41106 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, RACT, RACM 

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, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 3, 2009. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E9–19514 Filed 8–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[DA 09–1770; MB Docket No. 09–142; RM– 

11552] 

Television Broadcasting Services; 

Boston, MA 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission has before it 

a petition for rulemaking filed by 

WHDH–TV, the licensee of station 

WHDH–TV, DTV channel 7, Boston, 

Massachusetts. WHDH–TV requests the 

substitution of its pre-transition DTV 

channel 42 for its post-transition DTV 

channel 7 at Boston. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before August 31, 2009, and reply 

comments on or before September 8, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20554. In addition to filing comments 

with the FCC, interested parties should 

serve counsel for petitioner as follows: 

Charles R. Naftalin, Esq., Holland & 

Knight LLP, 2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Suite 100, Washington, DC 20006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joyce L. Bernstein, 

joyce.bernstein@fcc.gov, Media Bureau, 

(202) 418–1600. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 

09–142, adopted August 5, 2009, and 

released August 7, 2009. The full text of 

this document is available for public 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC’s Reference 

Information Center at Portals II, CY– 

A257, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC, 20554. This document 

will also be available via ECFS (http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents 

will be available electronically in ASCII, 

Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) This 

document may be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone 

1–800–478–3160 or via e-mail http:// 

www.BCPIWEB.com. To request this 

document in accessible formats 

(computer diskettes, large print, audio 

recording, and braille), send an e-mail to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission’s 

Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 

418–0432 (TTY). This document does 

not contain proposed information 

collection requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any 

proposed information collection burden 

‘‘for small business concerns with fewer 

than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

Provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to 

this proceeding. Members of the public 

should note that from the time a Notice 

of Proposed Rule Making is issued until 

the matter is no longer subject to 

Commission consideration or court 

review, all ex parte contacts are 

prohibited in Commission proceedings, 

such as this one, which involve channel 

allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 41107 

rules governing permissible ex parte 

contacts. 

For information regarding proper 

filing procedures for comments, see 47 

CFR 1.415 and 1.420. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 

Television, Television broadcasting. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 73 as follows: 

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST 

SERVICES 

1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. 

§ 73.622(i) [Amended] 

2. Section 73.622(i), the PostTransition Table of DTV Allotments 

under Massachusetts, is amended by 

adding DTV channel 42 and removing 

DTV channel 7 at Boston. 

Clay C. Pendarvis, 

Associate Chief, Video Division, Media 

Bureau, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–19526 Filed 8–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS