18984 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

32. Should spotters receive specific 

training for backing maneuvers? 

33. Is backing maneuver training 

presented formally in a class or 

provided informally on a jobsite? 

34. If you have one or more 

employees who do not speak fluent 

English, do you provide backing 

maneuver training for them in another 

language? Would it be helpful to have 

training materials and guidelines 

available in a language they can 

understand? 

H. Economic Issues 

35. In addition to backup alarms, 

what initial costs are needed for safety 

measures associated with backing 

maneuvers? Please provide specific 

information on these costs. 

36. Do these safety measures for 

backing maneuvers affect daily 

productivity? Please provide specific 

information on these productivity costs. 

37. Do the various technological 

systems (cameras and proximity 

detection) save money or time if they 

replace spotters? Please explain. 

38. Are your costs for general liability 

insurance or workers’ compensation 

insurance affected by the types of 

backup safety systems you use? Please 

explain. 

39. What property damage has 

resulted from backing accidents? Please 

describe the types of accidents, the 

property damage involved, and the 

value of the damaged property. 

40. How, and to what extent, would 

promulgation of additional standards 

that address hazards in backing 

maneuvers affect small businesses in 

your industry? 

41. Do special circumstances exist 

that would make additional standards 

difficult or costly for small entities? 

Please describe these circumstances. 

42. Are there steps OSHA could take 

that would reduce the burden and cost 

of improved backing safety measures for 

small businesses? Please explain. 

I. Scope 

43. Should OSHA consider framing 

the problem in terms of the dangers 

associated with workers being too close 

to dangerous moving vehicles or mobile 

equipment, rather than focusing only on 

backover incidents? 

44. Are there non-regulatory 

alternatives the Agency should 

consider? 

45. What industry sectors, such as 

maritime or construction, have higher 

risks or greater frequency of injuries? On 

what information do you base your 

response? 

J. References 

All references in this list are available in 

OSHA Docket No. OSHA–2010–0059, 

Preventing Backover Injuries and Fatalities. 

ANSI A10.47–2009, Work Zone Safety for 

Highway Construction. 

ANSI B56.1–2009, Safety Standard for Low 

Lift and High Lift Trucks. 

RCW 46.37.400. Mirrors, backup devices. 

16VAC25–97–10. Applicability. 

16VAC25–97–30. Covered vehicle 

requirements. 

16VAC25–97–40. Responsibilities while 

engaged in reverse signal operation 

activities. 

16VAC25–97–50. Training. 

WAC 296–155–610(2)(f). Motor vehicles on 

construction sites. 

Fairfax, R.E., Acting Director, Directorate of 

Construction, letter to 20090429–9037, 

re: Permissible methods of operating 

trucks in reverse on construction sites, 

March 2, 2010. 

Hurwitz, D.S., Pradhan, A., Fisher, D., 

Knodler, M.A., Muttart, J.W., Menon, R., 

Meissner, U. ‘‘Backing Collisions: a 

Study of Drivers’ Eye and Backing 

Behaviour Using Combined Rear-view 

Camera and Sensor Systems,’’ Injury 

Prevention, 16: 79–84, 2010. 

Mazzae, E. and Garrott, R. National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration, 

‘‘Evaluation of the Performance of 

Available Backover Prevention 

Technologies for Light Vehicles,’’ The 

20th International Technical Conference 

on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles 

Conference, Paper Number 07–0292, 

2006. 

Mazzae, E. and Garrott, W.R. National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

‘‘Experimental Evaluation of the 

Performance of Available Backover 

Prevention Technologies for Medium 

Straight Trucks,’’ DOT HS 810 865, 

November 2007. 

Miles, Jr., J.B., Directorate of Field 

Operations, Memorandum for Roger 

Clark, Regional Administrator, re: 

Interpretation of 29 CFR 

1926.602(a)(9)(ii), January 21, 1987. 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, ‘‘Fatalities and Injuries 

in Motor Vehicle Backing Crashes,’’ 

Report to Congress, November 2008. 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, ‘‘Vehicle Backover 

Avoidance Technology Study,’’ Report to 

Congress, November 2006. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety 

and Health, Publication 2001–109, 

‘‘Preventing Injuries and Deaths of 

Workers Who Operate or Work Near 

Forklifts,’’ 2001. 

OSHA Backing Injuries 2007–2009, Region 9 

Spreadsheet. 

OSHA Backing Fatalities 2005–2010 

Spreadsheet. 

Pegula, S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, ‘‘Fatal 

occupational injuries at road 

construction sites, 2003–07,’’ Monthly 

Labor Review, November 2010. 

Pratt, S.G., Fosbroke, D.E, Marsh, S.M. 

National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health, Publication No. 2001– 

128, ‘‘Building Safer Highway Work 

Zones: Measures to Prevent Worker 

Injuries from Vehicles and Equipment,’’ 

April 2001. 

Robertson, T. Eugene Fire and EMS 

Department, ‘‘Personnel Noise Exposure 

to Fire Apparatus Backup Alarms: 

Eugene Fire and EMS,’’ March 1998. 

Ruff, T.M. National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health, ‘‘Evaluation of 

Systems to Monitor Blind Areas Behind 

Trucks Used in Road Construction and 

Maintenance: Phase 1,’’ Report of 

Investigations 9660, February 2003. 

Ruff, T.M. ‘‘Monitoring Blind Spots: A Major 

Concern for Haul Trucks,’’ Engineering 

and Mining Journal, December 2001, 

202(12). 

Ruff, T.M. National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health, ‘‘Test Results of 

Collision Warning Systems for Surface 

Mining Dump Trucks,’’ Report of 

Investigations 9652, May 2000. 

Suter, A.H. ‘‘Construction Noise: Exposure, 

Effects, and the Potential for 

Remediation; A Review and Analysis,’’ 

American Industrial Hygiene Association 

Journal, 63: 768–789, November/ 

December 2002. 

Swanson, R., Director, Directorate of 

Construction, letter re: Alternatives to 

common back-up alarms on construction 

motor vehicles; use of other effective 

technology or observers/signal persons, 

September 27, 2004. 

Authority and Signature 

David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, 

Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. 

Department of Labor, authorized the 

preparation of this notice pursuant to 

Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the Occupational 

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 

653, 655, 657), 29 CFR part 1911, and 

Secretary’s Order 1–2012 (77 FR 3192). 

Signed at Washington, DC, on March 23, 

2012. 

David Michaels, 

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational 

Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7510 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket No. USCG–2012–0182] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation for Marine 

Events; Yorktown Parade of Sail, York 

River; Yorktown, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18985 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish special local regulation during 

the Yorktown Parade of Sail, a parade of 

five tall ships and 195 other vessels, to 

be held on the waters of York River, 

Yorktown, Virginia on June 2, 2012. 

This regulation is necessary to provide 

for the safety of life on navigable waters 

during the event. This action is 

intended to restrict vessel traffic in 

portions of the York River, Yorktown, 

Virginia during the event. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2012–0182 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) 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. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or email LCDR Christopher 

O’Neal, Waterways Management 

Division Chief, Sector Hampton Roads, 

Coast Guard; telephone 757–668–5581, 

email Christopher.A.ONeal@uscg.mil. 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. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking USCG–2012–0182, indicate 

the specific section of this document to 

which each comment applies, and 

provide a reason for each suggestion or 

recommendation. You may submit your 

comments and material online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online, it will be considered 

received by the Coast Guard when you 

successfully transmit the comment. If 

you fax, hand deliver, or mail your 

comment, it will be considered as 

having been received by the Coast 

Guard when it is received at the Docket 

Management Facility. We recommend 

that you include your name and a 

mailing address, an email address, or a 

telephone number in the body of your 

document so that we can contact you if 

we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, type the 

docket number USCG–2012–0182 in the 

‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ 

Click on ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ on the 

line associated with this rulemaking. 

If you submit your comments by mail 

or hand delivery, submit them in an 

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 

11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit 

comments 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 and may 

change the rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view documents mentioned in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, type the docket 

number USCG–2012–0182 in the 

‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ 

Click on Open Docket Folder on the line 

associated with this rulemaking. You 

may also visit the Docket Management 

Facility in Room W12–140 on the 

ground floor of the Department of 

Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of 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 plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting 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. 

For information on facilities or 

services for individuals with disabilities 

or to request special assistance at the 

public meeting, contact LCDR 

Christopher O’Neal at the telephone 

number or email address indicated 

under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this notice. 

Basis and Purpose 

This regulation proposes to add an 

enforcement period of a new special 

local regulation for one marine event 

within the Fifth Coast Guard District. 

Marine events are frequently held on the 

navigable waters within the boundaries 

of Fifth Coast Guard District. The water 

activities that typically comprise marine 

events include sailing regattas, power 

boat races, swim races and holiday 

parades. For a description of the 

geographical area of each Coast Guard 

Sector—Captain of the Port Zone, please 

see 33 CFR 3.25. 

On June 2, 2012, York County 

Recreation Parks and Tourism will 

sponsor the ‘‘Yorktown Parade of Sail’’ 

on the waters of York River. The event 

will consist of approximately 200 

vessels on the waters of York River, 

Yorktown, VA. A fleet of spectator 

vessels is expected to gather near the 

event site to view the parade. To 

provide for the safety of participants, 

spectators, support and transiting 

vessels, the Coast Guard will 

temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the 

event area during the races. The 

regulation at 33 CFR 100.501 would be 

enforced for the duration of the event. 

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.501, 

from Noon to 2 p.m. on June 2, 2012, 

vessels may not enter the regulated area 

unless they receive permission from the 

Coast Guard Patrol Commander. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard is establishing a 

temporary special local regulation on 

specified waters of the York River, in 

Yorktown, Virginia. The regulated area 

will be established in the interest of 

public safety during the ‘‘Yorktown 

Parade of Sail’’, and will be enforced 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

18986 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

from Noon to 2 p.m. on June 2, 2012. 

The Coast Guard, at its discretion, when 

practical, will allow the passage of 

vessels. Except for participants and 

vessels authorized by the Captain of the 

Port or his Representative, no person or 

vessel may enter or remain in the 

regulated area. 

The regulated area will include all 

waters of the York River bounded by the 

north and south shores of the York River 

and to the west by the Coleman 

Memorial Bridge and bounded to the 

east by a line drawn from the United 

States Coast Guard pier to Gaines Point 

in Gloucester, VA. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 14 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, as supplemented 

by Executive Order 13563, Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review, and 

does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 

or under section 1 of Executive Order 

13563. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under those 

Orders. 

We expect the economic impact of 

this proposed rule to be so minimal that 

a full Regulatory Evaluation is 

unnecessary. Although this rule 

prevents traffic from transiting a portion 

of the York River from Noon until 2 

p.m. on June 2, 2012, the effect of this 

regulation will not be significant due to 

the limited duration that the regulated 

area will be in effect and the extensive 

advance notifications that will be made 

to the maritime community via marine 

information broadcasts, local radio 

stations and area newspapers so 

mariners can adjust their plans 

accordingly. Additionally, this 

rulemaking does not change the 

permanent regulated areas that have 

been published in 33 CFR 100.501, 

Table to § 100.501. In some cases vessel 

traffic may be able to transit the 

regulated area when the Coast Guard 

Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do 

so. 

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 or 

operators of vessels intending to transit 

this section of the York River from Noon 

until 2 p.m. on June 2, 2012. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this 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. 

This regulation will not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because: (i) It 

will be enforced only for a short period 

of time (two hours); (ii) vessels may be 

granted the opportunity to transit the 

safety zone during the period of 

enforcement if the Patrol Commander 

deems it safe to do so; (iii) vessels may 

transit around the safety zone; and (iv) 

before the enforcement period, the Coast 

Guard will issue maritime advisories so 

mariners can adjust their plans 

accordingly. 

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 the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact LCDR 

Christopher O’Neal. The Coast Guard 

will not retaliate against small entities 

that question or complain about this 

proposed rule or any policy or action of 

the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call 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 rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

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 rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might 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 would 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18987 

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 Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, 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 one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This rule is 

categorically excluded, under figure 2– 

1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction. 

This rule involves implementation of 

regulations within 33 CFR Part 100 that 

apply to organized marine events on the 

navigable waters of the United States 

that may have potential for negative 

impact on the safety or other interest of 

waterway users and shore side activities 

in the event area. The category of water 

activities includes but is not limited to 

sail boat regattas, boat parades, power 

boat racing, swimming events, crew 

racing, and sail board racing. 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 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 

2. In § 100.501, add temporary line 

No. (c)25 in Table to § 100.501 to read 

as follows: 

§ 100.501 Special Local Regulations; 

Marine Events in the Fifth Coast Guard 

District. 

* * * * * 

Table To § 100.501.—All coordinates 

listed in the Table to § 100.501 reference 

Datum NAD 1983. 

COAST GUARD SECTOR HAMPTON ROADS—COTP ZONE

Number Date Event Sponsor Location 

*******

25 ......... June 2, 2012 .................. Yorktown Parade of Sail York County Recreation 

Parks and Tourism.

Regulated area includes all waters of the York 

River bounded by the north and south shores of 

the York River and to the west by the Coleman 

Memorial Bridge and bounded to the east by a 

line drawn from the United States Coast Guard 

pier to Gaines Point in Gloucester, VA. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983. 

* * * * * 

Dated: March 13, 2012. 

Mark S. Ogle, 

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

Port Hampton Roads. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7513 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0924; FRL–9653–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Nonattainment New 

Source Review; Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These 

revisions pertaining to Pennsylvania’s 

nonattainment New Source Review 

(NSR) program incorporate 

preconstruction permitting regulations 

for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) into 

the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is approving 

these revisions in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0924 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: cox.kathleen@epa.gov. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS