Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 5345 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing these proposed 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria only on a reasoned 

determination that their benefits would 

justify their costs. In choosing among 

alternative regulatory approaches, the 

Department selected those approaches 

that would maximize net benefits. Based 

on the analysis that follows, the 

Department believes that this regulatory 

action is consistent with the principles 

in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

The proposed priority for KEAs and 

the other proposed priority, along with 

the associated proposed requirement, 

definitions, and selection criteria, 

would benefit individual children by 

supporting the development or 

enhancement of KEAs that would 

provide educators with timely and 

useful information to guide 

individualized instruction for children 

at kindergarten entry and throughout 

the year. In addition, the resulting 

assessments would benefit educators, 

administrators, and other stakeholders 

by yielding information that can be used 

to target investments for the education 

systems serving children in the years 

before kindergarten. A KEA would also 

support the implementation of State 

reform efforts in the area of early 

learning. 

The proposed priority for early 

learning collaborative efforts among 

States would encourage States to work 

together on developing a common KEA 

rather than developing or using separate 

KEAs, thus pooling expertise and 

experience while also creating 

efficiencies, including cost-efficiencies. 

The priority would also help ensure that 

a KEA developed by a consortium is 

made available for use by multiple 

States. It also would support the 

collection of comparable data regarding 

the level of children’s learning and 

development at kindergarten entry. 

The proposed selection criteria would 

help ensure that the assessments 

developed by grantees are of high 

quality, meet relevant technical 

standards, and align with other 

assessment work funded by the 

Department. 

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 

regarding this program. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the program contact person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

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 via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site 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). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: January 22, 2013. 

Deborah S. Delisle, 

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2013–01567 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

United States Copyright Office 

37 CFR Parts 201 and 210 

[Docket No. 2012–1] 

Copyright Office Fees 

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library 

of Congress. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking: 

Extension of reply comment periods. 

SUMMARY: The United States Copyright 

Office is extending the deadline for 

filing reply comments regarding its 

notice of proposed rulemaking 

concerning the establishment of a fee 

schedule for filing cable and satellite 

statements of account for use of the 

statutory licenses that provide for the 

secondary transmission of broadcast 

programming by cable and satellite 

companies. 

DATES: Reply comments on the 

proposed regulation must be received in 

the Office of the General Counsel of the 

Copyright Office no later than 5 p.m. 

Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on 

February 15, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: The Copyright Office 

strongly prefers that reply comments be 

submitted electronically. A comment 

submission page is posted on the 

Copyright Office Web site at http:// 

www.copyright.gov/docs/newfees/ 

comments/. The Web site interface 

requires submitters to complete a form 

specifying name and other required 

information, and to upload comments as 

an attachment. To meet accessibility 

standards, all comments must be 

uploaded in a single file in either the 

Adobe Portable Document File (PDF) 

format that contains searchable, 

accessible text (not an image); Microsoft 

Word; WordPerfect; Rich Text Format 

(RTF); or ASCII text file format (not a 

scanned document). The maximum file 

size is 6 megabytes (MB). The name of 

the submitter and organization should 

appear on both the form and the face of 

the comments. All comments will be 

posted publicly on the Copyright Office 

Web site exactly as they are received, 

along with names and organizations if 

provided. If electronic submission of 

comments is not feasible, please contact 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with 
5346 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

the U.S. Copyright Office at (202) 707– 

8380 for special instructions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Megan Rivet, Budget Analyst, or Melissa 

Dadant, Senior Advisor for Operations 

and Special Projects, at (202) 707–8350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

December 6, 2012, the U.S. Copyright 

Office published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) announcing a 

revised schedule of fees for filing semiannual statements of account pursuant 

to 17 U.S.C. 111, 119, and 122 based 

upon a new cost study. 77 FR 72,788 

(December 6, 2012). Comments to the 

proposed fees were due on January 7, 

2013 and the Office received three 

comments at that time, including a 

comment from the National Cable & 

Telecommunications Association 

(‘‘NCTA’’). 

In its comment, NCTA noted that it 

had submitted on December 13, 2012 a 

request pursuant to the Freedom of 

Information Act (‘‘FOIA’’) for the cost 

studies referenced in the Office’s 

December 6 notice announcing new 

proposed fees. Subsequently, NCTA 

filed a motion on January 14, 2013 

requesting an extension of the January 

22, 2013 date for filing reply comments 

in anticipation of a response from the 

Office to its FOIA request. The Office is 

extending the time to file reply 

comments to 5:00 p.m. EST February 15, 

2013 in order to provide additional time 

for stakeholders to prepare reply 

comments after the Office resolves the 

pending FOIA request. 

Dated: January 16, 2013. 

Tanya M. Sandros, 

Deputy General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2013–01291 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0433; EPA–R01– 

OAR–2012–0149; A–1–FRL–9754–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Massachusetts and New Hampshire; 

Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts and 

the State of New Hampshire. These 

revisions include regulations to update 

the enhanced motor vehicle inspection 

and maintenance (I/M) programs in 

Massachusetts and New Hampshire. The 

revised programs in Massachusetts and 

New Hampshire include a test and 

repair network for an on-board 

diagnostic (OBD2) testing program for 

model year 1996 and newer vehicles. 

The intended effect of this action is to 

propose approval of the revised 

programs into the Massachusetts and 

New Hampshire SIPs. This action is 

being taken under the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– 

OAR–2009–0433 for comments 

pertaining to our proposed approval 

action for Massachusetts or EPA–R01– 

OAR–2012–0149 for comments 

pertaining to our proposed approval 

action for New Hampshire by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0433 or 

EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0149,’’ Anne 

Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA New England Regional 

Office, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, 

(Mail code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 

02109–3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Anne Arnold, 

Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, 5 Post 

Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code 

OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules Section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ariel Garcia, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA New England Regional Office, 5 

Post Office Square, Suite 100 (Mail 

code: OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109– 

3912., telephone number (617) 918– 

1660, fax number (617) 918–0660, email 

garcia.ariel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: November 15, 2012. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00930 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0763; FRL–9772–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri; Control of Sulfur Emissions 

From Stationary Boilers 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve 

revisions to the Missouri State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted 

October 27, 2009. This revision adds a 

new rule to reduce the concentration of 

fine particles (PM2.5) in the St. Louis 

nonattainment area by limiting sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) emissions (a precursor 

pollutant to PM2.5), from industrial 

boilers. EPA is approving this revision 

because it strengthens the Missouri SIP. 

EPA’s approval of this SIP revision is 

being done in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with