Public Call Information: Dial: 833-568-8864, Confirmation Code: 161 296 7302.

Join from the meeting link: https://www.zoomgov.com/j/1612967302.

Members of the public may listen to this discussion through the above call-in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind and hard of hear hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and confirmation code.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324 or emailed to David Barreras dbarreras@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (312) 353-8311.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Mississippi Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

Public Call Information: Dial: (833) 568-8864, Confirmation Code: 160 491 7299.

Zoom Link: https://www.zoomgov.com/j/1604917299 Members of the public may listen to this discussion through the above call in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Individual who is deaf, deafblind and hard of hear hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and confirmation code.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to David Barreras at dbarreras@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact David Barreras at (202) 656-8937.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Missouri Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its Procedures for Conducting Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to Commerce's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).

In accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty order(s) and suspended investigation(s):

As a courtesy, we are making information related to sunset proceedings, including copies of the pertinent statute and Commerce's regulations, Commerce's schedule for Sunset Reviews, a listing of past revocations and continuations, and current service lists, available to the public on Commerce's website at the following address: https://enforcement.trade.gov/sunset/. All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with Commerce's regulations regarding format, translation, and service of documents. These rules, including electronic filing requirements via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), can be found at 19 CFR 351.303.

In accordance with section 782(b) of the Act, any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(d), Commerce will maintain and make available a public service list for these proceedings. Parties wishing to participate in any of these five-year reviews must file letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d). To facilitate the timely preparation of the public service list, it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding submit an entry of appearance within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties who want access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (APO) to file an APO application immediately following publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation. Commerce's regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304-306. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 1

Domestic interested parties, as defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b), wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with Commerce's regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, Commerce will automatically revoke the order without further review. 2

If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, Commerce's regulations provide that all parties wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that Commerce's information requirements are distinct from the ITC 's information requirements. Consult Commerce's regulations for information regarding Commerce's conduct of Sunset Reviews. Consult Commerce's regulations at 19 CFR part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at Commerce.

Note that Commerce has amended certain of its requirements pertaining to the service of documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f). 3 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the day on which it is due.

In prior proceedings we have encouraged interested parties to provide an executive summary of their comments, including footnotes. In these sunset reviews, we request that interested parties provide at the beginning of their comments, an executive summary for each issue raised in their comments. Further, we request that interested parties limit their public executive summary of each issue to no more than 450 words, not including citations. We intend to use the public executive summaries as the basis of the comment summaries included in the decision memorandum that will accompany the notice to be published in the Federal Register . Finally, we request that interested parties include footnotes for relevant citations in the public executive summary of each issue.

This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c).

For further information, please visit the NEFSC website at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/population-assessments/fishery-stock-assessments-new-england-and-mid-atlantic. For additional information about research track assessment peer review, please visit the NEFSC web page at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/population-assessments/research-track-stock-assessments.

Daily Meeting Agenda—Research Track Peer Review Meeting

The agenda is subject to change; all times are approximate and may be changed at the discretion of the Peer Review Chair.

The meeting is open to the public; however, during the `Report Writing' session on Friday, March 14th, the public should not engage in discussion with the Peer Review Panel.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Special requests should be directed to Brian Hooper, via the email provided in the ADDRESSES section.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

The Groundfish Committee and Advisory Panel will meet to discuss Amendment 23 Review Metrics and Indicators. They will receive an update on the development of monitoring review metrics and indicators, including potential feedback for further refining the list of possible metrics and indicators. Also on the agenda is Framework Adjustment 68/Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) Control Rules, they plan to receive an update, including a work plan for integration with revised Risk Policy. The group will receive a brief update on the Redfish Sector Exemption Program Review. Other business will be discussed, as necessary.

Although non-emergency issues not contained on the agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. The public also should be aware that the meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Cate O'Keefe, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multi-step process including: (1) Data/Assessment Workshop, and (2) a series of webinars. The product of the Data/Assessment Workshop is a report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses, and describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, HMS Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

The items of discussion for the SEDAR 90 Data Webinar 1 are as follows:

The group will discuss available data streams/sources and their use in the assessment for South Atlantic red snapper.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 business days prior to each workshop.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multi-step process including: (1) Data Workshop, (2) a series of assessment webinars, and (3) A Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a report that compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The assessment webinars produce a report that describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The product of the Review Workshop is an Assessment Summary documenting panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, HMS Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

The items of discussion during the Data scoping webinar are as follows:

Participants will discuss what data may be available for use in the assessment.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 business days prior to each workshop.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

During this meeting the EOP Committee and AP will review a draft of the 2025 Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) risk assessment report. The draft report has been updated to reflect recent revisions to the risk assessment, incorporates the latest data and scientific information, including the 2025 Mid-Atlantic State of the Ecosystem report, and continued improvements to indicators based on previous input from the EOP Committee and AP. The EOP Committee and AP will provide any additional feedback before the 2025 EAFM risk assessment report is finalized and presented to the Council in April.

A detailed agenda and background documents will be made available on the Council's website ( www.mafmc.org ) prior to the meeting.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Shelley Spedden, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

The Skate and Monkfish Advisory Panels (AP) will meet to discuss nominations for a Monkfish AP Chair. They will receive an overview of 2025 Council work priorities for the Skate and Monkfish Fishery Management Plans. They plan to discuss research updates on skate and monkfish. They also plan to discuss the 2025 Monkfish and Skate Management Track Assessments. On the agenda, is the development of separate specifications actions for the Monkfish and Skate Fishery Management Plans (a) Fishing years 2026-2028 Monkfish specifications, (b) Fishing years 2026-2027 Skate specifications, (c) Range of potential measures (monkfish and skate possession limits, monkfish Days-At-Sea). They will also discuss plans for the Joint Monkfish-Skate Plan Development Teams to develop joint analyses on monkfish and skate fisheries overlap.

Other business will be discussed if necessary.

Although non-emergency issues not contained on the agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. The public also should be aware that the meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Cate O'Keefe, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

The purpose of the Proposed Action is to safely test and demonstrate the expeditious delivery of tons of materiel through space in support of ongoing research, development, test, and experimentation under the DAF Rocket Cargo Vanguard program. Under the Rocket Cargo Vanguard, the Air Force Research Laboratory is leading a science and technology effort to determine the viability and utility of using large commercial rockets for Department of Defense (DoD) global logistics, potentially expanding the portfolio of capabilities the United States Space Force presents to combatant commanders. The need for the Proposed Action is to advance novel space capabilities to transport materiel in hours anywhere around the globe. Current military modes of transportation require days to weeks of planning and logistics to provide materiel to distant locations at the time and place of need. The Proposed Action would explore the military utility of this technology to address rapid global mobility challenges by leveraging commercial technology to mature critical capabilities.

To begin the testing, demonstration, and evaluation of these capabilities as soon as 2025, the DAF's operational requirements necessitate use of a landing location that ensures public safety and adherence to applicable sections of 14 CFR part 450, Launch and Reentry Licensing Requirements, as implemented by the FAA, and limits impacts to ongoing military operations. In accordance with these operational requirements, the DAF further determined that the location must be remote, securable, U.S. Government-controlled, capable of air or maritime transport of personnel and materiel and support the disposition and removal of reentry vehicles via barged transport. Based on these operational requirements, the DAF identified several initial locations potentially capable of supporting reentry vehicle landings: Johnston Atoll, Kwajalein Atoll, Midway Island, and Wake Island. Upon further examination, the DAF concluded that Johnston Atoll is the only location that meets all operational requirements over the duration of the four-year reentry and landing test program. Therefore, Johnston Atoll is the alternative to be considered in the EA.

Johnston Island, an unincorporated territory of the United States within Johnston Atoll located in a broad ocean area, was identified as the safest and most viable location to meet operational requirements. Johnston Atoll includes the Johnston Atoll National Wildlife Refuge and is within the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument (PIHMNM). This area has historically enabled decades of DoD operations in support of national defense and holds important national ecological and cultural values.

Expected effects of the Proposed Action that will be analyzed in the EA include but are not limited to the potential effects on essential fish habitat, migratory birds, and other protected species. Potential effects to protected species will be addressed under consultation with USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate.

As required, the DAF will also analyze the no action alternative for this Proposed Action. The DAF will coordinate and consult as appropriate with the USFWS under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, and with the NMFS under Section 7 of the ESA, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Additionally, the DAF is committed to working with the FAA, USFWS, NMFS, other stakeholders, and interested parties to advance cultural, ecological and conservation protections at Johnston Atoll, the Johnston Atoll National Wildlife Refuge, and the PIHMNM.

OAC has received written requests for disinterment from the closest living descendent of each of the nineteen individuals. OAC will disinter and facilitate the transport and reinterment of the remains to private cemeteries chosen by the families and Tribes at government expense. This disinterment will be conducted under the authority of Army Regulation 290-5, in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) savings clauses at 25 U.S.C. 3009. Additional information related to Native Americans buried at the Carlisle Barracks Post Cemetery can be found at https://armycemeteries.army.mil/Cemeteries/Carlisle-Barracks-Main-Post-Cemetery.

Proposal to renew the following currently approved collection of information:

1. Title: Certification of Compliance with Mandatory Bars to Employment.

OMB Number: 3064-0121.

Form Number: 2120/16.

Affected Public: Individuals seeking employment from the FDIC.

Burden Estimate:

General Description of Collection: This information collection arises from the reporting requirements contained in 12 CFR part 336, subpart B, of the FDIC Rules and Regulations entitled “Minimum Standards of Fitness for Employment with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.” This rule implements Section 19 of the Resolution Trust Corporation Completion Act, Public Law 103-204, by (among other things) prescribing a certification, with attachments in some cases, relating to job applicants' fitness and integrity. More specifically, the statute provides that the FDIC shall issue regulations implementing provisions that prohibit any person from becoming employed by the FDIC who has been convicted of any felony; has been removed from, or prohibited from participating in the affairs of, any insured depository institution pursuant to any final enforcement action by any appropriate federal banking agency; has demonstrated a pattern or practice of defalcation regarding obligations to insured depository institutions; or has caused a substantial loss to federal deposit insurance funds. This collection of information implements these mandatory bars to employment through a certification, signed by job applicants prior to an offer of employment using Form 2120/16. There is no change in the methodology or substance of this information collection. The increase in total estimated annual burden from 88 hours in 2022 to 144 hours in this renewal is due to an increase in estimated number of respondents. We are renewing on the PRA-required 3-year renewal schedule despite the current Federal hiring freeze to ensure the FDIC can resume collecting this information from job applicants when the freeze is lifted.

Comments are invited on (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the FDIC's functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the estimates of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All comments will become a matter of public record.

The IHS is submitting the proposed information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as amended, and its implementing regulations. This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected agencies as required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d) concerning the proposed collection of information to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques of other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. A copy of the draft supporting statement is available at www.regulations.gov (see Docket ID [IHS_FRDOC_0001]. The Agency's 60-day notice (89 FR 104550) soliciting comments on the information collection was published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2024, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. No comments were received.

Title: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery: Indian Health Service Customer Service Satisfaction and Similar Surveys.

Type of Information Collection Request: Three-year extension approval of this information collection.

OMB Control Number: 0917-0036.

Abstract: The proposed information collection activity provides a means to garner qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. Qualitative feedback is information that provides useful insights on perceptions and opinions, but is not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and actionable communications between the Agency and its customers and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on the Agency's services will be unavailable.

The Agency will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:

• Information gathered will be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the Agency;

• Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions;

• Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study;

• The collections are voluntary;

• The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per respondent) and are low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal Government;

• The collections are non-controversial and do not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;

• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future; and

• With the exception of information needed to provide remuneration for participants of focus groups and cognitive laboratory studies, personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained.

Feedback collected under this generic clearance provides useful information, but it does not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: the target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential non-response bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.

As a general matter, information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

Current Actions: Extension of approval for a collection of information.

Type of Review: Extension.

Affected Public: Individuals and households, businesses and organizations, and Tribal governments.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 105,000.

Below are projected annual average estimates for the next 3 years:

Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: 100.

Average Number of Respondents per Activity: 1,050.

Annual Responses: 105,000.

Frequency of Response: Once per request.

Average Minutes per Response: 10.

Burden Hours: 17,500.

There are no direct costs to respondents to report.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Comment Due Date: Your comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having full effect if received within 30-days of the date of this publication.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) publishes a notice listing all HHS-certified laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITFs) in the Federal Register during the first week of each month, in accordance with Section 9.19 of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines) using Urine and Section 9.17 of the Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid. If any laboratory or IITF certification is suspended or revoked, the laboratory or IITF will be omitted from subsequent lists until such time as it is restored to full certification under the Mandatory Guidelines.

If any laboratory or IITF has withdrawn from the HHS National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) during the past month, it will be listed at the end and will be omitted from the monthly listing thereafter.

This notice is also available on the internet at https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/drug-testing-resources/certified-lab-list.

HHS separately notifies Federal agencies of the laboratories and IITFs currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines using Urine and of the laboratories currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid.

The Mandatory Guidelines using Urine were first published in the Federal Register on April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and subsequently revised in the Federal Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908); September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118); April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644); November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858); December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75122); April 30, 2010 (75 FR 22809); January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920); and on October 12, 2023 (88 FR 70768).

The Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid were first published in the Federal Register on October 25, 2019 (84 FR 57554) with an effective date of January 1, 2020, and subsequently revised in the Federal Register on October 12, 2023 (88 FR 70814).

The Mandatory Guidelines were initially developed in accordance with Executive Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Law 100-71 and allowed urine drug testing only. The Mandatory Guidelines using Urine have since been revised, and new Mandatory Guidelines allowing for oral fluid drug testing have been published. The Mandatory Guidelines require strict standards that laboratories and IITFs must meet in order to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on specimens for Federal agencies. HHS does not allow IITFs to conduct oral fluid testing.

To become certified, an applicant laboratory or IITF must undergo three rounds of performance testing plus an on-site inspection. To maintain that certification, a laboratory or IITF must participate in a quarterly performance testing program plus undergo periodic, on-site inspections.

Laboratories and IITFs in the applicant stage of certification are not to be considered as meeting the minimum requirements described in the HHS Mandatory Guidelines using Urine and/or Oral Fluid. An HHS-certified laboratory or IITF must have its letter of certification from HHS/SAMHSA (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests that the test facility has met minimum standards. HHS does not allow IITFs to conduct oral fluid testing.

In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid effective October 10, 2023 (88 FR 70814), the following HHS-certified laboratories meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on oral fluid specimens:

At this time, there are no laboratories certified to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on oral fluid specimens.

In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines using Urine effective February 1, 2024 (88 FR 70768), the following HHS-certified IITFs meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens:

In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines using Urine effective February 1, 2024 (88 FR 70768), the following HHS-certified laboratories meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens:

The following laboratory is voluntarily withdrawing from the National Laboratory Certification Program effective January 10, 2025:

* The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) voted to end its Laboratory Accreditation Program for Substance Abuse (LAPSA) effective May 12, 1998. Laboratories certified through that program were accredited to conduct forensic urine drug testing as required by U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations. As of that date, the certification of those accredited Canadian laboratories continued under DOT authority. The responsibility for conducting quarterly performance testing plus periodic on-site inspections of those LAPSA-accredited laboratories was transferred to the U.S. HHS, with the HHS' NLCP contractor continuing to have an active role in the performance testing and laboratory inspection processes. Other Canadian laboratories wishing to be considered for the NLCP may apply directly to the NLCP contractor just as U.S. laboratories do.

Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to be qualified, HHS will recommend that DOT certify the laboratory as meeting the minimum standards of the current Mandatory Guidelines published in the Federal Register . After receiving DOT certification, the laboratory will be included in the monthly list of HHS-certified laboratories and participate in the NLCP certification maintenance program. DOT established this process in July 1996 (61 FR 37015) to allow foreign laboratories to participate in the DOT drug testing program.

You may access the information collection instrument with instructions or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: https://www.regulations.gov and entering USCIS-2025-0002 in the search box. Comments must be submitted in English, or an English translation must be provided. All submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of https://www.regulations.gov.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

E.O. 14161, “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” directs implementation of uniform vetting standards and necessitates the collection of all information necessary for a rigorous vetting and screening of all grounds of inadmissibility or bases for the denial of immigration-related benefits. See 90 FR 8451 (Jan. 20, 2025). Execution of the E.O. requires U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to collect standard data on immigration forms and/or information collection systems. This data will be collected from certain populations of individuals on applications for immigration-related benefits and is necessary for the enhanced identity verification, vetting, and national security screening and inspection conducted by USCIS and required under the E.O.

This collection of information is necessary to comply with section 2 of the E.O. to establish screening and vetting standards and procedures to enable USCIS to assess an alien's eligibility to receive an immigration-related benefit from USCIS. This data collection is also used to validate an applicant's identity and to help determine whether such grant of a benefit poses a security or public-safety threat to the United States.

USCIS will collect biographic information on immigration information collection instruments and systems. USCIS will update its forms and systems to collect additional information from individuals who seek admissibility or other benefits when that information is not already collected.

U.S. Government departments and agencies involved in screening and vetting, to include USCIS, identified 24 data elements that would constitute a new baseline threshold of data to be collected for identity verification and national security vetting. For USCIS, these data elements will be added to certain immigration benefit request forms where the information is not already collected. The 24 core data elements are as follows:

The following seven (7) data elements are biographic identifiers used to help USCIS confirm both an individual's identity as it relates to the submitted application and to other records. These biographic identifiers are also used by USCIS and screening partners to help confirm or disprove an association between an applicant and information of interest and the strength of that association in the context of the underlying information.

The following data elements are a unique numeric identifier issued to a single individual that USCIS uses to help confirm both a person's identity and for DHS records. They are also used by USCIS and screening partners to help find, confirm, or disprove an association between an applicant, the strength of that association, or to provide other information about the individual that may be important in the adjudication. Applicants will be asked to provide current passport/travel/national identity document information, country of issuance, issue date, and expiration date, as applicable. Other USCIS forms request more information on passports or travel documents to include expired documents and passports containing a U.S. visa. The questions related to passport information are requested depending on benefit eligibility and national security needs. If additional information is needed for this data element, USCIS will revise the applicable OMB approved information collection under the form's control number and not add the additional questions using this generic approval.

The following 16 data elements are used by USCIS (1) to provide official correspondence to an applicant, and/or (2) as secondary data elements to help confirm a subject's identity as it relates to the submitted application and to other records, and/or (3) to, internally and with screening partners, help confirm or disprove an association between an applicant and information of interest, and the strength of that association in the context of the underlying information.

Applicant information is collected to maintain a record of persons applying for specific immigration benefits, and to help determine whether these applicants are eligible to receive the benefits for which they are applying. The information provided through USCIS forms is also analyzed—along with other information that the Secretary of Homeland Security determines is necessary, including information about other persons included on the USCIS forms—against various security and law enforcement databases to identify those applicants who may pose a security or public-safety risk to the United States.

(1) Type of Information Collection: New Collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Certain Information on Immigration Forms.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: GC-2025-0002; USCIS.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. E.O. 14161, “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” directs implementation of uniform vetting standards and necessitates collection of all information necessary for a rigorous vetting and screening of all grounds of inadmissibility or bases for the denial of immigration-related benefits. Execution of the E.O. requires U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to collect standard data on immigration forms and/or information collection systems. This data will be collected from certain populations of individuals on applications for immigration-related benefits and is necessary for the enhanced identity verification, vetting and national security screening, and inspection conducted by USCIS and required under the E.O.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection N-400 is 909,700 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.77 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-131 is 1,073,059 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.77 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-192 is 68,050 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.78 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-485 is 1,060,585 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.73 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-589 is 203,379 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.93 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-590 is 106,200 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.77 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-730 is 13,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.27 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-751 is 140,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.77 hour.

• The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-829 is 1,010 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.80 hour.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 2,750,064 hours.

(7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $0. No additional costs to the public are anticipated due to this action. Any costs to the respondents associated with the specific form filed are captured in those approved collections.

Background. —On February 26, 2009, the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) issued an antidumping duty order on imports of small diameter graphite electrodes from China (74 FR 8775). Commerce issued a continuation of the antidumping duty order on imports of small diameter graphite electrodes from China following Commerce's and the Commission's first five-year reviews, effective June 23, 2014 (79 FR 35523) and second five-year reviews, effective April 6, 2020 (85 FR 19134). The Commission is now conducting a third five-year review pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), to determine whether revocation of the order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the domestic industry within a reasonably foreseeable time. Provisions concerning the conduct of this proceeding may be found in the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure at 19 CFR part 201, subparts A and B, and 19 CFR part 207, subparts A and F. The Commission will assess the adequacy of interested party responses to this notice of institution to determine whether to conduct a full or expedited review. The Commission's determination in any expedited review will be based on the facts available, which may include information provided in response to this notice.

Definitions. —The following definitions apply to this review:

(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or kind of merchandise that is within the scope of the five-year review, as defined by Commerce.

(2) The Subject Country in this review is China.

(3) The Domestic Like Product is the domestically produced product or products which are like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the Subject Merchandise. In its original determination, its expedited first five-year review determination, and its full second five-year review determination, the Commission defined the Domestic Like Product as all small diameter graphite electrodes coextensive with Commerce's scope.

(4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. producers as a whole of the Domestic Like Product, or those producers whose collective output of the Domestic Like Product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the product. In its original determination, its expedited first five-year review determination, and its full second five-year review determination, the Commission defined the Domestic Industry as all U.S. producers of small diameter graphite electrodes.

(5) An Importer is any person or firm engaged, either directly or through a parent company or subsidiary, in importing the Subject Merchandise into the United States from a foreign manufacturer or through its selling agent.

Participation in the proceeding and public service list. —Persons, including industrial users of the Subject Merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the proceeding as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in § 201.11(b)(4) of the Commission's rules, no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the proceeding.

Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.

Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and APO service list. —Pursuant to § 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI submitted in this proceeding available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the proceeding, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the proceeding. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

Certification. —Pursuant to § 207.3 of the Commission's rules, any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with this proceeding must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best of the submitter's knowledge. In making the certification, the submitter will acknowledge that information submitted in response to this request for information and throughout this proceeding or other proceeding may be disclosed to and used: (i) by the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

Written submissions. —Pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules, each interested party response to this notice must provide the information specified below. The deadline for filing such responses is 5:15 p.m. on April 2, 2025. Pursuant to § 207.62(b) of the Commission's rules, eligible parties (as specified in Commission rule 207.62(b)(1)) may also file comments concerning the adequacy of responses to the notice of institution and whether the Commission should conduct an expedited or full review. The deadline for filing such comments is 5:15 p.m. on May 14, 2025. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of § 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on Filing Procedures, available on the Commission's website at https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission's procedures with respect to filings. Also, in accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the proceeding must be served on all other parties to the proceeding (as identified by either the public or APO service list as appropriate), and a certificate of service must accompany the document (if you are not a party to the proceeding you do not need to serve your response).

Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov ). No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice.

No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 25-5-630, expiration date June 30, 2026. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.

Inability to provide requested information. —Pursuant to § 207.61(c) of the Commission's rules, any interested party that cannot furnish the information requested by this notice in the requested form and manner shall notify the Commission at the earliest possible time, provide a full explanation of why it cannot provide the requested information, and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide equivalent information. If an interested party does not provide this notification (or the Commission finds the explanation provided in the notification inadequate) and fails to provide a complete response to this notice, the Commission may take an adverse inference against the party pursuant to § 776(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677e(b)) in making its determination in the review.

Information To Be Provided in Response To This Notice of Institution: As used below, the term “firm” includes any related firms.

Those responding to this notice of institution are encouraged, but not required, to visit the USITC's website at https://usitc.gov/reports/response_noi_worksheet, where one can download and complete the “NOI worksheet” Excel form for the subject proceeding, to be included as attachment/exhibit 1 of your overall response.

(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.

(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union or worker group, a U.S. importer of the Subject Merchandi se, a foreign producer or exporter of the Subject Merchandise, a U.S. or foreign trade or business association (a majority of whose members are interested parties under the statute), or another interested party (including an explanation). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, identify the firms in which your workers are employed or which are members of your association.

(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.

(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping duty order on the Domestic Industry in general and/or your firm/entity specifically. In your response, please discuss the various factors specified in section 752(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675a(a)) including the likely volume of subject imports, likely price effects of subject imports, and likely impact of imports of Subject Merchandise on the Domestic Industry.

(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the Domestic Like Product. Identify any known related parties and the nature of the relationship as defined in section 771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677(4)(B)).

(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise and producers of the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country that currently export or have exported Subject Merchandise to the United States or other countries after 2018.

(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the Domestic Like Product and the Subject Merchandise (including street address, World Wide Web address, and the name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of a responsible official at each firm).

(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the Domestic Like Product or the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or other markets.

(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, provide the following information on your firm's operations on that product during calendar year 2024, except as noted (report quantity data in metric tons and value data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms in which your workers are employed/which are members of your association.

(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the Domestic Like Product accounted for by your firm's(s') production;

(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the Domestic Like Product (that is, the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix);

(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s);

(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s); and

(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include both U.S. and export commercial sales, internal consumption, and company transfers) for your most recently completed fiscal year (identify the date on which your fiscal year ends).

(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that product during calendar year 2024 (report quantity data in metric tons and value data in U.S. dollars). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.

(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') imports;

(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of Subject Merchandise imported from the Subject Country; and

(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of Subject Merchandise imported from the Subject Country .

(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that product during calendar year 2024 (report quantity data in metric tons and value data in U.S. dollars, landed and duty-paid at the U.S. port but not including antidumping duties). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.

(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') production;

(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country (that is, the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix); and

(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') exports.

(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the Domestic Like Product that have occurred in the United States or in the market for the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country after 2018, and significant changes, if any, that are likely to occur within a reasonably foreseeable time. Supply conditions to consider include technology; production methods; development efforts; ability to increase production (including the shift of production facilities used for other products and the use, cost, or availability of major inputs into production); and factors related to the ability to shift supply among different national markets (including barriers to importation in foreign markets or changes in market demand abroad). Demand conditions to consider include end uses and applications; the existence and availability of substitute products; and the level of competition among the Domestic Like Product produced in the United States, Subject Merchandise produced in the Subject Country, and such merchandise from other countries.

(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the Domestic Like Product and Domestic Industry ; if you disagree with either or both of these definitions, please explain why and provide alternative definitions.

Authority: This proceeding is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules.

Background. —On April 21, 2020, the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) issued antidumping and countervailing duty orders on imports of wooden cabinets and vanities from China (85 FR 22126 and 22134). The Commission is conducting reviews pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), to determine whether revocation of the orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the domestic industry within a reasonably foreseeable time. Provisions concerning the conduct of this proceeding may be found in the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure at 19 CFR part 201, subparts A and B, and 19 CFR part 207, subparts A and F. The Commission will assess the adequacy of interested party responses to this notice of institution to determine whether to conduct full or expedited reviews. The Commission's determinations in any expedited reviews will be based on the facts available, which may include information provided in response to this notice.

Definitions. —The following definitions apply to these reviews:

(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or kind of merchandise that is within the scope of the five-year reviews, as defined by Commerce.

(2) The Subject Country in these reviews is China.

(3) The Domestic Like Product is the domestically produced product or products which are like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the Subject Merchandise. In its original determinations, the Commission defined a single Domestic Like Product consisting of wooden cabinets and vanities, coextensive with Commerce's scope.

(4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. producers as a whole of the Domestic Like Product, or those producers whose collective output of the Domestic Like Product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the product. In its original determinations, the Commission defined the Domestic Industry as those U.S. producers of the Domestic Like Product, but did not include (i) importers that assembled ready-to-assemble flat packs into assembled units and (ii) one firm for which appropriate circumstances existed to exclude from the Domestic Industry under the related party provision.

(5) The Order Date is the date that the antidumping and countervailing duty orders under review became effective. In these reviews, the Order Date is April 21, 2020.

(6) An Importer is any person or firm engaged, either directly or through a parent company or subsidiary, in importing the Subject Merchandise into the United States from a foreign manufacturer or through its selling agent.

Participation in the proceeding and public service list. —Persons, including industrial users of the Subject Merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the proceeding as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in § 201.11(b)(4) of the Commission's rules, no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the proceeding.

Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.

Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and APO service list. —Pursuant to § 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI submitted in this proceeding available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the proceeding, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the proceeding. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

Certification. —Pursuant to § 207.3 of the Commission's rules, any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with this proceeding must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best of the submitter's knowledge. In making the certification, the submitter will acknowledge that information submitted in response to this request for information and throughout this proceeding or other proceeding may be disclosed to and used: (i) by the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

Written submissions. —Pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules, each interested party response to this notice must provide the information specified below. The deadline for filing such responses is on or before 5:15 p.m. on April 2, 2025. Pursuant to § 207.62(b) of the Commission's rules, eligible parties (as specified in Commission rule 207.62(b)(1)) may also file comments concerning the adequacy of responses to the notice of institution and whether the Commission should conduct expedited or full reviews. The deadline for filing such comments is on or before 5:15 p.m. on May 14, 2025. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of § 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on Filing Procedures, available on the Commission's website at https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission's procedures with respect to filings. Also, in accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the proceeding must be served on all other parties to the proceeding (as identified by either the public or APO service list as appropriate), and a certificate of service must accompany the document (if you are not a party to the proceeding you do not need to serve your response).

Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov ). No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice.

No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 25-5-632, expiration date June 30, 2026. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.

Inability to provide requested information. —Pursuant to § 207.61(c) of the Commission's rules, any interested party that cannot furnish the information requested by this notice in the requested form and manner shall notify the Commission at the earliest possible time, provide a full explanation of why it cannot provide the requested information, and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide equivalent information. If an interested party does not provide this notification (or the Commission finds the explanation provided in the notification inadequate) and fails to provide a complete response to this notice, the Commission may take an adverse inference against the party pursuant to § 776(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677e(b)) in making its determinations in the reviews.

Information To Be Provided in Response to This Notice of Institution: As used below, the term “firm” includes any related firms.

Those responding to this notice of institution are encouraged, but not required, to visit the USITC's website at https://usitc.gov/reports/response_noi_worksheet, where one can download and complete the “NOI worksheet” Excel form for the subject proceeding, to be included as attachment/exhibit 1 of your overall response.

(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and email address of the certifying official.

(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union or worker group, a U.S. importer of the Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer or exporter of the Subject Merchandise, a U.S. or foreign trade or business association (a majority of whose members are interested parties under the statute), or another interested party (including an explanation). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, identify the firms in which your workers are employed or which are members of your association.

(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.

(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on the Domestic Industry in general and/or your firm/entity specifically. In your response, please discuss the various factors specified in § 752(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675a(a)) including the likely volume of subject imports, likely price effects of subject imports, and likely impact of imports of Subject Merchandise on the Domestic Industry.

(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the Domestic Like Product. Identify any known related parties and the nature of the relationship as defined in § 771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677(4)(B)).

(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise and producers of the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country that currently export or have exported Subject Merchandise to the United States or other countries since the Order Date.

(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the Domestic Like Product and the Subject Merchandise (including street address, World Wide Web address, and the name, telephone number, fax number, and email address of a responsible official at each firm).

(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the Domestic Like Product or the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or other markets.

(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, provide the following information on your firm's operations on that product during calendar year 2024, except as noted (report quantity data in units and value data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms in which your workers are employed/which are members of your association.

(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the Domestic Like Product accounted for by your firm's(s') production;

(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the Domestic Like Product (that is, the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix);

(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s);

(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s); and

(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include both U.S. and export commercial sales, internal consumption, and company transfers) for your most recently completed fiscal year (identify the date on which your fiscal year ends).

(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that product during calendar year 2024 (report quantity data in units and value data in U.S. dollars). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.

(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping or countervailing duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') imports;

(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of Subject Merchandise imported from the Subject Country; and

(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of Subject Merchandise imported from the Subject Country.

(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that product during calendar year 2024 (report quantity data in units and value data in U.S. dollars, landed and duty-paid at the U.S. port but not including antidumping or countervailing duties). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.

(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') production;

(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country (that is, the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix); and

(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') exports.

(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the Domestic Like Product that have occurred in the United States or in the market for the Subject Merchandise in the Subject Country since the Order Date, and significant changes, if any, that are likely to occur within a reasonably foreseeable time. Supply conditions to consider include technology; production methods; development efforts; ability to increase production (including the shift of production facilities used for other products and the use, cost, or availability of major inputs into production); and factors related to the ability to shift supply among different national markets (including barriers to importation in foreign markets or changes in market demand abroad). Demand conditions to consider include end uses and applications; the existence and availability of substitute products; and the level of competition among the Domestic Like Product produced in the United States, Subject Merchandise produced in the Subject Country, and such merchandise from other countries.

(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the Domestic Like Product and Domestic Industry; if you disagree with either or both of these definitions, please explain why and provide alternative definitions.

Authority: This proceeding is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission's rules.

On June 13, 2024, the Commission instituted this investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”), based on a complaint filed by SharkNinja Operating LLC of Needham, Massachusetts; Omachron Alpha Inc. of Canada; and Omachron Intellectual Property Inc. of Canada (collectively, “Complainants”). 89 FR 50369-70 (June 13, 2024). The complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain surface cleaning devices and components thereof by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,776,120 (“the '120 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 10,219,661 (“the '661 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 11,910,983 (“the '983 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 11,910,984 (“the '984 patent”). Id. The complaint further alleged that an industry in the United States exists or is in the process of being established. Id. The notice of investigation named as respondents Dyson, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois; Dyson Technology Limited of Tetbury Hill, United Kingdom; and Dyson Canada Limited of Toronto, Canada (collectively, “Dyson”). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not participating in this investigation. Id.

On December 23, 2024, the Commission terminated the investigation as to claims 1, 8, 9, and 12 of the '120 patent; claims 1, 2, 9-12, 15, and 16 of the '661 patent; claims 4, 8, 12, and 17-19 of the '983 patent; and claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 9-18 of the '984 patent. Order No. 16 (Dec. 3, 2024); unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Dec. 26, 2024).

On February 4, 2025, Complainants and Dyson filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation based on a settlement agreement. The parties represented that the settlement agreement is the only agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter of the investigation, and that termination of the investigation is consistent with public interest as it would conserve public and private resources and would have no adverse effects to the public. The joint motion included confidential and redacted copies of the subject settlement agreement.

On February 5, 2025, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 20) pursuant to Commission Rule 210.21(b) (19 CFR 210.21(b)), granting the joint motion to terminate the investigation based on settlement.

No petitions for review of the subject ID were filed.

The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. The investigation is terminated.

The Commission vote for this determination took place on February 26, 2025.

The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-016-C.

Petitioner: Peabody Twentymile Mining, LLC, 29515 Routt County Road 27, Oak Creek, Colorado 80467.

Mine: Foidel Creek Mine, MSHA ID No. 05-03836, located in Routt County, Colorado.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a), Permissible electric equipment.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of 30 CFR 75.1002(a) to permit alternative methods of compliance to permit the use of additional respiratory dust protection. Specifically, the petitioner proposes to use the Drager X-plore 8700 powered air purifying respirator (PAPR).

The petitioner states that:

(a) The Foidel Creek Mine is located at 29515 Routt County Road 27, Oak Creek, Colorado 80467. The mine's contact person is Terry Morson, Safety Manager. The Foidel Creek Mine is a typical western drift mine that opened in 1983. The mine has four portals and three shafts into the Wadge Seam, the latter consisting of two intake portals and one return portal. There is also one inner seam return shaft to the Wolf Creek Seam.

(b) The mine employs approximately 150 personnel underground and 49 on the surface, including office employees. The mine operates 2 shifts, 7 days a week. There is one longwall section in the Wolf Creek Seam, 985 feet long, approximately 9 feet in mining height, with the panel approximately 9,000 feet long. A longwall crew of 7 miners typically operates on the graveyard shift, seven days per week, and a second longwall crew frequently works on dayshift. A continuous mining machine (CMM) crew of 8 miners working seven days per week on the graveyard shift extracts coal using the room and pillar method, and a second CMM crew works frequently on the dayshift. The mine's total production was 91,038 tons during the 4th quarter of 2023. Total methane liberation in the 2nd quarter of FY 2023 was 174,495 cubic feet per day.

(c) Conveyor belts transport coal out of the mine. Diesel-powered mantrips are used to transport miners in and out of the mine.

(d) The mine is ventilated by the following three fans:

(1) 5 MN Fan—Buffalo Forge, Model MS-1 28/16, RPM: 880/1,180, Diameter: 110 inches, HP: 3,000, Volts: 4,160, Water Gage: 11.1 inches, Axial Vane, Running.

(2) Bleeder Tap Fan—National Turbine, Model NT 122206, RPM: 3,000, Diameter: 12 inches, HP: 125, Volts: 480, Not recorded, Multi-stage pump, Running.

(3) 0 Entry Fan—Jeffery Model 84UA96, RPM: 1,195, Diameter: 96 inches, HP: 1,000, Volts: 4,160, Water Gage: 9.4 inches, Axial Vane, Idle.

(e) Peabody seeks modification of 30 CFR 75.1002(a), as it pertains to use of battery-powered respirable protection in its continuous miner sections.

(f) Peabody currently uses the 3M Airstream helmet to provide additional protection for its miners against exposure to respirable coal mine dust. There are clear long-term health benefits from using such technology.

(g) For more than 40 years the 3M Airstream Headgear-Mounted PAPR System has been used by many mine operators to help protect their workers. During those years there have been technological advancements in products and services for industrial applications. Recently 3M has indicated that they have been facing multiple key component supply disruptions for the Airstream product line that have created issues with providing acceptable supply service levels. Because of those issues, 3M discontinued the Airstream by June 1, 2020, and that this discontinuation is global.

(h) 3M announced that February 2020 was the final time to place an order for systems and components and that June 2020 was the final date to purchase Airstream components.

(i) Currently there are no replacement 3M PAPRs that meet applicable U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) standards for permissibility. Electronic equipment used in underground mines in potentially explosive atmospheres is required to be approved by MSHA per 30 CFR. 3M and other manufacturers do offer alternative products for many other environments and applications.

(j) Following that discontinuation, mines that used the Airstream did not have an MSHA-approved alternative PAPR to provide to miners. One of the benefits of the PAPRs is that they provide a constant flow of air inside the headtop or helmet. This constant airflow helps to provide both respiratory protection and comfort in hot working environments.

(k) Twentymile previously filed Petitions to permit the use of the Versaflow TR-800 Intrinsically Safe Powered Air Purifying Respirator and the Clean Space EX PAPR at Docket No. M-2023-011-C. Such petition was granted on November 18, 2024.

(l) Twentymile now seeks approval to use the Drager X-plore 8700 PAPR.

(m) The Drager X-plore 8700 is certified by CSA Group according to the ANSI 60079-0:2022 (General Requirements) and 60079-13 (intrinsic Safety) standards. The certificate, issued to Drager Safety AG&Co. KG, Ex ib III B 135°C DB, Class 1, Zone 1, AEx ib IIB T4 Gb and Zone 21, AEx ib IIIB 135°C DB. It is intrinsically safe. It uses a Drager LBT 04xx LI-ION Battery Pack.

(n) NIOSH researchers in a paper titled “ An Evaluation of the Relative Safety of U.S. Mining Explosion-Protected Equipment Approval Requirements versus those of International Standards” have determined that equipment which meets two-fault intrinsic safety as defined in the ANSI/UL 60079 standard would provide at least an equivalent level of safety as that provided by equipment approved to MSHA criteria.

(o) The certifications, listing material (drawings, certificate and text report) were found to support the conclusion that the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) meets the applicable “two fault” intrinsic safety requirements for mining equipment as found in the ANSI/UL standard.

(p) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) Unit is not MSHA approved as permissible and Drager is not pursuing approval.

(q) The standards for approval of these respirators are an acceptable alternative to MSHA's standards and provide an equivalent level of protection.

(r) Peabody believes the Drager unit will perform similarly to the Versaflow in terms of interference with the proximity detector as long as the manufacturer's guidelines in reproduction are met.

(s) The alternate method proposed by the petitioner will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) Affected mine employees shall be trained in the proper use and maintenance of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) in accordance with established manufacturer guidelines. This training shall alert the affected employee that the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is not approved under 30 CFR part 18 and shall be de-energized when 1.0 or more percent methane is detected. The training shall also include the proper method to de-energize these PAPRs. In addition to manufacturer guidelines, MSHA shall require that mine employees be trained to inspect the units before use to determine if there is any damage to the units that would negatively impact intrinsic safety as well as all stipulations in the proposed decision and order (PDO) granted by MSHA.

(b) The PAPRs, battery packs, all associated wiring and connections shall be inspected by a qualified person before use to determine if there is any damage to the units that would negatively impact intrinsic safety. If any defects are found, the PAPR shall be removed from service.

(c) Each PAPR shall be assigned a unique identification number. The operator shall maintain a separate logbook for the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) that shall be kept with the equipment, or in a location with other mine record books and shall be made available to MSHA upon request. The equipment shall be examined at least weekly by a qualified person as defined in 30 CFR 75.512-1 and the examination results recorded in the logbook. Since float coal dust is removed by the air filter prior to reaching the motor, the PAPR user shall conduct regular examinations of the filter and perform periodic testing any alarms concerning the filter. Examination entries may be expunged after one year.

(d) The mine shall stock an adequate supply of replacement filters.

(e) All Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall be physically examined prior to initial use by a qualified person as defined in 30 CFR 75.151. Each unit shall be examined by the person to operate the equipment prior to taking the equipment underground to ensure the equipment is being used according to the original equipment manufacturer's recommendations and maintained in a safe operating condition. The examinations for the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) shall include:

(1) Check the equipment for any physical damage and the integrity of the case;

(2) Remove the battery and inspect for corrosion;

(3) Inspect the contact points to ensure a secure connection to the battery;

(4) Reinsert the battery and power up and shut down to ensure proper connections; and

(5) Check the battery compartment cover or battery attachment to ensure that it is securely fastened.

(f) The operator shall ensure that all Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) units are serviced according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Dates of service shall be recorded in the equipment's log book and shall include a description of the work performed.

(g) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) units to be located shall not be put into service until MSHA has initially inspected the equipment and determined that it is in compliance with all the terms and conditions of the PDO granted by MSHA.

(h) Prior to energizing the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) in areas where permissible equipment is required, methane tests shall be made in accordance with 30 CFR 75.323(a).

(i) All hand-held methane detectors shall be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined by 30 CFR 75.320. All methane detectors shall provide visual and audible warnings when methane is detected at or above 1.0 percent.

(j) A qualified person as defined in existing 30 CFR 75.151 shall continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) when such equipment is located where permissible equipment is required.

(k) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent methane. When 1.0 percent or more of methane is detected while the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is being used, the equipment shall be de-energized immediately and the equipment withdrawn from the affected area.

(l) Use only Li-Ion High Capacity Battery or Li-Ion standard capacity battery (EX), which meets lithium battery safety standard UL 1642 or IEC 62133.

(m) The battery packs shall be “changed out” in intake air. Before each shift when the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is to be used, all batteries and power units for the equipment shall be charged sufficiently so that they are not expected to be replaced on that shift.

(n) The following maintenance and use conditions shall apply to equipment containing lithium-type batteries:

(1) Always correctly use and maintain the lithium-ion battery packs. The battery pack may be disassembled or modified by anyone other than permitted by the manufacturer of the equipment.

(2) The battery pack shall only be charged in an area free of combustible material, readily monitored and located on the surface of the mine. The battery pack shall be charged by only using the manufacturer's recommended charger.

(3) The batteries shall not be allowed to get wet or immersed in liquid. This does not preclude incidental exposure of sealed battery packs.

(4) The batteries shall not be used, charged or stored in locations where the manufacturer's recommended temperature limits are exceeded. The batteries shall not be placed in direct sunlight or used or stored near a source of heat.

(5) The battery shall not be used at the end of its life cycle ( e.g., when there is a performance decrease of greater than 20 percent in battery operated equipment). The battery shall be disposed of properly.

(6) Follow the manufacturer's recommendations and instructions. Check and monitor each unit's run time. Observe and notate the initial run time that a new fully charged battery provides for powering the unit. A record of the initial run time and the date shall be made by a trained and competent person. This record shall not be expunged on an annual basis but shall be retained until the PAPR and/or the battery is retired from service.

(7) Routinely check the battery's charge status.

(8) Routinely monitor batteries that are approaching the end of their estimated service life.

(9) Remove the battery from service when the following conditions are met:

(i) The battery run time drops below 80 percent of the new battery run time; or

(ii) The battery charge time increases significantly.

(10) Follow the storage instructions as recommended by the manufacturer. If the instructions were not followed for a battery stored or otherwise unused for an extended period or the battery has no charge remaining, consider it to be damaged. Do not attempt to recharge it or to use it. Remove it from service and replace it with a new battery.

(o) Personnel engaged in the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with the use of the equipment in areas where methane could be present. Affected mine employees shall also be trained to properly position their proximity detection system/miner wearable component (PDS MWC) at least six inches from their PAPR's battery/motor blower or battery/power unit to prevent interference. Additionally, personnel shall be trained regarding proper procedures for donning self-contained self-rescuers (SCSRs) during a mine emergency while wearing the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX). The mine operator shall submit proposed revisions to update the Mine Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting Program of Instruction under 30 CFR 75.1502.

(p) Within 60 days after the PDO granted by MSHA becomes final, the operator shall submit proposed revisions for its approved 30 CFR part 48 training plans to the Mine Safety and Health Enforcement District Manager. These proposed revisions shall specify initial and refresher training regarding the terms and conditions stated in the PDO granted by MSHA. When training is conducted on the terms and conditions in the PDO granted by MSHA, an MSHA Certificate of Training (Form 5000-23) shall be completed. Comments shall be included on the Certificate of Training indicating that the training received was for use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX).

(q) All personnel who will be involved with or affected by the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall receive training in accordance with 30 CFR 48.7 on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA within 60 days of the date the PDO granted by MSHA becomes final. Such training shall be completed before any Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) can be used in areas where equipment must be permissible and such miners will be located. The operator shall keep a record of such training and provide such record to MSHA upon request.

(r) The operator shall provide annual retraining to all personnel who will be involved with or affected by the use of the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) in accordance with 30 CFR 48.8. The operator shall train new miners on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA in accordance with 30 CFR 48.5 and shall train experienced miners on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA in accordance with 30 CFR 48.6. The operator shall keep a record of such training and provide such record to MSHA upon request.

(s) The operator shall post the PDO granted by MSHA in unobstructed locations on the bulletin boards and/or in other conspicuous places where notices to miners are ordinarily posted, for a period of not less than 60 consecutive days. Unless specifically mentioned herein, nothing in the PDO granted by MSHA changes or supersedes the requirements otherwise imposed by the Mine Act, other mandatory standards or regulations, or approved plans. The petitioner shall include the above terms and conditions in the initial and annual refresher training as required in its approved Part 48 training plans to ensure that miners are aware of the stipulations contained in the PDO granted by MSHA.

(t) The miners at Foidel Creek are not represented by a labor organization and the Amended Petition is posted on the mine bulletin board as of December 20, 2024.

In support of the proposed alternative method, the petitioner has also submitted a copy of the PDO for the previously filed petition to permit the use of the Versaflow TR-800 PAPR and the Clean Space EX PAPR (Docket No. M-2023-011-C), manufacturer spec sheets for the Drager X-plore 8700 PAPR and certificates of compliance from CSAGroup.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-011-C.

Petitioner: Signal Peak Energy, LLC, 100 Portal Dr., Roundup, MT 59072.

Mine: Bull Mountains Mine No. 1, MSHA ID No. 24-01950, located in Musselshell County, Montana.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a), Permissible electric equipment.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the application of 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) to allow the use of an alternative method of respirable dust protection. Specifically, the petitioner is seeking modification of the existing standard to permit usage of Dräger X-plore 8700 Powered Air Purifying Respirators (PAPRs) to be used inby the last open crosscut to protect miners from respirable dust.

The petitioner states that:

(a) The petitioner currently utilizes 3M Versaflo TR-800 PAPRs, that were approved for use under a previous petition. The company's request to utilize Dräger units seeks to leverage its improved performance, battery life, durability, and air volume capacity to provide employees with the best protection available.

(b) Signal Peak Energy's Bull Mountains Mine No. 1 is a non-gassy mine. Methane and other relevant explosive gases have not been encountered at the mine.

(c) MSHA-approved permissible PAPRs are widely discontinued.

(d) Although not MSHA approved, the proposed Dräger X-plore 8700 PAPR is certified as intrinsically safe to use in explosive or dusty environments. It is approved with an intrinsically safe (IS) rating of Class I, Zone 1, AEx ib IIB T4 Gb for explosive gas environments, and Zone 21, AEx ib IIIB 135 °C Db for combustible dust environments, under standards including CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 60079-11:14 and ANSI/UL 60079-11:13. These certifications ensure the unit's safe operation in hazardous locations where explosive gases or dusts may be present.

(e) The standards for approval of these respirators are an acceptable alternative to MSHA's standards and provide an equivalent level of protection.

(f) The alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) Batteries for the Dräger X-plore 8700 PAPR shall be charged only in intake air, either on the surface or underground, and not within 150 feet of a worked-out area.

(b) Battery inspections and replacements shall be conducted in intake air, either on the surface or underground.

(c) Appropriate battery packs and chargers shall be used with Dräger X-plore 8700 PAPRs:

(1) Li-Ion “High Capacity Battery (EX)”, 10.8 V, 6400mAh, P/N R59575, Um= 18 V DC for charging; or

(2) Li-Ion “Standard Capacity Battery (EX)” 10.8 V, 3350mAh, P/N R59595, Um= 18 V DC for charging.

(d) Miners shall be trained on the safe use, care, and inspection of the Dräger X-plore 8700 PAPR units.

(e) The Dräger X-plore 8700 PAPR units shall be assessed for physical damage before each use.

(f) The Dräger X-plore 8700 PAPR shall not be used if methane is at or above one percent. If methane levels are higher than one percent, equipment shall immediately be de-energized and removed from the affected areas.

(g) All qualified and affected personnel shall receive training on the terms and conditions of the proposed decision and order (PDO) granted by MSHA prior to utilizing equipment in affected areas. A record of training shall be kept and provided upon request by an authorized representative.

(h) There are no representatives of miners at Signal Peak Energy, LLC, Bull Mountains Mine No. 1. A copy of this petition has been posted on the bulletin board as of December 20, 2024.

In support of the proposed alternative method, the petitioner has also submitted: a Dräger X-plore 8700 EX Certificate of Compliance and a Dräger X-plore 8700 EX data sheet.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-015-C.

Petitioner: Peabody Twentymile Mining, LLC, 29515 Routt County Road 27, Oak Creek, Colorado 80467.

Mine: Foidel Creek Mine, MSHA ID No. 05-03836, located in Routt County, Colorado.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a), Permissible electric equipment.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) to permit alternative methods of compliance to permit the use of additional respiratory dust protection. Specifically, the petitioner proposes to use the Drager X-plore 8700 powered air purifying respirator (PAPR).

The petitioner states that:

(a) The Foidel Creek Mine is located at 29515 Routt County Road 27, Oak Creek, Colorado 80467. The mine's contact person is Terry Morson, Safety Manager. The Foidel Creek Mine is a typical western drift mine that opened in 1983. The mine has four portals and three shafts into the Wadge Seam, the latter consisting of two intake portals and one return portal. There is also one inner seam return shaft to the Wolf Creek Seam.

(b) The mine employs approximately 150 personnel underground and 49 on the surface, including office employees. The mine operates 2 shifts, 7 days a week. There is one longwall section in the Wolf Creek Seam, 985 feet long, approximately 9 feet in mining height, with the panel approximately 9,000 feet long. A longwall crew of 7 miners typically operates on the graveyard shift, seven days per week, and a second longwall crew frequently works on dayshift. A continuous mining machine (CMM) crew of 8 miners working seven days per week on the graveyard shift extracts coal using the room and pillar method, and a second CMM crew works frequently on the dayshift. The mine's total production was 91,038 tons during the 4th quarter of 2023. Total methane liberation in the 2nd quarter of FY 2023 was 174,495 cubic feet per day.

(c) Conveyor belts transport coal out of the mine. Diesel-powered mantrips are used to transport miners in and out of the mine.

(d) The mine is ventilated by the following three fans:

(1) 5 MN Fan—Buffalo Forge, Model MS-1 28/16, RPM: 880/1,180, Diameter: 110 inches, HP: 3,000, Volts: 4,160, Water Gage: 11.1 inches, Axial Vane, Running.

(2) Bleeder Tap Fan—National Turbine, Model NT 122206, RPM: 3,000, Diameter: 12 inches, HP: 125, Volts: 480, Not recorded, Multi-stage pump, Running.

(3) 0 Entry Fan—Jeffery Model 84UA96, RPM: 1,195, Diameter: 96 inches, HP: 1,000, Volts: 4,160, Water Gage: 9.4 inches, Axial Vane, Idle.

(e) Peabody seeks modification of 30 CFR 75.507-1(a), as it pertains to use of battery-powered respirable protection in its continuous miner sections.

(f) Peabody currently uses the 3M Airstream helmet to provide additional protection for its miners against exposure to respirable coal mine dust. There are clear long-term health benefits from using such technology.

(g) For more than 40 years the 3M Airstream Headgear-Mounted PAPR System has been used by many mine operators to help protect their workers. During those years there have been technological advancements in products and services for industrial applications. Recently 3M has indicated that they have been facing multiple key component supply disruptions for the Airstream product line that have created issues with providing acceptable supply service levels. Because of those issues, 3M discontinued the Airstream by June 1, 2020, and that this discontinuation is global.

(h) 3M announced that February 2020 was the final time to place an order for systems and components and that June 2020 was the final date to purchase Airstream components.

(i) Currently there are no replacement 3M PAPRs that meet applicable U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) standards for permissibility. Electronic equipment used in underground mines in potentially explosive atmospheres is required to be approved by MSHA per 30 CFR. 3M and other manufacturers do offer alternative products for many other environments and applications.

(j) Following that discontinuation, mines that used the Airstream did not have an MSHA-approved alternative PAPR to provide to miners. One of the benefits of the PAPRs is that they provide a constant flow of air inside the headtop or helmet. This constant airflow helps to provide both respiratory protection and comfort in hot working environments.

(k) Twentymile previously filed Petitions to permit the use of the Versaflow TR-800 Intrinsically Safe Powered Air Purifying Respirator and the Clean Space EX PAPR at Docket No. M-2023-010-C. Such petition was granted on November 18, 2024.

(l) Twentymile now seeks approval to use the Drager X-plore 8700 PAPR.

(m) The Drager X-plore 8700 is certified by CSA Group according to the ANSI 60079-0:2022 (General Requirements) and 60079-13 (intrinsic Safety) standards. The certificate, issued to Drager Safety AG&Co. KG, Ex ib III B 135 °C DB, Class 1, Zone 1, AEx ib IIB T4 Gb and Zone 21, AEx ib IIIB 135 °C DB. It is intrinsically safe. It uses a Drager LBT 04xx LI-ION Battery Pack.

(n) NIOSH researchers in a paper titled “ An Evaluation of the Relative Safety of U.S. Mining Explosion-Protected Equipment Approval Requirements versus those of International Standards” have determined that equipment which meets two-fault intrinsic safety as defined in the ANSI/UL 60079 standard would provide at least an equivalent level of safety as that provided by equipment approved to MSHA criteria.

(o) The certifications, listing material (drawings, certificate and text report) were found to support the conclusion that the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) meets the applicable “two fault” intrinsic safety requirements for mining equipment as found in the ANSI/UL standard.

(p) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) Unit is not MSHA approved as permissible and Drager is not pursuing approval.

(q) The standards for approval of these respirators are an acceptable alternative to MSHA's standards and provide an equivalent level of protection.

(r) Peabody believes the Drager unit will perform similarly to the Versaflow in terms of interference with the proximity detector as long as the manufacturer's guidelines in reproduction are met.

(s) The alternate method proposed by the petitioner will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) Affected mine employees shall be trained in the proper use and maintenance of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) in accordance with established manufacturer guidelines. This training shall alert the affected employee that the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is not approved under 30 CFR part 18 and shall be de-energized when 1.0 or more percent methane is detected. The training shall also include the proper method to de-energize these PAPRs. In addition to manufacturer guidelines, MSHA shall require that mine employees be trained to inspect the units before use to determine if there is any damage to the units that would negatively impact intrinsic safety as well as all stipulations in the proposed decision and order (PDO) granted by MSHA.

(b) The PAPRs, battery packs, all associated wiring and connections shall be inspected by a qualified person before use to determine if there is any damage to the units that would negatively impact intrinsic safety. If any defects are found, the PAPR shall be removed from service.

(c) Each PAPR shall be assigned a unique identification number. The operator shall maintain a separate logbook for the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) that shall be kept with the equipment, or in a location with other mine record books and shall be made available to MSHA upon request. The equipment shall be examined at least weekly by a qualified person as defined in 30 CFR 75.512-1 and the examination results recorded in the logbook. Since float coal dust is removed by the air filter prior to reaching the motor, the PAPR user shall conduct regular examinations of the filter and perform periodic testing any alarms concerning the filter. Examination entries may be expunged after one year.

(d) The mine shall stock an adequate supply of replacement filters.

(e) All Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall be physically examined prior to initial use by a qualified person as defined in 30 CFR 75.151. Each unit shall be examined by the person to operate the equipment prior to taking the equipment underground to ensure the equipment is being used according to the original equipment manufacturer's recommendations and maintained in a safe operating condition. The examinations for the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) shall include:

(1) Check the equipment for any physical damage and the integrity of the case;

(2) Remove the battery and inspect for corrosion;

(3) Inspect the contact points to ensure a secure connection to the battery;

(4) Reinsert the battery and power up and shut down to ensure proper connections; and

(5) Check the battery compartment cover or battery attachment to ensure that it is securely fastened.

(f) The operator shall ensure that all Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) units are serviced according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Dates of service shall be recorded in the equipment's log book and shall include a description of the work performed.

(g) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) units to be located shall not be put into service until MSHA has initially inspected the equipment and determined that it is in compliance with all the terms and conditions of the PDO granted by MSHA.

(h) Prior to energizing the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) in areas where permissible equipment is required, methane tests shall be made in accordance with 30 CFR 75.323(a).

(i) All hand-held methane detectors shall be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined by 30 CFR 75.320. All methane detectors shall provide visual and audible warnings when methane is detected at or above 1.0 percent.

(j) A qualified person as defined in existing 30 CFR 75.151 shall continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) when such equipment is located where permissible equipment is required.

(k) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent methane. When 1.0 percent or more of methane is detected while the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is being used, the equipment shall be de-energized immediately and the equipment withdrawn from the affected area.

(l) Use only Li-Ion High Capacity Battery or Li-Ion standard capacity battery (EX), which meets lithium battery safety standard UL 1642 or IEC 62133.

(m) The battery packs shall be “changed out” in intake air. Before each shift when the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is to be used, all batteries and power units for the equipment shall be charged sufficiently so that they are not expected to be replaced on that shift.

(n) The following maintenance and use conditions shall apply to equipment containing lithium-type batteries:

(1) Always correctly use and maintain the lithium-ion battery packs. The battery pack may be disassembled or modified by anyone other than permitted by the manufacturer of the equipment.

(2) The battery pack shall only be charged in an area free of combustible material, readily monitored and located on the surface of the mine. The battery pack shall be charged by only using the manufacturer's recommended charger.

(3) The batteries shall not be allowed to get wet or immersed in liquid. This does not preclude incidental exposure of sealed battery packs.

(4) The batteries shall not be used, charged or stored in locations where the manufacturer's recommended temperature limits are exceeded. The batteries shall not be placed in direct sunlight or used or stored near a source of heat.

(5) The battery shall not be used at the end of its life cycle ( e.g., when there is a performance decrease of greater than 20 percent in battery operated equipment). The battery shall be disposed of properly.

(6) Follow the manufacturer's recommendations and instructions. Check and monitor each unit's run time. Observe and notate the initial run time that a new fully charged battery provides for powering the unit. A record of the initial run time and the date shall be made by a trained and competent person. This record shall not be expunged on an annual basis but shall be retained until the PAPR and/or the battery is retired from service.

(7) Routinely check the battery's charge status.

(8) Routinely monitor batteries that are approaching the end of their estimated service life.

(9) Remove the battery from service when the following conditions are met:

(i) The battery run time drops below 80 percent of the new battery run time; or

(ii) The battery charge time increases significantly.

(10) Follow the storage instructions as recommended by the manufacturer. If the instructions were not followed for a battery stored or otherwise unused for an extended period or the battery has no charge remaining, consider it to be damaged. Do not attempt to recharge it or to use it. Remove it from service and replace it with a new battery.

(o) Personnel engaged in the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with the use of the equipment in areas where methane could be present. Affected mine employees shall also be trained to properly position their proximity detection system/miner wearable component (PDS MWC) at least six inches from their PAPR's battery/motor blower or battery/power unit to prevent interference. Additionally, personnel shall be trained regarding proper procedures for donning self-contained self-rescuers (SCSRs) during a mine emergency while wearing the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX). The mine operator shall submit proposed revisions to update the Mine Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting Program of Instruction under 30 CFR 75.1502.

(p) Within 60 days after the PDO granted by MSHA becomes final, the operator shall submit proposed revisions for its approved 30 CFR part 48 training plans to the Mine Safety and Health Enforcement District Manager. These proposed revisions shall specify initial and refresher training regarding the terms and conditions stated in the PDO granted by MSHA. When training is conducted on the terms and conditions in the PDO granted by MSHA, an MSHA Certificate of Training (Form 5000-23) shall be completed. Comments shall be included on the Certificate of Training indicating that the training received was for use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX).

(q) All personnel who will be involved with or affected by the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall receive training in accordance with 30 CFR 48.7 on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA within 60 days of the date the PDO granted by MSHA becomes final. Such training shall be completed before any Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) can be used in areas where equipment must be permissible and such miners will be located. The operator shall keep a record of such training and provide such record to MSHA upon request.

(r) The operator shall provide annual retraining to all personnel who will be involved with or affected by the use of the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) in accordance with 30 CFR 48.8. The operator shall train new miners on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA in accordance with 30 CFR 48.5 and shall train experienced miners on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA in accordance with 30 CFR 48.6. The operator shall keep a record of such training and provide such record to MSHA upon request.

(s) The operator shall post the PDO granted by MSHA in unobstructed locations on the bulletin boards and/or in other conspicuous places where notices to miners are ordinarily posted, for a period of not less than 60 consecutive days. Unless specifically mentioned herein, nothing in the PDO granted by MSHA changes or supersedes the requirements otherwise imposed by the Mine Act, other mandatory standards or regulations, or approved plans. The petitioner shall include the above terms and conditions in the initial and annual refresher training as required in its approved Part 48 training plans to ensure that miners are aware of the stipulations contained in the PDO granted by MSHA.

(t) The miners at Foidel Creek are not represented by a labor organization and the Amended Petition is posted on the mine bulletin board as of January 8, 2025.

In support of the proposed alternative method, the petitioner has also submitted a copy of the PDO for the previously filed petition to permit the use of the Versaflow TR-800 PAPR and the Clean Space EX PAPR (Docket No. M-2023-010-C), manufacturer spec sheets for the Drager X-plore 8700 PAPR and certificates of compliance from CSAGroup.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-017-C.

Petitioner: Canyon Fuel Company, LLC, 597 South SR 24, Salina, Utah 84654.

Mine: Sufco Mine, MSHA ID No. 42-00089, located in Sevier County, Utah.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.507-1(a), Permissible electric equipment.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of 30 CFR 75.507-1(a) to permit an alternate method of compliance for respiratory protection. Specifically, the petitioner proposes to use the Drager X-plore 8000 powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) to protect miners from potential exposure to respirable dust during normal mining conditions, in return air outby the last open cross cut.

The petitioner states that:

(a) Sufco Mine is proposing to use the Drager X-plore 8000 PAPR in conjunction with the 3M Versa Flo units that have been approved for use. The 3M Versa Flo unit is highly used in the medical field which causes shortage and backorders of filters and other parts of the unit. Sufco feels that the Drager PAPR would help relieve the issues of storages and backorders for the 3M Versa Flo unit filters and other parts, and so that miners will still be provided a method that provides a direct reduction of miners' exposure to respirable dust, thus reducing their health risks.

(b) The Drager X-plore 8000 PAPR provides a constant flow of filtered air to the miners, which provides a direct reduction of miners' exposure to respirable dust, thus reducing their health risks. There are no other MSHA-approved units.

(c) The Drager X-plore 8000 PAPRs are ergonomically designed for greater movement in tight workspaces. This respirator has the following features: helps protect against certain airborne contaminates; is easy to use and maintain; has interchangeable components, which will enable Sufco to customize the PAPR system to help meet the needs of our specific application; is intrinsically safe; has audible and visual alarms; has a multi-speed blower; and the battery offers long run time and charges quickly.

(d) The Drager X-plore 8000 is intrinsically safe and certified by UL under the ANSI/UL 60079-11:13 standard to be used in hazardous locations.

(e) The alternative method will provide no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the existing standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) The batteries for the PAPRs shall be charged outby the last open crosscut when not in operation.

(b) The batteries shall be charged by the following products: Drager battery Charger for the X-plore 8000 standard charger.

(c) The Drager X-plore 8000 PAPR shall only use the Drager X-plore 8700 battery.

(d) Affected miners shall be trained in the proper use and care of the PAPR units in accordance with manufacturers' instructions.

(e) The instrument shall be checked for physical damage and the integrity of the case.

(f) If methane is detected in concentrations of 1.0 percent or more, procedures in accordance with 30 CFR 75.323 shall be followed.

(g) There are no representatives of miners at Canyon Fuel Company, LLC, Sufco Mine. A copy of this petition has been posted on the bulletin board on December 29, 2024.

In support of the proposed alternative method, the petitioner has also submitted manufacturer spec sheets for the Drager X-plore PAPR and certificates of compliance from CSAGroup, a nationally recognized testing laboratory (NRTL) in the U.S. and an Accredited Certification Organization by Standards Councils of Canada in Canada.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-014-C.

Petitioner: Peabody Twentymile Mining, LLC, 29515 Routt County Road 27, Oak Creek, Colorado 80467.

Mine: Foidel Creek Mine, MSHA ID No. 05-03836, located in Routt County, Colorado.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.500(d), Permissible electric equipment.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of 30 CFR 75.500(d) to permit alternative methods of compliance to permit the use of additional respiratory dust protection. Specifically, the petitioner proposes to use the Drager X-plore 8700 powered air purifying respirator (PAPR).

The petitioner states that:

(a) The Foidel Creek Mine is located at 29515 Routt County Road 27, Oak Creek, Colorado 80467. The mine's contact person is Terry Morson, Safety Manager. The Foidel Creek Mine is a typical western drift mine that opened in 1983. The mine has four portals and three shafts into the Wadge Seam, the latter consisting of two intake portals and one return portal. There is also one inner seam return shaft to the Wolf Creek Seam.

(b) The mine employs approximately 150 personnel underground and 49 on the surface, including office employees. The mine operates 2 shifts, 7 days a week. There is one longwall section in the Wolf Creek Seam, 985 feet long, approximately 9 feet in mining height, with the panel approximately 9,000 feet long. A longwall crew of 7 miners typically operates on the graveyard shift, seven days per week, and a second longwall crew frequently works on dayshift. A continuous mining machine (CMM) crew of 8 miners working seven days per week on the graveyard shift extracts coal using the room and pillar method, and a second CMM crew works frequently on the dayshift. The mine's total production was 91,038 tons during the 4th quarter of 2023. Total methane liberation in the 2nd quarter of FY 2023 was 174,495 cubic feet per day.

(c) Conveyor belts transport coal out of the mine. Diesel-powered mantrips are used to transport miners in and out of the mine.

(d) The mine is ventilated by the following three fans:

(1) 5 MN Fan—Buffalo Forge, Model MS-1 28/16, RPM: 880/1,180, Diameter: 110 inches, HP: 3,000, Volts: 4,160, Water Gage: 11.1 inches, Axial Vane, Running.

(2) Bleeder Tap Fan—National Turbine, Model NT 122206, RPM: 3,000, Diameter: 12 inches, HP: 125, Volts: 480, Not recorded, Multi-stage pump, Running.

(3) 0 Entry Fan—Jeffery Model 84UA96, RPM: 1,195, Diameter: 96 inches, HP: 1,000, Volts: 4,160, Water Gage: 9.4 inches, Axial Vane, Idle.

(e) Peabody seeks modification of 30 CFR 75.500(d), as it pertains to use of battery-powered respirable protection in its continuous miner sections.

(f) Peabody currently uses the 3M Airstream helmet to provide additional protection for its miners against exposure to respirable coal mine dust. There are clear long-term health benefits from using such technology.

(g) For more than 40 years the 3M Airstream Headgear-Mounted PAPR System has been used by many mine operators to help protect their workers. During those years there have been technological advancements in products and services for industrial applications. Recently 3M has indicated that they have been facing multiple key component supply disruptions for the Airstream product line that have created issues with providing acceptable supply service levels. Because of those issues, 3M discontinued the Airstream by June 1, 2020, and that this discontinuation is global.

(h) 3M announced that February 2020 was the final time to place an order for systems and components and that June 2020 was the final date to purchase Airstream components.

(i) Currently there are no replacement 3M PAPRs that meet applicable U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) standards for permissibility. Electronic equipment used in underground mines in potentially explosive atmospheres is required to be approved by MSHA per 30 CFR. 3M and other manufacturers do offer alternative products for many other environments and applications.

(j) Following that discontinuation, mines that used the Airstream did not have an MSHA-approved alternative PAPR to provide to miners. One of the benefits of the PAPRs is that they provide a constant flow of air inside the headtop or helmet. This constant airflow helps to provide both respiratory protection and comfort in hot working environments.

(k) Twentymile previously filed Petitions to permit the use of the Versaflow TR-800 Intrinsically Safe Powered Air Purifying Respirator and the Clean Space EX PAPR at Docket No. M-2023-009-C. Such petition was granted on November 18, 2024.

(l) Twentymile now seeks approval to use the Drager X-plore 8700 PAPR.

(m) The Drager X-plore 8700 is certified by CSA Group according to the ANSI 60079-0:2022 (General Requirements) and 60079-13 (intrinsic Safety) standards. The certificate, issued to Drager Safety AG&Co. KG, Ex ib III B 135 °C DB, Class 1, Zone 1, AEx ib IIB T4 Gb and Zone 21, AEx ib IIIB 135 °C DB. It is intrinsically safe. It uses a Drager LBT 04xx LI-ION Battery Pack.

(n) NIOSH researchers in a paper titled “ An Evaluation of the Relative Safety of U.S. Mining Explosion-Protected Equipment Approval Requirements versus those of International Standards ” have determined that equipment which meets two-fault intrinsic safety as defined in the ANSI/UL 60079 standard would provide at least an equivalent level of safety as that provided by equipment approved to MSHA criteria.

(o) The certifications, listing material (drawings, certificate and text report) were found to support the conclusion that the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) meets the applicable “two fault” intrinsic safety requirements for mining equipment as found in the ANSI/UL standard.

(p) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) Unit is not MSHA approved as permissible and Drager is not pursuing approval.

(q) The standards for approval of these respirators are an acceptable alternative to MSHA's standards and provide an equivalent level of protection.

(r) Peabody believes the Drager unit will perform similarly to the Versaflow in terms of interference with the proximity detector as long as the manufacturer's guidelines in reproduction are met.

(s) The alternate method proposed by the petitioner will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) Affected mine employees shall be trained in the proper use and maintenance of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) in accordance with established manufacturer guidelines. This training shall alert the affected employee that the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is not approved under 30 CFR part 18 and shall be de-energized when 1.0 or more percent methane is detected. The training shall also include the proper method to de-energize these PAPRs. In addition to manufacturer guidelines, MSHA shall require that mine employees be trained to inspect the units before use to determine if there is any damage to the units that would negatively impact intrinsic safety as well as all stipulations in the proposed decision and order (PDO) granted by MSHA.

(b) The PAPRs, battery packs, all associated wiring and connections shall be inspected by a qualified person before use to determine if there is any damage to the units that would negatively impact intrinsic safety. If any defects are found, the PAPR shall be removed from service.

(c) Each PAPR shall be assigned a unique identification number. The operator shall maintain a separate logbook for the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) that shall be kept with the equipment, or in a location with other mine record books and shall be made available to MSHA upon request. The equipment shall be examined at least weekly by a qualified person as defined in 30 CFR 75.512-1 and the examination results recorded in the logbook. Since float coal dust is removed by the air filter prior to reaching the motor, the PAPR user shall conduct regular examinations of the filter and perform periodic testing any alarms concerning the filter. Examination entries may be expunged after one year.

(d) The mine shall stock an adequate supply of replacement filters.

(e) All Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall be physically examined prior to initial use by a qualified person as defined in 30 CFR 75.151. Each unit shall be examined by the person to operate the equipment prior to taking the equipment underground to ensure the equipment is being used according to the original equipment manufacturer's recommendations and maintained in a safe operating condition. The examinations for the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) shall include:

(1) Check the equipment for any physical damage and the integrity of the case;

(2) Remove the battery and inspect for corrosion;

(3) Inspect the contact points to ensure a secure connection to the battery;

(4) Reinsert the battery and power up and shut down to ensure proper connections; and

(5) Check the battery compartment cover or battery attachment to ensure that it is securely fastened.

(f) The operator shall ensure that all Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) units are serviced according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Dates of service shall be recorded in the equipment's log book and shall include a description of the work performed.

(g) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) units to be located shall not be put into service until MSHA has initially inspected the equipment and determined that it is in compliance with all the terms and conditions of the PDO granted by MSHA.

(h) Prior to energizing the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) in areas where permissible equipment is required, methane tests shall be made in accordance with 30 CFR 75.323(a).

(i) All hand-held methane detectors shall be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined by 30 CFR 75.320. All methane detectors shall provide visual and audible warnings when methane is detected at or above 1.0 percent.

(j) A qualified person as defined in existing 30 CFR 75.151 shall continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) when such equipment is located where permissible equipment is required.

(k) The Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent methane. When 1.0 percent or more of methane is detected while the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is being used, the equipment shall be de-energized immediately and the equipment withdrawn from the affected area.

(l) Use only Li-Ion High Capacity Battery or Li-Ion standard capacity battery (EX), which meets lithium battery safety standard UL 1642 or IEC 62133.

(m) The battery packs shall be “changed out” in intake air. Before each shift when the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) is to be used, all batteries and power units for the equipment shall be charged sufficiently so that they are not expected to be replaced on that shift.

(n) The following maintenance and use conditions shall apply to equipment containing lithium-type batteries:

(1) Always correctly use and maintain the lithium-ion battery packs. The battery pack may be disassembled or modified by anyone other than permitted by the manufacturer of the equipment.

(2) The battery pack shall only be charged in an area free of combustible material, readily monitored and located on the surface of the mine. The battery pack shall be charged by only using the manufacturer's recommended charger.

(3) The batteries shall not be allowed to get wet or immersed in liquid. This does not preclude incidental exposure of sealed battery packs.

(4) The batteries shall not be used, charged or stored in locations where the manufacturer's recommended temperature limits are exceeded. The batteries shall not be placed in direct sunlight or used or stored near a source of heat.

(5) The battery shall not be used at the end of its life cycle ( e.g., when there is a performance decrease of greater than 20 percent in battery operated equipment). The battery shall be disposed of properly.

(6) Follow the manufacturer's recommendations and instructions. Check and monitor each unit's run time. Observe and notate the initial run time that a new fully charged battery provides for powering the unit. A record of the initial run time and the date shall be made by a trained and competent person. This record shall not be expunged on an annual basis but shall be retained until the PAPR and/or the battery is retired from service.

(7) Routinely check the battery's charge status.

(8) Routinely monitor batteries that are approaching the end of their estimated service life.

(9) Remove the battery from service when the following conditions are met:

(i) The battery run time drops below 80 percent of the new battery run time; or

(ii) The battery charge time increases significantly.

(10) Follow the storage instructions as recommended by the manufacturer. If the instructions were not followed for a battery stored or otherwise unused for an extended period or the battery has no charge remaining, consider it to be damaged. Do not attempt to recharge it or to use it. Remove it from service and replace it with a new battery.

(o) Personnel engaged in the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with the use of the equipment in areas where methane could be present. Affected mine employees shall also be trained to properly position their proximity detection system/miner wearable component (PDS MWC) at least six inches from their PAPR's battery/motor blower or battery/power unit to prevent interference. Additionally, personnel shall be trained regarding proper procedures for donning self-contained self-rescuers (SCSRs) during a mine emergency while wearing the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX). The mine operator shall submit proposed revisions to update the Mine Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting Program of Instruction under 30 CFR 75.1502.

(p) Within 60 days after the PDO granted by MSHA becomes final, the operator shall submit proposed revisions for its approved 30 CFR part 48 training plans to the Mine Safety and Health Enforcement District Manager. These proposed revisions shall specify initial and refresher training regarding the terms and conditions stated in the PDO granted by MSHA. When training is conducted on the terms and conditions in the PDO granted by MSHA, an MSHA Certificate of Training (Form 5000-23) shall be completed. Comments shall be included on the Certificate of Training indicating that the training received was for use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX).

(q) All personnel who will be involved with or affected by the use of the Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) shall receive training in accordance with 30 CFR 48.7 on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA within 60 days of the date the PDO granted by MSHA becomes final. Such training shall be completed before any Drager X-plore 8700 (EX) can be used in areas where equipment must be permissible and such miners will be located. The operator shall keep a record of such training and provide such record to MSHA upon request.

(r) The operator shall provide annual retraining to all personnel who will be involved with or affected by the use of the Drager Xplore 8700 (EX) in accordance with 30 CFR 48.8. The operator shall train new miners on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA in accordance with 30 CFR 48.5 and shall train experienced miners on the requirements of the PDO granted by MSHA in accordance with 30 CFR 48.6. The operator shall keep a record of such training and provide such record to MSHA upon request.

(s) The operator shall post the PDO granted by MSHA in unobstructed locations on the bulletin boards and/or in other conspicuous places where notices to miners are ordinarily posted, for a period of not less than 60 consecutive days. Unless specifically mentioned herein, nothing in the PDO granted by MSHA changes or supersedes the requirements otherwise imposed by the Mine Act, other mandatory standards or regulations, or approved plans. The petitioner shall include the above terms and conditions in the initial and annual refresher training as required in its approved Part 48 training plans to ensure that miners are aware of the stipulations contained in the PDO granted by MSHA.

(t) The miners at Foidel Creek are not represented by a labor organization and the Amended Petition is posted on the mine bulletin board as of January 8, 2025.

In support of the proposed alternative method, the petitioner has also submitted a copy of the PDO for the previously filed petition to permit the use of the Versaflow TR-800 PAPR and the Clean Space EX PAPR (Docket No. M-2023-009-C), manufacturer spec sheets for the Drager X-plore 8700 PAPR and certificates of compliance from CSAGroup.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-002-M.

Petitioner: Grefco Minerals, LLC, 36904 Summit Lake Road, Burney, CA 96013.

Mine: Grefco Mine & Mill, MSHA ID No. 26-00125, located in Nye County, Nevada.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 56.20001, Intoxicating beverages and narcotics.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of 30 CFR 56.20001 to permit alcohol stow-fermented from starch bearing an alcohol content of less than 10 percent alcohol by volume (“ABV”), commonly called “beer”, to be at the Grefco plant for the purpose of use in chemical testing that is part of product quality control and research.

The petitioner states that:

(a) Grefco requests that it be permitted to:

(1) Store containers of beer at the plant in secure locations, with restricted access;

(2) Use beer for purposes of quality control testing, statistical method control testing, and research testing; and

(3) Store open containers of beer that may be used during more than one testing event at the Grefco Mine & Mill, in secure locations, with restricted access.

(b) Grefco does not seek modification of any other part of the standard. The consumption of any intoxicating beverages and narcotics (including beer) shall be prohibited, and persons under the influence of alcohol or narcotics (including beer) shall be prohibited, and persons under the influence of alcohol or narcotics shall not be permitted on site.

(c) The purpose of 30 CFR 56.20001 is to protect miners by ensuring that miners do not have access to intoxicating beverages and narcotics at mines, and that miners are not under the influence of intoxicating beverages and narcotics while on the job. Grefco agrees with the purpose of the standard. The use of intoxicating beverages is not tolerated at Grefco. However, for commercial purposes, Grefco requires that containers of beer be stored at Grefco so that Grefco may conduct appropriate quality control and research testing.

(d) Grefco believes that the proposed modifications may be accomplished in a manner that ensures miners do not have access to the beer that Grefco will use for testing purposes.

(e) The Grefco Mine and Mill is a surface diatomaceous earth (“DE”) mine and processing facility. Mined DE is processed by Grefco to create finished DE products (“the marketable products”). One of the commercial applications of the marketable products is a filtration agent utilized during the brewing process for beer. The marketable products are integrated onto a fine mesh screen, with other ingredients, thereby creating a “filter cake.” At the end of the brewing process, following fermentation, which results in the creation of the alcohol-containing liquid that is called “beer”, the beer is passed through the filter cake to remove undesirable containments. This results in higher clarity of the beer, which is commercially desirable.

(f) Grefco is filing this petition because 30 CFR 56.20001 prohibits intoxicating beverages on or around mines. Grefco's mining operations require that containers of beer, less than l0 percent ABV, be located at the Grefco plant in order to conduct quality control testing of the marketable products, and to perform research testing to ensure that the marketable products are suitable for use in beer brewing. Beer industry customers are at the core of Grefco's business.

(g) Although DE can be an excellent filtration aid in the production of beer, it also contains naturally occurring iron, which is undesirable in beer production. If the beer absorbs too much iron, the beer will develop a bitter taste, which is not commercially desirable. Soluble iron in beer also has a deleterious effect on beer stability, which is also not commercially desirable. Accordingly, one of the most critical properties of the marketable products is its beer-soluble iron (“BSI”) content.

(h) In order to ensure that the marketable products meet the BSI and other applicable specifications, Grefco must engage in testing on-site at the Grefco plant to identify the BSI content of the marketable products as they are processed. Specifications for BSI in the marketable products are measured at the parts per million level. Grefco warrants maximum BSI content in marketable products sold to the beer industry. In order to (1) adequately control the production of marketable products, and (2) release marketable products within customers' specifications, it is essential to conduct in-process, finished product and research testing of the marketing products. The number of actual BSI tests conducted daily at the Grefco plant can range from five to thirty per day. This testing methodology conforms to that recommended by the American Society of Brewing Chemists.

(i) Because this on-site testing and research activity requires that beer be stored and used at the Grefco plant, which is prohibited by 30 CFR 56.20001 there is a need for this petition.

(j) The alternate method proposed by the petitioner will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection under the mandatory standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) Beer used in lab procedures shall be ordered by a lab technician or other responsible designee who will arrange for the supply of beer to be purchased and delivered to the appropriate person/department for receipt.

(b) When the beer is received, the amount shall be recorded on a log or other equivalent form.

(c) The bottles shall be initialed or marked in some way across the label with permanent marker, prior to storage, to easily identify containers purchased for testing purposes.

(d) Beer shall be stored in a steel locking cabinet. The key shall be kept by the lab technician or other designee(s). A copy of the key to the locking steel cabinet shall be kept by the Quality Manager or other responsible person.

(e) A record of use shall be kept on the log or equivalent form to include the amount, date used, and initials of the person acquiring the product for testing purposes.

(f) When testing has concluded the remaining degassed beer shall be disposed of appropriately by dumping down the drain or other disposal means.

(g) Empty containers shall be kept in the locking cabinet or designated receptacle until they can be disposed of properly.

(t) The miners at Grefco Minerals, LLC, Grefco Mine & Mill, are not represented by a labor organization; however, a copy of this petition has been provided to the representative of the miners at the mine January 10, 2025.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. The application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, sections 44.10 and 44.11 of 30 CFR establish the requirements for filing petitions for modification.

Docket Number: M-2025-018-C.

Petitioner: Canyon Fuel Company, LLC, 597 South SR 24, Salina, Utah 84654.

Mine: Sufco Mine, MSHA ID No. 42-00089, located in Sevier County, Utah.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1002(a), Permissible electric equipment.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of 30 CFR 75.1002(a) to permit an alternate method of compliance for respiratory protection. Specifically, the petitioner proposes to use the Drager X-plore 8000 powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) to protect miners from potential exposure to respirable dust during normal mining conditions, within 150 feet of pillar working or longwall faces.

The petitioner states that:

(a) Sufco Mine is proposing to use the Drager X-plore 8000 PAPR in conjunction with the 3M Versa Flo units that have been approved for use. The 3M Versa Flo unit is highly used in the medical field which causes shortage and backorders of filters and other parts of the unit. Sufco feels that the Drager PAPR would help relieve the issues of storages and backorders for the 3M Versa Flo unit filters and other parts, and so that miners will still be provided a method that provides a direct reduction of miners' exposure to respirable dust, thus reducing their health risks.

(b) The Drager X-plore 8000 PAPR provides a constant flow of filtered air to the miners, which provides a direct reduction of miners' exposure to respirable dust, thus reducing their health risks. There are no other MSHA-approved units.

(c) The Drager X-plore 8000 PAPRs are ergonomically designed for greater movement in tight workspaces. This respirator has the following features: helps protect against certain airborne contaminates; is easy to use and maintain; has interchangeable components, which will enable Sufco to customize the PAPR system to help meet the needs of our specific application; is intrinsically safe; has audible and visual alarms; has a multi-speed blower; and the battery offers long run time and charges quickly.

(d) The Drager X-plore 8000 is intrinsically safe and certified by UL under the ANSI/UL 60079-11:13 standard to be used in hazardous locations.

(e) The alternative method will provide no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the existing standard.

The petitioner proposes the following alternative method:

(a) The batteries for the PAPRs shall be charged outby the last open crosscut when not in operation.

(b) The batteries shall be charged by the following products: Drager battery Charger for the X-plore 8000 standard charger.

(c) The Drager X-plore 8000 PAPR shall only use the Drager X-plore 8700 battery.

(d) Affected miners shall be trained in the proper use and care of the PAPR units in accordance with manufacturers' instructions.

(e) The instrument shall be checked for physical damage and the integrity of the case.

(f) If methane is detected in concentrations of 1.0 percent or more, procedures in accordance with 30 CFR 75.323 shall be followed.

(g) There are no representatives of miners at Canyon Fuel Company, LLC, Sufco Mine. A copy of this petition has been posted on the bulletin board on December 29, 2024.

In support of the proposed alternative method, the petitioner has also submitted manufacturer spec sheets for the Drager X-plore PAPR and certificates of compliance from CSAGroup, a nationally recognized testing laboratory (NRTL) in the U.S. and an Accredited Certification Organization by Standards Councils of Canada in Canada.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under the mandatory standard.

The 504 Loan Program was authorized under Title V of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 to foster economic development by providing long-term financing for small business concerns. A Certified Development Company (CDC) is an entity authorized by SBA to deliver 504 financing to small businesses. 13 CFR 120.830 requires CDC's to submit certain reports to SBA, collectively referred to as the “Annual Report” which is utilized by SBA to monitor CDC adherence to CFR and SBA Loan Program Requirements.

Comments may be submitted on (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for the agency to properly perform its functions; (b) whether the burden estimates are accurate; (c) whether there are ways to minimize the burden, including through the use of automated techniques or other forms of information technology; and (d) whether there are ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information.

OMB Control Number: 3245-0074.

Title: Certified Development Company (CDC) Annual Report Guide.

Description of Respondents: Certified Development Company.

SBA Form Number: SBA Form 1253.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 195.

Estimated Annual Responses: 195.

Estimated Annual Hour Burden: 5,460.

Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on February 24, 2025, applications for disaster loans may be submitted online using the MySBA Loan Portal https://lending.sba.gov or other locally announced locations. Please contact the SBA disaster assistance customer service center by email at disastercustomerservice@sba.gov or by phone at 1-800-659-2955 for further assistance.

The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

The Interest Rates are:

The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 209776 and for economic injury is 209780.

Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this document provides the public notice that by letter dated October 25, 2024, BNSF petitioned FRA for an extension of a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 236, Rules, Standards, and Instructions Governing the Installation, Inspection, Maintenance, and Repair of Signal and Train Control Systems, Devices, and Appliances. The relevant Docket Number is FRA-2007-27287.

Specifically, BNSF seeks an extension of relief from the 2-year periodic testing requirements in §§ 236.377, Approach locking; 236.378, Time locking; 236.379, Route locking; 236.380, Indication locking; and 236.381, Traffic locking, for its solid-state microprocessor-based equipment. The existing waiver in this docket extends the testing requirements to at least once every four years.

In support of its request, BNSF states that “[s]ince this waiver has been active, microprocessor-based signal systems have proven to be safer and more reliable than traditional relay-based signal systems due to the significant reduction in possible points of failure.” BNSF contends that the regulation's 2-year requirement “provides no safety benefit over testing on a four-year interval given that BNSF's microprocessor-based equipment operates using programmed logic that, once installed, does not change.” In its petition, BNSF further explains that conducting periodic testing less frequently improves safety by “reducing the amount of disruption to signal circuits and train operations, as well as reducing potential employee exposures by spending less time foul of track.” Since 2009, when the waiver in this docket was initially granted, BNSF reports zero false proceed signal incidents due to microprocessor-based equipment controlling the locking.

A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications concerning the petition, is available for review online at www.regulations.gov.

Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party desires an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for their request.

Communications received by May 2, 2025 will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be considered if practicable.

Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of FRA's dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

In general, title 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) section 20157(h) requires FRA to certify that a host railroad's PTC system complies with title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 236, subpart I, before the technology may be operated in revenue service. Before making certain changes to an FRA-certified PTC system or the associated FRA-approved PTCSP, a host railroad must submit, and obtain FRA's approval of, an RFA to its PTCSP under 49 CFR 236.1021.

Under 49 CFR 236.1021(e), FRA's regulations provide that FRA will publish a notice in the Federal Register and invite public comment in accordance with 49 CFR part 211, if an RFA includes a request for approval of a material modification of a signal or train control system. Accordingly, this notice informs the public that, on February 10, 2025, PATH submitted an RFA to its PTCSP for its Communication Based Train Control (CBTC), which seeks FRA's approval for an updated software version V3.5.121, which includes ZC software, a ZC database, ATS software, and a CC software update. That RFA is available in Docket No. FRA-2010-0034.

Interested parties are invited to comment on PATH's RFA to its PTCSP by submitting written comments or data. During FRA's review of PATH's RFA, FRA will consider any comments or data submitted within the timeline specified in this notice and to the extent practicable, without delaying implementation of valuable or necessary modifications to a PTC system. See 49 CFR 236.1021; see also 49 CFR 236.1011(e). Under 49 CFR 236.1021, FRA maintains the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a railroad's RFA to its PTCSP at FRA's sole discretion.

In accordance with 49 CFR 211.3, FRA solicits comments from the public to inform its decisions. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov. To facilitate comment tracking, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely optional. If you wish to provide comments containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact FRA for alternate submission instructions.

Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this document provides the public notice that by letter dated January 14, 2025, LIRR petitioned FRA for an extension of a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 222, Use of Locomotive Horns at Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. The relevant Docket Number is FRA-2008-0045.

Specifically, LIRR seeks an extension of relief from § 222.21(a), When must a locomotive horn be used?, which requires that a railroad sound its locomotive horn in a specific manner (two long, one short, and one long blast) as it approaches and enters public highway-rail grade crossings. LIRR seeks to continue sounding one short blast when departing from 22 train stations. 1 In its petition, LIRR states that “there have been no material changed circumstances” since the inception of the waiver.

A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications concerning the petition, is available for review online at www.regulations.gov.

Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party desires an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for their request.

Communications received by April 2, 2025 will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be considered if practicable.

Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of FRA's dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

In general, title 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) section 20157(h) requires FRA to certify that a host railroad's PTC system complies with title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 236, subpart I, before the technology may be operated in revenue service. Before making certain changes to an FRA-certified PTC system or the associated FRA-approved PTC Safety Plan (PTCSP), a host railroad must submit, and obtain FRA's approval of, an RFA under 49 CFR 236.1021(m).

Under 49 CFR 236.1021(e), FRA's regulations provide that FRA will publish a notice in the Federal Register and invite public comment in accordance with 49 CFR part 211, if an RFA includes a request for approval of a material modification of a signal or train control system. Accordingly, this notice informs the public that, on February 3, 2025, SFRTA submitted an RFA to its Interoperable Electronic Train Management System (I-ETMS), which seeks FRA's approval for SFRTA to disable its PTC system temporarily while it performs a wayside signal cutover of Control Point Tompkins, enabling SFRTA to upgrade end-of-life wayside signal operating equipment. That RFA is available in Docket No. FRA-2010-0039.

Interested parties are invited to comment on SFRTA's RFA by submitting written comments or data. During FRA's review of this railroad's RFA, FRA will consider any comments or data submitted within the timeline specified in this notice and to the extent practicable, without delaying implementation of valuable or necessary modifications to a PTC system. See 49 CFR 236.1021; see also 49 CFR 236.1011(e). Under 49 CFR 236.1021, FRA maintains the authority to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a railroad's RFA at FRA's sole discretion.

In accordance with 49 CFR 211.3, FRA solicits comments from the public to better inform its decisions. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See https://www.regulations.gov/ privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov. To facilitate comment tracking, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely optional. If you wish to provide comments containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact FRA for alternate submission instructions.

Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this document provides the public notice that by letter dated December 26, 2024, AAR petitioned FRA for an extension of a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 215, Railroad Freight Car Safety Standards. The relevant Docket Number is FRA-2013-0077.

Specifically, AAR seeks an extension of relief from § 215.127(c)(1), Defective draft arrangement, which specifies that a railroad may not place or continue in service a car if an end of car cushioning unit is leaking clearly formed droplets. AAR proposes to keep a car in service “if the unit is equipped with a [unit condition indicator] that indicates that the cushioning unit is functioning.”

In support of its request, AAR states that the waiver has protected railroad employees “from needless exposure to switching hazards related to jacking freight cars and removing and replacing heavy cushion units because railroads have been able to leave fully functioning cushioning units in place.” Further, AAR notes that the relief has “allowed the industry to avoid unnecessary repairs” due to the current regulatory requirements. The petition also included data from AAR's performance assessments of units identified as defective by a unit condition indicator.

A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications concerning the petition, is available for review online at www.regulations.gov.

Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party desires an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for their request.

Communications received by April 2, 2025 will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be considered if practicable.

Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of FRA's dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

I. Overview: Mercedes-Benz has determined that certain MY 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class, A-Class, GLA-Class, and GLB-Class motor vehicles do not fully comply with the requirements of paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.135). Mercedes-Benz filed a noncompliance report dated January 27, 2020, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, and subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 10, 2020, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.

Notice of receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition was published with a 30-day public comment period, on May 6, 2020, in the Federal Register (85 FR 27024). NHTSA received one comment from the general public. To view the petition and all supporting documents, log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number “NHTSA-2020-0010.”

II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 27,375 of the following MY 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class, A-Class, GLA-Class, and GLB-Class motor vehicles manufactured between August 20, 2018, and January 16, 2020, are potentially involved:

III. Noncompliance: Mercedes-Benz explains that the noncompliance is that the instrument panel in the subject vehicles displays the braking telltales in a slightly smaller size than required by paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135. Specifically, the size of the text for the brake telltales in the subject vehicles ranges between 2.92 mm to 3.17 mm when the minimum required is 3.2 mm.

IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135, includes the requirements relevant to this petition. Each visual indicator shall display a word or words in accordance with the requirements of FMVSS No. 101 and S5.5 of FMVSS 135, which shall be legible to the driver under all daytime and nighttime conditions when activated. Unless otherwise specified, the words shall have letters not less than 3.2 mm ( 1/8 inch) high.

V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's Petition: The following views and arguments presented in this section, “V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's Petition,” are the views and arguments provided by Mercedes-Benz and do not reflect the views of the Agency. In its petition, Mercedes-Benz describes the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

In support of its petition, Mercedes-Benz offers the following reasoning:

1. Mercedes-Benz believes that the letter height of the braking telltales, which in this instance is slightly smaller than the requirement, does not expose an occupant to any greater risk of injury than an occupant in a vehicle with slightly larger font size.

2. Mercedes-Benz alleges that the purpose of the standardized size requirement for the brake system warning telltales is to ensure they are visually perceptible to drivers under all operating conditions. Mercedes-Benz says that the Agency has a long and consistent history of granting petitions for inconsequentiality for discrepancies involving a letter height requirement where the text appeared somewhat smaller than required. Mercedes-Benz says that NHTSA has granted petitions where the telltales displayed included lettering that was as much as a full millimeter less than the minimum size. See 47 FR 31347 (July 19, 1982) (granting a petition of Subaru of America, Inc., where the brake system indicator lettering was only 2.2 mm high, but the ISO symbol telltales were located within the driver's line of sight and continued to be “easily identifiable and very readable”).

3. Mercedes-Benz asserts that in addressing similar noncompliances in the past, the Agency has determined that “it is very unlikely that a vehicle user would either fail to see or fail to understand the meaning of the brake . . . warning light” where the “information presented by the telltales is correct.” See 81 FR 92963 (December 20, 2016) (granting General Motors' petition of over 46,000 vehicles where the “Park” indicator displayed at 2.44 mm). In the General Motors decision, the Agency found the discrepancy “pose[d] little, if any, risk to motor vehicle safety” where all other braking indicator requirements were met and the telltales were located in the instrument cluster, adjacent to the speedometer and in direct view of the driver); 69 FR 41568 (July 9, 2004) (granting a petition of Hyundai Motor Company involving more than 237,000 vehicles, where the FMVSS No. 105 braking system indicator letter height varied from 2.5 mm to 3.1 mm).

4. In subject noncompliance, the letter height for the braking telltales are only slightly smaller than the 3.2 mm minimum. Depending on the particular indicator, the text size can be smaller by a range of 0.03 mm up to a maximum of .28 mm. The electronic instrument cluster is located within the driver's direct field of vision, and the braking telltales are located adjacent to the speedometer and, therefore, remain within the driver's direct line of sight. Mercedes-Benz claims that this slight difference in size is not visually perceptible and does not affect the driver's ability to read or understand the telltales. Mercedes-Benz further asserts that the telltales are clearly illuminated and remain visible under all driving conditions.

5. Mercedes-Benz states that all the telltales at issue here are accurately depicted and are displayed in the correct colors, consistent with FMVSS No. 101, Table 1. Thus, there should not be any confusion about the meaning of the telltales, and the standard symbol that is displayed continues to convey the intended meaning of the indicator. Further, although the lettering that appears below the ISO symbols is slightly smaller than 3.2 mm minimum height, the overall height of the ABS and Parking Brake symbols is more than 3.2 mm and exceeds the height requirement of the standard. Finally, the functionality of the brake telltales themselves is not affected by the software issue. The telltales properly display during both the instrument cluster warning lamp operation check and in the event a brake malfunction was to occur.

6. Mercedes-Benz says that it has not received any reports related to the performance of the telltales included on the 10.25-inch displays in the subject vehicles. Nor has it received any reports related to customers' inability to read or decipher the brake telltales.

Mercedes-Benz concludes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.

Mercedes-Benz's complete petition and all supporting documents are available by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov and by following the online search instructions to locate the docket number as listed in the title of this notice.

VI. Public Comment: NHTSA received one comment from the general public. While the Agency takes great interest in the public's concerns and appreciates the commenter's feedback, the comment does not address the purpose of this particular petition.

VI. NHTSA's Analysis: In determining inconsequentiality of a noncompliance, NHTSA focuses on the safety risk to individuals who experience the type of event against which a recall would otherwise protect. 1 In general, NHTSA does not consider the absence of complaints or injuries when determining if a noncompliance is inconsequential to safety. The absence of complaints does not mean vehicle occupants have not experienced a safety issue, nor does it mean that there will not be safety issues in the future. 2 Further, because each inconsequential noncompliance petition must be evaluated on its own facts and determinations are highly fact-dependent, NHTSA does not consider prior determinations as binding precedent. Petitioners are reminded that they have the burden of persuading NHTSA that the noncompliance is inconsequential to safety.

While reviewing the facts of the case, OVSC reached out to Mercedes to find out if there were additional warnings messages that triggered along with the brake indicator. Mercedes provided several screenshots that show supplemental warning messages that activate along with brake indicator and help convey the required brake warnings to the driver. Taking into consideration all of the information provided and the oversized height of the additional information, the Agency agrees with Mercedes-Benz that this noncompliance will not have an adverse effect on vehicle safety. Despite the letter height of the braking telltales being slightly smaller than the 3.2 mm requirement, the overall height of the adjacent ABS and Parking Brake ISO symbols is more than 3.2 mm and exceeds the height requirement of the standard. Additionally, the instrument cluster's braking telltales are adjacent to the speedometer and directly within the driver's direct field of view. The aforementioned facts support a conclusion that it would be unlikely for a driver to fail to perceive and understand the meaning of the illuminated telltale and symbols. As the symbols are accurately depicted and are displayed in the correct colors, consistent with FMVSS No. 101, Table 1, there should not be any confusion about the meaning of the telltales; and the standard symbol that is displayed continues to convey the intended meaning of the indicator. The information presented by the telltales is correct.

VII. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that Mercedes-Benz has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 135 noncompliance in the affected vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Mercedes-Benz's petition is hereby granted, and Mercedes-Benz is consequently exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.

NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in section 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only applies to the subject vehicles that Mercedes-Benz no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Mercedes-Benz notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.