Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 11323 

This administrative action also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 

FR19885, April 23, 1997), because it is 

not economically significant. This 

administrative action does not involve 

technical standards; thus the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

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

272 note) do not apply. The 

administrative action also does not 

involve special consideration of 

environmental justice related issues as 

required by Executive Order 12898 (59 

FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This 

administrative action does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

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

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

(5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. Section 808 allows 

the issuing agency to make a rule 

effective sooner than otherwise 

provided by the CRA if the agency 

makes a good cause finding that notice 

and public procedure is impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest. Today’s administrative action 

simply codifies a provision which is 

already in effect as a matter of law in 

Federal and approved state programs. 5 

U.S.C. 808(2). These announced actions 

were effective upon EPA’s concurrence. 

EPA will submit a report containing this 

action 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 action in the Federal 

Register. This update to Texas’ SIP 

Compilation is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: February 19, 2015. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart SS—Texas 

■ 2. In § 52.2270(e), the table titled 

‘‘EPA Approved Nonregulatory 

Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory 

Measures in the Texas SIP’’ is amended 

by adding an entry at the end for ‘‘DFW 

nine-county area ESL TCM to traffic 

signalization TCMs’’. 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 52.2270 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

DFW nine-county area ESL 

TCM to traffic signalization 

TCMs.

Dallas-Fort Worth: Dallas, 

Tarrant, Collin, Denton, 

Parker, Johnson, Ellis, Kaufman and Rockwall Counties.

9/16/2010 1/9/2014, 79 FR 1596 ........ DFW ESLs recategorized as 

TCM 1/9/2014, substituted 

withtraffic signalization 

TCMs 11/3/2014. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04269 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0399; FRL–9923–66– 

Region 7] 

Air Quality State Implementation 

Plans; Approval and Promulgation: 

Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and 

Maintenance Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of Missouri relating to its 

vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/ 

M) Program. On August 16, 2007, and 

December 7, 2007, the Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources 

(MDNR) requested to amend the SIP to 

replace the St. Louis centralized vehicle 

test program, called the Gateway Clean 

Air Program (GCAP), with a decentralized, OBD-only vehicle I/M 

program called the Gateway Vehicle 

Inspection Program (GVIP). In this 

action, EPA is also approving three 

additional SIP revisions submitted by 

Missouri related to the state’s I/M 

program including: Exemptions for 

specially constructed vehicles or ‘‘kitcars,’’ exemptions for Plugin Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles (PHEV), and rescission 

of Missouri State Highway Patrol rules 

from the Missouri SIP. 

These revisions to Missouri’s SIP do 

not have an adverse effect on air quality 

as demonstrated in the technical 

support document which is a part of 

this docket. EPA’s approval of these SIP 

revisions is being done in accordance 

with the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

April 2, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0399. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, 

Kansas 66219. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
11324 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

excluding Federal holidays. The 

interested persons wanting to examine 

these documents should make an 

appointment with the office at least 24 

hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Brown, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

913–551–7718, or by email at 

brown.steven@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section 

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

I. What is being addressed in this document? 

II. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

III. EPA’s response to comments. 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

I. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

EPA is approving revisions to the St. 

Louis vehicle I/M program to replace 

the centralized, transient I/M240 vehicle 

I/M program (GCAP) with the decentralized, OBD-only, vehicle I/M 

program (GVIP). MDNR submitted to 

EPA five SIP revision submissions to 

address the vehicle I/M program 

replacement and associated state rule, 

plus one supplemental demonstration. 

They are as follows: 

On August 16, 2007, MDNR requested 

that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10–5.380, 

‘‘Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection’’ 

be rescinded and replaced with rule 10 

CSR 10–5.381, ‘‘On-Board Diagnostics 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection.’’ In 

that same submittal letter, MDNR also 

requested that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 

10–5.375, ‘‘Motor Vehicles Emissions 

Inspection Waiver’’ be rescinded. EPA is 

not taking any action on 10 CSR 10– 

5.375 as it is being replaced in its 

entirety with the GVIP I/M program, 

Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10–5.381. 

On December 14, 2007, MDNR 

submitted the new GVIP plan and 

performance standard demonstration to 

show that the GVIP program meets the 

basic requirements as described in 40 

CFR part 51 subpart S. This submission 

also requests that EPA approve the plan 

to replace the GCAP I/M program with 

the new GVIP program. 

On December 21, 2007, Missouri 

submitted a revision requesting that the 

Missouri State Highway Patrol rules be 

removed from the Missouri SIP because 

the new rule, 10 CSR 10–5.381, does not 

rely on the Missouri Highway Patrol 

rules for enforcement. More details can 

be found in the technical support 

document that is a part of this docket. 

On January 2, 2009, MDNR submitted 

a required supplemental demonstration 

for I/M network type and program 

evaluation as required by 40 CFR 

51.353. This demonstration is required 

within one year after the I/M program 

begins. 

On June 17, 2009, Missouri submitted 

a revision to I/M rule 10 CSR 10–5.381 

which includes minor clarification edits 

and exempts specially constructed 

vehicles or ‘‘kit-cars’’ from the rule. 

On December 10, 2012, Missouri 

submitted a revision to exempt Plugin 

Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) from 

the I/M program as codified in rule 10 

CSR 10–5.381. 

As part of our review, EPA performed 

a separate analysis of all the state’s SIP 

submissions and a cumulative air 

quality analysis as documented in the 

technical support document that is part 

of this docket. EPA’s analysis shows 

that these SIP revisions do not adversely 

affect air quality in the St. Louis area 

and are approvable. 

II. Have the requirements for approval 

of a SIP revision been met? 

The state submission has met the 

public notice requirements for SIP 

submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 

51.102. The submission also satisfied 

the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 

51, appendix V. In addition, as 

explained above and in more detail in 

the technical support document which 

is part of this docket, the revision meets 

the substantive SIP requirements of the 

CAA, including section 110 and 

implementing regulations. 

III. EPA’s Response to Comments 

The public comment period on EPA’s 

proposed rule opened December 28, 

2014, the date of its publication in the 

Federal Register, and closed on January 

29, 2015. During this period, EPA 

received five comments from one 

anonymous commenter. 

Comment 1: The commenter contends 

that while no action is necessary with 

regards to removing Missouri Rule 10 

CSR 10–5.375 from the SIP because 

Missouri is replacing the GCAP program 

with the GVIP program, EPA incorrectly 

stated that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10– 

5.375 was not part of the SIP. 

Response 1: EPA agrees with the 

commenter that 10 CSR 10–5.375 was 

included in list number 47 in 40 CFR 

52.1320(e) under ‘‘Vehicle I/M 

Program’’ and also should have been 

listed in 40 CFR 52.1320(c) but was not. 

EPA also agrees that no action is 

necessary to remove 10 CSR 10–5.375 

from the SIP as the GCAP I/M program 

is being wholly replaced with the GVIP 

I/M program. Therefore, no action is 

necessary on Missouri’s request to 

remove Missouri rule CSR 10–5.375 

from the SIP. 

Comment 2: The commenter contends 

that the analysis performed to show that 

the new I/M program meets the 

performance standard did not account 

for the removal of both the IM240 and 

single speed idle test and therefore was 

done improperly. 

Response 2: Missouri is not required 

to include a performance standard test 

for IM240 and single speed idle testing 

as Missouri is only required to meet the 

Basic Performance Standard test set 

forth by EPA. The reason for the 

performance standard testing was to 

give an indication of whether or not the 

GVIP program would satisfy the 

minimum requirements of EPA’s I/M 

rule. The GVIP program’s modeling 

parameters used by Missouri during this 

Basic Performance Standard test 

analysis were correctly identified and 

performed adequately. The technical 

support document (TSD) supplied in the 

docket reviews the performance 

standard test results and also includes a 

section 110(l) modeling exercise that 

compares the GCAP and GVIP I/M 

programs emissions results. 

Comment 3: The commenter states 

that portions of the St. Louis area are 

required to have an enhanced I/M 

program as part of the 1-hour ozone 

maintenance plan which covers the 

second ten-year maintenance plan and 

beyond. The commenter says that this 

means that until Missouri has 

demonstrated that the enhanced I/M 

program is no longer necessary, and 

EPA approves this demonstration, the 

St. Louis area is still required to have an 

enhanced I/M program. 

Response 3: Under the 1-hour 

standard, the St. Louis area was 

classified as moderate non-attainment 

and was only required to do a basic I/ 

M program. At the time the GCAP was 

approved, its emission reductions were 

compared to those that would be 

achieved by the basic I/M performance 

standard and were found to exceed the 

performance standard. Because the 

GCAP program met the applicable 

performance standard as well as 

providing the additional emission 

reductions required under the 

attainment plan, it was approved. 

Today’s action, among other things, is 

approving the replacement of the GCAP 

program with the GVIP program which 

has also been found to meet the 

minimum basic program requirements 

but also achieves greater emission 

reductions than the GCAP program it 

replaces as demonstrated by the section 

110(l) analysis included in the TSD in 

the docket for today’s action. The GVIP 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 11325 

program meets all the requirements 

previously met by the GCAP when it 

was approved into the SIP. Today’s 

action does not weaken or remove the 

I/M program from the SIP as 

demonstrated in the TSD, contrary to 

what is implied by the commenter. 

Additionally, Missouri relies on the 

GVIP program and it is specifically 

relied upon in the St. Louis area’s 1997 

8-hour ozone maintenance plan. 

Comment 4: The commenter states 

that Missouri’s emissions analysis uses 

the outdated EPA mobile model, 

MOBILE–6, and that because Missouri 

submitted this SIP revision over five 

years ago and EPA has not acted on it, 

the burden should be on EPA to perform 

an additional analysis utilizing the 

updated EPA mobile model, 

MOVES2014. 

Response 4: EPA did perform an 

additional modeling analysis utilizing 

MOVES2014 to compare the GCAP and 

GVIP I/M program differences for 

control efficiency and emissions results 

for the St. Louis area. The results show 

that the GVIP program achieves greater 

emission reductions than the GCAP 

program. These results can be found in 

the TSD which is part of this docket. 

Comment 5: The commenter states 

that EPA should perform an additional 

modeling analysis that uses the 

performance standard in the February 

2014 guidance document EPA–420–B– 

14–006. The commenter further states 

that by using this guidance any analysis 

will show that the removal of the IM240 

test and single speed idle test will result 

in a loss of NOX and VOC emission 

reductions and that losses will need to 

be compensated for with other emission 

reduction measures. 

Response 5: Additional performance 

standard modeling is only required if 

changes are made to an approved I/M 

program prior to attaining the standard 

for which the program was adopted 

(section 4.0, EPA guidance document: 

EPA–420–B–14–006). Missouri has 

attained the standard(s) for which the 

program was adopted. Once an area goes 

from being a nonattainment area to an 

attainment and maintenance area, the 

only analysis required when changing 

an I/M program is to estimate the 

shortfall, if any, created by the change 

as part of a required 110(l) 

demonstration. The 110(l) 

demonstration modeling contained in 

the TSD, provided in the docket, was 

performed using the February 2014 

guidance cited in the comment and 

shows that there was no shortfall 

created by the change from the GCAP to 

the GVIP which is being approved 

through this action. 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking final action to amend 

the Missouri SIP to approve revisions to 

St. Louis vehicle I/M program. While 

these SIP revisions were submitted in 

separate requests, they are direct 

changes to the St. Louis Vehicle 

Inspection Program and are being 

addressed in one SIP action. 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

In this rule, EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation 

by reference of the Missouri rule 10– 

5.381 ‘‘On Board Diagnostics Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Inspection’’ 

described in the amendments to 40 CFR 

part 52 set forth below.’’ EPA has made, 

and will continue to make, these 

documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), 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 CAA. Accordingly, 

this action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action 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 the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by May 4, 2015. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this action for the purposes of 

judicial review nor does it extend the 

time within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
11326 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: February 18, 2015. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as set 

forth below: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. In § 52.1320(c) the table is amended 

by: 

■ a. Removing the entry for ‘‘10–5.380’’; 

■ b. Adding in numerical order the 

entry for ‘‘10–5.381’’; and 

■ c. Removing the chapter title 

‘‘Missouri Department of Public Safety 

Division 50-State Highway Patrol 

Chapter 2—Motor Vehicle Inspection’’ 

and its entries for ‘‘50–2.010 through 

50–2.420’’. 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of Plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

Missouri 

citation Title 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

*******

Chapter 5—Air Quality Regulations and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area 

*******

10–5.381 ...... On-Board Diagnostics Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Inspection.

12/30/12 3/3/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–04271 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1 and 63 

[IB Docket No. 12–299; FCC 14–48] 

Reform of Rules and Policies on 

Foreign Carrier Entry Into the U.S. 

Telecommunications Market 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) announces that the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved, for a period of three years, the 

information collection requirements 

associated with the Commission’s 

Report and Order, IB Docket No. 12– 

299, FCC 14–48. This notice is 

consistent with the Report and Order, 

which stated that the Commission 

would publish a document in the 

Federal Register announcing OMB 

approval and the effective date of the 

requirements. 

DATES: The amendments to 47 CFR 

1.767(a)(8), 1.768(g)(2), 63.11(g)(2) and 

63.18(k), published at 79 FR 31873, June 

3, 2014 are effective on March 3, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information contact Cathy 

Williams, Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov, (202) 

418–2918. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document announces that, on February 

10, 2015 and February 20, 2015, OMB 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in the 

Commission’s Report and Order, FCC 

14–48, published at 79 FR 31873, June 

3, 2014. The OMB Control Numbers are 

3060–0686 and 3060–0944. The 

Commission publishes this notice as an 

announcement of the effective date of 

the requirements. If you have any 

comments on the burden estimates 

listed below, or how the Commission 

can improve the collections and reduce 

any burdens caused thereby, please 

contact Cathy Williams, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1– 

C823, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, 

DC 20554. Please include the OMB 

Control Number, 3060–0686, in your 

correspondence. The Commission will 

also accept your comments via email at 

PRA@fcc.gov. 

To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities 

(Braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), send an email to fcc504@

fcc.gov or call the Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Synopsis 

As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), 

the FCC is notifying the public that it 

received OMB approval on February 10, 

2015 and February 20, 2015, for the new 

information collection requirements 

contained in the Commission’s rules at 

47 CFR 1.767(a)(8), 1.768(g)(2), 

63.11(g)(2) and 63.18(k). 

Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency 

may not conduct or sponsor a collection 

of information unless it displays a 

current, valid OMB Control Number. 

No person shall be subject to any 

penalty for failing to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that does not 

display a current, valid OMB Control 

Number. The OMB Control Numbers are 

3060–0686 and 3060–0944. 

The foregoing notice is required by 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES