4034 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 13 / Thursday, January 22, 2009 / Notices 

budgets are adequate for conformity 

purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) which was promulgated in 

our August 15, 1997 final rule (62 FR 

43780, 43781–43783). We have further 

described our process for determining 

the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets 

in our July 1, 2004 final rule (69 FR 

40004, 40038), and we used the 

information in these resources in 

making our adequacy determination. 

Please note that an adequacy review is 

separate from EPA’s completeness 

review, and should not be used to 

prejudge EPA’s ultimate approval action 

for the SIP. Even if we find a budget 

adequate, the SIP could later be 

disapproved. 

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

Dated: January 9, 2009. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E9–1110 Filed 1–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OECA–2008–0371; FRL–8763–9] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission to OMB for 

Review and Approval; Comment 

Request; NESHAP for Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Fabrication, 

Renewal, EPA ICR Number 2027.04, 

OMB Control Number 2060–0516 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.), this document announces 

that an Information Collection Request 

(ICR) has been forwarded to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval. This is a request 

to renew an existing approved 

collection. The ICR which is abstracted 

below describes the nature of the 

collection and the estimated burden and 

cost. 

DATES: Additional comments may be 

submitted on or before February 23, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

referencing docket ID number EPAOECA–2008–0371, to (1) EPA online 

using www.regulations.gov (our 

preferred method), or by e-mail to 

docket.oeca@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Enforcement and 

Compliance Docket and Information 

Center, mail code 2201T , 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB at: 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer 

for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20503. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sounjay Gairola, Office of Enforcement 

and Compliance Assurance, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number: (202) 564–4003; e-mail 

address: gairola.sounjay@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has 

submitted the following ICR to OMB for 

review and approval according to the 

procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. 

On May 30, 2008 (73 FR 31088), EPA 

sought comments on this ICR pursuant 

to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no 

comments. Any additional comments on 

this ICR should be submitted to EPA 

and OMB within 30 days of this notice. 

EPA has established a public docket 

for this ICR under docket ID number 

EPA-HQ-OECA–2008–0371, which is 

available for public viewing online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, in person 

viewing at the Enforcement and 

Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC. The EPA Docket 

Center Public Reading Room is open 

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

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the 

Enforcement and Compliance Docket is 

(202) 566–1927. 

Use EPA’s electronic docket and 

comment system at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, to submit or view 

public comments, access the index 

listing of the contents of the docket, and 

to access those documents in the docket 

that are available electronically. Once in 

the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then 

key in the docket ID number identified 

above. Please note that EPA’s policy is 

that public comments, whether 

submitted electronically or in paper, 

will be made available for public 

viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, 

as EPA receives them and without 

change, unless the comment contains 

copyrighted material, Confidential 

Business Information (CBI), or other 

information whose public disclosure is 

restricted by statute. For further 

information about the electronic docket, 

go to www.regulations.gov. 

Title: NESHAP for Flexible 

Polyurethane Foam Fabrication 

(Renewal) 

ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 

2027.04, OMB Control Number 2060– 

0516. 

ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to 

expire on March 31, 2009. Under OMB 

regulations, the Agency may continue to 

conduct or sponsor the collection of 

information while this submission is 

pending at OMB. An Agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

The OMB control numbers for EPA’s 

regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after 

appearing in the Federal Register when 

approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, 

and displayed either by publication in 

the Federal Register or by other 

appropriate means, such as on the 

related collection instrument or form, if 

applicable. The display of OMB control 

numbers in certain EPA regulations is 

consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. 

Abstract: The National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) for Flexible Polyurethane 

Foam Fabrication (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart MMMMM) were proposed on 

August 8, 2001 (66 FR 41729) and 

promulgated on April 14, 2003 (68 FR 

18062). 

The affected entities are subject to the 

General Provisions of the NESHAP at 40 

CFR part 63, subpart A, and any 

changes, or additions to the General 

Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart MMMMM. 

Owners or operators of the affected 

facilities must submit a one-time-only 

report of any physical or operational 

changes, initial performance tests, and 

periodic reports and results. Owners or 

operators are also required to maintain 

records of the occurrence and duration 

of any startup, shutdown, or 

malfunction in the operation of an 

affected facility, or any period during 

which the monitoring system is 

inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are 

required semiannually. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information is 

estimated to average 90 hours per 

response. Burden means the total time, 

effort, or financial resources expended 

by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 

or disclose or provide information to or 

for a Federal agency. This includes the 

time needed to review instructions; 

develop, acquire, install, and utilize 

technology and systems for the purposes 

of collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 13 / Thursday, January 22, 2009 / Notices 4035 

requirements which have subsequently 

changed; train personnel to be able to 

respond to a collection of information; 

search data sources; complete and 

review the collection of information; 

and transmit or otherwise disclose the 

information. 

Respondents/Affected Entities: 

Flexible polyurethane foam fabrication 

facilities. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

11. 

Frequency of Response: Initially, 

occasionally, semiannually, and 

annually. 

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 

12,303. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$1,004,834, which includes: labor costs 

of $1,002,163, annualized capital/ 

startup costs of $997, and $1,674 in 

O&M costs. 

Changes in the Estimates: There is no 

change in the total estimated burden 

currently identified in the OMB 

Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. 

Apparent differences of less than 500 

hours are attributable to rounding; in 

previous years, hours were rounded to 

the nearest thousand; this ICR presents 

more exact figures. 

Dated: January 13, 2009. 

John Moses, 

Acting Director, Collection Strategies 

Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–1169 Filed 1–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE 

UNITED STATES 

Economic Impact Policy 

This notice is to inform the public 

that the Export-Import Bank of the 

United States has received an 

application for a $453 million direct 

loan to support the U.S. export of 

approximately $372 million worth of 

mining equipment and services for a 

mining project in the Dominican 

Republic. The U.S. exports will enable 

the company in the Dominican Republic 

to produce approximately 28.35 metric 

tons of gold and 140 metric tons of 

silver per year on average during the 11- 

year repayment term of the loan. 

Available information indicates that 

most of this new gold and silver 

production will be sold internationally. 

Interested parties may submit comments 

on this transaction by e-mail to 

economic.impact@exim.gov or by mail 

to 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Room 

1238, Washington, DC 20571, within 14 

days of the date this notice appears in 

the Federal Register. 

Helene S. Walsh, 

Vice-President, Policy Analysis Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–1164 Filed 1–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6690–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

[MB Docket No. 08–214; DA 08–2819] 

NFL Enterprises LLC, Complainant v. 

Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, 

Defendant; File No. CSR–7876–P 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This document finds that the 

Administrative Law Judge exceeded his 

authority by setting a hearing date 

beyond the 60-day deadline specified in 

the Hearing Designation Order for 

issuing a recommended decision 

regarding the above-captioned program 

carriage dispute and orders that the 

Media Bureau will proceed to resolve 

this dispute without the benefit of a 

recommended decision from the ALJ. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information on this 

proceeding, contact Steven Broeckaert, 

Steven.Broeckaert@fcc.gov, or David 

Konczal, David.Konczal@fcc.gov, of the 

Media Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 

418–2120. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Memorandum Opinion 

and Order, DA 08–2819, adopted and 

released on December 31, 2008. The full 

text of this document is available for 

public inspection and copying during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Center, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street, SW., CY–A257, Washington, DC 

20554. This document will also be 

available via ECFS (http://www.fcc.gov/ 

cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available 

electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/ 

or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete text 

may be purchased from the 

Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554. To request this 

document in accessible formats 

(computer diskettes, large print, audio 

recording, and Braille), send an e-mail 

to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Synopsis of the Order 

1. On October 10, 2008, the Media 

Bureau issued a Memorandum Opinion 

and Hearing Designation Order 

(‘‘HDO’’) in the above captioned matter. 

73 FR 65312, November 3, 2008. The 

HDO, among other things, referred 

certain program carriage disputes, 

including the above-captioned matter, to 

an Administrative Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) to 

resolve factual disputes as to whether 

the defendant cable operators had 

discriminated against the complainant 

video programmers or required a 

financial interest in the complainant 

video programmer’s programming as a 

condition for carriage in violation of the 

Commission’s program carriage rules. 73 

FR 65312, 65322, 65323, November 3, 

2008. The HDO ordered the ALJ to make 

and return a recommended decision to 

the Commission within 60 days of the 

release date of the HDO, i.e., by 

December 9, 2008. Unfortunately, the 

ALJ has not issued a recommended 

decision by the deadline but, instead, 

has set a date to begin a hearing more 

than three months past the HDO’s 

deadline without indicating when a 

recommended decision will be released. 

Herring Broadcasting, Inc. v. Time 

Warner Cable Inc. et al., Order, MB 

Docket No. 08–214, FCC 08M–50 (rel. 

Dec. 2, 2008). 

2. On December 24, 2008, the Media 

Bureau issued a Memorandum Opinion 

and Order (the ‘‘Dec. 24th MO&O’’) 

finding that the ALJ exceeded his 

authority by setting a hearing date 

beyond the HDO’s 60-day deadline for 

issuing a recommended decision. In the 

Matter of Herring Broadcasting Inc., d/ 

b/a WealthTV, et al., Memorandum 

Opinion and Order, DA 08–2805, MB 

Docket 08–214 (rel. Dec. 24, 2008), at 

¶¶ 2, 14–16 (‘‘Dec. 24th MO&O’’). In the 

Dec. 24th MO&O, the Media Bureau 

stated that the ALJ’s limited authority to 

consider these matters extended through 

December 9, 2008. See id. The Media 

Bureau noted that this deadline has 

passed, and the ALJ’s delegated 

authority over these hearing matters has 

thus expired under the terms of the 

HDO. See id. While the above-captioned 

matter was not included in the caption 

of the Dec. 24th MO&O, NFL 

Enterprises, LLC has filed a Motion for 

Clarification arguing that the logic and 

reasoning of that decision applies 

equally to the above-captioned matter. 

See NFL Enterprises LLC, Motion for 

Clarification, MB Docket No. 08–214, 

File No. CSR–7876–P (filed Dec. 29, 

2008). We agree and therefore the Media 

Bureau will proceed to resolve the 

above-captioned program carriage 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with NOTICES