### 7518 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

(2) Add § 165.T08–1097 to read as follows:

**§ 165.T08–1097 Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Mile 842.0 to 839.5.** 

(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of the Upper Mississippi River, Mile 842.0 to 839.5 extending the entire width of the waterway.

(b) Effective date. This rule is effective from 6:30 a.m. until 10:30 a.m. on July 24, 2011.

(c) Periods of Enforcement. This rule will be enforced from 6:30 a.m. until 10:30 a.m. CST on July 24, 2011. The Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River will inform the public through broadcast notice to mariners of all safety zone changes and enforcement periods.

(d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River or a designated representative.

(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the zone must request permission from the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River or a designated representative. The Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River representative may be contacted at 314–

269–2332.

(3) All persons and vessels must comply with the instruction of the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River or their designated representative. Designated Captain of the Port representatives includes United States Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.

Dated: January 25, 2011. S.L. Hudson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River.

[FR Doc. 2011–2860 Filed 2–9–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 55**

**[EPA–R10–OAR–2011–0045; FRL–9265–3]**

**Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations Consistency Update for**  **Alaska**

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

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to update a portion of the Outer Continental Shelf ( ‘‘ OCS ’’ ) Air Regulations. Requirements applying to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States’ seaward boundaries must be updated periodically to remain consistent with the requirements of the corresponding onshore area, as mandated by the Clean Air Act ( ‘‘the Act’’ ). The portion of the OCS air regulations that is being updated pertains to the requirements for OCS sources in the State of Alaska. The intended effect of approving the OCS requirements for the State of Alaska is to regulate emissions from OCS sources in accordance with the requirements onshore. The change to the existing requirements discussed below is proposed to be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations and is listed in the appendix to the OCS air regulations.

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before March 14, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by docket number EPA–R10– OAR–2011–0045, by one of the following methods:

A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments;

B. E-Mail: greaves.natasha@epa.gov; C. Mail: Natasha Greaves, Federal and Delegated Air Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop: AWT–107, Seattle, WA 98101;

D. Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Attn: Natasha Greaves (AWT–107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, 9th Floor. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number. EPA–R10–OAR–2011– 0045. EPA’s policy is that all comments received 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 information claimed to be 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. The http:// www.regulations.gov Web site is an

‘‘ anonymous access ’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Natasha Greaves, Federal and Delegated Air Programs Unit, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop: AWT–107, Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number: (206) 553–7079; email address: greaves.natasha@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Table of Contents

I. Background Information

Why is EPA taking this action? II. EPA’s Evaluation

What criteria were used to evaluate rules

submitted to update 40 CFR part 55? III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory

Planning and Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory Flexibility Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination

With Indian Tribal Government G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of

Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks


### 7519 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules

1 The reader may refer to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and the preamble to the final rule promulgated September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further background and information on the OCS regulations. 2 Each COA which has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce part 55, will use its administrative and procedural rules as onshore. However, in those instances where EPA has not delegated authority to implement and enforce part 55, as in Alaska, EPA will use its own administrative and procedural requirements to implement the substantive requirements. See 40 CFR 55.14 (c)(4). H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

I. Background Information Why is EPA taking this action?

On September 4, 1992, EPA promulgated 40 CFR part 55 (the OCS rule), 1 which established requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources in order to attain and maintain federal and state ambient air quality standards and to comply with the provisions of part C of title I of the Act. Part 55 applies to all OCS sources offshore of the States except those located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87.5 degrees longitude. Section 328 of the Act requires that for such sources located within 25 miles of a State’s seaward boundary, the requirements shall be the same as would be applicable if the sources were located in the corresponding onshore area ( ‘‘ COA ’’ .) Because the OCS requirements are based on onshore requirements, and onshore requirements may change, section 328(a)(1) of the Act requires that EPA update the OCS requirements as necessary to maintain consistency with onshore requirements.

Pursuant to section 55.12 of the OCS rule, consistency reviews will occur (1) At least annually; (2) upon receipt of a Notice of Intent under section 40 CFR 55.4; or (3) when a state or local agency submits a rule to EPA to be considered for incorporation by reference in part 55. This proposed action is being taken in response to the submittal of a Notice of Intent on December 10, 2010 by Shell Offshore, Inc. Public comments received in writing within 30 days of publication of this proposed rule will be considered by EPA before publishing a final rule.

Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of States’ seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. This limits EPA’s flexibility in deciding which requirements will be incorporated into part 55 and prevents EPA from making substantive changes to the requirements it incorporates. As a result, EPA may be incorporating rules into part 55 that do not conform to all of EPA’s state implementation plan ( ‘‘ SIP ’’ ) guidance or certain requirements of the Act.

Consistency updates may result in the inclusion of state or local rules or regulations into part 55, even though the same rules may ultimately be disapproved for inclusion as part of the SIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does not imply that a rule meets the requirements of the Act for SIP approval, nor does it imply that the rule will be approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP.

II. EPA’s Evaluation

What criteria were used to evaluate rules to update 40 CFR part 55?

In updating 40 CFR part 55, EPA reviewed the current COA rules for consistency with part 55 to ensure that they are rationally related to the attainment or maintenance of federal or state ambient air quality standards or part C of title I of the Act, that they are not designed expressly to prevent exploration and development of the OCS and that they are applicable to OCS sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also evaluated the rules to ensure they are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 55.12 (e). In addition, EPA has excluded administrative or procedural rules, 2 and requirements that regulate toxics which are not related to the attainment and maintenance of federal and state ambient air quality standards. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ‘‘ significant’’ and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget ( ‘‘ OMB ’’ ) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines ‘‘ significant regulatory action ’’ as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.

This action is not a ‘‘ significant regulatory action ’’ under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB Review. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in 40 CFR part 55, and by extension this update to the rules, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060–0249. The OMB Notice of Action is dated January 15, 2009. The approval expires January 31, 2012.

OMB’s Notice of Action dated January 15, 2009 indicated that the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collection of information under 40 CFR part 55 is estimated to average 112 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information


### 7520 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and are identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act ( ‘‘RFA ’’ ) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.

This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have had a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( ‘‘ UMRA ’’ ), Public Law 104–4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ‘‘ Federal mandates ’’ that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million of more in any one year.

Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted.

Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.

Today’s proposed rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector in any one year. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

Executive Orders 13132, entitled

‘‘ Federalism ’’ (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure

‘‘ meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. ’’ ‘‘Policies that have federalism implications ’’ is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have ‘‘ substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. ’’

This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. This rule does not amend the existing provisions within 40 CFR part 55 enabling delegation of OCS regulations to a COA, and this rule does not require the COA to implement the OCS rules. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed rule from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled

‘‘ Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ’’ (65 FR 67249 (November 9, 2000)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process

to ensure ‘‘ meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications. ’’ This rule does 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 and thus does not have ‘‘tribal implications, ’’ within the meaning of Executive Order 13175. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. In addition, this rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Consultation with Indian tribes is therefore not required under Executive Order 13175. Nonetheless, in the spirit of Executive Order 13175 and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and tribes, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed rule from tribal officials.


### 7521 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ’’ (62 FR 19885 (April 23, 1997)), applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be

‘‘ economically significant’’ as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866. In addition, the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportional risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ’’ [66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)] because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order

12866. I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( ‘‘ NTTAA ’’ ), Public Law 104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable laws or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decided not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

As discussed above, this rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA requirements. In the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards and in light of the fact that EPA is required to make the OCS rules consistent with current COA requirements, it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in this action. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards. EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such standards should be used in this regulation. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 55

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Outer Continental Shelf, Ozone, Particulate matter, Permits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

Dated: February 2, 2011. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, Region 10.

Title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations, is proposed to be amended as follows:

**PART 55—[AMENDED]**

1. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Section 328 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. ) as amended by Public Law 101–549.

2. Section 55.14 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(2)(i)(A) to read as follows:

**§ 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States’**  **seaward boundaries, by State.**

* * * * *

(e) * * * (2) * * * (i) * * * (A) State of Alaska Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, December 9,

2010.

* * * * *

3. Appendix A to part 55 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) under the heading ‘‘Alaska’’ to read as follows: Appendix A To Part 55—Listing of State and Local Requirements Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, by State

* * * * *

Alaska

(a) * * * (1) The following State of Alaska requirements are applicable to OCS Sources, December 9, 2010, Alaska Administrative Code—Department of Environmental Conservation. The following sections of Title 18, Chapter 50:
Article 1. Ambient Air Quality Management 18 AAC 50.005. Purpose and Applicability of Chapter (effective 10/01/2004) 18 AAC 50.010. Ambient Air Quality Standards (effective 04/01/2010) 18 AAC 50.015. Air Quality Designations, Classification, and Control Regions (effective 12/09/2010) except (b)(1), (b)(3) and (d)(2) Table 1. Air Quality Classifications 18 AAC 50.020. Baseline Dates and Maximum Allowable Increases (effective 07/25/2008) Table 2. Baseline Dates Table 3. Maximum Allowable Increases 18 AAC 50.025. Visibility and Other Special Protection Areas (effective 06/21/1998) 18 AAC 50.030. State Air Quality Control Plan (effective 10/29/2010) 18 AAC 50.035. Documents, Procedures, and Methods Adopted by Reference (effective 04/01/2010) 18 AAC 50.040. Federal Standards Adopted by Reference (effective12/09/2010) except (h)(2) 18 AAC 50.045. Prohibitions (effective 10/01/ 2004) 18 AAC 50.050. Incinerator Emissions Standards (effective 07/25/2008) Table 4. Particulate Matter Standards for Incinerators 18 AAC 50.055. Industrial Processes and Fuel-Burning Equipment (effective 12/ 09/2010) except (a)(3) through (a)(9), (b)(2)(A), (b)(3) through (b)(6), (e) and (f) 18 AAC 50.065. Open Burning (effective 01/ 18/1997) 18 AAC 50.070. Marine Vessel Visible Emission Standards (effective 06/21/ 1998) 18 AAC 50.075. Wood-Fired Heating Device Visible Emission Standards (effective 05/ 06/2009) 18 AAC 50.080. Ice Fog Standards (effective 01/18/1997) 18 AAC 50.085. Volatile Liquid Storage Tank Emission Standards (effective 01/18/ 1997) 18 AAC 50.090. Volatile Liquid Loading Racks and Delivery Tank Emission Standards (effective 07/25/2008) 18 AAC 50.100. Nonroad Engines (effective 10/01/2004) 18 AAC 50.110. Air Pollution Prohibited (effective 05/26/1972)
Article 2. Program Administration 18 AAC 50.200. Information Requests (effective 10/01/2004) 18 AAC 50.201. Ambient Air Quality Investigation (effective 10/01/2004)


### 7522 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules

18 AAC 50.205. Certification (effective 10/01/ 2004) except (b) 18 AAC 50.215. Ambient Air Quality Analysis Methods (effective 10/29/2010) Table 5. Significant Impact Levels (SILs) 18 AAC 50.220. Enforceable Test Methods (effective 10/01/2004) 18 AAC 50.225 Owner-Requested Limits (effective 12/09/2010) except (c) through (g) 18 AAC 50.230. Preapproved Emission Limits (effective 07/01/2010) except (d) 18 AAC 50.235. Unavoidable Emergencies and Malfunctions (effective 10/01/2004) 18 AAC 50.240. Excess Emissions (effective 10/01/2004) 18 AAC 50.245. Air Episodes and Advisories (effective 10/01/2004) Table 6. Concentrations Triggering an Air Episode
Article 3. Major Stationary Source Permits 18 AAC 50.301. Permit Continuity (effective 10/01/2004) except (b) 18 AAC 50.302. Construction Permits (effective 12/09/2010) 18 AAC 50.306. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permits (effective 12/ 09/2010) except (c) and (e) 18 AAC 50.311. Nonattainment Area Major Stationary Source Permits (effective 10/ 01/2004) except (c) 18 AAC 50.316. Preconstruction Review for Construction or Reconstruction of a Major Source of Hazardous Air Pollutants (effective 12/01/2004) except (c) 18 AAC 50.321. Case-By-Case Maximum Achievable Control Technology (effective 12/01/04) 18 AAC 50.326. Title V Operating Permits (effective12/01/2004) except (c)(1), (h), (i)(3), (j)(5), (j)(6), (k)(1), (k)(3), (k)(5), and (k)(6) 18 AAC 50.345. Construction, Minor and Operating Permits: Standard Permit Conditions (effective 11/09/2008) 18 AAC 50.346. Construction and Operating Permits: Other Permit Conditions (effective 12/09/2010) Table 7. Standard Operating Permit Condition

Article 4. User Fees

18 AAC 50.400. Permit Administration Fees (effective 07/01/2010) except (a)(2), (a)(5), (j)(2) through (j)(5), (j)(8), and (j)(13) 18 AAC 50.403. Negotiated Service Agreements (effective 07/01/2010) 18 AAC 50.410. Emission Fees (effective 07/ 10/2010) 18 AAC 50.499. Definition for User Fee Requirements (effective 01/29/2005)

Article 5. Minor Permits

18 AAC 50.502. Minor Permits for Air Quality Protection (effective 12/09/2010) except (b)(1) through (b)(3), (b)(5), (d)(1)(A) and (d)(2)(A) 18 AAC 50.508. Minor Permits Requested by the Owner or Operator (effective 12/07/ 2010) 18 AAC 50.510. Minor Permit—Title V Permit Interface (effective 12/09/2010) 18 AAC 50.540. Minor Permit: Application (effective 12/09/2010) 18 AAC 50.542. Minor Permit: Review and Issuance (effective 12/09/2010) except (a), (b), (c), and (d) 18 AAC 50.544. Minor Permits: Content (effective 12/09/2010) 18 AAC 50.560. General Minor Permits (effective 10/01/2004) except (b)

Article 9. General Provisions 18 AAC 50.990. Definitions (effective 12/09/ 2010)

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2011–3004 Filed 2–9–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION** 

**NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION** 

**48 CFR Part 24**

**[FAR Case 2009–004; Docket 2010–0089, Sequence 2]** 

**RIN 9000–AL59**

**Federal Acquisition Regulation; Enhancing Contract Transparency** 

**AGENCY :**  Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

**ACTION :**  Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.

**SUMMARY :**  DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing this document to summarize and respond to the comments received in response to the advance notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register at 75 FR 26916, May 13, 2010. This information was used to determine if the FAR should be amended to provide for further transparency in Government contracts.

DoD, GSA, and NASA acknowledge the comments and solutions provided and will take this information into account, at a later date, in determining if the FAR should be amended to further enhance transparency in Government contracting.

At this time, DoD, GSA, and NASA do not plan to amend the FAR because some of the existing acquisition systems

at http://www.acquisition.gov provide certain information on Government contracts that is readily available to the public, and most of the content of a contract solicitation or contract action not already available on one of the acquisition systems at http:// www.acquisition.gov is either standard FAR terms and conditions available at https://www.acquisition.gov/far/ index.html, agency specific terms and conditions available from the contracting agency Web site, or sensitive information that may be releasable under FOIA.

**DATES :**  The advance notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register at 75 FR 26916, May 13, 2010, is withdrawn as of February 10, 2011.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For clarification of content, contact Mr. Michael Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at (202) 208–4949. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat at (202) 501–4755. Please cite FAR Case 2009–004.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

DoD, GSA, and NASA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (75 FR 26916, May 13, 2010) requesting information that would assist in determining how best to amend the FAR to enable public posting of contract actions, should such posting become a requirement in the future, without compromising (1) contractors’ proprietary and confidential commercial or financial information or (2) Government-sensitive information. The transparency effort is intended to promote efficiency in Government contracting consistent with the Administration’s memorandum entitled Transparency and Open Government (January 21, 2009, available at: http:// www.whitehouse.gov/the

_ press

_ office/ TransparencyandOpenGovernment/ ). This is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to review under Section 6(b) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. Discussion of Public Comments

In response to the May notice, 15 respondents, including Government agencies, industry associations, advocacy groups, and private individuals, submitted a total of 44 comments. The comments fall into nine categories, each of which is discussed in the following sections. 1. Public Meeting

Comments: Two respondents commented on the usefulness of a public meeting. The first respondent favored a public meeting so that the costs associated with publicly posting contracts could be addressed. Another respondent stated that holding a public meeting on the methods by which contracts will be made public and the types of information that should be