3680 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

(C)(28)(d), (C)(28)(e), (C)(29), (C)(30), 

(C)(31), (C)(32), (C)(33), (C)(34), (C)(35), 

(C)(36), (C)(37), (C)(38), (C)(39), (C)(40), 

(C)(41), (C)(42), (C)(43), (C)(44), (C)(45), 

(C)(46), (C)(47), (C)(48), (C)(48)(a), 

(C)(48)(b), (C)(49), (C)(50), (C)(51), 

(C)(52), (C)(53), (C)(54), (C)(55), (C)(56), 

(C)(57), (C)(58), (C)(59), (C)(60), (C)(61), 

(C)(62), (C)(63), (C)(64), (C)(64)(a), 

(C)(64)(a)(i), (C)(64)(a)(ii), (C)(64)(a)(iii), 

(C)(64)(b), (C)(64)(b)(i), (C)(64)(b)(ii), 

(C)(64)(b)(iii), (C)(65), (C)(66). 

3745–21–06 Classification of 

Regions: 

Entire rule as revised including 

removal of paragraphs (A) and (B). 

3745–21–08 Control of carbon 

monoxide from stationary sources: 

Paragraphs (A), (B), (C), (D), and (E). 

3745–21–09 Control of emissions of 

volatile organic compounds from 

stationary sources and 

perchloroethylene from dry cleaning 

facilities: 

Title, Paragraphs (B)(3)(a), (B)(3)(f), 

(B)(3)(h), (B)(3)(j), (B)(3)(l), (B)(4)(a), 

(B)(4)(b), (C)(4), (H)(1)(a), (H)(1)(b), 

(H)(3), (O)(5)(b), (O)(6)(a), (O)(6)(b), the 

portion of paragraph (U)(1) which states, 

‘‘If a miscellaneous metal parts or 

products coating is subject to two or 

more limits as listed in (U)(1)(a) through 

(U)(1)(i) above, the limit which is least 

restrictive shall apply’’, the portion of 

paragraph (U)(2)(e) which states, ‘‘Daily 

usage limitations included in (U)(2)(e)(i) 

through (U)(2)(e)(iii) above shall not 

apply to coatings employed by the metal 

parts or products coating line on parts 

or products which are not metal’’, 

(U)(2)(h), (AA)(1)(b), (AA)(1)(c), (FF)(1), 

(II)(2), (II)(3), (II)(4), (NN)(1), (NN)(2), 

(NN)(3), (NN)(4), (NN)(5), (OO), (OO)(1), 

(OO)(2), (OO)(3), (OO)(4), (PP)(2), 

(UU)(3), (AAA), (DDD), and Appendix 

A. EPA approved more recent versions 

of paragraphs (O)(6)(b) and (VV)(1)(e) on 

March 30, 2007, at 72 FR 15045, and so 

no rulemaking on the versions of these 

paragraphs submitted in 2003 is 

necessary. 

3745–21–10 Compliance test 

methods and procedures: 

Title, Paragraphs (J), (J)(1), (J)(2), (J)(4), 

Appendix A, and Appendix B. 

We are taking no action on revisions 

to 3745–21–04 (C)(3)(a) because the 

paragraph was subsequently revised in 

a March 23, 2009, submittal. EPA has 

approved this revision in separate 

rulemake published July 28, 2009, at 74 

FR 37171. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the 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 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 CAA; 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 rule 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: January 13, 2010. 

Walter W. Kovalick Jr., 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2010–1223 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0960; FRL–9105–8] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern oxides of nitrogen 

(NOX) from residential water heaters. 

We are approving local rules that 

regulate these emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA or the Act). We are taking 

comments on this proposal and plan to 

follow with a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

February 22, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0960, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

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

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Http:// 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules 3681 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

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. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the rule 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this 

proposal with the date that it was 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SJVAPCD ............................................. 4902 Residential Water Heaters ................................................... 03/19/09 04/29/09 

On 07/20/09, EPA determined that the 

submittal for SJVAPCD Rule 4902 met 

the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 

51, Appendix V, which must be met 

before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 4902 into the SIP on February 17, 

2004 (69 FR 7370). 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

NOX emissions help produce groundlevel ozone, smog and particulate 

matter, which harm human health and 

the environment. Section 110(a) of the 

CAA requires States to submit 

regulations that control NOX emissions. 

Rule 4902 limits NOX, emissions from 

residential water heaters and was 

amended to extend the applicability of 

the rule and strengthen the emission 

limits for NOX. EPA’s technical support 

document (TSD) has more information 

about this rule. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

Generally, SIP rules for NOX

emissions must be enforceable (see 

section 110(a) of the Act), must require 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for each major 

source in ozone nonattainment areas 

classified as moderate or above (see 

sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must 

not relax existing requirements (see 

sections 110(l) and 193). Although the 

SJVAPCD regulates a serious (8-hour) 

and extreme (1-hour) ozone 

nonattainment area, submitted Rule 

4902 is not subject to RACT because it 

is applies only to sources that are not 

major sources of NOX. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability 

requirements consistently include the 

following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe this rule is consistent with 

the relevant requirements, policy and 

guidance regarding enforceability and 

SIP relaxations. The TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA recommendations to further 

improve this rule. We do not have 

further recommendations to improve 

this rule. 

D. Public comment and final action. 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rule fulfills all relevant requirements, 

we are proposing to fully approve it 

under section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We 

will accept comments from the public 

on this proposal for the next 30 days. 

Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate this rule 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
3682 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: December 29, 2009. 

Jane Diamond, 

Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, 

Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2010–1184 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 15 

[WT Docket Nos. 08–166, 08–167, and ET 

Docket No. 10–24; FCC 10–16] 

Revisions to Rules Authorizing the 

Operation of Low Power Auxiliary 

Stations in the 698–806 MHz Band; 

Public Interest Spectrum Coalition, 

Petition for Rulemaking Regarding 

Low Power Auxiliary Stations, 

Including Wireless Microphones, and 

the Digital Television Transition 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) the 

Commission seeks to refine and update 

its rules governing the use of wireless 

microphones, seeking comment on a 

range of issues concerning the operation 

of these devices in the core TV bands. 

DATES: Interested parties may file 

comments on or before February 22, 

2010, and reply comments on or before 

March 15, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by WT Docket No. 08–166, 

08–167 and ET Docket No. 10–24, by 

any of the following methods: 

fi Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

fi Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web site: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

fi Mail: Filings can be sent by hand 

or messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail 

(although the Commission continues to 

experience delays in receiving U.S. 

Postal Service mail). All filings must be 

addressed to the Commission’s 

Secretary, Office of the Secretary, 

Federal Communications Commission. 

fi People with Disabilities: Contact 

the FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– 

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for submitting 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

D’Ari, Wireless Telecommunications 

Bureau, (202) 418–1550, e-mail 

Paul.Dari@fcc.gov, or Hugh L. Van Tuyl, 

Office of Engineering and Technology, 

(202) 418–7506, e-mail 

Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s rules 

noted in the Report and Order and 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

in WT Docket Nos. 08–166 and 08–167, 

ET Docket No.10–24, and FCC 10–16, 

adopted January 14, 2010, and released 

on January 15, 2010. This summary 

should be read with its companion 

document, the Report and Order 

summary published elsewhere in this 

issue of the Federal Register. The full 

text of the Report and Order and 

FNPRM is available for public 

inspection and copying during business 

hours in the FCC Reference Information 

Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., 

Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

It also may be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor at 

Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room 

CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554; the 

contractor’s Web site, http:// 

www.bcpiweb.com; or by calling (800) 

378–3160, facsimile (202) 488–5563, or 

e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Copies of 

the public notice also may be obtained 

via the Commission’s Electronic 

Comment Filing System (ECFS) by 

entering the docket numbers, WT 

Docket No. 08–166, WT Docket No. 08– 

167, and ET Docket No. 10–24. 

Additionally, the complete item is 

available on the Federal 

Communications Commission’s Web 

site at http://www.fcc.gov. 

Synopsis of the Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking Section of the 

Report and Order and Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking 

I. Introduction 

1. In this Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (FNPRM), the Commission 

addresses the use of wireless low power 

auxiliary stations, including wireless 

microphones that operate on the TV 

bands by entities that are not eligible for 

a part 74 low power auxiliary station 

license. In light of the important 

functions that these types of devices 

provide to the public, the Commission 

propose that the Commission should 

revise its rules to permit the use of 

wireless microphones and other low 

power audio devices in the core TV 

bands on an unlicensed basis under part 

15 of the rules by entities that are not 

currently eligible for licensing under 

part 74, Subpart H of the rules. The 

Commission also proposes to adopt 

technical rules for such operation under 

part 15. In addition, the Commission 

seeks comment on whether to provide 

for some expansion of the eligibility 

under part 74, Subpart H of the rules to 

create additional categories of licensed 

use of wireless microphones or other 

low power auxiliary stations. The 

Commission also seeks comment on the 

adoption in its rules marketing and 

labeling requirements, including 

possible requirements pertaining to part 

74 low power auxiliary stations that 

could help ensure that ineligible entities 

do not obtain such devices. Consistent 

with the Commissions broader efforts to 

manage spectrum as effectively and 

efficiently as possible, the Commission 

also seek comment on possible longterm reform, based in part on 

technological innovation such as digital 

technology, that would enable wireless 

microphones to operate more efficiently 

and with improved immunity to 

harmful interference, thereby increasing 

the availability of spectrum for wireless 

microphone and other uses. Finally, the 

Commission seeks comment on whether 

there are any changes it could make to 

other rule parts, including part 90, that 

would address the needs of wireless 

microphone users. 

2. As discussed in the Report and 

Order, there are several reasons why 

this is an appropriate time for the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1