### 54805 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 174 / Thursday, September 9, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209– 3939).

The meetings will be conducted in an informal manner. Presenters and attendees may provide written information to the court reporter for inclusion in the rulemaking record. MSHA will make transcripts of the meetings available on MSHA’s Web site http://www.msha.gov, and include them in the rulemaking record.

The meetings will be held on the following dates at the locations indicated:

Date Location Contact number

October 8, 2010 ........................................ MSHA National Office, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, 25th Floor Conference Room, Arlington, VA 22209. (202) 693–9440

October 12, 2010 ...................................... Embassy Suites Sacramento-Riverwalk Promenade, 100 Capitol Mall, Sacramento, CA 95814. (916) 326–5000

October 14, 2010 ...................................... Omni William Penn Hotel, 530 William Penn Place, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 ....... (412) 281–7100

MSHA has reviewed a number of guidelines for safety and health management programs, including:

• The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA’s) Voluntary Protection Program and its Safety and Health Program Management Guidelines;

• The American National Standards Institute’s (ANSI’s) and American Industrial Hygiene Association’s (AIHA’s) ANSI/AIHA’s Z10–2005, Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems;

• The International Standards Organization’s (ISO’s) ISO 9001:2008 (E), Quality management systems— Requirements; and

• The British Standards Institution’s (BSI’s) BS OHSAS 18001:2007, Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series, Occupational health and safety management systems— Requirements.

The Guidelines reveal that the components of effective safety and health management programs generally include:

1. Management Commitment. 2. Worker Involvement. 3. Hazard Identification, including workplace inspections for violations of mandatory health and safety standards.

4. Hazard Prevention and Control. 5. Safety and Health Training. 6. Program Evaluation. Year after year, many companies experience low injury and illness rates and low violation rates. For these companies, preventing harm to their workers is more than compliance with safety and health requirements; it reflects the embodiment of a culture of safety—from the CEO to the worker to the contractor. This culture of safety derives from a commitment to a systematic, effective, comprehensive safety and health management program, implemented with the full participation of all workers. MSHA understands that many companies have developed and implemented effective safety and health management programs. At the meetings, you will hear about some of these programs. The Agency is interested in receiving comments on all aspects of safety and health management
programs.

MSHA will accept written comments and information for the record from any interested party, including those not presenting oral statements.

Dated: September 2, 2010. Joseph A. Main, Assistant Secretary of Labor, for Mine Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2010–22403 Filed 9–8–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4510–43–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0556; FRL–9198–1]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Minnesota; Carbon Monoxide (CO) Limited Maintenance Plan for the Twin**  **Cities Area**

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

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to approve a request submitted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) on June 16, 2010, to revise the Minnesota State Implementation Plan (SIP) for carbon monoxide (CO) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The State has submitted a limited maintenance plan for CO showing continued attainment of the CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul (Twin Cities) area. The one hour CO NAAQS and eight hour CO NAAQS are 35 parts per million (ppm), and 9 ppm, respectively. This limited maintenance plan satisfies section 175A of the CAA, and is in accordance with EPA’s October 29, 1999, approval of the State’s redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Twin Cities area. Additionally, this limited maintenance plan for CO satisfies the requirements contained in the October 6, 1995, EPA memorandum entitled ‘‘ Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas. ’’

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before October 12, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– OAR–2010–0556, by one of the following methods:

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

2. E-mail: bortzer.jay@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692–2054.
4. Mail: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

5. Hand Delivery: Jay Bortzer, 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.

Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Final Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit
comments.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer, Air Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–0258, chang.andy@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In the Final Rules section of this Federal Register , EPA is approving the State’s SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial


### 54806 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 174 / Thursday, September 9, 2010 / Proposed Rules

submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives 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. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register

.

Dated: August 26, 2010. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010–22339 Filed 9–8–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0715; FRL–9200–3]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans—Maricopa**  **County (Phoenix) PM–10 Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan**  **for Attainment of the 24-Hour PM–10 Standard; Clean Air Act Section 189(d)** 

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

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

EPA is proposing to approve in part and disapprove in part State implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Arizona to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements applicable to the serious Maricopa County (Phoenix) nonattainment area (Maricopa area). These requirements apply to the Maricopa area following EPA’s June 6, 2007 finding that the area failed to meet its December 31, 2006 serious area deadline to attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter of ten microns or less (PM–10). Under CAA section 189(d), Arizona was required to submit a plan by December 31, 2007 providing for expeditious attainment of the PM–10 NAAQS and for an annual emission reduction in PM–10 or PM–10 precursors of not less than five percent per year until attainment (189(d) plan). EPA is proposing to disapprove provisions of the 189(d) plan for the Maricopa area because they do not meet applicable CAA requirements for emissions inventories as well as for attainment, five percent annual emission reductions, reasonable further progress and milestones, and contingency measures. EPA is also proposing to disapprove the 2010 motor vehicle emission budget in the 189(d) plan as not meeting the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). EPA is also proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of State regulations for the control of PM–10 from agricultural sources. Finally, EPA is proposing to approve various provisions of State statutes relating to the control of PM–10 emissions in the Maricopa area.

**DATES :**  Any comments must arrive by October 12, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2010–0715, by one of the following methods:

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

2. E-mail: nudd.gregory@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Gregory Nudd (Air2), 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 thebody of your comment. If you send email 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.

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is 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 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 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 :**  Gregory Nudd, U.S. EPA Region 9, 415– 947–4107, nudd.gregory@epa.gov or http://www.epa.gov/region09/air/ actions.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document, the terms

‘‘we, ’’ ‘‘us, ’’ and ‘‘ our’’ mean U.S. EPA.

Table of Contents
I. PM–10 Air Quality Planning in the Maricopa Area II. Overview of Applicable CAA Requirements III. Evaluation of the 189(d) Plan’s Compliance With CAA Requirements IV. Summary of Proposed Actions V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. PM–10 Air Quality Planning in the Maricopa Area

The NAAQS are standards for certain ambient air pollutants set by EPA to protect public health and welfare. PM– 10 is among the ambient air pollutantsfor which EPA has established healthbased standards. PM–10 causes adverse health effects by penetrating deep in the lungs, aggravating the cardiopulmonary system. Children, the elderly, and people with asthma and heart conditions are the most vulnerable.

On July 1, 1987 EPA revised the health-based national ambient air quality standards (52 FR 24672), replacing the standards for total suspended particulates with new standards applying only to particulate matter up to ten microns in diameter (PM–10). At that time, EPA established two PM–10 standards, annual standards and 24-hour standards. Effective December 18, 2006, EPA revoked the annual PM–10 standards but retained the 24-hour PM–10 standards. 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). The 24-hour PM–10 standards of 150 micrograms per cubic meter ( μg/m 3 ) are attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 μg/m 3 , as determined in accordance with appendix K to 40 CFR part 50, is equal to or less than one. 40 CFR 50.6 and 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.

On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA or the