27940 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does 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 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 rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this 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 concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule 

involves establishment of a safety zone. 

An environmental analysis checklist 

and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

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 amends 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. 1226, 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; 

Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add new temporary zone 

§ 165.T11–169 to read as follows: 

§ 165.T11–169 Safety zone; Rockets Over 

the River; Bullhead City, Arizona 

(a) Location. The limits of the safety 

zone are as follows: all navigable waters 

within 1200 feet of the Arizona State 

Land Base firing site in approximate 

position 35°09.15′ N, 114°34.07′ W. 

(b) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 

p.m. on July 4, 2009. If the event 

concludes prior to the scheduled 

termination time, the Captain of the Port 

will cease enforcement of this safety 

zone and will announce that fact via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definition applies to this section: 

designated representative, means any 

commissioned, warrant, and petty 

officers of the Coast Guard on board 

Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, 

and local, state, and federal law 

enforcement vessels who have been 

authorized to act on the behalf of the 

Captain of the Port. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port of San Diego or 

his designated on-scene representative. 

(2) Mariners requesting permission to 

transit through the safety zone may 

request authorization to do so from the 

Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The 

PATCOM may be contacted on VHF–FM 

Channel 16. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the 

designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel shall proceed as 

directed. 

(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies. 

Dated: May 27, 2009. 

T.H. Farris, 

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

Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. E9–13774 Filed 6–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 72, 73, 74, 77, and 78 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0774; FRL–8917–6] 

RIN 2060–AP35 

Rulemaking To Reaffirm the 

Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid 

Rain Program Rules 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is 

reaffirming the promulgation of certain 

revisions of the Acid Rain Program 

rules. These revisions have been in 

effect since mid-2006. Most of them are 

crucial to the ongoing operation of the 

Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them 

streamline and clarify requirements of 

the program, which has achieved 

significant, cost-effective reductions in 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from 

utility sources since its commencement 

in 1995. These rule revisions were 

finalized in the Federal Register notices 

that also finalized the Clean Air 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 27941 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the final 

Federal Implementation Plans for CAIR 

(CAIR FIPs). On July 11, 2008, the U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit issued a decision 

vacating and remanding CAIR and the 

CAIR FIPs. On December 23, 2008, in 

response to petitions for rehearing, the 

Court modified its July 11, 2008 

decision and remanded CAIR and the 

CAIR FIPs but without a vacatur. These 

revisions to the Acid Rain Program rules 

were not addressed by, or involved in 

any of the issues raised by, any parties 

in the proceeding or the Court. EPA 

believes it is reasonable to view these 

revisions as unaffected by the Court’s 

decision. However, EPA is treating the 

Court’s remand as covering these 

revisions and, in response to the 

remand, is finalizing the rule 

reaffirming—pursuant to its authority 

under Title IV of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) and CAA section 301—the 

promulgation of these revisions on their 

merits and in order to remove any 

uncertainty about their regulatory 

status. With this action, the existing 

Acid Rain regulations continue in effect, 

and the Acid Rain Program continues to 

operate, unchanged and uninterrupted. 

DATES: The effective date of this action 

is August 11, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0774 (which 

includes by reference the dockets for 

CAIR and the CAIR FIPs, i.e., Docket ID 

Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0053 and 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0076). All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the Federal Docket Management System 

index 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 either electronically through 

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

copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, 

EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. The 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 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dwight C. Alpern, Clean Air Markets 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Clean Air Markets Division, 

Mailcode: 6204J, Ariel Rios Building, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202) 

343–9151, e-mail at 

alpern.dwight@epa.gov. Electronic 

copies of this document can be accessed 

through the EPA Web site at: http:// 

epa.gov/airmarkets. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulated Entities. Entities regulated 

by this action primarily are fossil fuelfired boilers, turbines, and combined 

cycle units that serve generators that 

produce electricity for sale or cogenerate 

electricity for sale and steam. Regulated 

categories and entities include: 

Category NAICS code Examples of potentially 

regulated industries 

Industry ....................................................................... 221112 and others ....................................... Electric service providers. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

regulated by this action. This table lists 

the types of entities, of which EPA is 

now aware, that could potentially be 

regulated by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this table could 

also be regulated. To determine whether 

your facility, company, business, 

organization, etc., is regulated by this 

action, you should carefully examine 

the applicability provisions in §§ 72.6, 

72.7, and 72.8 of title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations. If you have 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

Administrative Procedures Used in 

This Action. This notice finalizes the 

promulgation of certain revisions, of the 

Acid Rain Program rules, that were 

previously promulgated and have been 

in effect since mid-2006 and withdraws 

the interim final rule (73 FR 75983 and 

75959, December 15, 2008) reaffirming 

the promulgation of these same 

revisions. On December 15, 2008, EPA 

published in the Federal Register 

parallel notices of proposed and direct 

final rules reaffirming the promulgation 

of the non-CAIR- and non-CAIR-FIPrelated Acid Rain Program rule 

revisions that were originally finalized 

in the Federal Register notices that also 

finalized CAIR and CAIR FIPs. 73 FR 

75954 and 75983, December 15, 2008. 

As explained in the proposed and direct 

final notices, those notices provided 

interested persons an opportunity for 

public hearing and comment on the rule 

revisions until January 29, 2009. EPA 

explained that, if it received any adverse 

comment on the direct final notice, that 

notice would be withdrawn, no further 

opportunity for public comment would 

be provided, and a final rule would be 

issued based on the proposed notice and 

responding to all comments. The 

interim final rule would continue in 

effect until December 15, 2009 unless it 

was withdrawn on an earlier date by the 

direct final rule or (if the direct final 

rule itself was withdrawn) the final rule 

addressing these rule revisions. 

Therefore, following the receipt of an 

adverse comment, EPA withdrew the 

direct final notice (74 FR 13124, March 

26, 2009). 

Outline. The following outline is 

provided to aid in locating information 

in this preamble. 

I. Acid Rain Rule Revisions Whose 

Promulgation Is Reaffirmed 

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Acid Rain Rule Revisions Whose 

Promulgation Is Reaffirmed 

The Acid Rain Program rule revisions 

whose promulgation EPA is reaffirming 

in this final rule are described in detail 

in section III of the preamble of the 

interim final rule (73 FR 75963–66), 

which also explains the merits of the 

revisions. The revisions are non-CAIRand non-CAIR-FIP-related Acid Rain 

Program rule revisions that were 

originally finalized in the Federal 

27942 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

1As noted above, the Court’s disposition of CAIR 

and the CAIR FIPs changed—from remand with 

vacatur to remand without vacatur—after EPA 

proposed and explained the reaffirmation in the 

interim final and proposed notices but before the 

end of the comment period on the direct final 

notice. Moreover, the final reaffirmation in this 

action still is in response to a remand and based 

on the revisions’ merits set forth in the interim final 

rule. EPA therefore maintains that, despite the 

Court’s modification of its decision, the public has 

had a full opportunity to comment on the 

reaffirmation. 

Register notices that also finalized CAIR 

and the CAIR FIPs. As explained in the 

interim final notice, the revisions have 

been in effect since mid-2006, most of 

them are crucial to the ongoing 

operation of the Acid Rain Program, and 

the rest of them streamline and clarify 

requirements of the program. 

On July 11, 2008 (before promulgation 

of EPA’s interim final and proposed 

notices), the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit had 

issued a decision vacating and 

remanding CAIR and the CAIR FIPs. On 

December 23, 2008 (after interim final 

and proposed notices were promulgated 

but before the end of the comment 

period on the direct final notice), the 

Court modified its July 11, 2008 

decision in response to petitions for 

rehearing and remanded CAIR and the 

CAIR FIPs but without a vacatur. These 

revisions to the Acid Rain Program rules 

were not addressed by, or involved in 

any of the issues raised by, any parties 

in the proceeding or the Court. EPA 

believes it is reasonable to view these 

revisions as unaffected by the Court’s 

decision. However, EPA is treating the 

Court’s remand as covering these 

revisions and, in response to the 

remand, is finalizing its reaffirmation— 

pursuant to its authority under Title IV 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and CAA 

section 301—of the promulgation of 

these revisions for the reasons set forth 

in the interim final rule preamble (73 FR 

75963–66) and in order to remove any 

uncertainty about their regulatory 

status.1

EPA received only one comment on 

these revisions during the comment 

period for the direct final rule affirming 

the promulgation of the revisions. The 

comment, which was submitted on 

December 15, 2008, objected to 

finalization of any rules until the new 

administration could review them. The 

comment raised no substantive issues 

concerning any of the revisions at issue 

here. Having completed the requested 

review, EPA concludes that the 

promulgation of these revisions should 

be reaffirmed on their merits as set forth 

in the interim final rule (73 FR 75963– 

66). Further, in light of such final 

reaffirmation, EPA is withdrawing the 

interim final rule as of the effective date 

of this final rule. With this action, the 

existing Acid Rain regulations continue 

in effect, and the Acid Rain Program 

continues to operate, unchanged and 

uninterrupted. 

II. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 

(October 4, 1993)) and is therefore not 

subject to review under the Executive 

Order. In this action, EPA is simply 

reaffirming the promulgation of Acid 

Rain Program rule revisions that were 

previously issued and are currently in 

effect and have been since mid-2006. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. This rule 

simply reaffirms the promulgation of 

Acid Rain Program rule revisions that 

were previously issued, does not change 

the existing requirements in 40 CFR 

Parts 72, 73, 74, 77, and 78, and thus 

does not change the existing 

information collection burden. 

Moreover, EPA maintains that the effect 

of these revisions when they were first 

promulgated was, if anything, to reduce 

somewhat the information collection 

burden on regulated sources, e.g., by 

requiring compliance with the 

allowance-holding requirement at a 

source, rather than unit, level (thereby 

removing the need to transfer 

allowances among units at the same 

source) and by making other changes to 

the rules in place when the rule 

revisions were originally promulgated 

(such as removing the requirement for 

submission of an annual compliance 

certification report). In addition, the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) previously approved the 

information collection requirements in 

the existing rules under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and has assigned 

OMB control number 2060–0258. OMB 

control numbers for EPA’s regulations 

in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601, et seq.) (RFA) generally 

requires an agency to prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule 

subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing 

the impacts of today’s rule on small 

entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A 

small business as defined by the SBA’s 

regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a 

small governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) 

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this rule on small entities, I 

certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. In 

determining whether a rule has a 

significant economic impact on small 

entities, the impact of concern is any 

significant adverse economic impact on 

small entities, since the primary 

purpose of the regulatory flexibility 

analysis is to identify and address 

regulatory alternatives ‘‘which minimize 

any significant economic impact of the 

rule on small entities.’’ 5 U.S.C. 603 and 

604. Thus, an agency may certify that a 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities if the rule 

relieves regulatory burden or otherwise 

has a positive economic effect on all of 

the small entities subject to the rule. 

This rule does not change the existing 

Acid Rain Program rules and thus the 

economic impact of those rules on small 

entities. The rule simply reaffirms the 

promulgation of existing Acid Rain 

Program rule revisions that have been in 

effect since mid-2006. Moreover, the 

effect of these revisions when they were 

first promulgated was, if anything, to 

reduce somewhat the economic impact 

of the then-existing rules on all 

regulated sources and thus on small 

entities that might be, or own, regulated 

sources. For example, by requiring 

compliance on a source, rather than a 

unit, basis, the revisions reduced the 

potential for excess emissions penalties 

due to an inadvertent error, e.g., in the 

owner’s distribution of allowances 

among the units at a source that would 

cause one unit to have more than 

enough allowances to cover emissions 

and another unit to not have enough 

allowances to cover emission. As a 

further example, the revisions removed 

some requirements (e.g., the required 

submission of an annual compliance 

certification report) and thereby 

removed some costs of compliance for 

all regulated sources. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 27943 

We received no comment on any 

potential impacts of the rule on small 

entities or on any issues related to such 

impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures to State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or to the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any one year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed, section 205 

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most cost 

effective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule. 

The provisions of section 205 do not 

apply when they are inconsistent with 

applicable law. Moreover, section 205 

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other 

than the least costly, most cost-effective, 

or least burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation why that alternative 

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes 

any regulatory requirements that may 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

This rule does not change the existing 

Acid Rain Program rules and therefore 

does not result in any additional 

expenditures to State, local, and tribal 

governments or to the private sector. 

The rule simply reaffirms the 

promulgation of Acid Rain Program rule 

revisions that were previously issued 

and that are still in effect and have been 

since mid-2006. Moreover, the effect of 

these revisions when they were first 

promulgated was, if anything, to reduce 

somewhat the expenditures of State, 

local, and tribal governments and the 

private sector under the then-existing 

Acid Rain Program rules. For the same 

reasons, EPA has determined that this 

rule contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 

1999)), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

This rule does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This rule simply 

reaffirms the promulgation of Acid Rain 

Program rule revisions that were 

previously issued and that are still in 

effect and have been since mid-2006. 

Moreover, when first promulgated, these 

revisions did not have substantial direct 

effects on States, the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination With 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249 (Nov. 9, 2000)), requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ This rule does not have 

tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175. This rule simply 

reaffirms the promulgation of Acid Rain 

Program rule revisions that were 

previously issued and that are still in 

effect and have been since mid-2006. 

Moreover, when first promulgated, these 

revisions did not have substantial direct 

effects on tribal governments, 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. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045, entitled 

‘‘Protection of Children From 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885 (Apr. 23, 1997)), 

applies to any rule that: (1) Is 

determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the Agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the Agency. EPA 

interprets Executive Order 13045 as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that are based on health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. 

This rule is not subject to the 

Executive Order because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866 and is not based 

on health or safety risks. This rule 

simply reaffirms the promulgation of 

Acid Rain Program rule revisions that 

were previously issued and that are still 

in effect and have been since mid-2006. 

Moreover, when first promulgated, these 

revisions implemented certain 

requirements of the Acid Rain Program 

that were not on based on health or 

safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This 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)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

27944 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. This 

rule simply reaffirms the promulgation 

of Acid Rain Program rule revisions that 

were previously issued and that are still 

in effect and have been since mid-2006. 

Moreover, when first promulgated, these 

revisions did not address the use of any 

technical standards. Thus, this rule is 

not subject to the NTTAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. EPA 

has determined that this rule will not 

have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations because it does not change 

the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment, but 

simply reaffirms the promulgation of 

Acid Rain Program rule revisions that 

were previously issued and that are still 

in effect and have been since mid-2006. 

Moreover, when first promulgated, these 

revisions did not change the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule 

will be effective on August 11, 2009 

without further notice. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 72, 73, 

74, 77, and 78 

Environmental protection, Acid rain, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Electric utilities, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides. 

Dated: June 5, 2009. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–13860 Filed 6–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[DA 09–1236; MB Docket No. 08–134; RM– 

11466] 

Television Broadcasting Services; 

Bismarck, ND 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission grants a 

petition for rulemaking filed KBMY– 

KBCY, LLC, the licensee of station 

KBMY(TV), analog channel 17 and 

KBMY–DT, to substitute channel 17, its 

current analog channel, for its assigned 

post-transition DTV channel 16 at 

Bismarck, North Dakota. 

DATES: This rule is effective June 12, 

2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David J. Brown, Media Bureau, (202) 

418–1600. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, MB Docket No. 08–134, 

adopted June 2, 2009, and released June 

3, 2009. The full text of this document 

is available for public inspection and 

copying during normal business hours 

in the FCC’s Reference Information 

Center at Portals II, CY–A257, 445 12th 

Street, SW., 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.) This document may 

be purchased from the Commission’s 

duplicating contractor, Best Copy and 

Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., 

Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, 

telephone 1–800–478–3160 or via e-mail 

http://www.BCPIWEB.com. 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). This document does not contain 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, 

therefore, it does not contain any 

information collection burden ‘‘for 

small business concerns with fewer than 

25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to 

this proceeding. 

The Commission will send a copy of 

this Report and Order in a report to be 

sent to Congress and the Government 

Accountability Office pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A). 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 

Television, Television broadcasting. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission amends 47 CFR Part 73 as 

follows: 

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST 

SERVICES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. 

§ 73.622 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 73.622(i), the PostTransition Table of DTV Allotments 

under North Dakota, is amended by 

adding DTV channel 17 and removing 

DTV channel 16 at Bismarck. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Clay C. Pendarvis, 

Associate Chief, Video Division, Media 

Bureau. 

[FR Doc. E9–13863 Filed 6–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P