Document 4JwLwjEMr8ybrYE3XYbVMG51e

fiwnfcrm. jfttt"" The revisions are.heinrprapnad under a proceduro tttioi iptoriW processing'* {47 BUifWS). ifthe prepMedtetttims ai*sbst*atislly changed in amts other than Hums idsattSed in this notice, EPA will rrobatt those changes end may publish a revised NPR. if no subwa.ltia! changes are made other than thawr'draB# cited in thu notice, EPAwHl publJ0sFinal Rolwnaking Nbtice'orftM revisions. The fine! ruiemafcirw action by BA will occur only after the SIP revisions have hens adopted by Cortnecticut and sabodhep to EPA for incorporation into the SIP. tortile! processing will reduce the time necessary for. Soil approval of these SIP revisions by 3 to 4 months. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve the draft SIP revision!* described in tiwrffcitice with the.ondmtatiimg thatthe corrections discussed shove will be msde in the final revisions. The Office of Manag* ment end Budget has exempted this rule from the requirement* of.section 3- olExecutive Order 12291. Under S U.S.G. section flOSfbf. L certify that this SSP revision will not have significant economic impact on a substantia! number of small entities. (See 48 FR 8703.) The Administrator's dedsioa to approve or disapprove the plan revisions will be based on whether it meets the requirements of sections tl0taM2)lAHK) and 110UH3) o the Glean Air Act as amended, and EPA regulations .in 40 CHI Part Si, Throe revisions an bejng.pnpMwd ptanncta sections 110(a} and 3Cri(a) of tin Cfcan Air Act m amended (42 US.C?41*5 and TtSOlfa)}. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Air pollution i ornroi. Ozone Sulfur Aides. Nitrogen dioxide. Lead. Particulate matter. Carbon monoxide. Hydrocarbons, intergovernmental relations. t)al -d. Ottoi.t-r 2B, 1984 Michael R. Delano. Revianal Adn.tnatlrolor. Region l. (FR Doe at-32Str Piled 12-18-84: 8:45 ami muj*e cooe isw-swi 40 CPU Itat 7S3 * fOPHWfW* TM4W*nM! A<j*BCV?-Eavifisfisrisniafl 'Protection Agency (EPA). ACTKWK Response to Citizens*.Petition. stMtatapytrlbe j&iviitnmantai Rotestion Agency (EPAJ isgrcaing spettios filed undereetkai'ilofithaT'oxhB ' Substances ControlAetflSCAlby the Nataral Resources Defense GotandL fan., to prohibit the use ofasbestos in automohile-and.tmek brakes: EPA bos commenoedhit appropriate proceeding to address the risks which maybe pewd by this use ofasbestem. (MtsyfrSubmit written comments on or before March 13.1965. wiTOiiim t,^mi"w/t*.?.rg in triplicate Identified fay the document control number (OPTO-tttfHSJ to: TSCA Public fafanaatins Office (TSW93). Office ofToxic Sobsiance*. Environmental Prolectiea Agency. Rm. E-TO7. m, M. St, SW- WaMMagton. D.G mao. A copy of ifae petition and related information (with any confidential business tafo-mation deleted]!* located in: Room E-l,,7. Environmental Pi otecttosTAgency. 401 MSL, SVT. Wasbingtiffi, DC2MG0.. This material is available faruewing and cqRyJaklraii sjsb.' to ijunMonday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. nramm wFeHmwtwua: Edward .A. Klein. Director. 1SCA Assistance Office fTB-TSB). Office of Toxic Sobstaaces, Environmental Protection Agency. Rm. E~MS, 401 M StSW, Washington, D.C. 20430. Toll-free: (S00-4M-MW}. In Washington. D.C-- (554-MW1, Outside the USA: (Operator--202-554- 1434). L Introduction Section 21 of the Toxic Snbetacces Control Act (TSCA). 1511.8.0.2820. provides that any person may petition the Administrator afEFA to initiate a proceeding fut the issuance, umendr.e.it. or repeal of a rule under v annus sections of the Act. EPA may hold a public hearing or may conduct an appropriate investigation to determine whether the petition should be granted. ETA must either grant or deny the petit ior v-tlbir 90 days. If EPA grants h p,. .lion. EPA shall promptly i.eminence nn appropriate proceeding. If EPA dentes the petition, the reasons for denial must be published in the Federal Register, and the petitioner may waSSSBiiilliiiiSlliiifciaiiis mu aiteiBt saieilSaiiiiis court C the Untied States , EPA to inidata as rssjueetei talhaMWtofaatlmiBM*- ovil action must fat nW within flQSiy after A'sdwrf^f tint potion or. if KPA fails to grout m dtayiht petition wite 80 days ate- te poifc&ss-fUed within 60 days fafewa^.a^titgfii of . the flD-day responae period. il. Evaluation of the Petition 4. Introduction Op September 12, tt64t&A'Mceivad a petition from that Natural Resources Defense Councfi, lac. (NRDCj, requesting that EPA prohibit the further use of esbestoafasrtfatemObfle and ton* brakes undergdfe of TSC.V. The petition roquebtadaprottibiUoa of nsbestos ht-tethfaNkN for new cars and trucks end in replsesSRnt beaker for existing vehicles. The petition argued that theriaksposMfay aAtsSosini broke* are unreasoiiab&rand that . womanlly and bdtaiaifiyfeasible substitute* an anRahk. hi water tapnoa^ate akfmtiM Wider TSCA rircHan At ftp ' consider a number df factotertedmiiRg. among other tMnp, the effects f a idiemical subettmee on femnasrhealdt and the magnitude ofexponam the benefits ofatiUciitg&e Kbltmce; tmd_ the avaitefartr^^^ or uses bfthe ssjfetfeoce'bring'eaaefri. is VS.C 2005(cKD. IfafaAjemjylntr i.mductod a review ef the available information pertaining to tile use of asbestos in brakes, fadtiding die information tit NRDCs fmcitionL A summary of that review, htdoffingan evaluation of tire risks posed by mis tree snd the availability of substitute*, is pr***r-Titfff h'-taw H HttA Presented by Asbestos Asbestos is a demonstrated human careinogen that causes lung cancer end mesothelioma (a cancer of the, (heat and abdominal finings)..as, wettMpftpr lung disorder*. People are exposed to. aabeatos throughout the life cycle of the substance--when asbestos is mined. mMed. procoased fahricsited into tmlvs'jial and oonaumergtEoductt, and h in<n those producta are used, repaired, disposed ci. , WiUi regard to the use of asbestoein hi .ike*, it has besa estima`ed that about 1 ' vi people are potentially exposed i>n mg primary manufacturing of brake ir > non materials, and that about 550.000 po ipie ere potentially exposed to asliestos during servicinp. and reodi; ui vehicle brakes (Ref. 6). For exampk. arsons ia btake service and repeii heps typically are exposed to asoeM.m. wtodilrtta'tiAfrfivM tOn fOit i--X^WfWStinfWml ilfltrjMwft am rtfMStyfiSWTW&ffaQ^wMSi prafKTttM SK Wtteffl taUtt as* raKjMtd. ' Use of asbestos tovehicle bndoM may MtMrtrataM ssttenf afc. fm example.'EPA ha* m'^man- tfast motor vehicie brakingjaMt tfeetyoontribates between 0.23 to 1-3 percen* of the concentration of asbestos in the ambient eir (Ref. ?). Both genera! psfw.toswj'and workplace exposures to asbestos fibers from its ese in'brakes may wait is an increased ftmnberbf aAerios-reiated illnesses, indfodhtg i C...A valiability ofSabstUMes. The petitioner aMfts that economically ami teJbttaii% feasible ouoguime& to! franteiiT I fibnk.-nvaiaUe to i asbestos to-'fetAw.'ERAisa# t tie avaifaWitjr of adltetfia&ia fmmmf that analysis is saiiiiiaiiiiiirtiaii to Appendix A-ofititti.'Vflfniatoy te&pKt Analysis eMCoqtrole m fmhmtm- PnMfocto'VfReL 2J. whMi to tudoded In the pubic rerauid adsliahMi far NRDCs section S petitkiBuHPA acknowledge* tlntai asbestos twain brakes era i devekpadwMi that EEA's. may notwhack recent cfovetopments. 1. Heavy mhidebmks blocks. Brake Mocks art canfxxtenta of bratea Sbat are riveted-or boikai to tbs asides of brake shoes to provide protection against the beat and wear cmased by braking. Heavy vehicle brake blocks are used on heavy duly trades, buses, and other heavy duty vehicles. Aboat $4 percent of all asbestos used in brakes is in this catogosy of vast. Asbestos heavy vehicle brake blocks account tor about Mtpeftenf of the markerfor heat? vanfole brake blocks. Until recently, the only coBafedafly available substitute for aabmos heavy vehicle brake blocks was h semimetallk brake block using brass and zinc chips in an organic binder, ft is not considered as good as asbestos because it performs erratically at different temperatures It is also considered inferior to the asbestos brake block in resisting wear and minimizing brake fade Recently, aramid fiber products, such as Kevlar, have been introduced, bat aramid fiber products are now more expensive titan asbestos products, and there is not sufficient evidence to determine whether aramid fiber products will be as effective as asbestos in this application, information suggests that such products may last longer than asbestos-based products, but verification^ I informatic*!Jj?twM^ .- price and efficacy of the products are needed %iM ttMHMBfiniM1 ^ whether continued use of asbestoHA151* brake blocks i risk. L. Light andmedium vehicle drum - brake liaines. Drum brake lining# are tad* ofUctkBnHi(lin& ssfachajanw ~ carvedeast*! shoes' to a drum brake. About 46 penmi of aO-astos&te aaed in brakes-is in id* category ofnan. vnhicla nsbestms dram brake toting* may be used in bath the front and rear brakes OfBght mat mmdhm-mdA*rn, primarily onthfeiswntwheels.However. awtpta'rajffrvelackssffitihtwtBra brake linings on themr mdseek. At least 00 peMant of dstua brake tintogr,. are still asbestos. Until recentlyihe only sahsltaiteto&W . asbestos brakeiking*'wifdi appeared to have any potential were sejasineteJlk brake linum. Howwrezjhese j tend to perform rralio#% aft temperatures.Jade and jgradoee more noise than.aibeti-itos^ikkP- More recently, brake finings made with aramid fiber have been dgyetoped. However, these are bums expensive than the asbestos.product andthere is not currently enough information available to {a&e the petfonaanoB of aramid fiber fcrixe lkkgtu1%tbe.rs5ore, EPA's evidence indicate* fhaflarge vocome prOGtlCtnJSff xn vsf&xEt SWr brakes may -require tortwtontwS retooting by brake manufacturers. 'Therefore, aramid fiber brakes may not be avathfUa te subsiatofaftplantfifies for several years. 3.Heavy vehicle dkcbnAe parte. Disc brake pads are toed plates lined with friction tuaSertok whid rah against a rater. Heavyvehiete rarely use disc brakes. About 0.1 percent ofM asbestos used in bstoces is in this categoiry of ase. Sato*eSss4bcMcferake-p*ds an about 20 percent more expensive testa the asbestairriisetank*pads he* they last about 30 percent longer. The semimetallics disc brake pads are not considered to be good general replacements for asbestos disc brake pads for heavy vehicles because semimetallics perform better than asbestos only in hostile, high-friction, high-heat environments. 4. Light and medium vehicle disc brake pads. These are the same as disc brake pads for heavy vehicles, except they are smaller. About 20 percent of all asbestos used in brakes is in this category of use. In the disc brake market semimetallic brakes have already made larger inroads, aftd'hs m the drum brake linings market, aramtd- based brakes are just beginning to be introduced. Approximately 50 percent of .idmialB'eJiHKs*^-l_fCer-,a kesh Vt-Vet tffe'eHginal epq--uT-i-Sp--Cm--enseito--nrti.e ' t semimetallic. ia ^G^toamwWf WilA1 after-mifitbt ^pMSgiiitdlfiTtfefbraff' of disc brakes are asbestoraWIKt percent sea ssasaaatatiic. Semijssta^fc disc bratas cost approximately 3 Bdki as much aa the asbestosthaebrakepadfc'brt tiaeytat about 4&pifQimt ioeger dmthe asbestosjtoda. iSemteetaHic disc brake pack cannot-ashstitete for sabestos dt#t taka pad* ta emy applicattoia because of inferiorjarfarffianca charactacuhcs. RPA kos.tnfoauitfoadndieatirtg the! esnmtafiic disc, brake# aiteuld he used, only hi cats with power brake systems Ixscaune olberwisa the aeinimelailic brakes nti^y not provide enough, stopping power, pPA also has Iafurmaiimi that the sefoimetaltic brakes are .slightly inferior because die user has to push harder or, them before they are warmed up to get the came performance aa with asbestos brakes. EPA is aware that a good deal of prodnet reatwreii 1* being-diwito rievekp affective aabititotoaforasbestos ia-iirakes. EBAto-seeking additional tofaemtte ee substitutes for asbestos in brakes. EPA has deckled to grant ftFRDCs petition beaste the Aqgency beitoves that the use of asbestos in brakes does presoot.risksto.human health. EPA is initiatinga jmMMdtog to gather information rat the desirability and feasibility of reducing risks associated with the use of asbestos in.brakes. EPA will analyze the exposure born uses of. asbestos, the risk presented by those uses, and the substitutes for such uses. EPA will also stotbwinformation of the price, efficacy, and availability of substitute* for-asbeatorin brakes. After analysis tst thin iofcaiBatiou, EPA-will deteratirntwha! farther action# appropriate toatUreq&tha risks which maybe pott&iqr tte an dfASintos. Based onlnfonaation ravievrod to date, EPA is not prepared to makeen unreasonable risk finding for an immediate ban ofail uses of asbestos in brakes aY this time. Effrctive substitutes may not be available for certain upplicutionn of asbestos in brakes and substitutes lor other applications are not available in sufficient quantity because of limited production capacity. Retooling may be required to make substitutes available in large volumes. The Agency invites the public to submit comments on issues relating to the petition. IPA fa particularly interested in receiving information on both the current availability of substitutes for asbestos In brakes and 005674 f Ffiipi msMtTM / voi, No. MB f .Weditoaday,. December 191 IfSfr / ftoopcrattf gates i 4MBt on nw#ubOtat*|TOlt-lh*' an. Waiver Program. 1 fee prsfw#e4 currently toning ,$*iyai{a*i.Tfce AffeRcy has an ongoing woricgrouft reb.cto will cppliemMon raqaireaBaot wawiMcemme an applicant with an tippet Uab review theett owatA- will conttae to amputation or limb impairment to be investigate th aveilfeMHar ofeffective ttsbeetoa-free substitute* for usa in capable of toiaoB*tsetoig prehension and power grasp in each upper hrob. vehicle bcakes. m& consider The FHWA has had a fang-standing appropriate option* to address the nsk policy of requiring upper limb applicants presented fey asfeesto* ia brakes. to demonstrate prehension and power IV. Record grasp. This proposed action.would incorporate that policy into the rule. El`A has established a record for date: Comments must be received on or information relating to the NRDC before February 2.1985. petition. The record includes information considered by ERA hi developing this response ondeonsuto of ADORES* AU comments ebook) refer to the docket nsttber and notice number that appear at the top of this document the following categorietcf Informations fi) The fCRDC petition^ (2j Appendix A ofihe "Regulator Impact Analysis oftonfrols on ' v Asbestos Product*." and should be submitted fn triplicate, to room 3-K*4. Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety. 409 Seventh Street. SW. Washington, D.C. 250801 f3) Other Information on sobsUiutes FOR FURTHER INTORiSATlOtitMH'Men fur asbestos in brakes. Mr. Neill L Thomas, Bureau of Motor (4) Information received from the Cari^or Mr ` pufeJic concemfng the petition. Thomas P. Holiao, Office of the Chief {S] Memoranda summarizing meetings Counsel 12D2| 42fW1Wb. Federal end telephone conversations with the Highway Administration Department < f public concerning the petition. ftt) Appendix { of the "Regulatory Trensporta'ion. 400 Seventh St., 8VV.. Washington. D.C. 20590. Offii hour* lr.:; art Analysis of Controls on are from ":45 a.m. to445 J>4fe. e-L, Asbestos Products." Monday through Friday. {7} Appendix N of the "Regulatory 8UMUUMMWF MFOMSfeTHM: The impact Analysis of Controls on qualifications for drivers who drive in Asbeito* prci' ns." interstate or foreign commerce are found A public v; rsion of the record, in 49 CFR Par. 391. Among these without any i onfidenbal business Mfonniit.on. is available to the public in t1.; CJff'.v of Toxic Substances Public Information Office from 8 a.m. to 4 p m.. Monday through Friday, except legal imbdavs 1 he Public Information Office is lor.nted in Rm. E-107. 401 M St.. SW,, vVashir.g'on. DC. Dn'i-d' Dvcer.ije: 14. tOH4 William D. Ruckalshaus. A.ir:m:<,!ro:'j (FR Doc. 84-11130 Filed I2-ir-4: 1 M rm| qualifications are certain: physical standards. 49 CFR SSI-41. Twtt of die lyrical standards concern drivers who av e had an amputation of a !iml or who have a limb impairment. 49 CFR 391.41(b) (1) and (2). These two conditions ere subject to the waiver piuvisiors of 49 CFR 391.49. Waiver of Certain Physical Defttts Parugrapn (d) of | 391.49 l.s'.r > ,ht types nf documents that must accompany the letter cf apphcaium for *. waiver, it is proposed that paragraph WUM9 COOC ttMHtHMMM fdj(3) be expanded to give notice to an applicant that he or she must be capable of demonstrating prehension and power DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION grass in each upper limb separately. In Federal Highway Administration effect, this will require the use c f a limb prosthesis for an upper limb amputee 49 CFR Part 391 IBMCS Docket No. MC-111; Node* No. 84SI applicant who has been disqualified under 8 391.41(b)(1). A limb-impaired applicant would be required to wear an orthotic device if he or she was not Qualifications of Drivers-- Handicapped Driver Waiver Program capable of demonstrating prehension and power grasp in each uppe- limb without a device agency: Federil Hiphwav Administration (FHWA). DOT. ACTION: Nu'h e of proposed rulem-ikies In 1977. the FHWA contracted w;:h the Krusen Center for Research ard Engineering of the Moss Rehabdi'auor Hospital in Philadelphia. Pennsylvania summasy: The FHWA proposes to to develop a booklet or. the amputee amend the Federal Motor Carrier Safety commercial driver. A principal part of Regulations by dan lying an application the booklet. "Limb Prosthetics for the requirement of the Handicapped Driver Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety." wus the devetopmmii !&*<* MtotoflHaer Functional Matrix. Chart; vOFMGb.Tb* ADFMC identified ertfimi iriyjqWi . associated with specific types of amputation or iimb-Impnurmeni and graded its difficulty given the specific handicap type'. The dtartrean predicated on the behalf that a driver with an upper Hmb amputation or limbimpairment must swear a {nopertyfitted ard appropriate prosthetic irortbetie device to properly and safely operate a commercial motor vehicle. Limbimpaired applicants may nolrequirenn orthotic device if they can demonstrate prehension and power f/asp without one. Subsequently, the FHWA instituted s policy that all upper limb amputee applicants must hav a properly fitted and appropriate prosthesis. b proficient in its use. and use the prosthesis while driving to be considered for a waiver. Limb impaired applicants must have a ptuporly fitted and appropriate orthotic ilfi it r, he profit.ient in its use. and use the orthotic device while driving to be cour iered for a waiver, or be capable of demonstrating prehension and power grasp without i n orthotic device. Because this requirement is not specifically stated ta the waiver program rule, there has been some confusion among waiver applicants. By stating the requirement In the waiver prog-sm rule, we would inform the applicant initially of a-, important program requirement and avoid later confusion or misunderstanding It has been and continues to be the intent of the FHWA that all amputee or lhnb;mpiiirt'd drivers, who are granted wa vers, have prehension and power (.r.irp nbili'y in both upper limbs when driving ,i commercial motor vehicle. Tb>' CIIWA has had a long-standing policy that requires prehension and power grasp with each upper limb separately. This proposal merely expresses that policy and places no additional burden on the affected p- ;puia:ion. The anticipated economic impact of this proposed action, if any is negligible. Therefore, a full regulatory ev-.t'iHticn has not been prepared. The FHWA has determined that tins iio( .'inr-nt nntains neither major n,le und* i F.xecutive Order 12.91 or a s:gndii..ir.t regulation under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of'Transportation Fur the re.tsnns stated above and under the i.n'cria nf t!- Regulatory Flexibility Act [Pub L 96-154; the FHWA hereby ceitifies that this rulemaking, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impart on a substantia! r.t riber of small ent.i.es 005675 Motor currier--driver waivers. Motor vm&e safety. PART MI-TAMENOEDl ia consideration of the foregoing, the FriWA is propoiing to revise 49 CFR 391 4S(dM3} (i) ttOd (ii) to teed u folio***; 3814 War*f rartafetF*sysic*i 9*** (d) ` * 13) * * * (1) The medical evaluation summary, for a driver applicont disqualified under 1301.41(b)(1), .ahaB include; 4AJ An. assessment of die driver's functional capabilities as they relate to the driver's ability to perform normal taks associated with operating a motor vehicle; and fB) A statement that the applicant is capable of demonstrating prehension and power grasp with each upper limb separately; or (ii) The medical evaluation summary, for e-driver applicant disqualified tinder 1391.41(b)(2). shall include; (A) An explanation as to how and why the impaired area interferes with the driver's ability to perform normal tasks associated with ape'sting a motor vehicle; (B) An aseMHMmt ef whathar the condition wffl Hfee^'ramtlmnedlesHy stable over.the driver applicant's lifetime and (C) A statement that the applicant is capable of demonstrating prehension and power grasp with each tipper limb separately. (49 U.S.C. 3102.49 CFR 148 tnd 301410) (Catalog of Ft-deril Domestic Assistance Number70217, Motor Carrier Safety. The regulation* implementing Executive Order 12372 rageTrflns lalerfevsnuesntsi consuitarkm on Pads**! Programs and. activuies apply taihi* program) iMued oo; Daambm-U. ISM. Director. Boreas of Motor Gefme Safety. IPR Doc 84-32868 Hied 13-16^84: *48 ami cutunoottas -* INTERSTATE XMfeI ODMUmOII 49CfMien (Ex Faria He. MSuti-18] Heicur Car fir* and Car Santo* *asar Interstate Commerce Commission. action: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking Sxteaawn of time far Sling reply comments. SUMUMto Art9nt27m!Jaly8.'t9e4 (comlimrfdfe sictentkri'ttWtt 83027. Augustm tdtit). the OramnitSkM instituted a prbeeed&qfte-consider alteraatiw* to its bokcaniedition M it pertainrto car hire and ear service rules for boxcars. Interested parties have requested that the time-far ftlingrepiy comments be extended ferns'Dabstflber 24.1864, to February 7.1965. An . extension is necessary to enable" proper evaluation of and response to'complex proposals submitted fisfeftial comments. Because of the Overwhelming request for additional thtid andtookofoppbsittcm. threrMtotixtittsion is granted. DATW:"Reply comments are due on or before February 7.1961 AOORttS: An original and 15 copies of reply comments referring,(o Ex Parte No. 346 (Sub-No..IS) should be sen! to; Office of the Secretary, Case Control Branch. Intentste Commerce Commission. Washington. DC 20423. Reply comments must also be served on all parties of record in both Ex Parte No. 348 (Sub-No. 19) and Ex Parte No. 346 (Sub-No. 8). . root pusmtm mfmiatiom contact: Louis E. Gitomer. (202) 275-7245. Decided: December tz 1964. By the Commission. Rtet* H. Tsyior. (r.. Chairman. |nwH. Bayao. Secretary. [FR Doc. 84-32965 Fife! 12-18-64:8:45 am) stuMo con m-ti-it 005675