27628 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. 2012–11183 Filed 5–10–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0525; FRL–9340–1] 

α-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]- 

w-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene); 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of a-[p-(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-whydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (CAS Reg. 

Nos. 9036–19–5, 9002–93–1) when used 

as an inert ingredient at levels not to 

exceed 7% in pesticide formulations 

applied to growing crops and raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest. 

The Joint Inerts Task Force, Cluster 

Support Team Number 5 submitted a 

petition to EPA under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 

requesting establishment of an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance. This regulation eliminates the 

need to establish a maximum 

permissible level for residues of a-[p- 

(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-whydroxypoly(oxyethylene). 

DATES: This regulation is effective May 

11, 2012. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

July 10, 2012, and must be filed in 

accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also 

Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2011–0525. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The Docket 

Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 

5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kerry Leifer, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 308–8811; email address: 

leifer.kerry@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 

through the Government Printing 

Office’s e-CFR site at http:// 

ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/

40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test 

guidelines referenced in this document 

electronically, please go to http:// 

www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test 

Methods and Guidelines.’’ 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2011–0525 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing, and must be 

received by the Hearing Clerk on or 

before July 10, 2012. Addresses for mail 

and hand delivery of objections and 

hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 

178.25(b). 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing that does not 

contain any CBI for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information not marked 

confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 

may be disclosed publicly by EPA 

without prior notice. Submit a copy of 

your non-CBI objection or hearing 

request, identified by docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0525, by one of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

II. Background 

In the Federal Register of August 26, 

2011 (76 FR 53372) (FRL–8884–9), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA 

section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing 

the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 

1E7858) by Joint Inerts Task Force, 

Cluster Support Team 5, c/o CropLife 

America, 1156 15th St. NW., Suite 400, 

Washington, DC 20005. The petition 

requested that 40 CFR 180.910 be 

amended by establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance for 

residues of a-[p-(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-whydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (CAS Reg. 

Nos. 9036–19–5, 9002–93–1) when used 

as an inert ingredient at levels not to 

exceed 7% in pesticide formulations 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 27629 

applied to growing crops and raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest. 

That notice referenced a summary of the 

petition prepared by Joint Inerts Task 

Force, Cluster Support Team 5, the 

petitioner, which is available in the 

docket, http://www.regulations.gov. 

There were no comments received in 

response to the notice of filing. 

Previously, in the Federal Register of 

May 17, 2010 (75 FR 27443) (FRL–8826– 

3), EPA established a time-limited 

tolerance exemption for a-[p-(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-whydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (herein 

referred to in this document as 

octylphenol ethoxylate) with an 

expiration date of May 17, 2012. The 2- 

year time limitation was established for 

two purposes: 

1. To provide time for the 

development and submission of 

confirmatory toxicity data to address 

equivocal results in the available 

genotoxicity studies conducted on 

octylphenol ethoxylate (as described in 

Unit IV.C., of the May 17, 2010 final 

rule); and 

2. To provide additional time, should 

the initial testing not confirm EPA’s 

conclusion regarding the lack of a 

cancer concern, for registrants to attain 

EPA approval of registration 

amendments for reformulation of their 

pesticide products to remove 

octylphenol ethoxylate and to replace 

existing products with reformulated 

products. 

In establishing the time-limited 

tolerance exemption for octylphenol 

ethoxylate, EPA stated that if the 

submitted data confirmed its conclusion 

regarding a lack of cancer concern, the 

Agency intended to remove the 

expiration date from the tolerance 

exemption prior to expiration of the 

exemption. 

III. Inert Ingredient Definition 

Inert ingredients are all ingredients 

that are not active ingredients as defined 

in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are 

not limited to, the following types of 

ingredients (except when they have a 

pesticidal efficacy of their own): 

Solvents such as alcohols and 

hydrocarbons; surfactants such as 

polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty 

acids; carriers such as clay and 

diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as 

carrageenan and modified cellulose; 

wetting, spreading, and dispersing 

agents; propellants in aerosol 

dispensers; microencapsulating agents; 

and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not 

intended to imply nontoxicity; the 

ingredient may or may not be 

chemically active. Generally, EPA has 

exempted inert ingredients from the 

requirement of a tolerance based on the 

low toxicity of the individual inert 

ingredients. 

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and 

Determination of Safety 

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA 

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement for a tolerance (the 

legal limit for a pesticide chemical 

residue in or on a food) only if EPA 

determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ 

Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA 

defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue, including 

all anticipated dietary exposures and all 

other exposures for which there is 

reliable information.’’ This includes 

exposure through drinking water and in 

residential settings, but does not include 

occupational exposure. Section 

408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to 

give special consideration to exposure 

of infants and children to the pesticide 

chemical residue in establishing a 

tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to infants and children from 

aggregate exposure to the pesticide 

chemical residue * * *.’’ 

EPA establishes exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance only in those 

cases where it can be clearly 

demonstrated that the risks from 

aggregate exposure to pesticide 

chemical residues under reasonably 

foreseeable circumstances will pose no 

appreciable risks to human health. In 

order to determine the risks from 

aggregate exposure to pesticide inert 

ingredients, the Agency considers the 

toxicity of the inert in conjunction with 

possible exposure to residues of the 

inert ingredient through food, drinking 

water, and through other exposures that 

occur as a result of pesticide use in 

residential settings. If EPA is able to 

determine that a finite tolerance is not 

necessary to ensure that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

inert ingredient, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance may be 

established. 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in 

FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has 

reviewed the available scientific data 

and other relevant information in 

support of this action. EPA has 

sufficient data to assess the hazards of 

and to make a determination on 

aggregate exposure for octylphenol 

ethoxylate including exposure resulting 

from the exemption established by this 

action. 

In the Federal Register of May 17, 

2010, EPA issued a final rule 

establishing an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of octylphenol ethoxylate when used as 

an inert ingredient at levels not to 

exceed 7% in pesticide formulations 

applied to growing crops and raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest 

under 40 CFR 180.910 with an 

expiration date of May 17, 2012. EPA 

has determined that establishing an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of octylphenol 

ethoxylate when used as an inert 

ingredient an inert ingredient at levels 

not to exceed 7% in pesticide 

formulations applied to growing crops 

and raw agricultural commodities after 

harvest will not significantly change the 

risk assessments the Agency relied on to 

support the May 17, 2010, tolerance 

action, as explained in this unit. 

As part of the Agency’s conduct of the 

risk assessment in support of the May 

17, 2010, tolerance action, it was 

determined that there were no acute, 

chronic, short- or intermediate term 

aggregate risks of concern. With regards 

to aggregate cancer risk, the assessment 

concluded that based on a weight of the 

evidence consideration of the available 

data, the Agency believed that cancer 

risks would be negligible. However, due 

to the equivocal findings in the 

mutagenicity data base, the Agency 

asked for confirmatory data. 

Specifically, EPA recommended that 

supporters of the octylphenol ethoxylate 

tolerance exemption perform the 

following studies for confirmatory 

purposes: 

A new Ames assay (OCSPP 

Harmonized Guideline 870.5100— 

Bacterial reverse mutation test) and a 

mouse lymphoma assay (OCSPP 

Harmonized Guideline 870.5300—in 

vitro Mammalian cell gene mutation 

test). 

A bone marrow assay (OCSPP 

Harmonized Guideline 870.5395— 

Mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus 

test). 

Since in vivo mutagenicity studies 

such as the bone marrow assay are 

generally regarded as more definitive 

than in vitro studies, and a negative 

result in the bone marrow test may 

outweigh whatever results are found in 

the Ames test and mouse lymphoma 

assay, supporters of the octylphenol 

ethoxylate tolerance exemption were 

given the option of conducting the 

mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus 

test in lieu of the two in vitro 

mutagenicity studies. If those data did 

not confirm EPA’s cancer conclusion, 

then EPA would need 2-year cancer 

bioassays in the mouse and rat (OCSPP 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

27630 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Harmonized Guideline 870.4200— 

Carcinogenicity (mouse) and OCSPP 

Harmonized Guideline 870.4300— 

Combined Chronic Toxicity/ 

Carcinogenicity (rat)) to make a safety 

finding in support of the tolerance 

exemption. 

In response to the May 17, 2010, final 

rule, the Joint Inerts Task Force, Cluster 

Support Team Number 5 conducted an 

in vivo Mouse Bone Marrow Erythrocyte 

Micronucleus Test Following Oral 

Administration (OCSPP Harmonized 

Test Guideline 870.5395) of the 

representative test compound, poly(oxy1,2-ethanediyl),a-[4-(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-w-hydroxy- 

(CAS Reg. No. 9002–93–1). These data 

were submitted to the Agency on 

November 12, 2010 (Master Record 

Identification Number 48293301). 

The data were evaluated by EPA and 

it was determined that the test 

substance did not induce numerical or 

structural chromosomal damage, 

providing further confirmation that 

octylphenol ethoxylate is not of concern 

for aggregate cancer risk. Further details 

of this evaluation can be found at 

http://www.regulations.gov in the 

document ‘‘Octylphenol Ethoxylates— 

(JITF CST 5 Inert Ingredients).—Review 

of Confirmatory Mutagencity Toxicity 

Data’’ in docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2011–0525. 

Refer to the May 17, 2010, Federal 

Register document, available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, for a detailed 

discussion of the aggregate risk 

assessment and determination of safety. 

Therefore, based on this information 

and the findings in the final rule 

published in the Federal Register of 

May 17, 2010, EPA concludes that there 

is a reasonable certainty that no harm 

will result to the general population, or 

to infants and children from aggregate 

exposure to octylphenol ethoxylate 

residues. 

V. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

An analytical method is not required 

for enforcement purposes since the 

Agency is establishing an exemption 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

without any numerical limitation. 

B. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) established by the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as 

required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). 

The Codex Alimentarius is a joint 

United Nation Food and Agriculture 

Organization/World Health 

Organization food standards program, 

and it is recognized as an international 

food safety standards-setting 

organization in trade agreements to 

which the United States is a party. EPA 

may establish a tolerance that is 

different from a Codex MRL; however, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that 

EPA explain the reasons for departing 

from the Codex level. The Codex has not 

established a MRL for octylphenol 

ethoxylate. 

VI. Conclusions 

Therefore, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance is established 

for residues of a-[p-(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-whydroxypoly(oxyethylene) when used as 

an inert ingredient at levels not to 

exceed 7% in pesticide formulations 

applied to growing crops and raw 

agricultural commodities after harvest 

under 40 CFR 180.910. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule establishes an 

exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) 

in response to a petition submitted to 

the Agency. The Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) has exempted these 

types of actions from review under 

Executive Order 12866, entitled 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 

FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because 

this final rule has been exempted from 

review under Executive Order 12866, 

this final rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, entitled ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, 

entitled ‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

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

This final rule does not contain any 

information collections subject to OMB 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq., nor does it require any special 

considerations under Executive Order 

12898, entitled ‘‘Federal Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the tolerance in this final rule, do not 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.) do not apply. 

This final rule directly regulates 

growers, food processors, food handlers, 

and food retailers, not States or tribes, 

nor does this action alter the 

relationships or distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

Congress in the preemption provisions 

of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, 

the Agency has determined that this 

action will not have a substantial direct 

effect on States or tribal governments, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this final rule. In addition, this final 

rule does not impose any enforceable 

duty or contain any unfunded mandate 

as described under Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VIII. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule is not 

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 27631 

Dated: April 26, 2012. 

G. Jeffrey Herndon, 

Acting Director, Registration Division, Office 

of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. In § 180.910, the table is amended 

by revising the entry for the inert 

ingredient which reads in part ‘‘a-[p- 

(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre and 

post-harvest; exemptions from the 

requirement of a tolerance. 

* * * * * 

Inert ingredients Limits Uses 

*******

a-[p-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-whydroxypoly(oxyethylene) produced by the condensation of 1 mole of p-(1,1,3,3- 

tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a range of 1–14 or 

30–70 moles of ethylene oxide: If a blend of products is used, the average range number of moles 

of ethylene oxide reacted to produce any product 

that is a component of the blend shall be in the 

range of 1–14 or 30–70 (CAS Reg. Nos. 9036– 

19–5, 9002–93–1).

Not to exceed 7% of pesticide formulation.Surfactants related adjuvants of surfactants. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–11064 Filed 5–10–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MM Docket No. 00–168, 00–44; FCC 12– 

44] 

Standardized and Enhanced 

Disclosure Requirements for 

Television Broadcast Licensee Public 

Interest Obligations; Extension of the 

Filing Requirement for Children’s 

Television Programming Report (FCC 

Form 398) 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission revises its public file 

regulations to require that television 

station public inspection files be made 

available in an online public file to be 

hosted on the Commission’s Web site. 

DATES: The rules in this document 

contain information collection 

requirements that are not effective until 

approved by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB). These rules will 

become effective 30 days after the 

Commission publishes a document in 

the Federal Register announcing OMB 

approval of those information collection 

requirements. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information on this 

proceeding, contact Holly Saurer, 

Holly.Saurer@fcc.gov of the Media 

Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418– 

2120. For additional information 

concerning the Paperwork Reduction 

Act information collection requirements 

contained in this document, send an 

email to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Cathy 

Williams at (202) 418–2918. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Second 

Report and Order, FCC 12–44, adopted 

and released on April 27, 2012. The full 

text of this document is available for 

public inspection and copying during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Center, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street SW., CY–A257, 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.) The complete text 

may be purchased from the 

Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th 

Street SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554. To request this 

document in accessible formats 

(computer diskettes, large print, audio 

recording, and Braille), send an email to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission’s 

Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

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

418–0432 (TTY). 

The Commission will seek written 

comments on the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) modified information 

collection requirements in a separate 

notice that will be published in the 

Federal Register. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

Analysis 

This document contains modified 

information collection requirements. 

The Commission, as part of its 

continuing effort to reduce paperwork 

burdens, will invite the general public 

to comment on the information 

collection requirements contained in 

this Second Report and Order as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 in a 

separate notice to be published in the 

Federal Register. In addition, the 

Commission notes that pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

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

3506(c)(4), we previously sought 

specific comment on how the 

Commission might further reduce the 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees. We received one comment 

specifically addressing this issue. In the 

present document, we have assessed the 

effects of the new requirements on small 

businesses, including those with fewer 

than 25 employees, in the Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(‘‘FRFA’’) below. 

Summary of the Second Report and 

Order 

I. Introduction 

1. In this Second Report and Order we 

modernize the procedures television 

broadcasters use to inform the public 

about how they are serving their 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES