### 31340 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 106 / Thursday, June 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules

end of the fiscal year occurs on September 30 for any given year.

Note 2: In considering applications for grants under this program, the Department will compare the data and documentation the institution relied on in its application with data reported to the Department’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the IHE’s State-reported enrollment data, and the institutional annual report. If different percentages or data are reported in these various sources, the institution must, as part of the eligibility process, explain the reason for the differences. If the IPEDS data show that less than 25 percent of the institution’s undergraduate FTE students are Hispanic, the burden is on the institution to show that the IPEDS data are inaccurate. If the IPEDS data indicate that the institution has an undergraduate FTE less than 25 percent, and the institution fails to demonstrate that the IPEDS data are inaccurate, the institution will be considered ineligible.

Proposed Requirement 2—Use of TieBreaking Factors

To resolve ties in the reader scores of applications for development grants, the Department will award one additional point to an application from an institution of higher education (IHE) that has an endowment fund for which the market value per full-time equivalent (FTE) student is less than the comparable average current market value of the endowment funds per FTE student at similar type IHEs. In addition, to resolve ties in the reader scores of applications for PPHOA development grants, the Department will award one additional point to an application from an IHE that has expenditures for library materials per FTE student that are less than the comparable average expenditures for library materials per FTE student at similar type IHEs. (34 CFR 606.23(a)(1) and (2)).

For the purpose of these funding considerations, we will use 2008–2009 data.

If a tie remains after applying the tiebreaker mechanism above, priority will be given for Individual Development Grants to applicants that have the lowest endowment values per FTE student. (34 CFR § 606.23(b)(1)) Proposed Requirement 3—Limit on Applications From an Eligible Institution

In any fiscal year, an eligible institution may submit only one application for a grant under the PPOHA Program. This restriction isintended to ensure that more Hispanicserving institutions have an opportunity for assistance under Title V of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. Proposed Requirement 4—Limit on Use of Funds for Direct Student Assistance

A PPOHA Program grantee may use no more than 20 percent of its total PPOHA Program grant award to provide financial support—in the form of scholarships, fellowships, and otherstudent financial assistance—to lowincome students.

Final Requirements: We will announce the final requirements in a notice in the Federal Register . We will determine the final requirements after considering responses to this notice and other information available to the Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional requirements subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in which we choose to use one or more of these requirements, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register

.

Executive Order 12866: This notice has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed the potential costs and benefits of this proposed regulatory action.

The potential costs associated with this proposed regulatory action are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering this program effectively and efficiently.

In assessing the potential costs and benefits—both quantitative and qualitative—of this proposed regulatory action, we have determined that the benefits of the proposed requirements justify the costs.

We have determined, also, that this proposed regulatory action does not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.

Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.

This document provides early notification of our specific plans and actions for this program.

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format ( e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact person listed under **FOR FURTHER**
**INFORMATION CONTACT**

.

Electronic Access to This Document: You can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ fedregister. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site.

Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ index.html.

Delegation of Authority: The Secretary of Education has delegated authority to Daniel T. Madzelan, Director, Forecasting and Policy Analysis for the Office of Postsecondary Education, to perform the functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.031M.

Dated: May 25, 2010. Daniel T. Madzelan, Director, Forecasting and Policy Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2010–13318 Filed 6–2–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4000–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0158; FRL–9158–2]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Delaware; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the**  **1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National**  **Ambient Air Quality Standards**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to approve submittals from the State of Delaware pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 110(k)(2) and (3). These submittals address the infrastructure elements specified in the CAA section 110(a)(2) necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), and the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. This proposed action is limited to the


### 31341 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 106 / Thursday, June 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules

following infrastructure elements which were subject to EPA’s completeness findings pursuant to CAA section 110(K)(1) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, dated March 27, 2008, and the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, dated October 22, 2008: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof.

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before July 6, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2010–0158 by one of the following methods:

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina @epa.gov.

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0158, Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 0158. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is

an ‘‘ anonymous access ’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the http:// www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Delaware Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 1401, Dover, Delaware 19903.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ellen Wentworth, (215) 814–2034, or by e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62 FR 38856) and a new PM 2.5 NAAQS (62 FR 38652). The revised ozone NAAQS is based on 8-hour average concentrations. The 8-hour averaging period replaced the previous 1-hour averaging period, and the level of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm. The new PM 2.5 NAAQS established a health-based PM 2.5 standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ( μg/m 3 ) based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour standard of 65 μg/m 3 based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS from 65 μg/m 3 to
35 μg/m 3 on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144).

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS. In March of 2004, Earthjustice initiated a lawsuit against EPA for failure to take action against States that had not made SIP submissions to meet the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8- hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, i.e., failure to make a ‘‘finding of failure to submit the required SIP 110(a) SIP elements. ’’ On March 10, 2005, EPA entered into a Consent Decree with Earthjustice that obligated EPA to make official findings in accordance with section 110(k)(1) of the CAA as to whether States have made required complete SIP submissions, pursuant to sections 110(a)(1) and (2), by December 15, 2007 for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and by October 5, 2008 for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA made such findings for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16205) and on October 22, 2008, (73 FR 62902) for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. These completeness findings did not include findings relating to: (1) Section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that such subsection refers to a permit program as required by part D Title I of the CAA; (2) section 110(a)(2)(I); and (3) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which has been addressed by a separate finding issued by EPA on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147). Therefore this action does not cover these specific elements. II. Summary of State Submittals

Delaware provided multiple submittals to satisfy section 110(a)(2) requirements that are the subject of this proposed action for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The submittals shown in Table 1 addressed the infrastructure elements, or portions thereof, identified in section 110(a)(2) that EPA is proposing to approve.



### TABLE 

### 1—110(a)(2) E LEMENTS OR 

### P ORTIONS 

### T HEREOF 

### , EPA I S 

### P ROPOSING TO 

### A PPROVE FOR THE 

### 1997 O ZONE AND 

### PM 2.5 AND THE 

### 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS

Submittal date 1997 8-Hour ozone 1997 PM 2.5 2006 PM 2.5

December 13, 2007 ......... A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M. March 12, 2008 ................ ....................................................... C and J. September 19, 2008 ........ G.


### 31342 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 106 / Thursday, June 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 

### 1—110(a)(2) E LEMENTS OR 

### P ORTIONS 

### T HEREOF 

### , EPA I S 

### P ROPOSING TO 

### A PPROVE FOR THE 

### 1997 O ZONE AND 

### PM 2.5 AND THE 

### 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS—Continued

Submittal date 1997 8-Hour ozone 1997 PM 2.5 2006 PM 2.5
September 16, 2009 ........ A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M. March 10, 2010 ................ ....................................................... G ......................................... ............... G.

EPA has analyzed the above identified submissions and is proposing to make a determination that such submittals meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof. A detailed summary of EPA’s review and rationale for approving Delaware’s submittals may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action, which is available on line at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0158. III. Proposed Action

EPA is proposing to approve Delaware’s submittals that provide the basic program elements specified in the CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof, necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action. IV. 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 proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed 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 proposed rule, pertaining to Delaware’s section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: May 21, 2010. William C. Early, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 2010–13379 Filed 6–2–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND**  **SECURITY**

**Federal Emergency Management Agency** 

**44 CFR Part 67**

**[Docket ID FEMA–2010–0003; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1120]** 

**Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  Comments are requested on the proposed Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed BFE modifications for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the proposed regulatory flood elevations for the reach described by the downstream and upstream locations in the table below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are a part of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, these elevations, once finalized, will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents in those buildings.

**DATES :**  Comments are to be submitted on or before September 1, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  The corresponding preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each community is available for inspection at the community’s map repository. The respective addresses are listed in the table below.

You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA–B–1120, to Kevin C. Long, Acting Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2820, or (e-mail) kevin.long@dhs.gov.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Kevin C. Long, Acting Chief,