10172 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 43 / Friday, March 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 3. Section 1313.42 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 1313.42 Prohibition of shipments from 

certain foreign sources. 

(a) If the Administrator determines 

that a foreign manufacturer or 

distributor of ephedrine, 

pseudoephedrine, or 

phenylpropanolamine has refused to 

cooperate with a request by the 

Administrator for information known to 

the manufacturer or distributor on the 

distribution of the chemical, including 

sales, the Administrator may issue an 

order prohibiting the importation of the 

chemical in any case where the 

manufacturer or distributor is part of the 

chain of distribution. 

(b) Not later than 60 days prior to 

issuing the order to prohibit 

importation, the Administrator shall 

publish in the Federal Register a notice 

of intent to issue the order. During the 

60-day period, imports from the foreign 

manufacturer or distributor may not be 

restricted under this section. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4716 Filed 3–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[TD 9424] 

RIN 1545–BB61 

Unified Rule for Loss on Subsidiary 

Stock; Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correcting amendment. 

SUMMARY: This document contains a 

correction to final regulations (TD 9424) 

that were published in the Federal 

Register on Wednesday, September 17, 

2008 (73 FR 53934). 

The regulations apply to corporations 

filing consolidated returns, and 

corporations that enter into certain taxfree reorganizations. The regulations 

provide rules for determining the tax 

consequences of a member’s transfer 

(including by deconsolidation and 

worthlessness) of loss shares of 

subsidiary stock. 

DATES: Effective Date: This correction is 

effective on March 5, 2010, and is 

applicable on September 17, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maury Passman, (202) 622–7550 or 

Theresa Abell, (202) 622–7700 (not tollfree numbers). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The final regulations (TD 9424) that 

are the subject of this document are 

under sections 337, 358, 362 and 1502 

of the Internal Revenue Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published, the final regulations 

(TD 9424) contain an error that may 

prove to be misleading and is in need 

of clarification. The final regulations 

revised § 1.1502–35(a) to provide that, 

in general, § 1.1502–35 would only 

apply to transactions completed prior to 

September 17, 2008. The final 

regulations also revised the operative 

rules in § 1.1502–35. However, the 

effective date prescribed in § 1.1502– 

35(j) appeared to preclude the 

application of the revised § 1.1502–35 to 

transactions completed prior to 

September 17, 2008. The final 

regulations are clarified to provide that 

the revised rules in § 1.1502–35 

(including the ten-year termination of 

application of § 1.1502–35 described in 

Background section 2.A. of the 

preamble) apply after September 16, 

2008, to all transactions subject to that 

section. 

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 

Income taxes, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Correction of Publication 

■ Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is 

corrected by making the following 

correcting amendment: 

PART 1—INCOME TAXES 

■ Paragraph 1. The authority citation 

for part 1 continues to read in part as 

follows: 

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * 

■ Par. 2. Section 1.1502–35 is amended 

by revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (j) to read as follows: 

§ 1.1502–35 Transfers of subsidiary stock 

and deconsolidations of subsidiaries. 

* * * * * 

(j) Effective/applicability dates. This 

section applies after September 16, 

2008. * * * 

LaNita Van Dyke, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel, (Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 2010–4756 Filed 3–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0796] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Chester River, Chestertown, MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the drawbridge operation regulations of 

the S213 Bridge, at mile 26.8, across 

Chester River at Chestertown, MD. This 

final rule allows the bridge to open on 

signal if at least six hours notice is given 

and will provide for the reasonable 

needs of navigation, due to the 

anticipated infrequency of requests for 

vessel openings of the drawbridge. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 5, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and related 

materials received from the public, as 

well as documents mentioned in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket, are part of docket USCG–2009– 

0796 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2009–0796 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This 

material is also available for inspection 

or copying at the Docket Management 

Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Regulatory Information 

On September 25, 2009, we published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation 

Regulations; Chester River, 

Chestertown, MD’’ in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 48889). We received no 

comments on the proposed rule. No 

public meeting was requested, and none 

was held. 

Background and Purpose 

Maryland Department of 

Transportation-State Highway 

Administration (MDOT) is responsible 

for the operation of the S213 Bridge, at 

mile 26.8, across Chester River at 

Chestertown, MD. MDOT requested 

advance notification for vessel openings 

year-round due to the anticipated 

infrequency of requests for vessel 

openings of the drawbridge. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 43 / Friday, March 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 10173 

The S213 Bridge has a vertical 

clearance in the closed position to 

vessels of 12 feet, above mean high 

water. 

The existing operating regulations set 

out in 33 CFR 117.551 require the draw 

to open on signal from April 1 through 

September 30 from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. At 

all other times, the draw shall open on 

signal if at least six hours notice is 

given. 

Bridge opening data, supplied by 

MDOT, revealed a small amount of 

yearly openings of the draw span. In the 

past five years from 2004 to 2008, the 

bridge opened for vessels 42, 38, 54, 34 

and 34 times, respectively. Due to the 

anticipated infrequency of requests for 

vessel openings of the drawbridge, 

MDOT requested to change the current 

operating regulation by requiring the 

draw of the bridge to open on signal if 

at least six hours notice is given yearround. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The Coast Guard did not receive any 

comments on the NPRM. Therefore, no 

changes were made to the final rule. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. 

We reached this conclusion based on 

the fact that the changes have only a 

minimal impact on maritime traffic 

transiting the bridge. Mariners can 

minimize delay by ensuring the 

necessary notice is given six hours or 

more in advance of the scheduled 

transit. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This rule would affect the following 

entities, some of which might be small 

entities: the owners and operators of 

vessels needing to transit the bridge 

who cannot clear the bridge at its closed 

position. This rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

because any operator of an affected 

vessel may still transit the bridge if that 

operator provides the necessary notice 

six hours or more in advance of the 

scheduled transit. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

in the NPRM (SNPRM) we offered to 

assist small entities in understanding 

the rule so that they could better 

evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 

1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 

The Coast Guard will not retaliate 

against small entities that question or 

complain about this rule or any policy 

or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This rule calls for no new collection 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this rule under that Order and have 

determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 or more in any one year. 

Though this rule will not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not effect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

would not create an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that might 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
10174 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 43 / Friday, March 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guides the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded that this action is one 

of a category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(32)(e), of the Instruction. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of 

the Instruction, an environmental 

analysis checklist and a categorical 

exclusion determination are not 

required for this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise § 117.551 to read as follows: 

§ 117.551 Chester River. 

The draw of the S213 Bridge, mile 

26.8, at Chestertown, shall open on 

signal if at least six hours notice is 

given. 

Dated: February 2, 2010. 

Wayne E. Justice, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4648 Filed 3–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 49 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0185; FRL–9122–3] 

RIN 2009–AA00 

Source-Specific Federal 

Implementation Plan for Navajo 

Generating Station; Navajo Nation 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is promulgating a sourcespecific Federal Implementation Plan 

(FIP) to regulate emissions from the 

Navajo Generating Station (NGS), a coalfired power plant located on the Navajo 

Indian Reservation near Page, Arizona. 

EPA proposed the NGS FIP on 

September 12, 2006, to establish 

federally enforceable limitations for 

TSP, SO2, and opacity, and control 

measures for dust. The limits had 

previously been established in the 

Arizona SIP. EPA promulgated the 

Tribal Authority Rule in 1998, clarifying 

that state air quality regulations 

generally did not apply to facilities on 

Indian reservations and that EPA should 

fill the regulatory gap as necessary or 

appropriate. This action fills the 

regulatory gap for the NGS facility. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on April 5, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. R09–OAR–2006–0185. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the Federal eRulemaking portal index at 

http://www.regulations.gov and are 

available either electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California 94105. To 

inspect the hard copy materials, please 

schedule an appointment during normal 

business hours with the contact listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. A reasonable fee may be 

charged for copies. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarvy Mahdavi, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3173, mahdavi.sarvy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background of the Final Rule 

A. Summary of Final FIP Provisions 

II. Analysis of Major Issues Raised by 

Commenters 

A. Concerns About the Scope of the FIP 

B. Comments on Emissions Limits 

III. Administrative Requirements 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With 

Indian Tribal Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

I. Background of the Final Rule 

NGS is a 2,250 megawatt coal-fired 

power plant located on the Navajo 

Indian Reservation near Page, Arizona. 

Salt River Project (‘‘SRP’’) is the 

operating agent for NGS, which is 

jointly owned by SRP, the United States 

Bureau of Reclamation, the Los Angeles 

Department of Water and Power, the 

Arizona Public Service, the Nevada 

Power Company, and the Tucson 

Electric Power Company. Since 1974, 

NGS has been operating on real property 

held in trust by the federal government 

for the Navajo Nation. The facility 

consists of three 750 MW coal-fired 

electric utility steam generating units. 

In 1999, EPA initially proposed to 

promulgate a FIP to regulate emissions 

from NGS. See 64 FR 48725 (September 

8, 1999) (1999 proposed FIP). At that 

time, NGS was meeting certain 

emissions limits in the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). However, 

because the Arizona SIP is not approved 

to apply on the Navajo Indian 

Reservation, and because the Navajo 

Nation did not have a federally 

applicable tribal implementation plan 

(TIP), EPA proposed to promulgate a FIP 

to remedy the existing regulatory gap. 

The 1999 proposed FIP, therefore, 

would have, in essence, federalized the 

requirements contained in the Arizona 

SIP which NGS had historically 

followed. In explaining the basis for its 

proposed action, EPA stated that given 

the magnitude of emissions from the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES