Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Proposed Rules 11817 

adopt all six control measures that New 

Jersey identified as necessary to attain 

the 1-hour ozone standard. Therefore, 

EPA will not proceed with the May 27, 

2004 (69 FR 30249) proposed Finding of 

Failure to Implement. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001). This action merely proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). Because this rule proposes to 

approve pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it 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). 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will 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, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. This proposed rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272) do not apply. This proposed rule 

does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: March 6, 2007. 

Alan J. Steinberg, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. E7–4665 Filed 3–13–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[DA 07–805; MB Docket No. 05–132; RM–

11217] 

Radio Broadcasting Services; 

Junction, Melvin, and Menard, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The staff approves the 

withdrawal of a petition for rulemaking 

in this FM allotment rulemaking 

proceeding See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andrew J. Rhodes, Media Bureau, (202) 

418–2180. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, MB Docket No. 05–132, 

adopted February 21, 2007, and released 

February 23, 2007. The full text of this 

Commission decision is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Information Center (Room CY–A257), 

445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20554. The complete text of this 

decision may also be purchased from 

the Commission’s copy contractor, Best 

Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 

12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1–

800–378–3160 or http:// 

www.BCPIWEB.com. 

In response to a rulemaking petition 

filed by Charles Crawford, the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking proposed the 

allotment of Channel 242A at Melvin, 

Texas. To accommodate this allotment, 

it also proposed the substitution of 

Channel 292A for vacant Channel 242A 

at Menard, Texas, and the substitution 

of Channel 224A for vacant Channel 

292A at Junction, Texas. The 

withdrawal of the petition for 

rulemaking complies with Section 

1.420(j) of the Commission’s rules 

because the rulemaking petitioner is not 

receiving any money or other 

consideration in return for the 

withdrawal. See 70 FR 19398 (April 13, 

2005). 

This document is not subject to the 

Congressional Review Act. (The 

Commission, is, therefore, not required 

to submit a copy of this Report and 

Order to GAO, pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A) because the petition for 

rulemaking was dismissed). 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos, 

Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media 

Bureau. 

[FR Doc. E7–4544 Filed 3–13–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Parts 350, 385, 395, and 396 

[DOT Docket No. FMCSA–2004–18940] 

RIN 2126–AA89 

Electronic On-Board Recorders 

(EOBRs) for Documenting Hours of 

Service; Listening Sessions 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of public listening 

sessions. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration (FMCSA) 

announces public listening sessions to 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
11818 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

obtain feedback from interested parties 

on the Agency’s January 18, 2007, notice 

of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to 

establish new performance standards for 

EOBRs, require the use of these devices 

by certain motor carriers, and to provide 

incentives for the voluntary use of such 

devices by the industry. The listening 

sessions will provide all interested 

parties with an opportunity to share 

their views on the Agency’s EOBR 

rulemaking. All oral comments will be 

transcribed and placed in the public 

docket identified at the beginning of this 

notice. 

DATES: The listening sessions will be 

held on March 27, 2007, from 9:30 a.m. 

to 4:30 p.m., and on April 2, 2007, from 

9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Individuals who 

wish to make a formal presentation at 

either of the meetings should contact 

Ms. Deborah Freund at 202–366–4009 or 

e-mail her at deborah.freund@dot.gov 

no later than 5 p.m., e.t., on March 23, 

2007, for the March 27 meeting, and no 

later than 5 p.m., e.t., on March 29th for 

the April 2 meeting to ensure that 

sufficient time is allotted for the 

presentation and to identify any audiovisual equipment needed for the 

presentation. 

ADDRESSES: The March 27, 2007, 

meeting will be held at the Crowne 

Plaza West Hotel, 2532 West Peoria 

Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85029. The 

April 2, 2007, meeting will be held at 

the Harold Washington Library, 400 

South State Street, Chicago, Illinois 

60605–1203. You may also submit 

comments to the DOT Docket 

Management System (DMS), referencing 

Docket Number FMCSA–2004–18940, 

using any of the following methods: 

• Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments on the DOT electronic docket 

site. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–

001. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the Agency name and docket 

number or Regulatory Identification 

Number (RIN 2126–AA89) for this 

rulemaking. Note that all comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://dms.dot.gov including any 

personal information provided. For 

additional information on submitting 

comments, see the Supplemental 

Information section of this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL–

401 on the plaza level of the Nassif 

Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms 

Deborah M. Freund, Senior 

Transportation Specialist, Vehicle and 

Roadside Operations Division, FMCSA, 

(202) 366–4009, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office 

hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., 

e.t., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Information on Services for 

Individuals with Disabilities: For 

information on facilities or services for 

individuals with disabilities or to 

request special assistance at the 

meeting, contact Deborah Freund at 

202–366–4009. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 18, 2007 (72 FR 2340), 

FMCSA published an NPRM to amend 

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations (FMCSRs) to incorporate 

new performance standards for 

electronic on-board recorders (EOBRs) 

installed in commercial motor vehicles 

(CMVs) manufactured on or after the 

date 2 years following the effective date 

of the final rule. On-board hours-ofservice recording devices meeting 

FMCSA’s current requirements and 

voluntarily installed in CMVs 

manufactured before the 

implementation date of a final rule may 

continue to be used for the remainder of 

the service life of those CMVs. 

Under the proposal, motor carriers 

that have demonstrated a history of 

serious noncompliance with the hoursof-service (HOS) rules would be subject 

to mandatory installation of EOBRs 

meeting the new performance standards. 

If FMCSA determined, based on HOS 

records reviewed during each of two 

compliance reviews conducted within a 

2-year period, that a motor carrier had 

a 10 percent or greater violation rate 

(‘‘pattern violation’’) for any regulation 

in proposed Appendix C to Part 385, 

FMCSA would issue the carrier an 

EOBR remedial directive. The motor 

carrier would be required to install 

EOBRs in all of its CMVs regardless of 

their date of manufacture. The motor 

carrier would have to use the devices for 

HOS recordkeeping for a period of 2 

years, unless: (1) The carrier already had 

equipped its vehicles with automatic 

on-board recording devices (AOBRDs) 

meeting the Agency’s current 

requirements under 49 CFR 395.15 and 

(2) could demonstrate to FMCSA that its 

drivers understood how to use the 

devices. 

The FMCSA also proposed changes to 

the safety fitness standard that would 

require these carriers, i.e., those with a 

pattern of violations, to install, use, and 

maintain EOBRs in order to meet the 

new standard. Finally, the Agency 

would encourage industry wide use of 

EOBRs by providing the following 

incentives for motor carriers to 

voluntarily use EOBRs in their CMVs: 

(1) Revise the Agency’s compliance 

review procedures to permit 

examination of a random sample of 

drivers’ records of duty status; (2) 

provide partial relief from HOS 

supporting documents requirements, if 

certain conditions are satisfied; and (3) 

offer other potential incentives made 

possible by the inherent safety and 

driver health benefits of EOBR 

technology. 

Purpose of the Listening Sessions 

The FMCSA is committed to 

providing all interested parties an 

opportunity to discuss their 

perspectives on the pertinent issues that 

could affect any potential rulemaking 

changes. The Agency expects to receive 

numerous comments in response to its 

EOBR NPRM but believes additional 

information could be obtained through 

this listening session. 

Participants in the listening session 

will be given the opportunity to submit 

questions that they would like to hear 

discussed by others in attendance. 

FMCSA encourages participants who 

have prepared statements to submit 

them to the public docket rather than 

using time at a listening session to read 

them aloud. Individuals who wish to 

submit written comments or statements 

should submit the information to the 

public docket identified at the 

beginning of this notice. Those who 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Proposed Rules 11819 

desire notification of receipt of 

comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or 

postcard. Comments made during the 

meeting will be transcribed to preserve 

an accurate record of the discussion. 

Meeting Information 

Individuals who are unable to attend 

the meetings may submit written 

comments to the docket identified at the 

beginning of this notice. 

Issued on: March 7, 2007. 

John H. Hill, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 07–1209 Filed 3–9–07; 4:00 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AU76 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for Catesbaea melanocarpa 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

comment period, notice of availability 

of draft economic analysis, and 

amended required determinations. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

reopening of the comment period on the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for the plant Catesbaea melanocarpa 

(no common name) and the availability 

of the draft economic analysis of the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (Act). The draft 

economic analysis identifies potential 

costs of approximately $132,300 to 

$441,000 over a 20-year period as a 

result of the proposed designation of 

critical habitat, including those costs 

coextensive with listing. We are 

reopening the comment period to allow 

all interested parties an opportunity to 

comment simultaneously on the 

proposed rule and the associated draft 

economic analysis. If you previously 

submitted comments on the proposed 

rule, you need not resubmit them, 

because we have incorporated them into 

the public record and will fully 

considered them in preparation of our 

final rule. 

DATES: We will accept public comments 

on this document and the proposed rule 

published at 71 FR 48883, Aug. 22, 2006 

until April 13, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, 

you may submit your comments and 

information concerning this proposal by 

any one of several methods: 

1. Mail or hand-deliver to Edwin E. 

Mun ̃iz, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Caribbean Fish and 

Wildlife Office, Road 301 Km. 5.1, P.O. 

Box 491, Boquero ́n, PR 00622. 

2. Send by electronic mail (e-mail) to 

marelisa_rivera@fws.gov. Please see the 

‘‘Public Comments Solicited’’ section 

below for file format and other 

information about electronic filing. 

3. Fax to 787–851–7440. 

4. Submit comments on the Federal ERulemaking Portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in the preparation of this proposed 

rule, will be available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours at the Caribbean 

Fish and Wildlife Office at the above 

address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marelisa Rivera, Caribbean Fish and 

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES); 

telephone, 787–851–7297, extension 

231; facsimile, 787–851–7440. If you use 

a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 

800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments Solicited 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposal will be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, we hereby solicit comments 

or suggestions from the public, other 

concerned governmental agencies, the 

scientific community, industry, or any 

other interested party concerning this 

proposed rule and the draft economic 

analysis. We particularly seek 

comments concerning: 

(1) The reasons we should or should 

not determine any habitat to be critical 

habitat as provided by section 4 of the 

Act; 

(2) Specific information on the 

presence of Catesbaea melanocarpa, 

particularly: of the areas that were 

occupied at the time of listing and 

contain features that are essential for the 

conservation of the species, which areas 

we should include in the designations, 

and why; and, of the areas that were not 

occupied at listing, which are essential 

to the conservation of the species, and 

why; 

(3) Land use designations and current 

or planned activities in the subject areas 

and their possible impacts on proposed 

critical habitat; 

(4) Any foreseeable economic, 

national security, or other potential 

impacts resulting from the proposed 

designation and, in particular, any 

impacts on small entities; 

(5) Whether the draft economic 

analysis identifies all State and local 

costs attributable to the proposed 

critical habitat designation, and 

information on any costs that we may 

have inadvertently overlooked; 

(6) Whether the draft economic 

analysis makes appropriate assumptions 

regarding current practices and likely 

regulatory changes imposed as a result 

of the designation of critical habitat; 

(7) Whether the draft economic 

analysis correctly assesses the effect on 

regional costs associated with any land 

use controls that may derive from the 

designation of critical habitat; 

(8) Any foreseeable economic or other 

impacts resulting from the proposed 

designation of critical habitat, and in 

particular, any impacts on small entities 

or families; and other information that 

would indicate that the designation of 

critical habitat would or would not have 

any impacts on small entities or 

families; 

(9) Whether the draft economic 

analysis appropriately identifies all 

costs and benefits that could result from 

the designation; 

(10) Whether we could improve or 

modify our approach to critical habitat 

designation in any way, to provide for 

greater public participation and 

understanding, or to assist us in 

accommodating public concern and 

comments; and 

(11) Whether the benefits of exclusion 

in any particular area outweigh the 

benefits of inclusion. 

If you wish to comment, you may 

submit your comments and materials 

concerning this proposal by any one of 

several methods (see ADDRESSES). Please 

submit comments electronically to 

marelisa_rivera@fws.gov. Please also 

include ‘‘Attn: Catesbaea melanocarpa’’

in your e-mail subject header, and your 

name and return address in the body of 

your message. If you do not receive a 

confirmation from the system that we 

have received your electronic message, 

contact us directly by calling the 

Caribbean Fish and Wildlife Service 

Office at 787–851–7297. 

Our practice is to make comments, 

including names and home addresses of 

respondents, available for public review 

during regular business hours. 

Individual respondents may request that 

we withhold their names and home 

addresses, etc., but if you wish us to 

consider withholding this information, 

you must state this prominently at the 

beginning of your comments. In 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS