34920 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this 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 the rule in 

the Federal Register. This rule is not a 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by August 12, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action 

approving Indiana’s section 111(d)/129 

plan revision for SSI sources may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Administrative 

practice and procedure, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Sewage sludge incinerators. 

Dated: May 28, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 62 is amended as follows: 

PART 62—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF STATE PLANS 

FOR DESIGNATED FACILITIES AND 

POLLUTANTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 62 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart P—Indiana 

■ 2. Add an undesignated center 

heading and §§ 62.3670, 62.3671, and 

62.3672 to subpart P to read as follows: 

Control of Air Emissions From Sewage 

Sludge Incinerators 

§ 62.3670 Identification of plan. 

On February 27, 2013, Indiana 

submitted a State Plan for implementing 

the emission guidelines for Sewage 

Sludge Incinerators (SSI). The 

enforceable mechanism for this State 

Plan is a State rule codified in 326 

Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 11– 

10. The rule was adopted on August 1, 

2012, and became effective on 

November 1, 2012. 

§ 62.3671 Identification of sources. 

The Indiana State Plan for existing 

Sewage Sludge Incinerators (SSI) 

applies to all SSIs for which 

construction commenced on or before 

October 14, 2010 or for which a 

modification was commenced on or 

before September 21, 2011 primarily to 

comply with this rule. 

§ 62.3672 Effective Date. 

The Federal effective date of the 

Indiana State Plan for existing Sewage 

Sludge Incinerators is August 12, 2013. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13724 Filed 6–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE 

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services 

45 CFR Part 1180 

RIN 3137–AA21 

Technical Amendments To Reflect the 

Authorizing Legislation of the Institute 

of Museum and Library Services 

AGENCY: Institute of Museum and 

Library Services (IMLS), NFAH. 

ACTION: Technical amendment; final 

rule. 

SUMMARY: The Institute of Museum and 

Library amends its grants regulations by 

removing outdated regulations and 

making certain technical amendments to 

reflect Congress’ reauthorization of the 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services under the Museum and Library 

Services Act of 2010, as further 

amended by the Presidential 

Appointment Efficiency and 

Streamlining Act of 2011. The 

amendments also reorganize certain 

regulations to provide greater clarity for 

agency applicants and grantees. 

DATES: Effective June 11, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nancy E. Weiss, General Counsel, 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services, 1800 M Street NW., Suite 900, 

Washington, DC 20036. Email: 

nweiss@imls.gov. Telephone: (202) 653– 

4640. Facsimile: (202) 653–4610. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Technical Amendments and Removal 

of the Institute’s Outdated Regulations 

IMLS amends 45 CFR part 1180 to 

remove outdated regulations and make 

minor technical amendments to reflect 

Congress’ reauthorization of the 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services with the Museum and Library 

Services Act of 2010, Public Law 111– 

340 (December 22, 2010), as further 

amended by the Presidential 

Appointment Efficiency and 

Streamlining Act of 2011, Public Law 

112–166 (August 10, 2012). These 

revisions are meant to fulfill the 

Institute’s responsibility to its eligible 

grant applicants by ensuring that all 

regulations, policies, and procedures are 

up-to-date. The regulations being 

removed include regulations relating to 

programs and requirements no longer in 

existence at the Institute as a result of 

both agency practice and the Museum 

and Library Services Act of 2010, Public 

Law 111–340 (December 22, 2010), as 

further amended by the Presidential 

Appointment Efficiency and 

Streamlining Act of 2011, Public Law 

112–166 (August 10, 2012). In the 

interests of economy of administration, 

and because all of the regulations to be 

removed are outdated and the technical 

amendments are minor, they are 

included in one rulemaking vehicle. 

Section 553 of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), provides that, when an 

agency for good cause finds that notice 

and public procedure are impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest, the agency may issue a rule 

without providing notice and an 

opportunity for public comment. There 

is good cause for making this action 

final without prior proposal and 

opportunity for comment because the 

rule contains minor technical 

amendments that provide agency 

applicants and grantees with greater 

clarity and additional flexibility. 

II. Matters of Regulatory Procedure 

Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 

12866) 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Institute must determine whether the 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and 

therefore subject to OMB review and the 

requirements of the Executive Order. 

The Order defines a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as one that is likely 

to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an 

annual effect on the economy of $100 

million or more or adversely affect in a 

material way the economy, a sector of 

the economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, public health or 

safety, or State, local, or tribal 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 34921 

governments or communities; (2) create 

a serious inconsistency or otherwise 

interfere with an action taken or 

planned by another agency; (3) 

materially alter the budgetary impact of 

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 

programs or the rights and obligations of 

recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel 

legal or policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates, the President’s priorities, or 

the principles set forth in the Executive 

Order. 

The rule removes a number of 

outdated regulations and makes 

technical amendments to reflect 

Congress’ reauthorization of the 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services under the Museum and Library 

Services Act of 2010, Public Law 111– 

340 (December 22, 2010), as further 

amended by the Presidential 

Appointment Efficiency and 

Streamlining Act of 2011, Public Law 

112–166 (August 10, 2012). As such, it 

does not impose a compliance burden 

on the economy generally or on any 

person or entity. Accordingly, this rule 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

from an economic standpoint, and it 

does not otherwise create any 

inconsistencies or budgetary impacts to 

any other agency or Federal Program. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Because this rule removes outdated 

regulations and make certain technical 

amendments, the Institute has 

determined in Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) review that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it 

simply makes technical amendments 

and removes outdated regulations. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule is exempt from the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, since it removes existing 

outdated regulations and makes only 

technical amendments to reflect 

Congress’ reauthorization of the 

Institute of Museum and Library 

Services under the Museum and Library 

Services Act of 2010, Public Law 111– 

340 (December 22, 2010), as further 

amended by the Presidential 

Appointment Efficiency and 

Streamlining Act of 2011, Public Law 

112–166 (August 10, 2012). An OMB 

form 83–1 is not required. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

For purposes of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 

chapter 25, subchapter II), this rule will 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments and will not result in 

increased expenditures by State, local, 

and tribal governments, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

as adjusted for inflation) in any one 

year. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: 

a. Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

b. Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

c. Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Takings (E.O. 12630) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, the rule does not have significant 

takings implications. No rights, property 

or compensation has been, or will be, 

taken. A takings implication assessment 

is not required. 

Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, this rule does not have 

federalism implications that warrant the 

preparation of a federalism assessment. 

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Institute has determined that 

this rule does not unduly burden the 

judicial system and meets the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of the Order. 

Consultation with Indian tribes (E.O. 

13175) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, the Institute has evaluated this 

rule and determined that it has no 

potential negative effects on federally 

recognized Indian tribes. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. 

List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 1180 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government contracts, Grant 

programs-education, Grant programsIndians, Cooperative agreements, 

Federal aid programs, Grants 

administration, Libraries, Museums, 

Nonprofit organizations, Colleges and 

universities, and Report and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons stated in the preamble 

and under the authority of 20 U.S.C. 

9101 et seq., the Institute of Museum 

and Library Services amends 45 CFR 

part 1180 as follows: 

PART 1180—GRANTS REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 20 U.S.C. Section 9101 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 1180.2, add the following 

sentence to the beginning of paragraph 

(b) introductory text: 

§ 1180.2 Definition of a museum. 

* * * * * 

(b) The term ‘‘museum’’ in paragraph 

(a) of this section includes museums 

that have tangible and digital 

collections. * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 1180.3, revise the definition of 

‘‘Board’’ to read as follows: 

§ 1180.3 Other definitions. 

* * * * * 

Board means the National Museum 

and Library Services Board established 

by The Museum and Library Services 

Act of 2003, Pub. L. 108–81 (20 U.S.C. 

9105a), as amended. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 1180.37, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 1180.37 Rejection for technical 

deficiency—appeal; reconsideration; 

waiver. 

(a) An applicant whose application is 

rejected because of technical deficiency 

may appeal such rejection in writing to 

the Director within 10 business days of 

electronic or postmarked notice of 

rejection, whichever is earlier. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Revise § 1180.55 to read as follows: 

§ 1180.55 Subgrants. 

(a) A grantee may not make a subgrant 

unless expressly authorized by the 

Institute. In the event the Institute 

authorizes a subgrant, the grantee shall: 

(1) Ensure that the subgrant includes 

any clauses required by Federal law as 

well as any program-related conditions 

imposed by the Institute; 

(2) Ensure that the subgrantee is 

aware of the applicable legal and 

program requirements; and 

(3) Monitor the activities of the 

subgrantee as necessary to ensure 

compliance with Federal law and 

program requirements. 

(b) A grantee may contract for 

supplies, equipment, and services, 

subject to applicable law, including but 

not limited to applicable Office of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
34922 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circulars and government-wide 

regulations. 

Subpart D—[Removed] 

■ 6. Subpart D, consisting of § 1180.70, 

is removed. 

Dated: June 5, 2013. 

Nancy E. Weiss, 

General Counsel, Institute of Museum and 

Library Services. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13730 Filed 6–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7036–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 15 

[ET Docket No. 10–26; FCC 13–59] 

Definition of Auditory Assistance 

Device 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This document modifies the 

definition of ‘‘auditory assistance 

device’’ in the Commission’s rules to 

permit these devices to be used by 

anyone at any location for simultaneous 

language interpretation (simultaneous 

translation), where the spoken words 

are translated continuously in near real 

time. The revised definition permits 

unlicensed auditory assistance devices 

to be used to provide either auditory 

assistance or simultaneous translation, 

or both, without impeding these 

devices’ capability to provide auditory 

assistance to persons with disabilities. 

This document also lowers the limit for 

these auditory assistance devices’ 

unwanted emissions to the limits 

provided for other unlicensed devices in 

the Commission’s rules. 

DATES: Effective July 11, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Forster, (202) 418–7061, Policy 

and Rules Division, Office of 

Engineering and Technology, (202) 418– 

2290, Patrick.Forster@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, ET Docket No. 10–26, 

adopted May 1, 2013, and released May 

2, 2013, FCC 13–59. The full text of the 

Report and Order is available on the 

Commission’s Internet site at 

www.fcc.gov. It is also available for 

inspection and copying during regular 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The 

full text of the Report and Order also 

may be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplication contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 

445 12th St. SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554; telephone (202) 

488–5300; fax (202) 488–5563; email 

FCC@BCPIWEB.COM. 

Summary of the Report and Order 

1. The Report and Order modified the 

definition of ‘‘auditory assistance 

device’’ in part 15 of the Commission’s 

rules to expand the permissible uses of 

these devices beyond solely providing 

auditory assistance to persons with 

disabilities (e.g., amplification of sounds 

for the hard of hearing and audio 

description for the blind) to include 

simultaneous translation for anyone at 

any location. This action harmonized 

the part 15 definition of ‘‘auditory 

assistance device’’ with the definition of 

‘‘auditory assistance communications’’ 

in part 95 of the Commission’s rules. 

Under this expanded definition, part 15 

auditory assistance devices that operate 

in the 72–73 MHz, 74.6–74.8 MHz, and 

75.2–76 MHz (72–76 MHz) bands on an 

unlicensed basis may provide auditory 

assistance or simultaneous translation, 

or both, to anyone at any location. 

2. The Report and Order also lowered 

the limit for part 15 auditory assistance 

devices’ unwanted emissions to the 

limits that are provided in § 15.209 of 

the Commission’s rules to help reduce 

the likelihood that the unwanted 

emissions from increased use of these 

devices for simultaneous translation 

will degrade the reception of very high 

frequency television (VHF TV) channels 

2–4 (54–72 MHz) and 5–6 (76–88 MHz) 

and help improve the reception of VHF 

TV service. 

3. On September 9, 2011, the 

Commission adopted an Order and 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(Auditory Assistance Device NPRM) in 

this proceeding in which it proposed to 

modify the part 15 definition of 

‘‘auditory assistance device’’ to expand 

the permissible uses of these devices to 

include simultaneous language 

interpretation by any person at any 

location, in the same manner as 

permitted under part 95 for Low Power 

Radio Service stations that operate in 

the 216–217 MHz band. The 

Commission took this action in response 

to a petition for declaratory ruling filed 

by Williams Sound Corporation 

(Williams Sound), a provider of wireless 

auditory assistance devices. 

4. In the Auditory Assistance Device 

NPRM, the Commission sought 

comment on the advantages and 

disadvantages and potential benefits of 

expanding the permissible uses of part 

15 auditory assistance devices and any 

qualitative or quantitative costs 

associated with this proposal. It also 

sought comment on whether increased 

use of part 15 auditory assistance 

devices for simultaneous language 

interpretation would increase the 

potential for harmful interference to 

authorized services in the 72–76 MHz 

and adjacent bands and whether 

additional safeguards or changes to the 

technical requirements for these devices 

would be necessary to prevent harmful 

interference to those services. In 

addition, the Commission sought 

comment on whether a more restrictive 

limit for part 15 auditory assistance 

devices’ out-of-band emissions is 

needed to prevent harmful interference 

to authorized services in the 72–76 MHz 

and adjacent bands and improve the 

reception of VHF TV channels 2–6. 

5. Part 15 auditory assistance devices 

may operate in a full duplex mode of 

operation using necessary bandwidths 

up to 200 kilohertz wide. All 

fundamental emissions must be 

contained wholly within the 72–73 

MHz, 74.6–74.8 MHz, and 75.2–76 MHz 

bands with a maximum field strength of 

80 millivolts per meter (mV/m) 

measured at a distance of 3 meters, 

which is equivalent to a maximum 

effective radiated power (ERP) of 1.2 

milliwatts (mW). The field strength of 

any unwanted emissions (emissions 

outside of the 200 kilohertz necessary 

bandwidth) must not exceed 1,500 

microvolts per meter (mV/m) measured 

at a distance of 3 meters, which is 

equivalent to an ERP of 0.4 microwatts 

(mW). In the Auditory Assistance Device 

NPRM, the Commission asked what outof-band emissions limit would be 

appropriate—the § 15.209 limit, the 

unlicensed TV bands device limit, or 

some other limit—what would be an 

appropriate transition period for 

compliance, and whether currently 

approved part 15 auditory assistance 

devices should be grandfathered for a 

limited time or permanently. In the 

Report and Order, the Commission 

noted that although it used the term 

‘‘out-of-band’’ emissions in the Auditory 

Assistance Devices NPRM when 

referring to emissions outside of the 

frequency bands in which the auditory 

assistance devices operate (paras. 20 

and 21), the correct term to describe the 

emissions outside of the necessary 

bandwidth of the transmitting system is 

‘‘unwanted’’ emissions, and so it used 

the term ‘‘unwanted’’ emissions where 

appropriate throughout the Report and 

Order. 

Discussion 

6. In the Report and Order, the 

Commission modified the definition of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES