48618 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 154 / Friday, August 9, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0901; FRL–9394–5] 

Propylene Glycol; 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 propylene 

glycol (CAS Reg. No. 57–55–6) when 

used as an inert ingredient in 

antimicrobial formulations applied to 

food-contact surfaces in public eating 

places, dairy-processing equipment, and 

food-processing equipment and utensils 

under our regulations. Exponent on 

behalf of Ecolab, Inc. 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 

propylene glycol. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

August 9, 2013. Objections and requests 

for hearings must be received on or 

before October 8, 2013, 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–2012–0901. 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: Lois 

Rossi, Registration Division (7505P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–7090; email address: 

RDFRNotices@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. 

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–2012–0901 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 October 8, 2013. 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–2012–0901, 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. Petition for Exemption 

In the Federal Register of January 16, 

2013 (78 FR 3377) (FRL–9375–4), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA 

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

the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN– 

10525) by Exponent®, 1150 Connecticut 

Ave. NW., Suite 1100, Washington, DC 

20036 on behalf of Ecolab, Inc., 370 N. 

Wabasha Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. 

The petition requested that 40 CFR 

180.940(a) be amended by establishing 

an exemption from the requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of propylene 

glycol (CAS Reg. No. 57–55–6) when 

used as an inert ingredient in 

antimicrobial formulations applied to 

food-contact surfaces in public eating 

places, dairy-processing equipment, and 

food-processing equipment and utensils. 

That notice referenced a summary of the 

petition prepared by Ecolab, the 

petitioner, which is available in the 

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

There were no comments received in 

response to the notice of filing. 

III. Inert Ingredient Definition 

Inert ingredients are all ingredients 

that are not active ingredients as defined 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 154 / Friday, August 9, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 48619 

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 propylene glycol 

including exposure resulting from the 

exemption established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with propylene glycol 

follows. 

A. Toxicological Profile 

EPA has evaluated the available 

toxicity data and considered their 

validity, completeness, and reliability as 

well as the relationship of the results of 

the studies to human risk. EPA has also 

considered available information 

concerning the variability of the 

sensitivities of major identifiable 

subgroups of consumers, including 

infants and children. Specific 

information on the studies received and 

the nature of the adverse effects caused 

by propylene glycol as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) 

and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies 

are discussed in this unit. 

The acute oral toxicity of propylene 

glycol is low propylene glycol did not 

cause dermal or eye irritation in rabbits. 

It was not a dermal sensitizer. 

Propylene glycol administered via the 

oral route did not cause systemic 

toxicity in rats or dogs in studies 

conducted for up to 2 years at doses as 

high as 2,500 mg/kg/day. Neither 

maternal, developmental, offspring nor 

reproduction toxicity was observed at 

doses up to approximately 10,000 mg/ 

kg/day in a teratology screening and a 

continuous breeding study in mice. 

Also, dermal exposure to propylene 

glycol did not cause systemic toxicity 

nor increased skin tumor incidence at 

concentrations up to 100% (∼100,000 

mg/kg/day) propylene glycol in mice. 

Propylene glycol was not mutagenic 

or genotoxic on the basis of a battery of 

studies that included the bacterial gene 

mutation assay using Salmonella 

typhimurium (AMES) in vitro assay, in 

vitro Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) 

mutation assay, Chinese hamster ovary 

(CHO) chromosomal aberration assays, 

and an in vitro sister chromatid 

exchange assay. In addition, EPA 

concluded that propylene glycol was 

negative for carcinogenicity in studies 

conducted up to the testing limit doses 

established by the Agency. 

Although no neurotoxicity or 

immunotoxicity studies on propylene 

glycol are available, there is no evidence 

of neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity in 

the available studies. 

Propylene glycol should be readily 

metabolized to lactic acid at the typical 

low-level exposures. At higher 

concentrations (absorbed doses), 

propylene glycol is primarily excreted 

unchanged in the urine. 

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ 

Levels of Concern 

EPA has concluded that there are no 

toxicity endpoints of concern for oral, 

dermal, or inhalation exposure to 

propylene glycol. This conclusion is 

based on the results of toxicity testing 

of propylene glycol at dose levels near 

or above testing limits (as established in 

the OPPTS 870 series harmonized test 

guidelines). Since signs of toxicity were 

not observed, a toxicological endpoint 

of concern for use in risk assessment 

was not identified. Therefore, EPA has 

determined that a quantitative risk 

assessment, which would use safety 

factors applied to a point of departure 

that is protective of an identified hazard 

endpoint, for propylene glycol is not 

appropriate. 

C. Exposure Assessment 

1. Dietary exposure from food, feed, 

drinking water and non-dietary 

exposures. In evaluating dietary 

exposure to propylene glycol, EPA 

considered exposure under the 

proposed exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance. For purposes 

of this action, EPA qualitatively 

assessed dietary and non-dietary 

exposures from propylene glycol as 

follows: 

Dietary exposure (food and drinking 

water) could potentially occur from the 

use of propylene glycol as a food 

additive, from food packaging, from its 

use as an inert ingredient in pesticide 

formulations. In addition, dietary 

exposure to propylene glycol could 

occur as a result of contact with treated 

surfaces or food- or dairy-processing 

equipment or food utensils. Residential 

exposure could also potentially occur as 

a result of the use of propylene glycol 

in and around the home as a sanitizer, 

disinfectant, and pet treatment. Since an 

endpoint for risk assessment was not 

identified, a quantitative dietary 

exposure assessment for propylene 

glycol was not conducted. 

2. Cumulative effects from substances 

with a common mechanism of toxicity. 

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA 

requires that, when considering whether 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
48620 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 154 / Friday, August 9, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

to establish, modify, or revoke a 

tolerance, the Agency consider 

‘‘available information’’ concerning the 

cumulative effects of a particular 

pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other 

substances that have a common 

mechanism of toxicity.’’ 

EPA has not found propylene glycol 

to share a common mechanism of 

toxicity with any other substances, and 

propylene glycol does not appear to 

produce a toxic metabolite produced by 

other substances. For the purposes of 

this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has 

assumed that propylene glycol does not 

have a common mechanism of toxicity 

with other substances. For information 

regarding EPA’s efforts to determine 

which chemicals have a common 

mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate 

the cumulative effects of such 

chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at 

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ 

cumulative. 

D. Safety Factor for Infants and 

Children 

As part of its qualitative assessment, 

the Agency did not use safety factors for 

assessing risk, and no additional safety 

factor is needed for assessing risk to 

infants and children. The toxicity 

database for propylene glycol contains 

several acute, subchronic, and chronic, 

developmental, and reproductive 

toxicity studies, as well as 

carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, 

metabolism/pharmacokinetics, and 

dermal toxicity studies. No hazard was 

identified based on those studies. 

Although the toxicity database does not 

contain any neurotoxicity or 

immunotoxicity studies, no evidence of 

neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity effects 

was present in any of the available 

studies. Thus, there is no residual 

uncertainty regarding prenatal and/or 

postnatal toxicity of propylene glycol. 

Based on this information, there is no 

concern at this time for increased 

sensitivity to infants and children to 

propylene glycol when used as an inert 

ingredient in pesticide formulations 

applied to food-contact surfaces in 

public eating places, dairy-processing 

equipment, and food-processing 

equipment and utensils. 

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of 

Safety 

Taking into consideration all available 

information on propylene glycol, EPA 

concludes that there are no dietary or 

aggregate dietary/non-dietary risks of 

concern as a result of exposure to 

propylene glycol in food and water or 

from residential exposure. As discussed 

in this unit, EPA expects aggregate 

exposure to propylene glycol to pose no 

appreciable dietary risk given that the 

data show a lack of systemic toxicity at 

doses < 2500 mg/kg/day and a lack of 

any increased susceptibility of infants 

and children. Taking into consideration 

of all available information on 

propylene glycol, 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 propylene 

glycol 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 propylene glycol. 

VI. Conclusions 

Therefore, an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance is established 

under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for propylene 

glycol (CAS Reg. No. 57–55–6) when 

used as an inert ingredient in 

antimicrobial pesticide formulations 

applied to food-contact surfaces in 

public eating places, dairy-processing 

equipment, and food-processing 

equipment and utensils. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule exempts certain 

pesticide residues 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 exemption 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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 154 / Friday, August 9, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 48621 

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. 

Dated: July 29, 2013. 

Lois Rossi, 

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 § 180.940, the table in paragraph 

(a) is amended by adding, 

alphabetically, the following inert 

ingredient to read as follows: 

§ 180.940 Tolerance exemptions for active 

and inert ingredients for use in 

antimicrobial formulations (Food contact 

surface sanitizing solutions). 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

Pesticide chemical CAS Reg. 

No. Limits 

* * * * * 

Propylene glycol ......... 57–55–6 None. 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–19025 Filed 8–8–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1, 27, and 101 

[WT Docket Nos. 12–70 and 04–356; ET 

Docket No. 10–142; FCC 12–151] 

Service Rules for Advanced Wireless 

Services in the 2000–2020 MHz and 

2180–2200 MHz Bands, etc. 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission announces that the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved, for a period of three years, the 

information collection associated with 

the Commission’s Report and Order 

(R&O), Service Rules for Advanced 

Wireless Services in the 2000–2020 

MHz and 2180–2200 MHz Bands, etc. 

This notice is consistent with the 

R&O, which stated that the Commission 

would publish a document in the 

Federal Register announcing the 

effective date of those rules. 

DATES: The amendments to §§ 1.949, 

27.14, 27.17, 27.1131, 27.1134, 27.1136, 

27.1166, 27.1168, 21.1170, 101.69, and 

101.73(d) that appeared in the Federal 

Register at 78 FR 8229, February 5, 

2013, are effective on August 9, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Holmes, Wireless 

Telecommunications Bureau, 

Broadband Division, at (202) 418–BITS 

or by email at Kevin.Holmes@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document announces that, on July 31, 

2013, OMB approved, for a period of 

three years, the information collection 

requirements contained in the 

Commission’s R&O, FCC 12–151, 

published at 78 FR 8229 on February 5, 

2013. The OMB Control Number is 

3060–1030. The Commission publishes 

this notice as an announcement of the 

effective date of the rules. 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 Judith B. Herman at (202) 418– 

0214 or via email at JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov. Please include the 

OMB Control Number, 3060–1030, 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 July 31, 

2013, which contained new or modified 

information collection requirements, in 

47 CFR 1.949, 27.14, 27.17, 27.1131, 

27.1134, 27.1136, 27.1166, 27.1168, 

21.1170, 101.69, and 101.73(d), which 

would not be effective until approved 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget. The information collection was 

adopted in the Report and Order in WT 

Docket Nos. 12–70 and 04–356; ET 

Docket No. 10–142, FCC 12–151, which 

appears at 78 FR 8229, February 5, 2013, 

adopts flexible use rules for 40 

megahertz of spectrum in the 2 GHz 

band (2000–2020 MHz and 2180–2200 

MHz) that would increase the nation’s 

supply of spectrum for mobile 

broadband. Also, we adopted AWS–4 

terrestrial service, technical, and 

licensing rules that generally follow the 

Commission’s part 27 flexible use rules, 

modified as necessary to account for 

issues unique to the AWS–4 bands. 

First, we establish 2000–2020 MHz 

paired with 2180–2200 MHz as the 

AWS–4 band plan. In addition, we 

adopted appropriate technical rules for 

operations in the AWS–4 band. This 

includes rules governing the 

relationship of the AWS–4 band to other 

bands. Third, mindful that AWS–4 

spectrum is now allocated on a coprimary basis for Mobile Satellite and 

for terrestrial Fixed and Mobile services 

and that MSS licensees already have 

authorizations to provide service in the 

band, we determined that the AWS–4 

rules must provide for the protection of 

2 GHz MSS systems from harmful 

interference caused by AWS–4 systems. 

Fourth, consistent with our 

determination below to grant AWS–4 

terrestrial operating authority to the 

incumbent 2 GHz MSS licensees, we 

proposed to assign terrestrial rights by 

modifying the MSS operators’ licenses 

pursuant to section 316 of the 

Communications Act. Fifth, we adopted 

performance requirements for the AWS– 

4 spectrum. Specifically, licensees of 

AWS–4 operating authority will be 

subject to build-out requirements that 

require a licensee to provide terrestrial 

signal coverage and offer terrestrial 

service to at least 40 percent of its total 

terrestrial license areas’ population 

within four years, and to at least 70 

percent of the population in each of its 

license areas within seven years, and to 

appropriate penalties if these 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES