31086 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Swap Dealer and Intermediary 

Oversight. The Joint Audit Committee 

must obtain a written report from the 

examinations expert in accordance with 

paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(G)(3) of this section. 

(3) At the conclusion of the 

examinations expert’s engagement 

pursuant to paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(G)(1) or 

(2) of this section, the Joint Audit 

Committee must obtain from the 

examinations expert a written report on 

findings and recommendations issued 

under the consulting services standards 

of the American Institute of Certified 

Public Accountants. The Joint Audit 

Committee must provide the Director of 

the Division of Swap Dealer and 

Intermediary Oversight with a copy of 

the examinations expert’s written 

report, and the Joint Audit Committee’s 

written responses to any of the 

examinations expert’s findings and 

recommendations, within thirty days of 

the receipt thereof. Upon resolution of 

any questions or comments raised by 

the Division of Swap Dealer and 

Intermediary Oversight, and upon 

written notice from the Division of 

Swap Dealer and Intermediary 

Oversight that it has no further 

comments or questions on the 

examinations standards as amended (by 

reason of the examinations expert’s 

proposals, consideration of the Division 

of Swap Dealer and Intermediary 

Oversight’s questions or comments, or 

otherwise), the Joint Audit Committee 

shall commence applying such 

examinations standards for examining 

its registered futures commission 

merchant members for all examinations 

conducted with an ‘‘as of’’ date later 

than the date of the Division of Swap 

Dealer and Intermediary’s written 

notification. 

(H) The Joint Audit Program must 

require the Joint Audit Committee 

members to report to their respective 

risk and/or audit committee of their 

respective board of directors, or a 

functional equivalent committee, with 

timely reports of the activities and 

findings of the Joint Audit Program to 

assist the risk and/or audit committee of 

the board of directors, or a functional 

equivalent committee, to fulfill its 

responsibility of overseeing the 

examination function. 

(I) The examinations expert’s written 

report, the Joint Audit Committee’s 

response, if any, as well as any 

information concerning the supervisory 

program is confidential. 

(iii) Meetings of the Joint Audit 

Committee. (A) The Joint Audit 

Committee members must meet at least 

once each year. During such meetings, 

the Joint Audit Committee members 

shall consider revisions to the Joint 

Audit Program as a result of regulatory 

changes, revisions to the examination 

standards resulting from new or 

amended auditing standards issued by 

the Public Company Accounting 

Oversight Board, or the results of an 

examinations expert’s review. 

(B) In addition to the items 

considered in paragraph (d)(2)(iii)(A) of 

this section, the Joint Audit Committee 

members must consider the following 

items during the meetings: 

(1) Coordinating and sharing 

information between the Joint Audit 

Committee members, including issues 

and industry concerns in connection 

with examinations of futures 

commission merchants; 

(2) Identifying industry regulatory 

reporting issues and financial and 

operational internal control issues and 

modifying the Joint Audit Program 

accordingly; 

(3) Issuing risk alerts for futures 

commission merchants and/or 

designated self-regulatory organization 

examiners on an as-needed basis; 

(4) Responding to industry issues; and 

(5) Providing industry feedback to 

Commission proposals. 

(C) Minutes must be taken of all 

meetings and distributed to all members 

on a timely basis. 

(D) The Director of the Division of 

Swap Dealer and Intermediary 

Oversight must receive timely prior 

notice of each meeting, have the right to 

attend and participate in each meeting 

and receive written copies of the 

minutes required pursuant to paragraph 

(d)(2)(iii)(C) of this section, respectively. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 28, 

2018, by the Commission. 

Christopher Kirkpatrick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

Note: The following appendix will not 

appear in the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Appendix to Financial Surveillance 

Examination Program Requirements for 

Self-Regulatory Organizations— 

Commission Voting Summary 

On this matter, Chairman Giancarlo and 

Commissioners Quintenz and Behnam voted 

in the affirmative. No Commissioner voted in 

the negative. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14272 Filed 7–2–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

29 CFR Part 1910 

[Docket No. OSHA–2018–0003] 

RIN 1218–AB76 

Revising the Beryllium Standard for 

General Industry 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Labor. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: With this document, OSHA is 

withdrawing the proposed rule that 

accompanied its direct final rule (DFR) 

amending the beryllium standard for 

general industry to address the 

application of the standard to materials 

containing trace amounts of beryllium. 

DATES: As of July 3, 2018, the proposed 

rule published May 7, 2018 (83 FR 

19989) is withdrawn. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Press inquiries: Mr. Frank Meilinger, 

OSHA Office of Communications, Room 

N–3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–1999; 

email: meilinger.francis2@dol.gov. 

General information and technical 

inquiries: William Perry or Maureen 

Ruskin, Directorate of Standards and 

Guidance, Room N–3718, OSHA, U.S. 

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210; 

telephone: (202) 693–1950; fax: (202) 

693–1678. 

Copies of this Federal Register 

document and news releases: Electronic 

copies of these documents are available 

at OSHA’s web page at http://

www.osha.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 7, 

2018, OSHA published a DFR amending 

the application of the beryllium 

standard to materials containing trace 

amounts of beryllium (83 FR 19936). 

OSHA also published a companion 

proposed rule proposing the same 

changes to the beryllium standard (83 

FR 19989). In the DFR, OSHA stated 

that it would withdraw the companion 

proposed rule and confirm the effective 

date of the DFR if no significant adverse 

comments were submitted on the DFR 

by June 6, 2018. OSHA received seven 

comments in the record from Materion 

Brush, Inc., Mead Metals Inc., National 

Association of Manufacturers, Airborn, 

Inc., Edison Electric Institute, and two 

private citizens (Document ID OSHA– 

2018–0003–0004 thru OSHA–2018– 

0003–0010). The seven submissions 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 31087 

1 IQ (intelligence quotient) is a score created by 

dividing a person’s mental age score, obtained by 

administering an intelligence test, by the person’s 

chronological age, both expressed in terms of years 

and months. ‘‘Glossary of Important Assessment 

and Measurement Terms,’’ Philadelphia, PA: 

National Council on Measurement in Education. 

2016. 

2See 43 FR 46246 (October 5, 1978). 

3See 73 FR 66964 (November 12, 2008) (‘‘lead 

NAAQS rule’’). 

contained comments that were either 

supportive of the DFR or were 

considered not to be significant adverse 

comments (Document IDs OSHA–2018– 

0003–0004 thru OSHA–2018–0003– 

0010). Three of these submissions also 

contained comments that were outside 

the scope of the DFR and OSHA is not 

considering portions of those 

submissions that are outside the scope 

(OSHA–2018–0003–0004 thru OSHA– 

2018–0003–0006). Accordingly, OSHA 

is not proceeding with the proposed 

rule and is withdrawing it from the 

rulemaking process. 

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1910 

Beryllium, General industry, Health, 

Occupational safety and health. 

Authority and Signature 

Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary of Labor for Occupational 

Safety and Health, directed the 

preparation of this document under the 

following authorities: Sections 4, 6, and 

8 of the Occupational Safety and Health 

Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657), 

Secretary of Labor’s Order 5–2007 (72 

FR 31159), and 29 CFR part 1911. 

Signed at Washington, DC, on June 27, 

2018. 

Loren Sweatt, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14275 Filed 7–2–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0222; FRL–9980– 

21—Region 9] 

Approval of Arizona Air Plan; Hayden 

Lead Nonattainment Area Plan for the 

2008 Lead Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

state implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Arizona to 

meet Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) 

requirements applicable to the Hayden 

lead (Pb) nonattainment area (‘‘Hayden 

Lead NAA’’). The EPA is proposing to 

approve the base year emissions 

inventory, the attainment 

demonstration, the control strategy, 

including reasonably available control 

technology and reasonably available 

control measures demonstrations, the 

reasonable further progress 

demonstration, the contingency 

measure, and the new source review 

(NSR) provisions of the submittal as 

meeting the requirements of the CAA 

and the EPA’s implementing regulations 

for the 2008 lead national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by August 2, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2018–0222, at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Vagenas.Ginger@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, 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 the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the EPA’s full public comment 

policy, information about CBI or 

multimedia submissions, and general 

guidance on making effective 

comments, please visit http://

www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, 415– 

972–3964, vagenas.ginger@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ mean the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. The Lead NAAQS 

B. Designation of the Hayden Lead NAA 

C. CAA Requirements for Lead 

Nonattainment Areas 

D. Sources of Lead in the Hayden Lead 

NAA 

II. Arizona’s SIP Submittal To Address the 

Hayden Lead NAA 

A. Arizona’s SIP Submittal 

B. CAA Procedural and Administrative 

Requirements for SIP Submittals 

III. CAA and Regulatory Requirements for 

Lead Attainment SIPs 

A. CAA and EPA Guidance 

B. Infrastructure SIPs for Lead 

IV. Review of the 2017 Hayden Lead Plan 

A. Summary of the EPA’s Proposed 

Actions 

B. Emissions Inventories 

C. Reasonably Available Control Measure/ 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology Demonstration and Adopted 

Control Strategy 

D. Attainment Demonstration 

E. Reasonable Further Progress 

Demonstration 

F. Contingency Measures 

G. New Source Review 

V. The EPA’s Proposed Action and Request 

for Public Comments 

A. The EPA’s Proposed Approvals 

B. Request for Public Comments 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. The Lead NAAQS 

Under the CAA, the EPA must 

establish NAAQS for six pollutants, 

including lead. Lead is generally 

emitted in the form of particles that are 

deposited in water, soil, and dust. 

People may be exposed to lead by 

inhaling it or by ingesting leadcontaminated food, water, soil, or dust. 

Once in the body, lead is quickly 

absorbed into the bloodstream and can 

result in a broad range of adverse health 

effects including damage to the central 

nervous system, cardiovascular 

function, kidneys, immune system, and 

red blood cells. Children are 

particularly vulnerable to lead exposure, 

in part because they are more likely to 

ingest lead and in part because their 

still-developing bodies are more 

sensitive to the effects of lead. The 

harmful effects to children’s developing 

nervous systems (including their brains) 

arising from lead exposure may include 

IQ 1 loss, poor academic achievement, 

long-term learning disabilities, and an 

increased risk of delinquent behavior. 

The EPA first established a lead 

standard in 1978 at 1.5 micrograms per 

meter cubed (mg/m3) as a quarterly 

average.2 Based on new health and 

scientific data, the EPA revised the 

federal lead standard to 0.15 mg/m3 and 

revised the averaging time for the 

standard on October 15, 2008.3 A 

violation of the standard occurs when 

ambient lead concentrations exceed 0.15 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS