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

4 Wisconsin 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.

5 Thus, 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% O 2 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% O 2 (converted to 0.092 lbs/mmbtu) minus 12 ppmdv @15% O 2 (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.


### 61045 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules

**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