Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 107 / Friday, June 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32115 

193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone 

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), 

so Rules 4602 and 4603 must fulfill 

RACT. The ICAPCD regulates an ozone 

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), 

so Rules 425 and 427 must fulfill RACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we used to help evaluate enforceability 

and RACT requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 

ozone and carbon monoxide policy that 

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 

24, 1987. 

2. Issues Relating to ‘‘VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘A Guidance Document for 

Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. CTG for Automobile and the CTG 

for Light-Duty Truck Assembly 

Coatings, EPA–453/R–08–006, 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings, EPA–453/R–08–003, 

5. CTG for Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Materials, EPA–453/R– 

08–004, 

6. National Emissions Standards for 

Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 

Facilities: Summary of Requirements for 

Implementing NESHAP, EPA–456/R– 

97–006 and CARB Automotive Coatings 

SCM. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP 

relaxations. The TSDs have more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

The TSDs describe additional rule 

revisions that do not affect EPA’s 

current action but are recommended for 

the next time the local agency modifies 

the rules. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all relevant requirements, 

we are proposing to fully approve them 

as described in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act. We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate these rules 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, these rules do not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compound. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: May 19, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–13830 Filed 6–2–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987–0002; FRL–9315–7] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Intent To 

Delete the Coker’s Sanitation Service 

Landfills Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region III is issuing an 

Intent To Delete the Coker’s Sanitation 

Service Landfills Superfund Site (Site) 

located in Cheswold, Kent County, 

Delaware, from the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Delaware, through the 

Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control 

(DNREC), have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

July 5, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: 

Submit your comments, identified by 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987– 

0002, by one of the following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: ostrauskas.darius@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (215) 814–3002, Attn: Darius 

Ostrauskas. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
32116 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 107 / Friday, June 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

• Mail: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, Attn: 

Darius Ostrauskas (3HS23), 1650 Arch 

Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, Attn: 

Darius Ostrauskas (3HS23), 1650 Arch 

Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029, 

Phone: 215–814–3360, Business Hours: 

Mon. thru Fri.—9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987– 

0002. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

U.S. EPA Region III, Library, 2nd Floor, 

1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 

19103–2029, (215) 814–5254, Monday 

through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

The Dover Public Library, Reference 

Department, 45 South State Street, 

Dover, DE 19901, (302) 736–7030, 

Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 

9 p.m., Friday and Saturday, 9 a.m. to 

5 p.m., and Sunday, 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Darius Ostrauskas, Remedial Project 

Manager (3HS23), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103– 

2029, (215) 814–3360, e-mail: 

ostrauskas.darius@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ Section of 

today’s Federal Register, we are 

publishing a direct final Notice of 

Deletion of the Coker’s Sanitation 

Service Landfills Superfund Site 

without prior Notice of Intent To Delete 

because EPA views this as a 

noncontroversial revision and 

anticipates no adverse comment. We 

have explained our reasons for this 

deletion in the preamble to the direct 

final Notice of Deletion, and those 

reasons are incorporated herein. If we 

receive no adverse comment(s) on this 

deletion action, we will not take further 

action on this Notice of Intent to Delete. 

If we receive adverse comment(s), we 

will withdraw the direct final Notice of 

Deletion and it will not take effect. We 

will, as appropriate, address all public 

comments in a subsequent final Notice 

of Deletion based on this Notice of 

Intent to Delete. We will not institute a 

second comment period on this Notice 

of Intent to Delete. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final Notice of Deletion, which is 

located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: April 29, 2011. 

James W. Newsom, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–13844 Filed 6–2–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 73 and 76 

[MB Docket No. 11–93; FCC 11–84] 

Implementation of the Commercial 

Advertisement Loudness Mitigation 

(CALM) Act 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission proposes rules to 

implement the Commercial 

Advertisement Loudness Mitigation 

(‘‘CALM’’) Act. Among other things, the 

CALM Act directs the Commission to 

incorporate into its rules by reference 

and make mandatory a technical 

standard developed by an industry 

standard-setting body that is designed to 

prevent television commercial 

advertisements from being transmitted 

at louder volumes than the program 

material they accompany. Specifically, 

the CALM Act requires the Commission 

to incorporate by reference the ATSC A/ 

85 Recommended Practice (‘‘ATSC A/85 

RP’’) and make it mandatory ‘‘insofar as 

such recommended practice concerns 

the transmission of commercial 

advertisements by a television broadcast 

station, cable operator, or other 

multichannel video programming 

distributor.’’ As mandated by the statute, 

the proposed rules will apply to TV 

broadcasters, cable operators and other 

multichannel video programming 

distributors (‘‘MVPDs’’). The new law 

requires the Commission to adopt the 

required regulation on or before 

December 15, 2011, and it will take 

effect one year after adoption. The 

document seeks comment below on 

proposals regarding compliance, 

waivers, and other implementation 

issues. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

July 5, 2011; reply comments are due on 

or before July 18, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by MB Docket No. 11–93, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS) Web Site: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: All filings must be addressed 

to the Commission’s Secretary, Office of 

the Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1