31738 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 107 / Friday, June 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

modification unless the alteration 

occurs pursuant to a holder’s option 

under the terms of the instrument to 

convert the instrument into equity of the 

issuer (notwithstanding paragraph 

(c)(2)(iii) of this section). The rules of 

paragraph (f)(7) of this section apply to 

determine whether an alteration or 

modification results in an instrument or 

property right that is not debt. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(5) Changes in the nature of a debt 

instrument—(i) Property that is not 

debt. A modification of a debt 

instrument that results in an instrument 

or property right that is not debt for 

Federal income tax purposes is a 

significant modification. The rules of 

paragraph (f)(7) of this section apply to 

determine whether a modification 

results in an instrument or property 

right that is not debt. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(7) Rules for determining whether an 

alteration or modification results in an 

instrument or property right that is not 

debt—(i) In general. Except as provided 

in paragraph (f)(7)(ii) of this section, the 

determination of whether an instrument 

resulting from an alteration or 

modification of a debt instrument will 

be recharacterized as an instrument or 

property right that is not debt for 

Federal income tax purposes shall take 

into account all of the factors relevant 

to such a determination. 

(ii) Financial condition of the 

obligor—(A) Deterioration in financial 

condition of the obligor generally 

disregarded. Except as provided in 

paragraph (f)(7)(ii)(B) of this section, in 

making a determination as to whether 

an instrument resulting from an 

alteration or modification of a debt 

instrument will be recharacterized as an 

instrument or property right that is not 

debt under this section, any 

deterioration in the financial condition 

of the obligor between the issue date of 

the debt instrument and the date of the 

alteration or modification (as it relates 

to the obligor’s ability to repay the debt 

instrument) is not taken into account. 

For example, any decrease in the fair 

market value of a debt instrument 

(whether or not the debt instrument is 

publicly traded) between the issue date 

of the debt instrument and the date of 

the alteration or modification is not 

taken into account to the extent that the 

decrease in fair market value is 

attributable to the deterioration in the 

financial condition of the obligor and 

not to a modification of the terms of the 

instrument. 

(B) Substitution of a new obligor; 

addition or deletion of co-obligor. If 

there is a substitution of a new obligor 

or the addition or deletion of a coobligor, the rules in paragraph 

(f)(7)(ii)(A) of this section do not apply. 

* * * * * 

(h) Effective/applicability date—(1) In 

general. Except as otherwise provided 

in paragraph (h)(2) of this section, this 

section applies to alterations of the 

terms of a debt instrument on or after 

September 24, 1996. Taxpayers, 

however, may rely on this section for 

alterations of the terms of a debt 

instrument after December 2, 1992, and 

before September 24, 1996. 

(2) Exception. Paragraph (f)(7) of this 

section applies to an alteration of the 

terms of a debt instrument on or after 

the date of publication of the Treasury 

decision adopting these rules as final 

regulation in the Federal Register. A 

taxpayer, however, may rely on 

paragraph (f)(7) of this section for 

alterations of the terms of a debt 

instrument occurring before that date. 

Steven T. Miller, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13492 Filed 6–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 7 

[EPA–HQ–OA–2004–0002; FRL–9159–1] 

RIN 2090–AA37 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age 

in Programs or Activities Receiving 

Federal Assistance From the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to take 

action on Nondiscrimination on the 

Basis of Age in Programs or Activities 

Receiving Federal Assistance from the 

Environmental Protection Agency. This 

document sets out EPA rules for 

implementing the Age Discrimination 

Act of 1975, as amended. The Act 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

age in programs or activities receiving 

Federal assistance. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OA–2004–0002, by mail to OEI Docket, 

U.S. EPA, Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, 

DC 20460. Comments can also be 

submitted electronically or through 

hand delivery/courier by following the 

detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES

section of the direct final rule located in 

the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of 

this Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Walker, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Civil Rights, (Mail 

Code 1201A), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, telephone 

(202) 343–9894. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Why is EPA Issuing This Proposed 

Rule? 

This document proposes to take 

action on Nondiscrimination on the 

Basis of Age in Programs or Activities 

Receiving Federal Assistance from the 

Environmental Protection Agency. We 

have published a direct final rule 

approving regulations for implementing 

the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as 

amended, which prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of age in 

programs or activities receiving Federal 

assistance in the ‘‘Rules and 

Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register because we view this as a 

noncontroversial action and anticipate 

no adverse comment. We have 

explained our reasons for this action in 

the preamble to the direct final rule. 

If we receive no adverse comment, we 

will not take further action on this 

proposed rule. If we receive adverse 

comment, we will withdraw the direct 

final rule and it will not take effect. We 

would address all public comments in 

any subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. 

We do not intend to institute a second 

comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting must 

do so at this time. For further 

information, please see the information 

provided in the ADDRESSES section of 

this document. 

I. General Information 

These regulations implement 

provisions of the Age Discrimination 

Act of 1975, as amended. The Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. 

6101 et seq., (The Act) prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of age in 

programs or activities receiving Federal 

assistance. The Act applies to persons of 

all ages. The Act also contains specific 

exceptions that permit the use of certain 

age distinctions and factors other than 

age that meet the Act’s requirements. 

The Act however, does not cover 

employment discrimination on the basis 

of age. The Age Discrimination in 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 107 / Friday, June 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 31739 

Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. 621 

et. seq., (ADEA) applies specifically to 

employment practices and programs, 

both in the public and private sectors, 

and applies only to persons 40 and over. 

Complaints of employment 

discrimination based on age against an 

individual by recipients of federal 

financial assistance are subject to the 

ADEA and should be filed 

administratively with the Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

(EEOC) (see 29 CFR part 1626). The 

EEOC has recently published in the 

Federal Register a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) under the authority 

of the ADEA (see 75 FR 7212 (Feb. 18, 

2010)). EEOC’s NPRM defines the term 

‘‘reasonable factors other than age’’ 

(RFOA) under the ADEA, a term that is 

also used in the Age Discrimination Act 

and in the subject regulation. Because of 

the different statutory bases for the two 

regulations, the use of the term RFOA in 

EPA’s regulation implementing the Age 

Discrimination Act has no effect on 

EEOC’s regulation under the ADEA and 

the use of the term RFOA in EEOC’s 

regulation has no effect on EPA’s 

regulation. Nonetheless, EPA would 

accept comments about any potential 

impact of EEOC’s definition on EPA’s 

regulation. Parties interested in the 

ADEA action should refer to the Federal 

Register; 75 FR 7212 (Feb. 18, 2010). 

The Act required the former 

Department of Health, Education, and 

Welfare (HEW) to issue general, 

government-wide regulations setting 

standards to be followed by all Federal 

agencies implementing the Act. These 

government-wide regulations, which 

were issued on June 12, 1979, (45 CFR 

part 90; 44 FR 33768) and became 

effective on July 1, 1979, required each 

Federal agency providing assistance to 

any program or activity to publish final 

regulations implementing the Act, and 

to submit final agency regulations to 

HEW (now the Department of Health 

and Human Services (HHS)), before 

publication in the Federal Register. (See 

45 CFR 90.31.) The Act became effective 

on the effective date of HEW’s final 

government-wide regulations (i.e., July 

1, 1979). The Act was amended by the 

Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, 

Public Law 100–259, 102 Stat. 28, to 

add a definition for the term ‘‘program 

or activity.’’ 

The Age discrimination regulations 

apply to all applicants for, and 

recipients of, EPA assistance in the 

operation of their programs or activities, 

and only establish and enforce statutory 

rights that prohibit discrimination on 

the basis of age. These regulations do 

not apply to any program or activity 

unless that program or activity applies 

for and/or receives Federal assistance 

from the Agency. 

EPA’s Age discrimination regulations 

which implement the Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975, will amend 

the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (40 

CFR Part 7) by adding Age as a 

protected classification to the Agency’s 

nondiscrimination regulations. 

Currently, the Agency’s 

nondiscrimination regulations prohibit 

discrimination on the basis of race, 

color, national origin, sex (gender), or 

disability in any program or activity 

receiving EPA assistance. The Age 

Discrimination regulations will become 

the new Part 7 Subpart F— 

Discrimination Prohibited on the Basis 

of Age. 

The regulation states, ‘‘No person in 

the United States may, on the basis of 

age, be excluded from participation in, 

be denied the benefits of, or be 

subjected to discrimination under any 

program or activity receiving EPA 

assistance.’’ (40 CFR 7.140) The specific 

prohibited actions are patterned after 

the regulations issued under Title VI of 

the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (40 CFR 

7.30). As a general rule, separate or 

different treatment which denies or 

limits services from, or participation in, 

a program receiving Federal funds will 

be prohibited by these regulations. 

The Act does include some 

exceptions to the general rule against 

age discrimination. The regulations 

provide definitions for two terms 

‘‘normal operations’’ and ‘‘statutory 

objective’’ (40 CFR 7.25) that provide the 

framework for which the exceptions can 

apply. (40 CFR 7.150) For example, the 

normal operations and objectives of our 

public schools are to educate our 

nation’s children. Public schools, for 

instance, have received federal 

environmental grants, to establish 

ecology clubs or educate students on 

water restoration and beach ecology. 

These school programs are just a few 

examples of recipients operating under 

normal conditions and meeting their 

objectives while receiving federal 

assistance targeted at a specific age 

group, and are therefore, permissible 

under the Act. 

Recipients of EPA funds are also 

permitted to take an action otherwise 

prohibited by the Act, if the action is 

based on ‘‘reasonable factors other than 

age.’’ (40 CFR 7.155) For example, 

children may be more vulnerable to 

environmental exposures (i.e. lead 

poisoning) than adults because their 

bodily systems are still developing. 

Providing grants to recipients to 

research these specific exposure risks in 

children play an important role in 

protecting children’s health. Even 

though environmental toxins may also 

affect adults, it is thought that children 

are generally more vulnerable to such 

environmental exposures. Thus, 

recipients that are solely studying the 

unique environmental exposure risks to 

children (targeting a specific age group) 

are taking actions based on ‘‘reasonable 

factors other than age’’, and, such 

studies are therefore permissible under 

the Act. As noted above, the use of the 

term ‘‘reasonable factors other than age’’ 

in EPA’s regulation has no effect on 

EEOC’s RFOA definition under the 

ADEA and, conversely, the use of the 

term RFOA by the EEOC has no effect 

on EPA’s regulation. 

In addition, these regulations 

incorporate the provisions of the general 

regulations (45 CFR part 90; 44 FR 

33768) permitting a recipient of a 

program to provide special benefits for 

children and the elderly. (40 CFR 7.165) 

These special benefits often take the 

form of special discounts or reduced 

fees for the elderly or children in a 

federally funded program. 

II. Rulemaking History 

EPA first proposed regulations 

implementing the Age Discrimination 

Act as part of its proposed consolidated 

nondiscrimination regulations on 

January 8, 1981 (46 FR 2306–2312). The 

Age Discrimination Act provisions were 

not included in the final rule published 

on January 12, 1984 (49 FR 1656–66), 

because they had not been approved by 

HHS as required by the Act. During 

1993 through 1998, the regulations were 

submitted to HHS and went through 

different revisions in an on-going effort 

between EPA and HHS. Because of the 

time lapse since the regulations were 

initially drafted, in 2002 EPA had 

conducted an internal re-review of the 

draft regulations. The draft Age 

Discrimination Act regulations were 

then resubmitted to HHS in 2002, which 

granted its approval later that year. In 

January 2003, new regulatory 

development guidelines were issued, 

which spurred another delay in the 

publication of EPA’s draft Age 

regulations. Between 2003 and 2004, 

EPA’s internal re-review resulted in 

various revisions to the draft regulations 

based on the new regulatory 

development guidelines. In 2005, EPA 

resubmitted its final draft Age 

discrimination regulations to HHS. The 

revised regulations were subsequently 

approved by HHS in 2006. EPA is now 

publishing these regulations as a direct 

final rule along, with a parallel 

proposed rule. Any comments 

submitted during the 1981, public 

comment period pertaining to the Age 

provisions of the consolidated 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
31740 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 107 / Friday, June 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

nondiscrimination regulations are no 

longer available for viewing. Comments 

on the current rule are welcome. If we 

receive comment on the current rule, we 

will withdraw the direct final rule and 

it will not take effect. We would address 

all public comments in any subsequent 

final rule based on this proposed rule as 

mentioned above. 

III. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 

action is a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action.’’ Accordingly, EPA submitted 

this action to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 

12866 and any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. EPA 

Form 4700–4 (Preaward Compliance 

Review Report for All Applicants 

Requesting Federal Financial 

Assistance), which is used to collect 

compliance information under EPA’s 

nondiscrimination regulations, already 

requests civil rights compliance 

information based on age under the Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975. The current 

version, which also requests civil rights 

compliance information based on race, 

color, national origin, sex, or handicap 

as well as age, has been in use since 

January 1990. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

existing regulations at 40 CFR part 7 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2030–0020. The OMB control numbers 

for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The RFA generally requires an agency 

to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to notice 

and comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of today’s rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the U.S. Small Business 

Administration in 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a 

small governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) 

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s proposed rule on 

small entities, I certify that this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

This proposed rule will not impose 

any requirements on small entities 

because it only formalizes existing 

requirements for entities receiving 

assistance from EPA and would not 

substantively change existing 

obligations on recipients. The 

requirements prohibiting age 

discrimination by recipients of Federal 

assistance that are in the Age 

Discrimination Act and the governmentwide regulations have been in effect 

since 1979. We continue to be interested 

in the potential impacts of the proposed 

rule on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such 

impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may result 

in expenditures to State, local, and 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

to the private sector, of $100 million or 

more in any one year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed, section 205 

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule. 

The provisions of section 205 do not 

apply when they are inconsistent with 

applicable law. Moreover, section 205 

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other 

than the least costly, most cost-effective 

or least burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation why that alternative 

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes 

any regulatory requirements that may 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

Today’s rule contains no Federal 

mandates under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the UMRA for 

State, local, or tribal governments or the 

private sector for the following reasons: 

(1) The UMRA excludes from the 

definitions of ‘‘Federal 

intergovernmental mandate’’ and 

‘‘Federal private sector mandate’’ duties 

that arise from conditions of Federal 

assistance; (2) The UMRA generally 

excludes from the definition of ‘‘Federal 

intergovernmental mandate’’ duties that 

arise from participation in a voluntary 

Federal program; (3) The UMRA 

excludes from the definition of ‘‘Federal 

private sector mandate’’ duties that arise 

from participation in a voluntary 

Federal program; and (4) The UMRA 

does not apply to rules that establish or 

enforce statutory rights that prohibit 

discrimination on the basis of race, 

color, religion, sex, national origin, age, 

handicap, or disability. These 

regulations were mandated by Congress 

in the Act. These regulations only 

establish and enforce statutory rights 

that prohibit discrimination on the basis 

of age. These regulations do not apply 

to any program or activity unless that 

program or activity applies for and 

receives Federal assistance from the 

Agency. Application for, and receipt of, 

Federal assistance from the Agency is 

entirely voluntary. No program or 

activity is required to apply for, or 

accept, Federal assistance from the 

Agency. Thus, today’s rule is not subject 

to the requirements of sections 202 and 

205 of the UMRA. 

EPA has determined that this rule 

contains no regulatory requirements that 

might significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. These regulations 

apply uniformly to all recipients of 

Federal assistance from the Agency, 

regardless of whether the recipient is a 

small government. Moreover, the 

application for, and acceptance of, 

Federal assistance from the Agency that 

triggers the applicability of these 

regulations is entirely voluntary. 

Furthermore, it has already been 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 107 / Friday, June 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 31741 

determined that these regulations will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on small entities. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255), 

entitled ‘‘Federalism,’’ requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies 

that have federalism implications’’ is 

defined in the Executive Order to 

include regulations that have 

‘‘substantial direct effects 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.’’ 

This proposed rule does not have 

federalism implications. It will not have 

substantial direct effects 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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This rule does 

not directly impose any obligations on 

the States and there are no significant 

compliance costs associated with it. 

This rule only applies to State and nonState entities that apply for and receive 

assistance from EPA. When the 

recipient receives the EPA assistance, 

they accept the obligation to comply 

with EPA’s Age Discrimination Act 

implementing regulations. Compliance 

obligations are, therefore, voluntary and 

contractual. No entity is required to 

apply for or accept EPA assistance. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to this rule. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, 

and consistent with EPA policy to 

promote communications between EPA 

and State and local governments, EPA 

specifically solicits comment on this 

proposed rule from State and local 

officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249), 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments,’’ 

requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by tribal officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have tribal implications.’’ This proposed 

rule does not have tribal implications, 

as specified in Executive Order 13175. 

This rule does not directly impose any 

obligations on the Tribes and there are 

no significant compliance costs 

associated with it. This rule only 

applies to Tribal and non-Tribal entities 

that apply for and receive assistance 

from EPA. When the recipient receives 

the EPA assistance, it accepts the 

obligation to comply with EPA’s Age 

Discrimination Act implementing 

regulations. Compliance obligations are, 

therefore, voluntary and contractual. No 

entity is required to apply for or accept 

EPA assistance. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this rule. EPA 

specifically solicits additional comment 

on this proposed rule from tribal 

officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health & 

Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885), 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks,’’ applies to any rule that: (1) Is 

determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the Agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the Agency. 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that are based on health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Order has 

the potential to influence the regulation. 

This proposed rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it does 

not establish an environmental standard 

intended to mitigate health or safety 

risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001)) because it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

EPA is proposing to approve rules for 

implementing the Age Discrimination 

Act of 1975, as amended. The Act 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

age in programs or activities receiving 

Federal assistance. Accordingly, we 

have concluded that this rule is not 

likely to have any adverse energy 

effects. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 n) directs 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. This 

proposed rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, EPA is 

not considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. EPA is proposing to 

approve rules for implementing the Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975, as 

amended. The Act prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of age in 

programs or activities receiving Federal 

assistance. This rule does not adversely 

affect minority or low-income 

populations therefore, we have 

concluded that this rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 7 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
31742 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 107 / Friday, June 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Age discrimination, Civil rights, Equal 

employment opportunity, Individuals 

with disabilities, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sex 

discrimination. 

Dated: May 27, 2010. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13469 Filed 6–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1