Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules 4835 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule 

involves the establishment of security 

zones. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. In § 165.1108, revise paragraphs (b) 

and (c) to read as follows: 

§ 165.1108 Security Zones; Moored Cruise 

Ships, Port of San Diego, California. 

* * * * * 

(b) Location. The following areas are 

security zones: All navigable waters, 

extending from the surface to the sea 

floor, within a 100-yard radius around 

any cruise ship that is located within 

the San Diego port area landward of the 

sea buoys bounding the Port of San 

Diego. 

(c) Regulations. Under regulations in 

33 CFR part 165, subpart D, a person or 

vessel may not enter into or remain in 

the security zones created by this 

section unless authorized by the Coast 

Guard Captain of the Port, San Diego 

(COTP) or a COTP designated 

representative. Persons desiring to 

transit these security zones may contact 

the COTP at telephone number (619) 

683–6495 or on VHF–FM channel 16 

(156.8 MHz) to seek permission to 

transit the area. If permission is granted, 

all persons and vessels must comply 

with the instructions of the Captain of 

the Port or his or her designated 

representative. 

* * * * * 

Dated: January 20, 2011. 

T.H. Farris, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. 2011–1804 Filed 1–26–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0036; FRL–9258–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Volatile Organic Compound Reinforced 

Plastics Composites Production 

Operations Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a new rule for the control of volatile 

organic compound (VOC) emissions 

from reinforced plastic composites 

production operations to Ohio’s State 

Implementation plan (SIP). This rule 

applies to any facility that has 

reinforced plastic composites 

production operations. This rule is 

approvable because it satisfies the 

requirements for reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2010–0036, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 692–2511. 

• Mail: John Mooney, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John Mooney, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
4836 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2010– 

0036. 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 website 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. For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. 

Publicly available docket materials 

are available either electronically in 

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

copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. We recommend that you 

telephone Steven Rosenthal, 

Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886– 

6052 before visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental 

Engineer, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6052, 

Rosenthal.steven@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

II. What action is EPA taking today and what 

is the purpose of this action? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of Ohio’s 

reinforced plastics composites rule? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—The EPA may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. What action is EPA taking today and 

what is the purpose of this action? 

EPA is proposing to approve into 

Ohio’s SIP new rule OAC 3745–21–25 

‘‘Control of VOC Emissions from 

Reinforced Plastic Composites 

Production Operations.’’ This rule was 

submitted by the Ohio EPA to EPA on 

November 10, 2010, and contains 

requirements that satisfy RACT 

standards for VOC emissions from 

reinforced plastic composites 

production operations. This rule is 

needed to establish VOC RACT 

requirements for such operations to 

replace the requirements contained in 

OAC rule 3745–21–07 (Control of 

emissions of organic materials from 

stationary sources) because 3745–21–07 

has been revised by Ohio, and the 

revised rule (which is the subject of a 

separate Federal Register action) 

excludes reinforced plastic composites 

production operations. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of Ohio’s 

reinforced plastics composites rule? 

As discussed below, this rule satisfies 

RACT requirements and is consistent 

with the CAA and EPA regulations. A 

general discussion of the main elements 

of OAC 3745–21–25 (Control of VOC 

emissions from reinforced plastic 

composites production operations) 

follows: 

3745–21–25(A) Applicability 

(A)(1)—This rule applies to any 

facility that has reinforced plastic 

composites production operations, 

except as otherwise provided in 

paragraph (A)(2). 

(A)(2)—This paragraph exempts any 

facility in which potential VOC 

emissions from all reinforced plastic 

composites production operations 

combined is 10.0 tons per year or less 

and requires that up-to-date records be 

kept of the potential to emit VOC from 

all reinforced plastic composites 

production operations. However, 

consistent with EPA’s once in/always in 

policy, this exclusion is not available for 

any facility that has, or once had, a 

potential to emit for VOC equal to or 

greater than 10.0 tons per year for all 

reinforced plastic composites 

production operations combined on or 

after December 14, 2010 (12 months 

from the effective date of an earlier 

version of this rule). 

(A)(3)—Upon achieving compliance 

with this rule, the reinforced plastic 

composites production operations at the 

facility are not required to meet the 

requirements of 3745–21–07, which is 

Ohio’s general rule for the control of 

organic materials from stationary 

sources that are not controlled by 

another specific VOC RACT rule. This 

exemption from 3745–21–07 is 

appropriate because 3745–21–25 

contains VOC RACT requirements 

specific to reinforced plastic composites 

production operations, whereas 3745– 

21–07 is a general rule that covers a 

number of source categories. 

However, the applicability cutoff of 

3745–21–07 is 8 lbs/hour or 40 pounds/ 

day as compared to a 25 tons VOC/year 

cutoff for the control requirements of 

3745–21–25 for sheet molding 

compound (SMC) manufacturing 

operations. The main purpose of this 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules 4837 

rule is the control of such SMC 

operations because SMC machines were 

previously covered by 3745–21–07. 

Ohio EPA submitted a October 25, 2010, 

demonstration under section 110(l) of 

the CAA that the less stringent 

applicability cutoff in 3745–21–25 does 

not interfere with attainment of the 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards, nor interfere with any other 

requirement of the CAA. Ohio 

documented that the worst case 

maximum theoretical increase in 

uncontrolled emissions is 159 tons of 

VOC/year, but that the actual emission 

increase from this change in 

applicability cutoffs would be 7.1 tons 

of VOC/year. 

In December, 2007, Ohio EPA 

promulgated rules in OAC Chapter 

3745–110, ‘‘NOX RACT.’’ These rules 

addressed the control of emissions of 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from stationary 

sources such as boilers, combustion 

turbines, and stationary internal 

combustion engines. The rules were 

made applicable as an attainment 

strategy in the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain 

ozone moderate nonattainment area. On 

September 15, 2009, EPA redesignated 

the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain 

metropolitan area as attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. At the same 

time, EPA approved a waiver, for this 

area, from the NOX RACT requirements 

of section 182(f) of the CAA. Ohio’s 

NOX RACT rules are, therefore, surplus 

and can be used to offset any increase 

in emissions from SMC machines in 

Ohio. Ohio obtained 538 tons NOX/year 

actual (and surplus) emission 

reductions from the Arcelor-Mittal 

facility as a result of the installation of 

low NOX burners in its three reheat 

furnaces. The requirement for these low 

NOX burners is permanent and 

enforceable because they are needed to 

comply with OAC 3745–110, Ohio’s 

NOX RACT rule. In the ClevelandAkron-Lorain area, the ratio of NOX

emissions to VOC emissions is 

approximately 1.36 pounds NOx/pound 

VOC. Applying this factor, the VOC 

offset potential for the Arcelor-Mittal 

facility NOX reductions is 396 tons 

VOC/year. 

3745–21–25(B) Definitions—The 

definitions applicable to this rule are 

contained in paragraph (GG) of (OAC) 

Rule 3745–21–01. These definitions 

clearly and adequately define those 

terms which are needed to understand, 

and implement, the requirements 

contained in this rule. 

3245–21–25(C) Affected operations— 

This section lists those reinforced 

plastic composites production 

operations subject to this rule such as 

open molding; compression/injection 

molding; and centrifugal casting. All of 

the appropriate affected operations are 

listed in this section. Of particular note 

are SMC manufacturing operations, a 

source category for which there are a 

number of sources previously covered 

by 3745–21–07. The main pollutant 

from reinforced plastic composites 

manufacturing operations is styrene, 

which is both a VOC and a hazardous 

air pollutant. Except for SMC machines, 

the other reinforced plastic composites 

manufacturing operations are 

adequately controlled by the National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants: Reinforced Plastic 

Composites Production. (40 CFR part 63 

subpart WWWW) 

3245–21–25(D) VOC Control 

requirements—All affected operations 

must meet the work practice standards 

in Table 1 of this rule. If the 

combination of all reinforced plastic 

composites operations at a facility emits 

less than 100 tons of VOC per year, then 

the affected operations must meet the 

emission limits in Table 2 of this rule. 

If the combination of all reinforced 

plastic composites operations at a 

facility emits 100 tons or more of VOC 

per year, then the affected operations 

must reduce the total VOC emissions 

from these operations by at least 95 

percent or, as an alternative, meet the 

VOC emission limits in Table 3 of this 

rule. Also, any SMC machine with 

uncontrolled VOC emissions of 25.0 

tons or more per rolling 12-month 

period must be controlled by a VOC 

emission control system that reduces 

the VOC emissions from the SMC 

manufacturing machine by at least 95 

percent. A provision of the rule allows 

for a site-specific alternative 

requirement if approved by EPA. These 

control requirements and applicability 

cutoffs are consistent with RACT. 

3745–21–25(E) Emission factor 

determination—This section provides 

acceptable procedures for determining 

emission factors to determine 

compliance with certain VOC emission 

limits in table 2 and table 3 of this rule 

and to calculate VOC emissions. 

Emission factors approved by EPA, such 

as the emission factors in AP–42, may 

be used in lieu of a stack test. However, 

if a stack test is used the stack test 

results would supersede any published 

emission factors. In order to determine 

the monomer content of resins and gel 

coats, information provided by the 

material manufacturer, such as 

manufacturer’s formulation data and 

material safety data sheets, may be 

relied upon unless contradicted by 

actual measurement results. 

3745–21–25(F) Calculation of 

facility’s VOC emission threshold—This 

section establishes the procedures, 

including use of a calculated emission 

factor and conducting performance 

testing, for calculating the facility’s VOC 

emissions threshold in tons per year for 

purposes of determining which 

requirements apply under paragraph (D) 

of this rule. 

3745–21–25(G)–(I)—These paragraphs 

provide acceptable options for meeting 

the VOC emissions limits for open 

molding and centrifugal casting 

operations, continuous lamination/ 

casting operations, and pultrusion 

operations. 

3745–21–25(J)–(K)—These paragraphs 

apply to wet out area(s) and oven(s) for 

continuous lamination/casting 

operations. Paragraph (J) provides an 

acceptable method for calculating the 

annual uncontrolled and controlled 

VOC emissions from these operations, 

and paragraph (K) provides an 

acceptable method for determining the 

capture efficiency of the enclosure of 

the wet-out area and the capture 

efficiency of ovens(s) from these 

operations. 

3745–21–25(L)–(N)—These 

paragraphs provide acceptable 

procedures for calculating how much 

gel coat and resin is applied to the line 

and also for calculation of the percent 

reduction and a VOC emission factor to 

demonstrate compliance for continuous 

lamination/casting operations. 

3745–21–25(O) Demonstration of 

Continuous compliance—This 

paragraph provides acceptable methods 

for establishing continuing compliance 

with each VOC control requirement in 

paragraph (D) of this rule that applies to 

the affected operations. 

3745–21–25(P) Recordkeeping 

requirements—This paragraph 

establishes sufficient recordkeeping 

requirements to determine a facility’s 

applicability and compliance status 

including all data, assumptions, and 

calculations used to determine 

monomer contents and VOC emission 

factors. There are also specific 

recordkeeping requirements for SMC 

manufacturing machines in paragraph 

(P)(2). 

3745–21–25(Q) Reporting 

requirements—Semiannual compliance 

status reports are required for any 

reinforced plastic composites 

production operations subject to this 

rule. These compliance status reports 

must state that there were no deviations 

from VOC emission limitations, 

operating limits, or work practice 

standards during the reporting period. If 

such a deviation does occur, then 

detailed information is required on the 

deviation(s). 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
4838 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

3745–21–25(R) Compliance dates— 

This paragraph requires affected 

operations for which installation 

commenced before December 14, 2009 

(the effective date of an earlier version 

of this rule) to comply with the 

requirements of this rule by 12 months 

from December 14, 2009. Any affected 

operation for which installation 

commenced after December 14, 2009, 

must comply upon initial startup of the 

affected operation. These are reasonable 

compliance dates. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: January 14, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–1771 Filed 1–26–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 64 

[CG Docket No. 10–210; FCC 11–3] 

Implementation of the Twenty-First 

Century Communications and Video 

Accessibility Act of 2010, Section 105, 

Relay Services for Deaf-Blind 

Individuals 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission proposes rules for a pilot 

program to distribute funds for the 

National Deaf-Blind Equipment 

Distribution Program (NDBEDP) 

established by Congress in the TwentyFirst Century Communications and 

Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (CVAA). 

The law directs the Commission to 

establish rules within six months of 

enactment of the new statute that define 

as eligible for relay service support 

those programs approved by the 

Commission for the distribution of 

specialized customer premises 

equipment (specialized CPE) to people 

who are deaf-blind. The goal of this 

NDBEDP is to make telecommunications 

service, Internet access service, and 

advanced communications, including 

interexchange services and advanced 

telecommunications and information 

services, accessible by low income 

individuals who are deaf-blind. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

February 4, 2011. Reply comments are 

due on or before February 14, 2011. 

Written comments on the proposed 

information collection requirements, 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104–13, 

should be submitted on or before March 

28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by [CG Docket No. 10–210], 

by any of the following methods: 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the Commission’s Electronic 

Comment Filing System (ECFS) http://

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://www.

regulations.gov. Filers should follow the 

instructions provided on the Web site 

for submitting comments and transmit 

one electronic copy of the filing to each 

docket number referenced in the 

caption, which in this case is CG Docket 

No. 10–210. For ECFS filers, in 

completing the transmittal screen, filers 

should include their full name, U.S. 

Postal Service mailing address, and the 

applicable docket number. 

• Parties may also submit an 

electronic comment by Internet e-mail. 

To get filing instructions, filers should 

send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and 

include the following words in the body 

of the message, ‘‘get form <your e-mail 

address>.’’ A sample form and 

directions will be sent in response. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

four copies of each filing. In addition, 

parties must send one copy to the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or 

via e-mail to fcc@bcpiweb.com. Filings 

can be sent by hand or messenger 

delivery, by commercial overnight 

courier, or by first-class or overnight 

U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings 

must be addressed to the Commission’s 

Secretary, Office of the Secretary, 

Federal Communications Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St., SW., Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. All hand 

deliveries must be held together with 

rubber bands or fasteners. 

• Envelopes must be disposed of 

before entering the building. The filing 

hours are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service firstVerDate Mar<15>2010 14:37 Jan 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27JAP1.SGM 27JAP1

erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1