61044 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

4Wisconsin selected 2005 based on a review of 

historic emissions from 2001 through 2013 as 

reported in EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division 

(CAMD) emissions database. This timeframe reflects 

that the 12 ppmdv requirement was first created in 

January 2001. 

5Thus, these compensating reductions are 

contemporaneous with the emissions limits in 

Wisconsin statute 285.27 (3m), which was enacted 

by the Wisconsin legislature in December 2013. 

in 2005,4 and converted the emissions 

standards from ppmdv @15% O2 to a 

lbs/mmbtu equivalent. 

To determine the amount of emissions 

that needs to be offset, the difference 

between the 2005 maximum allowable 

emission rate of 25 ppmdv @15% O2

(converted to 0.092 lbs/mmbtu) minus 

12 ppmdv @15% O2 (converted to 

0.0442 lbs/mmbtu) was multiplied by 

the heat input for each combustion 

turbine in 2005. This calculation results 

in a total of 54.6 tons per year for which 

equivalent reductions must be obtained. 

This is a conservative estimate of the 

amount of offsetting credits needed 

because it is based upon the year within 

a 13-year period with the highest fuel 

use. 

Wisconsin has identified enforceable 

emission reductions to be used in 

offsetting the 54.6 tons per year of 

excess emissions in order to offset any 

backsliding. These emission reductions 

are generated by enforceable emission 

limitations currently in place for the 

South Oak Creek (SOC) Unit 5 electric 

generating facility, which operates in 

the Milwaukee-Racine former ozone 

nonattainment area. Under the 

Wisconsin Ozone SIP, SOC Unit 5 is 

required to meet a NOX emission 

limitation of 0.18 lbs/mmbtu. However, 

the same unit has also been required to 

meet an emission limitation of 0.10 lbs/ 

mmbtu since 2013 under a Jnauary 18, 

2012 consent decree (Civil Action No. 

03–C–0371) entered between EPA and 

We Energies, the operator of the SOC 

facility.5 Paragraph No. 107 of the 

consent decree allows the use of 

emission reductions generated by the 

decree ‘‘for the purpose of attainment 

demonstrations . . . or in determining 

impacts on NAAQS.’’ Wisconsin 

determined the emissions in excess to 

the SIP by multiplying the difference in 

the SIP and consent decree emission 

limits (0.18—0.10 lbs/mmbtu) by the 

unit’s heat input in 2013. The unit’s 

heat input for 2013 was obtained from 

the CAMD database. This calculation 

yields a total of 334.3 tons per year of 

excess emission reductions, which have 

not been allocated as offsets for any 

other purpose. Notably, the heat input 

for SOC Unit 5 was the lowest in 2013 

since 2001. Using this value thus 

represents the most conservative value 

since 2001 for heat input in calculating 

excess emissions reductions. 

Wisconsin submitted to EPA 54.6 tons 

per year of excess emission credits 

generated by the SOC Unit 5 generating 

facility to be used to address potential 

backsliding under this SIP revision. 

Wisconsin also notes that a total of 

61,970 tons of NOX was emitted in the 

Milwaukee-Racine ozone area from all 

sources in 2011. The emission 

reductions of 54.6 tons per year being 

addressed here for anti-backsliding 

represents less than 0.07% of that total. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is seeking comment only on the 

section 110(l) issue described above and 

is not reopening comment on any other 

issues. 

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 proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed 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). 

This rule is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it 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, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Nitrogen oxides. 

Dated: September 30, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24172 Filed 10–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 60 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2014–0272; FRL–9917–48– 

Region 8] 

Automatic Delegation of Authority to 

the States of Colorado, Montana, North 

Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and 

Wyoming To Implement and Enforce 

New Source Performance Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This action informs the public 

that on February 27, 2014, the EPA 

authorized automatic delegation to 

implement and enforce Clean Air Act 

New Source Performance Standards 

(NSPS) to the states of Colorado, 

Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Utah, and Wyoming (hereafter Region 8 

states). Also in this action, we propose 

to delete the delegation status table of 

NSPS for Region 8 states in the Code of 

Federal Regulations at 40 CFR part 

60.4(c) and replace it with a Web page 

address reflecting current delegation 

status of Region 8 states. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 61045 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before November 10, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket number EPA–R08– 

OAR–2014–0272, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: fulton.abby@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Director, Air Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules Section of this 

Federal Register for detailed instruction 

on how to submit comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Abby Fulton, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. (303) 312–6563, 

fulton.abby@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this 

Federal Register, EPA is approving the 

revision as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

revision and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the preamble to 

the direct final rule. If EPA receives no 

adverse comments, EPA will not take 

further action on this proposed rule. If 

EPA receives adverse comments, EPA 

will withdraw the direct final rule and 

it will not take effect. EPA will address 

all public comments in a subsequent 

final rule based on this proposed rule. 

EPA will not institute a second 

comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting must 

do so at this time. Please note that if 

EPA receives adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. See the information 

provided in the Direct Final action of 

the same title which is located in the 

Rules and Regulations Section of this 

Federal Register. 

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

Dated: September 18, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23766 Filed 10–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[GN Docket No. 12–268; DA 14–1395] 

Media Bureau Seeks Comment on 

Draft TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund 

Reimbursement Form 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comment. 

SUMMARY: In this Document, the Media 

Bureau of the Federal Communications 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) seeks 

comment on a draft TV Broadcaster 

Relocation Fund Reimbursement Form 

(‘‘Reimbursement Form’’), which 

broadcasters that are reassigned to new 

channels following the Incentive 

Auction and MVPDs will submit to 

provide information needed to obtain 

expense reimbursement. The Media 

Bureau also seeks comment on whether 

any information submitted on the 

Reimbursement Form should be kept 

confidential. 

DATES: Comments are due on October 

27, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by GN Docket No. 12–268, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web site: http://

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: 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, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 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 first-class, Express, and 

Priority mail must be addressed to 445 

12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pamela Gallant, Media Bureau, Video 

Division at 202–418–0614. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the FCC’s document, GN 

Docket No. 12–268, DA 14–1395 

(released September 25, 2014). The full 

text of this document is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The 

complete text of this document also may 

be purchased from the Commission’s 

copy contractor Best Copy and Printing, 

Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room CY– 

B402, Washington, DC, 20554. The full 

text may also be downloaded at: 

www.fcc.gov. 

Summary 

In this document (Public Notice 

available at http://www.fcc.gov/

document/media-bureau-seekscomment-incentive-auctionreimbursement-form), the Media Bureau 

seeks comment on a draft 

Reimbursement Form, which 

broadcasters and MVPDs will use to 

submit: Information needed to establish 

an account with the Department of 

Treasury for payment purposes; an 

estimate of their eligible relocation 

costs; actual cost documentation 

throughout the construction period, as 

they incur expenses; and their total 

expenses incurred. In order to ensure 

fairness, efficiency, and transparency of 

process for reimbursing broadcasters for 

relocation costs related to the Incentive 

Auction, and the associated costs of 

MVPDs, we are providing the 

opportunity for stakeholders to 

comment on a draft Reimbursement 

Form and instructions well in advance 

of the commencement of the Incentive 

Auction. The comments we receive will 

assist us in designing a form that 

facilitates the reimbursement process for 

all parties while also ensuring that we 

are efficient stewards of limited 

reimbursement funds, and guardians 

against waste, fraud and abuse. 

Consistent with the process set out in 

the Incentive Auction Order, 

broadcasters and MVPDs will file the 

Reimbursement Form no later than three 

months following the release of the 

Channel Reassignment Public Notice, at 

which time they will submit their 

overall estimate of the cost of 

completing their transition. At that time, 

broadcasters and MVPDs will indicate 

whether they plan to modify current 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS