This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

75504 

Vol. 76, No. 232 

Friday, December 2, 2011 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket No. CPSC–2011–0074] 

Table Saw Blade Contact Injuries; 

Notice of Extension of Time for 

Comments 

AGENCY: U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Comment request. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘CPSC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’ 

or ‘‘we’’) is considering whether a new 

performance safety standard is needed 

to address an unreasonable risk of injury 

associated with table saws. We are 

conducting this proceeding under the 

authority of the Consumer Product 

Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’), 15 U.S.C. 2051– 

2084. In the Federal Register of October 

11, 2011 (76 FR 62678), we published 

an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (‘‘ANPR’’), inviting written 

comments concerning the risk of injury 

associated with table saw blade contact, 

regulatory alternatives, other possible 

means to address this risk, and other 

topics or issues. In response to a request 

from the Power Tool Institute, Inc., we 

are announcing an extension of the 

comment period for 60 days. 

DATES: Submit comments by February 

10, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2011– 

0074, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions 

Submit electronic comments in the 

following way: Federal eRulemaking 

Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

To ensure timely processing of 

comments, the Commission is no longer 

accepting comments submitted by 

electronic mail (email), except through: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Written Submissions 

Submit written submissions in the 

following way: 

Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for 

paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions), 

preferably in five copies, to: Office of the 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330 

East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814; telephone (301) 504–7923. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

petition number for this rulemaking. All 

comments received may be posted 

without change, including any personal 

identifiers, contact information, or other 

personal information provided, to: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information, trade secret information, or 

other sensitive or protected information 

electronically. Such information should 

be submitted in writing. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to: http://www.

regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Caroleene Paul, Directorate for 

Engineering Sciences, U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, 5 Research 

Place, Rockville, Maryland 20850; 

telephone (301) 987–2225; fax (301) 

869–0294; email cpaul@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 

15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, 

and James Fulmer, et al. (‘‘petitioners’’) 

requested that we require performance 

standards for a system to reduce or 

prevent injuries from contact with the 

blade of a table saw. The petitioners 

cited estimates of 30,000 annual injuries 

involving table saws, with 

approximately 90 percent of the injuries 

occurring to the fingers and hands, and 

10 percent of the injuries resulting in 

amputation. The petitioners alleged that 

current table saws pose an unacceptable 

risk of severe injury because they are 

inherently dangerous and lack an 

adequate safety system to protect the 

user from accidental contact with the 

blade. 

In the Federal Register of July 9, 2003 

(68 FR 40912) and September 5, 2003 

(68 FR 52753), we invited comments on 

the issues raised by the petition 

(Petition No. CP03–2). We received 69 

comments. CPSC staff’s initial briefing 

package regarding the petition is 

available on the CPSC Web site at: 

http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia06/

brief/tablesaw.pdf. On July 11, 2006, the 

Commission voted (2–1) to grant the 

petition and directed CPSC staff to draft 

an ANPR. On July 15, 2006, the 

Commission lost its quorum and was 

unable to move forward with 

publication of an ANPR at that time. 

However, CPSC staff continued to 

evaluate table saws and initiated a 

special study from January 2007 to 

December 2008, to gather more accurate 

estimates on table saw injuries and 

hazard patterns related to table saw 

injuries. Based on CPSC staff’s updated 

information on blade contact injuries 

associated with table saw use and CPSC 

staff’s evaluation of current technologies 

on table saws, we issued an ANPR on 

table saw blade contact injuries in the 

Federal Register of October 11, 2011 (76 

FR 62678). CPSC staff also updated its 

briefing package, which supplements 

the initial briefing package, and the 

updated briefing package is available on 

the CPSC Web site at: http://www.cpsc.

gov/library/foia/foia11/brief/tablesaw.

pdf. 

The ANPR contained information 

describing the product, the market for 

table saws, the incident data, economic 

considerations, existing standards, and 

regulatory alternatives (76 FR at 62679 

through 62683). The ANPR identified 

three regulatory alternatives: (1) A 

voluntary standard addressing risks 

associated with table saw blade contact 

injuries; (2) a mandatory rule 

establishing performance requirements 

that would address table saw blade 

contact injuries, or (3) a labeling rule 

requiring specified warnings and 

instructions to address table saw blade 

contact injuries (76 FR at 62683). The 

ANPR also invited comment on 25 

topics or issues. For the reader’s 

convenience, we list those topics or 

issues here: 

1. Written comments with respect to 

the risk of injury identified by the 

Commission, the regulatory alternatives 

being considered, and other possible 

alternatives for addressing the risk; 

2. Any existing standard or portion of 

a standard that could be issued as a 

proposed regulation; 

3. A statement of intention to modify 

or develop a voluntary standard to 

address the risk of injury discussed in 

this notice, along with a description of 

a plan (including a schedule) to do so; 

4. Studies, tests, or surveys that have 

been performed to analyze table saw 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 232 / Friday, December 2, 2011 / Proposed Rules 75505 

blade contact injuries, severity of 

injuries, and costs associated with the 

injuries; 

5. Studies, tests, or surveys that 

analyze table saw use in relation to 

approach/feed rates, kickback, and 

blade guard use and effectiveness; 

6. Studies, tests, or descriptions of 

new technologies, or new applications 

of existing technologies that can address 

blade contact injuries, and estimates of 

costs associated with incorporation of 

new technologies or applications; 

7. Estimated manufacturing cost, per 

table saw, of new technologies or 

applications that can address blade 

contact injuries; 

8. Expected impact of technologies 

that can address blade contact injuries 

on wholesale and retail prices of table 

saws; 

9. Expected impact of technologies 

that can address blade contact injuries 

on utility and convenience of use; 

10. Information on effectiveness or 

user acceptance of new blade guard 

designs; 

11. Information on manufacturing 

costs of new blade guard designs; 

12. Information on usage rates of new 

blade guard designs; 

13. Information on U.S shipments of 

table saws prior to 2002, and between 

2003 and 2005; 

14. Information on differences 

between portable bench saws, contractor 

saws, and cabinet saws in frequency and 

duration of use; 

15. Information on differences 

between saws used by consumers, saws 

used by schools, and saws used 

commercially in frequency and duration 

of use; 

16. Studies, research, or data on entry 

information of materials being cut at 

blade contact (I.E., approach angle, 

approach speed, and approach force); 

17. Information that supports or 

disputes preliminary economic analyses 

on the cost of employing technologies 

that reduce blade contact injuries on 

table saws; 

18. Studies, research, or data on 

appropriate indicators of performance 

for blade-to-skin requirements that 

mitigate injury; 

19. Studies, research, or data that 

validates human finger proxies for skinto-blade tests; 

20. Studies, research, or data on 

detection/reaction systems that have 

been employed to mitigate blade contact 

injuries; 

21. Studies, research, or data on the 

technical challenges associated with 

developing new systems that could be 

employed to mitigate blade contact 

injuries; 

22. Studies, research, or data on 

guarding systems that have been 

employed to prevent or mitigate blade 

contact injuries; 

23. Studies, research, or data on 

kickback of a work piece during table 

saw use; 

24. The costs and benefits of 

mandating a labeling or instructions 

requirement; and 

25. Other relevant information 

regarding the addressability of blade 

contact injuries. 

The ANPR requested comments by 

December 12, 2011. 

On November 3, 2011, the Power Tool 

Institute, Inc. (‘‘PTI’’) requested a 60-day 

extension of the comment period. PTI 

explained that in March 2011, it had 

submitted a Freedom of Information Act 

request for all documents and materials 

related to and underlying the ‘‘Table 

Saw Study’’ conducted by CPSC staff. It 

further explained that: 

In the ANPR, CPSC makes it clear that it 

was this updated injury information upon 

which the Commission’s decision to issue the 

proposed rule was based. The importance of 

this injury data, and the associated materials 

describing the context of the injuries, makes 

it vital that stakeholders have the ability to 

analyze this information prior to submitting 

comments on the ANPR. 

Letter from Susan M. Young, Power 

Tool Institute, Inc., to Inez M. 

Tenenbaum, Chairman, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, dated 

November 3, 2011, at 1. PTI further 

indicated that it had not received all 

materials relating to its FOIA request 

and, between September 29, 2011 and 

October 28, 2011, had submitted an 

additional three FOIA requests for other 

materials pertaining to the ‘‘CPSC’s 

development of a table saw standard.’’ 

Id. at 1–2. PTI said that: 

A 60-day extension of the comment period 

would allow PTI the ability to adequately 

analyze the reports underlying the Table Saw 

Study, give CPSC staff time to respond to 

PTI’s outstanding FOIA requests, and give 

PTI the opportunity to formulate an adequate 

analysis of the information received. With 

the additional time granted, PTI will be in a 

position to submit comments to CPSC in 

support of the Commission’s goal of 

increasing public protection from 

unnecessary injuries. 

Id. at 2. 

The Commission has produced all 

underlying reports regarding the Table 

Saw Study to PTI, including more than 

800 pages of information. While 

additional FOIA requests by PTI may be 

pending, the documents relevant to the 

Table Saw Study all have been 

produced, and PTI’s other FOIA 

requests seek documents on different 

products or issues that are not relevant 

to the ANPR. Thus, the production of 

additional documents in response to 

PTI’s outstanding FOIA requests does 

not justify a further extension of the 

comment date. However, to ensure that 

the public has an adequate opportunity 

to comment with regard to the 

underlying reports regarding the Table 

Saw Study that have been produced to 

PTI, the Commission will be posting 

those reports in its FOIA Reading Room 

on the CPSC Web site and will make 

them a part of the administrative record. 

Through this notice, we are announcing 

a 60-day extension of the comment 

period to give all interested parties 

additional time to prepare their 

responses to the ANPR. Thus, the 

comment period for the ANPR is 

extended to February 10, 2012. 

Dated: November 29, 2011. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31008 Filed 12–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0959] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf 

Intracoastal Waterway (Algiers 

Alternate Route), Belle Chasse, LA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the regulation governing the 

operation of the SR 23 bridge across the 

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (Algiers 

Alternate Route), mile 3.8, at Belle 

Chasse, Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana. 

Due to increased vehicular traffic, the 

State of Louisiana requested a change to 

the operation schedule, allowing the 

bridge to open only on the hour during 

the day from Monday through Friday, 

while maintaining morning and 

afternoon maritime restrictions. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

January 31, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2011–0959 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS