°58′00′′ N, 

87°35′30′′ W. (NAD 83) 

(11) Four Mile Intake Crib. All waters 

of Lake Michigan within the arc of a 

circle with a 100-yard radius of the Four 

Mile Crib with its center in approximate 

position 41°52′40′′ N, 87°32′45′′ W. 

(NAD 83) 

* * * * * 

Dated: July 21 2011. 

M.W. Sibley, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Sector Lake Michigan. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20091 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0032; FRL–9449–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology, Oxides of Nitrogen, 

Cleveland Ozone Non-Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA), 

revisions to the Ohio State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on 

January 3, 2008 and June 1, 2011. These 

revisions incorporate provisions related 

to the implementation of nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for major 

sources in the former Cleveland-AkronLorain moderate ozone nonattainment 

area. These rules are not required 

because, as established in section 182(f) 

of the CAA, NOX emission control 

requirements do not apply if the 

resulting emission reductions are not 

needed to demonstrate attainment of the 

8-hour ozone standard, which is the 

case for the former Cleveland-AkronLorain moderate ozone nonattainment 

area. However, these rules are being 

submitted and approved for their SIP 

strengthening effect as the control 

requirements in the submitted rules 

result in a RACT level of control. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 8, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2008–0032, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 692–2511. 

• Mail: John Mooney, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John Mooney, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2008– 

0032. 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. For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to section I of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. 

Publicly available docket materials 

are available either electronically in 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS