52042 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 174 / Monday, September 8, 2008 / Notices 

1The CARB Board approved the OBD standards 

by Resolution 05–38 on July 21, 2005 and the 

California Office of Administrative Law approved 

the regulations on February 15, 2006. 

2EPA recently denied California its request for a 

waiver for its new motor vehicle greenhouse gas 

standards. See 73 FR 12156 (March 6, 2008). 

3 72 FR 3200 (January 24, 2007). 

Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. 

Dated: August 12, 2008. 

Molly A. O’Neill, 

Assistant Administrator and Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. E8–20733 Filed 9–5–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–8708–1] 

California State Motor Vehicle 

Pollution Control Standards; Notice of 

Waiver of Clean Air Act Preemption; 

California’s 2010 Model Year HeavyDuty Vehicle and Engine On-Board 

Diagnostic Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice regarding waiver of clean 

air act preemption. 

SUMMARY: By this decision, issued under 

section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act, as 

amended, (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7543(b), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is granting California its request for a 

waiver Clean Air Act preemption for its 

2010 and later model year heavy-duty 

vehicle and engine on-board diagnostic 

(OBD) requirements. 

ADDRESSES: The Agency’s Decision 

Document, containing an explanation of 

the Deputy Assistant Administrator’s 

decision, as well as all documents relied 

upon in making that decision, including 

those submitted to EPA by CARB, are 

available at EPA’s Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center (Air 

Docket). Materials relevant to this 

decision are contained in Docket No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0844. The docket 

is located at the Air Docket, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, and may 

be viewed between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday. The telephone 

is (202) 566–1742. A reasonable fee may 

be charged by EPA for copying docket 

material. 

Additionally, an electronic version of 

the public docket is available through 

the Federal government’s electronic 

public docket and comment system. 

You may access EPA dockets at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. After opening the 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site, 

select ‘‘Environmental Protection 

Agency’’ from the pull-down Agency 

list, then scroll to ‘‘Keyword or ID’’ and 

enter EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0844 to 

view documents in the record of this 

California request. Although a part of 

the official docket, the public docket 

does not include Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Electronic copies of this Notice and 

the accompanying Decision Document 

are available via the Internet on the 

Office of Transportation and Air Quality 

(OTAQ) Web site and looking at the 

path entitled http://www.epa.gov/ 

OTAQ. Users can find these documents 

by accessing the OTAQ web and looking 

at the path entitled Federal Register 

Notices. The electronic Federal Register 

version of the Notice is made available 

on the day of publication on the primary 

Web site http://epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/ 

EPA-AIR. Please note that due to the 

differences between the software used to 

develop the documents and the software 

into the documents may be 

downloaded, changes in format, page 

length, etc., may occur. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Dickinson, Compliance and 

Innovative Strategies Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel 

Rios Building (6405J), 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Telephone: 

(202) 343–9256. E-Mail Address: 

Dickinson.David@EPA.GOV 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I have 

decided to grant California a waiver of 

Clean Air Act preemption pursuant to 

section 209(b) of the Act for its 2010 and 

later model year heavy-duty vehicle and 

engine OBD requirements.1

Section 209(b) of the Act provides 

that, if certain criteria are met, the 

Administrator shall waive preemption 

for California to enforce new motor 

vehicle emission standards and 

accompanying enforcement procedures. 

The criteria include consideration of 

whether California arbitrarily and 

capriciously determined that its 

standards are, in the aggregate, at least 

as protective of public health and 

welfare as the applicable Federal 

standards; whether California needs 

State standards to meet compelling and 

extraordinary conditions; and whether 

California’s standards are consistent 

with section 202(a) of the Act. 

As further explained in the Decision 

Document supporting today’s decision, 

although EPA did receive comment on 

California’s request, the Agency finds 

there is an insufficient basis to deny 

California its waiver request based on 

the criteria set forth in section 209(b) of 

the Act. 

In its request letter to EPA, the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

stated that the OBD requirements will 

not cause the California standards, in 

the aggregate, to be less protective of 

public health and welfare than the 

applicable Federal standards. EPA 

received no information during this 

proceeding that questioned whether 

CARB’s OBD requirements are less 

protective than applicable Federal 

standards. I cannot find that CARB’s 

OBD regulations would cause the 

California motor vehicle emission 

standards, in the aggregate, to be less 

protective of public health and welfare 

than applicable Federal standards. 

CARB has repeatedly demonstrated, 

with respect to traditional pollution 

concerns, (i.e. not including global 

climate change), the existence of 

compelling and extraordinary 

conditions in California.2 EPA has not 

received any adverse comments to 

suggest that California no longer suffers 

from serious and unique air pollution 

problems. Because EPA has not received 

adverse public comment, or any other 

relevant information, challenging the 

need for CARB’s own motor vehicle 

pollution control program based on lack 

of compelling and extraordinary 

conditions for the purposes of this 

waiver request, I cannotdeny the waiver 

based on a lack of compelling and 

extraordinary conditions. 

CARB stated in its request letters that 

the amendments do not raise any 

concerns of inadequate leadtime or 

impose any inconsistent certification 

requirements. EPA received comment 

suggesting that EPA not necessarily 

deny the ultimate granting of CARB’s 

waiver request, but rather that EPA 

defer making a decision in order to 

‘‘maximize the opportunities for full 

alignment and harmonization between 

the EPA and ARB OBD programs for 

HDOH engines, and to reduce the 

prospects that other states will elect to 

opt into the ARB OBD program, which, 

from an emissions inventory 

perspective, will not be materially 

different from the EPA OBD program.’’

EPA notes that its notice of proposed 

rulemaking for heavy-duty vehicle and 

engine OBD was published on January 

24, 2007 but a final rule has not been 

completed.3 Although EPA remains 

sensitive to the issues raised by the 

commenter, such comments do not 

include data or other basis by which to 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 174 / Monday, September 8, 2008 / Notices 52043 

demonstrate the feasibility of CARB’s 

OBD requirements. I cannot find that 

CARB’s OBD regulations, as noted, 

would cause the California motor 

vehicle emission standards to be 

inconsistent with section 202(a). 

A full explanation of EPA’s decision, 

including our review of comments 

received, is contained in a Decision 

Document which may be obtained as 

explained above. 

My decision will affect not only 

persons in California but also the 

manufacturers outside the State who 

must comply with California’s 

requirements in order to produce heavyduty vehicles and engines for sale in 

California. For this reason, I hereby 

determine and find that this is a final 

action of national applicability. 

As with past waiver decisions, this 

action is not a rule as defined by 

Executive Order 12866. Therefore, it is 

exempt from review by the Office of 

Management and Budget as required for 

rules and regulations by Executive 

Order 12866. 

In addition, this action is not a rule 

as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(2). Therefore, EPA has 

not prepared a supporting regulatory 

flexibility analysis addressing the 

impact of this action on small business 

entities. 

Finally, the Administrator has 

delegated the authority to make 

determinations regarding waivers under 

section 209(b) of the Act to the Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation. 

Dated: August 13, 2008. 

Robert J. Meyers, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, 

Office of Air and Radiation. 

[FR Doc. E8–20732 Filed 9–5–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Notice of Public Information 

Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the 

Federal Communications Commission 

for Extension Under Delegated 

Authority, Comments Requested 

August 27, 2008. 

SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort 

to reduce paperwork burden and as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–

3520), the Federal Communications 

Commission invites the general public 

and other Federal agencies to comment 

on the following information 

collection(s). Comments are requested 

concerning (a) whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Commission, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

Commission’s burden estimate; (c) ways 

to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information collected; and 

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on the 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that does not 

display a valid OMB control number. 

DATES: Written PRA comments should 

be submitted on or before November 7, 

2008. If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the contact listed below as soon 

as possible. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit all PRA 

comments by e-mail or U.S. post mail. 

To submit your comments by e-mail, 

send them to PRA@fcc.gov. To submit 

your comments by U.S. mail, mark them 

to the attention of Cathy Williams, 

Federal Communications Commission, 

Room 1–C823, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information about the 

information collection(s), contact Cathy 

Williams at (202) 418–2918 or send an 

e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–0474. 

Title: Section 74.1263, Time of 

Operation. 

Form Number: Not applicable. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Business and other for 

profit entities; not-for-profit institutions. 

Number of Respondents/Responses: 

75. 

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 

hours. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion 

reporting requirement. 

Total Annual Burden: 38 hours. 

Total Annual Costs: None. 

Nature of Response: Required to 

obtain or retain benefits. The statutory 

authority for this collection of 

information is contained in 154(i), 303 

and 308 of the Communications Act of 

1934, as amended. 

Confidentiality: No need for 

confidentiality required for this 

collection of information. 

Privacy Impact Assessment(s): No 

impact(s). 

Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 74.1263(c) 

requires licensees of FM translator or 

booster stations to notify the 

Commission of its intent to discontinue 

operations for 30 or more consecutive 

days. In addition, licensees must notify 

the Commission within 48 hours of the 

station’s return to operation. 47 CFR 

74.1263(d) requires FM translator or 

booster station licensees to notify the 

Commission of its intent to permanently 

discontinue operations and to forward 

the station license to the FCC for 

cancellation. FCC staff uses this data to 

keep records up-to-date. These 

notifications inform FCC staff that 

frequencies are not being used for a 

specified amount of time and that 

frequencies have become available for 

other users. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–20737 Filed 9–5–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Public Information Collection 

Requirement Submitted to OMB for 

Review and Approval, Comments 

Requested 

August 26, 2008. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burden, 

invites the general public and other 

Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An 

agency may not conduct or sponsor a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 

does not display a valid control number. 

Comments are requested concerning (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES