Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 41101 

the revised PCB human health water 

quality criterion if approved. 

When the Commission directed the 

executive director in 2005 to initiate 

rulemaking on updated PCB criteria, in 

accordance with a recommendation of 

the TAC, it also asked her to work with 

State regulatory agencies and EPA 

(collectively, ‘‘co-regulators’’) to 

develop recommendations for 

implementing criteria for 

bioaccumulative toxic pollutants such 

as PCBs that would be ‘‘consistent with 

the existing Clean Water Act National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) framework while * * * 

reflecting principles of adaptive 

management’’ and to solicit public 

comment on these recommendations 

(DRBC Resolution No. 2005–19 par’s. 

3–4). It is expected that Stage 2 TMDLs 

issued by EPA will include as an 

appendix a TMDL implementation plan 

developed by DRBC and its coregulators. The implementation plan, 

which will take the form of a guidance 

document, will explain how the load 

allocations assigned by the TMDL to 

nonpoint sources and the wasteload 

allocations assigned to point sources 

can be achieved consistent with the 

Clean Water Act and principles of 

adaptive management. 

According to the 2003 and 2006 

TMDLs, actual loadings of PCBs to the 

Delaware Estuary and Bay respectively 

are in some cases orders of magnitude 

above those needed to allow attainment 

of the designated use. The EPA’s 2003 

Delaware Estuary TMDL report projects 

that ‘‘due to the scope and complexity 

of the problem that has been defined 

through these TMDLs, achieving the 

estuary water quality standards for PCBs 

will take decades.’’ (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Regions II and III, 

Total Maximum Daily Loads for 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) for 

Zones 2–5 of the Tidal Delaware River, 

December 15, 2003, p. xiii). As required 

by Section 4.30.9 of the DRBC Water 

Quality Regulations, adopted by DRBC 

Resolution No. 2005–9 on May 18, 2005, 

the largest point source dischargers of 

PCBs to the Delaware Estuary and Bay 

have already undertaken pollutant 

minimization plans designed to locate 

the sources of PCBs entering their 

wastewater and stormwater systems and 

contain or remove them. The TMDL 

implementation plan developed by the 

co-regulators recognizes that many point 

source dischargers already have reduced 

their PCB loadings in an effort to meet 

their TMDL wasteload allocations 

assigned by the Stage 1 TMDLs. Some 

point source dischargers are expected to 

achieve their required reductions soon; 

however, others will require an 

extended period of time, including in 

some instances decades, to achieve the 

PCB loading reductions needed to meet 

their assigned wasteload allocations. 

The implementation plan developed by 

the co-regulators will accommodate 

these dischargers through the use of 

compliance schedules consistent with 

the Clean Water Act and applicable 

regulations. It is understood that those 

dischargers who cannot achieve their 

wasteload allocations within a single 

five-year permit cycle notwithstanding 

good faith efforts to do so as soon as 

possible will be given additional time, 

even if this requires compliance 

schedules extending well beyond a 

single five-year permit cycle. 

Subjects on which Comment is 

Expressly Solicited. Public comment is 

solicited on all aspects of the proposed 

rule. Without limiting the foregoing, the 

Commission has identified certain 

subject matters on which it expressly 

seeks comment. First, comments are 

solicited on the assumptions applied in 

developing the criterion, including the 

appropriate cancer risk level. (See DRBC 

Resolution No. 2005–19, par. 2). In 

accordance with current DRBC 

regulations, that level is 10¥6, or one 

additional cancer in every one million 

humans exposed for 70 years. (See 

WQR, § 3.10.3 D.4). The assumptions 

applied in developing the revised PCB 

criterion of 16 picograms per liter are set 

forth in a basis and background 

document that is available on the DRBC 

Web site, http://DRBC.net. The second 

area on which the Commission 

expressly seeks comment is best 

approaches for implementing water 

quality criteria for bioaccumulative 

pollutants consistent with the NPDES 

framework and principles of adaptive 

management. (See DRBC Resolution No. 

2005–19, par. 4). The third is the 

implementation plan developed by the 

co-regulators, which is posted on the 

Commission’s Web site, http:// 

DRBC.net. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

text of the proposed rule, relevant DRBC 

resolutions, the basis and background 

document and the co-regulators’ 

implementation plan for the proposed 

criterion will be available on the DRBC 

Web site, http://DRBC.net, on or before 

August 17, 2009. For further 

information, please contact Commission 

Secretary Pamela M. Bush, 609–883– 

9500 ext. 203. 

Dated: August 4, 2009. 

Pamela M. Bush, 

Commission Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–19028 Filed 8–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6360–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 58 

[Docket No: EOUST 103] 

RIN 1105–AB16 

Procedures Governing Administrative 

Review of a United States Trustee’s 

Decision To Deny a Chapter 12 or 

Chapter 13 Standing Trustee’s Claim of 

Actual, Necessary Expenses 

AGENCY: Executive Office for United 

States Trustees (‘‘EOUST’’), Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This notice of proposed 

rulemaking (‘‘rule’’) sets forth the 

procedures for a chapter 12 or chapter 

13 standing trustee (‘‘trustee’’) to obtain 

administrative review of a United States 

Trustee’s decision to deny a trustee’s 

claim that certain expenses are actual 

and necessary for the administration of 

bankruptcy cases. Section 1231(b) of the 

Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and 

Consumer Protection Act of 2005 

(‘‘BAPCPA’’), codified at 28 U.S.C. 

586(e), requires that: Trustees exhaust 

all administrative remedies pertaining 

to a denial of a claim of actual, 

necessary expenses before seeking 

judicial review; and the Attorney 

General prescribe procedures for 

administrative review of such denials. 

This rule ensures that the process for 

administratively reviewing a United 

States Trustee’s denial of a trustee’s 

request for expenses is fair and effective. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

October 13, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the rule may 

be submitted via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, by telefax to (202) 

307–2397, or by postal mail to EOUST, 

20 Massachusetts Ave., NW., 8th Floor, 

Washington, DC 20530. To ensure 

proper handling of comments, please 

reference ‘‘Docket No. EOUST 103— 

Trustee Expenses’’ on all written and 

electronic correspondence. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ramona D. Elliott, General Counsel, or 

Larry Wahlquist, Office of General 

Counsel, at (202) 307–1399 (not a tollfree number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Posting of Public Comments 

Please note that all comments 

received are considered part of the 

public record and made available for 

public inspection online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Such information 

includes personal identifying 

information (such as your name, 

address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by 

the commenter. If you want to submit 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

41102 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

personal identifying information (such 

as your name, address, etc.) as part of 

your comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also locate 

all the personal identifying information 

you do not want posted online in the 

first paragraph of your comment and 

identify what information you want 

redacted. 

If you want to submit confidential 

business information as part of your 

comment but do not want it to be posted 

online, you must include the phrase 

‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also 

prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Personal identifying information and 

confidential business information 

identified and located as set forth above 

will be placed in the agency’s public 

docket file, but not posted online. If you 

wish to inspect the agency’s public 

docket file in person by appointment, 

please see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT paragraph. Comments filed 

after the end of the comment period 

may be considered to the extent feasible. 

Discussion of Rule 

The administration of all chapter 12 

and 13 bankruptcy cases is entrusted to 

private persons who are case or standing 

trustees under the supervision and 

oversight of a regional United States 

Trustee. As distinguished from case or 

standing trustees, United States Trustees 

are employees of the Department of 

Justice. A standing trustee is appointed 

by the United States Trustee under 28 

U.S.C. 586 and administers more than 

one chapter 13 or chapter 12 case, as 

opposed to a case trustee who is 

appointed under 11 U.S.C. 1302 or 11 

U.S.C. 1202 and who administers only 

the case to which the trustee is 

appointed. This rule addresses the right, 

conferred by the Bankruptcy Abuse 

Prevention and Consumer Protection 

Act of 2005 (‘‘BAPCPA’’), of a standing 

trustee to obtain administrative review 

when the trustee’s request for projected 

expenses, referred to as a ‘‘claim of 

actual, necessary expenses’’ in 28 U.S.C. 

586(e)(3), is denied by the United States 

Trustee. 

When a debtor files for bankruptcy 

relief under chapter 12 or chapter 13, 

the debtor proposes a plan to pay his or 

her creditors a percentage of the 

amounts owed to creditors over a 

specified period of time and obtains 

court approval of this plan. This process 

is termed confirming a chapter 12 or 

chapter 13 plan. Once the bankruptcy 

court confirms the plan, the trustee will 

oversee the payment of creditors 

pursuant to the plan. The debtor pays 

plan payments to the trustee and the 

trustee then disburses the appropriate 

amounts to creditors. 

As part of the process of 

administering debtors’ cases, a trustee 

incurs expenses. A trustee is authorized 

to collect a specified percentage of 

disbursed funds from debtors’ plan 

payments to pay for these expenses. 

However, before incurring expenses, a 

trustee obtains approval from the United 

States Trustee. As the first step in 

obtaining United States Trustee 

approval for expenses, the United States 

Trustee requires that the trustee submit 

a budget for the anticipated expenses for 

the fiscal year ending each September 

30th. Next, these projected expenses are 

evaluated by the United States Trustee 

who will either approve the expenses or 

require modifications to the proposed 

budget. Once the United States Trustee 

approves the trustee’s budget, the 

trustee is notified of this approval, and 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 586(e), the 

trustee’s compensation, and a specified 

percentage fee that the trustee may 

collect from debtors’ plan payments, is 

authorized. This fee is to be used for 

payment of the approved expenses 

incurred during the fiscal year. 

When a trustee realizes that expenses 

for the current year might exceed the 

approved amount, a trustee must submit 

a request to the United States Trustee, 

and obtain approval, before incurring 

expenses above the approved amount. 

This request must be submitted when 

the increase to an individual expense 

line item is greater than both 10% of the 

budgeted amount and $5,000.00. 

Expenses for certain items require prior 

United States Trustee approval 

regardless of amount. These expenses 

currently are increases in the amount 

budgeted for employee expenses, 

increases in office lease obligations, 

payments to the standing trustee or 

relative of the standing trustee, and 

expenses for any item not originally 

contained in the approved budget. 

These expenses are set forth in the 

Chapter 13 Trustee Handbook, which is 

posted on the EOUST web site. If any 

other expenses are added to this list, the 

United States Trustee will notify 

trustees via email or regular mail at least 

30 days before including the new 

expenses in a revision to the Handbook. 

If a trustee disagrees with the United 

States Trustee’s denial of the trustee’s 

request for expenses, the trustee may 

seek administrative review of the denial 

under the procedures identified in this 

rule. The Director of the EOUST will 

conduct a de novo review of the United 

States Trustee’s decision to determine 

whether the record supports the United 

States Trustee’s decision and whether 

the decision was an appropriate exercise 

of the United States Trustee’s discretion 

or contrary to law. 

With the passage of BAPCPA, 

Congress directed the Attorney General 

to prescribe procedures implementing 

administrative review for trustees when 

a claim of actual, necessary expenses is 

denied. The Attorney General delegated 

this authority to the Director, Executive 

Office for United States Trustees. In 

response to this congressional mandate, 

the Director publishes this rule, which 

establishes such procedures. This rule 

imposes requirements only upon 

standing trustees who are supervised by 

United States Trustees. In addition, this 

rule addresses only the United States 

Trustee’s denial of a trustee’s claim of 

actual, necessary expenses. This rule 

does not address the suspension or 

termination of trustees. EOUST will 

publish another notice of proposed 

rulemaking that addresses the 

suspension or termination of trustees 

with a RIN number of 1105–AB12. 

Executive Order 12866 

This rule has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review’’ section 1(b), The Principles of 

Regulation. This rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as 

defined by Executive Order 12866 and, 

accordingly, this rule has not been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. 

The Department has also assessed 

both the costs and benefits of this rule 

as required by section 1(b)(6) and has 

made a reasoned determination that the 

benefits of this regulation justify its 

costs. The costs considered in this 

regulation include the costs for 

prosecuting an administrative appeal of 

the United States Trustee’s denial of a 

trustee’s claim of actual, necessary 

expenses. The anticipated costs are the 

compiling, photocopying and mailing of 

the requested records. However, none of 

these costs are new. This rule simply 

codifies the current practice for 

obtaining administrative review of the 

United States Trustee’s decision. 

The benefits of this rule include the 

codification of the process for a trustee 

to obtain administrative review of the 

United States Trustee’s denial of a 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 41103 

trustee’s claim of actual, necessary 

expenses. These benefits justify its costs 

in complying with Congress’ mandate to 

prescribe procedures to implement 28 

U.S.C. 586(e). 

Executive Order 13132 

This rule will not have a substantial 

direct effect on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

it is determined that this rule does not 

have sufficient federalism implications 

to warrant the preparation of a 

Federalism Assessment. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not contain an 

information collection under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501, et seq.). If a trustee wishes to 

appeal a United States Trustee’s 

decision, the trustee submits a request 

for review to the Director detailing the 

specific factual circumstances 

supporting the trustee’s argument. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

In accordancewith the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the 

Director has reviewed this rule and by 

approving it certifies that it will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This certification is based upon the fact 

that this rule does not impose any new 

costs upon trustees that did not already 

exist under the current administrative 

review process. In addition, the costs of 

compiling, photocopying and mailing 

records are de minimis. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This rule does not require the 

preparation of an assessment statement 

in accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 

1531. This rule does not include a 

federal mandate that may result in the 

annual expenditure by State, local, and 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of more than the 

annual threshold established by the Act 

($100 million). Therefore, no actions 

were deemed necessary under the 

provisions of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined by section 804 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 801 et 

seq. This rule will not result in an 

annual effect on the economy of $100 

million or more; a major increase in 

costs or prices; or significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, and 

innovation; or on the ability of United 

States-based companies to compete with 

foreign-based companies in domestic 

and export markets. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 58 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Bankruptcy, Credit and 

debts. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

in the preamble, Part 58 of chapter I of 

title 28 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations is proposed to be amended 

as follows: 

PART 58—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 58 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552; 11 U.S.C. 

109(h), 111, 521(b), 727(a)(11), 1141(d)(3), 

1202; 1302, 1328(g); 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 586, 

589b. 

2. Add § 58.11 to read as follows: 

§ 58.11 Procedures Governing 

Administrative Review of a United States 

Trustee’s Decision to Deny a Chapter 12 or 

Chapter 13 Standing Trustee’s Claim of 

Actual, Necessary Expenses. 

(a) The following definitions apply to 

§ 58.11 of this Part. These terms shall 

have these meanings: 

(1) The term ‘‘claim of actual, 

necessary expenses’’ means the request 

by a chapter 12 or chapter 13 standing 

trustee for the United States Trustee’s 

approval of the trustee’s projected 

expenses for each fiscal year budget, or 

for an amendment to the current budget 

when an increase in an individual 

expense line item is greater than both 

10% of the budgeted amount and 

$5,000.00. Expenses for certain items 

require prior United States Trustee 

approval regardless of amount; 

(2) The term ‘‘Director’’ means the 

person designated or acting as the 

Director of the Executive Office for 

United States Trustees; 

(3) The term ‘‘final decision’’ means 

the determination issued by the Director 

based upon the review of the United 

States Trustee’s decision to deny all or 

part of a trustee’s claim of actual, 

necessary expenses; 

(4) The term ‘‘notice’’ means the 

written communication from the United 

States Trustee to a trustee that the 

trustee’s claim of actual, necessary 

expenses has been denied in whole or 

in part; 

(5) The term ‘‘request for review’’ 

means the written communication from 

a trustee to the Director seeking review 

of the United States Trustee’s decision 

to deny, in whole or in part, the 

trustee’s claim of actual, necessary 

expenses; 

(6) The term ‘‘trustee’’ means an 

individual appointed by the United 

States Trustee under 28 U.S.C. 586(b) to 

serve as the standing trustee for chapter 

12 or chapter 13 cases in a particular 

region; and 

(7) The term ‘‘United States Trustee’’ 

means, alternatively: 

(i) The Executive Office for United 

States Trustees; 

(ii) A United States Trustee appointed 

under 28 U.S.C. 581; 

(iii) A person acting as a United States 

Trustee; 

(iv) An employee of a United States 

Trustee; or 

(v) Any other entity authorized by the 

Attorney General to act on behalf of the 

United States under this rule. 

(b) The United States Trustee may 

issue a decision to deny a trustee’s 

claim of actual, necessary expenses. 

Reasons for denial include, but are not 

limited to, finding any of the following: 

(1) The trustee failed to provide to the 

United States Trustee sufficient 

justification for the expense; 

(2) The trustee failed to demonstrate 

to the United States Trustee that the 

expense is a cost effective use of funds; 

(3) The trustee failed to demonstrate 

to the United States Trustee that the 

expense is reasonably related to the 

duties of the trustee; 

(4) The trustee failed to obtain 

authorization from the United States 

Trustee prior to making an expenditure 

that was not provided for in the current 

budget; 

(5) The trustee failed to provide the 

United States Trustee with documents, 

materials, or other information 

pertaining to the expense; 

(6) The trustee failed to timely submit 

to the United States Trustee accurate 

budgets or requests for amendment of 

budgets to cover the additional expense; 

or 

(7) The trustee failed to demonstrate 

to the United States Trustee that the 

expense is directly related to office 

operations. 

(c) Before issuing a notice of denial, 

the United States Trustee shall 

communicate in writing with the trustee 

in an attempt to resolve any dispute 

over a claim of actual, necessary 

expenses: 

(1) For disputes involving the 

trustee’s projected expenses for the 

upcoming fiscal year budget, the United 

States Trustee shall either resolve the 

dispute or issue a written notice of 

denial no later than October 31 of the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

41104 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

current calendar year, or, if the United 

States Trustee has requested additional 

information, 30 days from the deadline 

for submission of the additional 

information if such deadline is after 

October 1, unless the trustee and United 

States Trustee agree to a longer period 

of time. Any projected expenses not 

specifically disputed shall be approved 

in the ordinary course and the trustee’s 

fee shall be set on an interim basis; 

(2) For disputes over amendments to 

the current year budget, the United 

States Trustee shall either resolve the 

dispute or issue a written notice of 

denial within 30 days of the trustee’s 

amendment request, or, if the United 

States Trustee has requested additional 

information, 30 days from the deadline 

for submission of the additional 

information, unless the trustee and 

United States Trustee agree to a longer 

period of time. Any portion of the 

amendment not specifically disputed 

shall be approved in the ordinary 

course; 

(3) If the United States Trustee does 

not resolve the dispute or issue a 

written notice of denial within the timeframes identified in (c)(1) or (c)(2) of 

this section, the trustee’s claim of 

actual, necessary expenses shall be 

deemed denied. 

(d) The United States Trustee shall 

notify a trustee in writing of any 

decision denying a trustee’s claim of 

actual, necessary expenses. The notice 

shall state the reason(s) for the decision 

and shall reference any documents or 

communications relied upon in 

reaching the decision. The United States 

Trustee shall provide to the trustee 

copies of any such non-privileged 

documents that were not supplied to the 

United States Trustee by the trustee. 

The notice shall be sent to the trustee by 

overnight courier, for delivery the next 

business day. 

(e) The notice shall advise the trustee 

that the decision is final and 

unreviewable unless the trustee requests 

in writing a review by the Director no 

later than 30 calendar days from the 

date of the notice to the trustee. 

(f) The decision to deny a trustee’s 

claim of actual, necessary expenses 

shall take effect upon the expiration of 

a trustee’s time to seek review from the 

Director or, if the trustee timely seeks 

such review, upon the issuance of a 

written final decision by the Director. 

(g) The trustee’s request for review 

shall be in writing and shall fully 

describe why the trustee disagrees with 

the United States Trustee’s decision, 

and shall be accompanied by all 

documents and materials the trustee 

wants the Director to consider in 

reviewing the United States Trustee’s 

decision. The trustee shall send the 

original and one copy of the request for 

review, including all accompanying 

documents and materials, to the Office 

of the Director by overnight courier, for 

delivery the next business day. In order 

to be timely, a request for review shall 

be received at the Office of the Director 

no later than 30 calendar days from the 

date of the notice to the trustee. The 

trustee shall also send a copy of the 

request for review to the United States 

Trustee by overnight courier, for 

delivery the next business day. 

(h) The United States Trustee shall 

have 30 calendar days from the date of 

the trustee’s request for review to 

submit to the Director a written 

response regarding the matters raised in 

the trustee’s request for review. The 

United States Trustee shall provide a 

copy of this response to the trustee by 

overnight courier, for delivery the next 

business day. 

(i) The Director may seek additional 

information from any party, in the 

manner and to the extent the Director 

deems appropriate. 

(j) In reviewing the decision to deny 

a trustee’s claim of actual, necessary 

expenses, the Director shall determine: 

(1) Whether the decision is supported 

by the record; and 

(2) Whether the decision constitutes 

an appropriate exercise of discretion. 

(k) The Director shall issue a written 

final decision no later than 90 calendar 

days from the receipt of the trustee’s 

request for review, or, if the Director has 

requested additional information, 30 

days from the deadline for submission 

of the additional information, unless the 

trustee agrees to a longer period of time. 

The Director’s final decision on the 

trustee’s request for review shall 

constitute final agency action. 

(l) In reaching a final decision the 

Director may specify a person to act as 

a reviewing official. The reviewing 

official may not be under the 

supervision of the United States Trustee 

who denied the trustee’s claim of actual, 

necessary expenses. The reviewing 

official’s duties shall be specified by the 

Director on a case-by-case basis, and 

may include reviewing the record, 

obtaining additional information from 

the participants, providing the Director 

with written recommendations, and 

such other duties as the Director shall 

prescribe in a particular case. 

(m) This rule does not authorize a 

trustee to seek review of any decision to 

change maximum annual compensation, 

to decrease or increase appointments of 

trustees in a region or district, to change 

the trustee’s percentage fee, or to 

suspend, terminate, or remove a trustee. 

(n) A trustee must exhaust all 

administrative remedies before seeking 

redress in any court of competent 

jurisdiction. 

Dated: August 6, 2009. 

Clifford J. White III, 

Director, Executive Office for United States 

Trustees. 

[FR Doc. E9–19456 Filed 8–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–40–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0474; FRL–8945–8] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern oxides of nitrogen 

(NOX) and particulate matter (PM) 

emissions from boilers of various 

capacities. We are approving local rules 

that regulate these emission sources 

under the Clean Air Act as amended in 

1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking 

comments on this proposal and plan to 

follow with a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

September 14, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0474, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS