Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 56591 

and securement systems. The NPRM 

also included a new requirement for 

automated stop and route 

announcements in systems with 100 or 

more buses and requirements specific to 

bus rapid transit systems. To improve 

accessibility, the Board proposed 

reducing the maximum slope of vehicle 

ramps. The NPRM proposed that bus 

ramps have slopes not steeper than 1:6 

(17 percent) when deployed to the 

boarding and alighting areas without 

station platforms and to the roadway. 

See T303.8.1 in the NPRM. Some bus 

and ramp manufacturers currently 

provide ramps that meet this proposed 

provision. To minimize the ramp 

extension beyond the doorway, some 

manufacturers provide a fixed ramp 

slope inside the bus creating the 

potential for a grade break, or change in 

ramp slope, within a single ramp run. 

These designs also can reduce the level 

floor space at the top of the ramp. 

The comment period on the NPRM 

ended on November 23, 2010. After the 

comment period ended, the Access 

Board received correspondence from 

Lane Transit District, Santa Clara Valley 

Transportation Authority, and Douglas 

Cross Transportation Consulting that 

raised issues regarding the usability of 

these ramps. The Access Board staff met 

with representatives from Lane Transit 

District and Douglas Cross 

Transportation Consulting to discuss 

these issues. The correspondence and a 

report on the meeting have been placed 

in the docket. 

In August 2012, the Access Board 

reopened the comment period until 

October 31, 2012 to collect additional 

information on bus ramps. See 77 FR 

50068, August 20, 2012. As part of this 

effort, the Board will hold two 

information meetings to discuss the 

usability and impacts of certain bus 

ramp designs that have recently been 

implemented. 

The first information meeting will be 

held in Washington, DC from 9:30 a.m. 

to 1:30 p.m. on September 19, 2012 in 

the Board’s conference center at 1331 F 

Street NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 

20004–1111. Notice of the first meeting 

was provided in the August 20, 2012 

Federal Register notice. 

The second information meeting will 

be held in conjunction with the 

American Public Transportation 

Association (APTA) annual meeting in 

Seattle, WA from 2:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 

on October 2, 2012 at the Washington 

State Convention Center, Rooms 611– 

612 (6th level), 800 Convention Place, 

Seattle, WA 98101–2350. The 

information meeting is open to all 

members of the public, including those 

who are not registered to attend the 

APTA annual meeting. 

The Access Board is interested in 

receiving information on the following 

questions at the information meetings: 

1. Can a bus ramp with a slope of 1:6 

be provided without a grade break and 

without compromising the available 

level space within the bus at the top of 

the ramp? How might bus kneeling 

affect these designs? 

2. If the ramp slope were required to 

be uniform for the length of the ramp 

with no grade breaks, how would such 

a requirement affect bus and ramp 

designs, manufacturers, transit 

operators, and transit users, including 

those with disabilities? 

3. How much level space, measured 

when the bus is sitting on a level 

surface, can be provided beyond the top 

of the ramp? How can this space be 

configured to permit individuals who 

use wheeled mobility devices to access 

fare collection devices and to turn into 

the main aisle? How does the slope of 

the ramp, the location of the fare 

collection device, and the configuration 

of the handrail affect the availability of 

this space? 

4. If level space were required at the 

top of the ramp to permit access to fare 

collection devices and to facilitate 

turning into main aisles, how would 

such a requirement affect bus designs, 

manufacturers, transit operators, and 

transit users, including those with 

disabilities? 

Bus and ramp manufacturers, transit 

operators, researchers, disability 

organizations, and interested 

individuals are invited to participate in 

the public information meetings and to 

submit comment. Transcripts of the 

meetings will be placed in the docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov and will be 

available on the Access Board’s Web site 

at http://www.access-board.gov/transit/. 

The information meetings will be 

accessible to persons with disabilities. 

An assistive listening system, computer 

assisted real-time transcription (CART), 

and sign language interpreters will be 

provided. Persons attending the 

information meetings are requested to 

refrain from using perfume, cologne, 

and other fragrances for the comfort of 

other participants (see www.

accessboard.gov/about/policies/

fragrance.htm for more information). 

David M. Capozzi, 

Executive Director. 

[FR Doc. 2012–22554 Filed 9–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0466; FRL–9726–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri; Maximum Allowable 

Emission of Particulate Matter From 

Fuel Burning Equipment Used for 

Indirect Heating 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Missouri to incorporate a new rule, 

Maximum Allowable Emissions of 

Particulate Matter (PM) Emissions from 

Fuel Burning Equipment Used for 

Indirect Heating. The new rule 

consolidates four pre-existing rules into 

one state-wide rule for clarity. The 

applicable standard addressed in this 

action is the PM2.5 and PM10 NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA in 2006. EPA is 

proposing this revision because the 

standards and requirements set by the 

rules will strengthen the Missouri SIP. 

EPA’s approval of this SIP revision is 

being done in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

October 15, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2012–0466, by mail to Stephanie 

Doolan, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101. Comments may also 

be submitted electronically or through 

hand delivery/courier by following the 

detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES

section of the direct final rule located in 

the rules section of this Federal 

Register.. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Doolan at (913) 551–7719, or 

by email at doolan.stephanie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of the Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the state’s 

SIP revision as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

revision amendment and anticipates no 

relevant adverse comments to this 

action. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

56592 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

no further activity is contemplated in 

relation to this action. If EPA receives 

relevant 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 action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on part of 

this rule and if that part can be severed 

from the remainder of the rule, EPA may 

adopt as final those parts 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 29, 2012. 

Mark J. Hague, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2012–22470 Filed 9–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of the Secretary 

43 CFR Part 2 

RIN 1093–AA15 

Freedom of Information Act 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

This rule would revise the regulations 

that the Department follows in 

processing records under the Freedom 

of Information Act (‘‘FOIA’’). The 

revisions clarify and update procedures 

for requesting information from the 

Department and procedures that the 

Department follows in responding to 

requests from the public. The revisions 

also incorporate clarifications and 

updates resulting from changes to the 

FOIA and case law. Finally, the 

revisions include current cost figures to 

be used in calculating and charging fees 

and increase the amount of information 

that members of the public may receive 

from the Department without being 

charged processing fees. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before November 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the rulemaking by either of the 

methods listed below. Please use 

Regulation Identifier Number 1093– 

AA15 in your message. 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions on the Web site for 

submitting comments. 

2. U.S. mail, courier, or hand delivery: 

Executive Secretariat—FOIA 

regulations, Department of the Interior, 

1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 

20240. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cindy Cafaro, Office of Executive 

Secretariat and Regulatory Affairs, 202– 

208–5342. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why We’re Publishing This Rule and 

What It Does 

The regulations are being revised to 

update, clarify, and streamline the 

language of procedural provisions, and 

to incorporate certain changes brought 

about by the amendments to the FOIA 

under the OPEN Government Act of 

2007, Public Law 110–175, 121 Stat. 

2524. Additionally, the regulations are 

being updated to reflect developments 

in the case law and to include current 

cost figures to be used in calculating 

and charging fees. 

The revisions also incorporate 

changes to the language and structure of 

the FOIA regulations in order to 

improve the Department’s FOIA 

performance. More nuanced multitrack 

processing can be found at § 2.15. 

Partial fee waivers will expressly be 

permitted under § 2.45. Proposed 

revisions of the Department’s fee 

schedule can be found at § 2.42, 

§ 2.49(a)(1), and Appendix A. The 

duplication charge for physical records 

or scanning records will increase from 

thirteen to fifteen cents a page. The 

amount at or below which the 

Department will not charge a fee will 

increase from $30.00 to $50.00. 

II. Compliance With Laws and 

Executive Orders 

1. Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

Executive Order 12866 provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs will review all significant rules. 

The Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs has determined that 

this rule is not significant. 

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the 

principles of E.O. 12866 while calling 

for improvements in the nation’s 

regulatory system to promote 

predictability, to reduce uncertainty, 

and to use the best, most innovative, 

and least burdensome tools for 

achieving regulatory ends. The 

executive order directs agencies to 

consider regulatory approaches that 

reduce burdens and maintain flexibility 

and freedom of choice for the public 

where these approaches are relevant, 

feasible, and consistent with regulatory 

objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes 

further that regulations must be based 

on the best available science and that 

the rulemaking process must allow for 

public participation and an open 

exchange of ideas. We have developed 

this rule in a manner consistent with 

these requirements. 

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this proposed rule will not 

have a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

3. Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 

804(2), the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act. This 

proposed rule: 

a. Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

b. Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

c. Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This proposed rule does not impose 

an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

proposed rule does not have a 

significant or unique effect on State, 

local or tribal governments or the 

private sector. A statement containing 

the information required by the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required. 

5. Takings (E.O. 12630) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, the rule does not have significant 

takings implications. A takings 

implication assessment is not required. 

6. Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the proposed rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. It would not substantially 

and directly affect the relationship 

between the Federal and state 

governments. A Federalism Assessment 

is not required. 

7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS