Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 10995 

shall include testing of the operating 

effectiveness of relevant RC internal 

controls (SOC 1 Type II SSAE 16 

Report). If the service organization uses 

another service organization (subservice provider), Postal Service 

management should consider the nature 

and materiality of the transactions 

processed by the sub-service 

organization and the contribution of the 

sub-service organization’s processes and 

controls in the achievement of the 

Postal Service’s control objectives. The 

Postal Service should have access to the 

sub-service organization’s SOC 1 Type II 

SSAE 16 report. The control objectives 

to be covered by the SOC 1 Type II 

SSAE 16 report are subject to Postal 

Service review and approval, and are to 

be provided to the Postal Service 30 

days prior to the initiation of each 

examination period. As a result of the 

examination, the service auditor shall 

provide the RC and the Postal Service 

with an opinion on the design and 

operating effectiveness of the RC’s 

internal controls related to the CMRS 

system and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure considered 

material to the services provided to the 

Postal Service by the RC. Such 

examinations are to be conducted on no 

less than an annual basis, and are to be 

as of and for the 12 months ended June 

30 of each year (except for new 

contracts for which the examination 

period will be no less than the period 

from the contract date to the following 

June 30, unless otherwise agreed to by 

the Postal Service). The examination 

reports are to be provided to the Postal 

Service by August 15 of each year. To 

the extent that internal control 

weaknesses are identified in a SOC 1 

Type II SSAE 16 report, the Postal 

Service may require the remediation of 

such weaknesses and review working 

papers and engage in discussions about 

the work performed with the service 

auditor. The Postal Service requires that 

all remediation efforts (if applicable) are 

completed and reported by the RC prior 

to the Postal Service’s fiscal year end 

(September 30). In addition, the RC will 

be responsible for performing an 

examination of their internal control 

environment related to the CMRS 

system and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure considered 

material to the services provided to the 

Postal Service by the RC, in particular, 

disclosing changes to internal controls 

for the period of July 1 to September 30. 

This examination should be 

documented and submitted to the Postal 

Service by October 14. The RC will be 

responsible for all costs related to the 

examinations conducted by the service 

auditor and the RC. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 501.16 is amended by 

revising paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 501.16 PC postage payment 

methodology. 

* * * * * 

(f) Security and Revenue Protection. 

To receive Postal Service approval to 

continue to operate PC Postage systems, 

the provider must submit to a periodic 

examination of its PC Postage system 

and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure that may have 

a material impact on Postal Service 

revenues, as determined by the Postal 

Service. The examination shall be 

performed by a qualified, independent 

audit firm and shall be conducted in 

accordance with the Statements on 

Standards for Attestation Engagements 

(SSAEs) No. 16, Service Organizations, 

developed by the American Institute of 

Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), 

as amended or superseded. Expenses 

associated with such examination shall 

be incurred by the provider. The 

examination shall include testing of the 

operating effectiveness of relevant 

provider internal controls (SOC1 Type II 

SSAE 16 Report). If the service 

organization uses another service 

organization (sub-service provider), 

Postal Service management should 

consider the nature and materiality of 

the transactions processed by the subservice organization and the 

contribution of the sub-service 

organization’s processes and controls in 

the achievement of the Postal Service’s 

control objectives. The Postal Service 

should have access to the sub-service 

organization’s SOC 1 Type II SSAE 16 

report. The control objectives to be 

covered by the SOC 1 Type II SSAE 16 

report are subject to Postal Service 

review and approval, and are to be 

provided to the Postal Service 30 days 

prior to the initiation of each 

examination period. As a result of the 

examination, the service auditor shall 

provide the provider and the Postal 

Service with an opinion on the design 

and operating effectiveness of the 

internal controls related to the PC 

Postage system, and any other 

applications and technology 

infrastructure considered material to the 

services provided to the Postal Service 

by the provider. Such examinations are 

to be conducted on no less than an 

annual basis, and are to be as of and for 

the 12 months ended June 30 of each 

year (except for new contracts for which 

the examination period will be no less 

than the period from the contract date 

to the following June 30, unless 

otherwise agreed to by the Postal 

Service). The examination reports are to 

be provided to the Postal Service by 

August 15 of each year. To the extent 

that internal control weaknesses are 

identified in a SOC 1 Type II SSAE 16 

report, the Postal Service may require 

the remediation of such weaknesses, 

and review working papers and engage 

in discussions about the work 

performed with the service auditor. The 

Postal Service requires that all 

remediation efforts (if applicable) are 

completed and reported by the provider 

prior to the Postal Service’s fiscal year 

end (September 30). In addition, the 

provider will be responsible for 

performing an examination of their 

internal control environment related to 

the PC Postage system and any other 

applications and technology 

infrastructure considered material to the 

services provided to the Postal Service 

by the provider, in particular, disclosing 

changes to internal controls for the 

period of July 1 to September 30. This 

examination should be documented and 

submitted to the Postal Service by 

October 14. The provider will be 

responsible for all costs related to the 

examinations conducted by the service 

auditor and the provider. 

* * * * * 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice. 

[FR Doc. 2014–03539 Filed 2–26–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0645; FRL–9907–08– 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Wisconsin; Transportation Conformity 

Procedures 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Wisconsin on 

August 1, 2013, for the purpose of 

establishing transportation conformity 

‘‘Conformity’’ criteria and procedures 

related to interagency consultation, and 

enforceability of certain transportation 

related control and mitigation measures. 

This revision replaces Wisconsin’s 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
10996 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Conformity SIP that was approved on 

August 27, 1996. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective April 28, 2014, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by March 

31, 2014. If adverse comments are 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0645, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2013– 

0645. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

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

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Michael 

Leslie, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 

353–6680 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Leslie, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, 

leslie.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background for this action? 

II. What is EPA’s analysis of Wisconsin’s SIP 

revision? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

Transportation conformity is required 

under section 176(c) of the Clean Air 

Act (Act) to ensure that transportation 

planning activities are consistent 

(‘‘conform to’’) with air quality planning 

goals in nonattainment/maintenance 

areas. The transportation conformity 

regulation is found in 40 CFR part 93 

and provisions related to transportation 

conformity SIPs are found in 40 CFR 

51.390. Transportation conformity 

applies to areas that are designated 

nonattainment or maintenance for the 

following transportation related criteria 

pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter 

(PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, and 

nitrogen dioxide. 

EPA originally promulgated the 

Federal transportation conformity 

criteria and procedures (‘‘Transportation 

Conformity Rule’’) on November 24, 

1993 (58 FR 62188). On August 10, 

2005, the ‘‘Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 

Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 

Legacy for Users’’ (SAFETEA–LU) was 

signed into law. SAFETEA–LU revised 

section 176(c) of the Act which contains 

transportation conformity provisions. 

SAFETEA–LU streamlined the 

requirements for conformity SIPs. Under 

SAFETEA–LU, states are required to 

address and tailor only three sections of 

the rules in their conformity SIPs: 40 

CFR 93.105, 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), 

and, 40 CFR 93.125(c). States are no 

longer required to submit conformity 

SIP revisions that address the other 

sections of the conformity rule. 

Wisconsin’s SIP revision updates the 

state’s transportation conformity 

provisions, to be consistent with the Act 

as amended by SAFETEA–LU and EPA 

regulations (40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR 

51.390). 

II. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Wisconsin’s SIP revision? 

A conformity SIP can be adopted as 

a state rule, as a memorandum of 

understanding (MOU), or memorandum 

of agreement (MOA). The appropriate 

form of the state conformity procedures 

depends upon the requirements of local 

or state law, as long as the selected form 

complies with all Act requirements for 

adoption, submission to EPA, and 

implementation of SIPs. EPA will accept 

state conformity SIPs in any form 

provided the state can demonstrate to 

EPA’s satisfaction that, as a matter of 

state law, the state has adequate 

authority to compel compliance with 

the requirements of the conformity SIP. 

Wisconsin concluded that this SIP 

revision in the form of a MOA will be 

enforceable through a number of 

Wisconsin Statutes, as with their 

original conformity SIP. These statutes 

authorize state agencies to enter into 

legally binding cooperative contracts for 

the receipt or furnishing of services. 

Wisconsin collaborated with the 

Wisconsin Department of 

Transportation (WisDOT), EPA, Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA), 

Federal Transit Administration, the 

Southeast Regional Planning 

Commission (SEWRPC), Bay-Lake 

Regional Planning Commission 

(BLRPC), to develop the Transportation 

Conformity MOA. This MOA was 

agreed upon and signed by all of the 

above consultation parties. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 10997 

EPA has evaluated this SIP 

submission and finds that the state has 

addressed the requirements of the 

Federal transportation conformity rule 

as described in 40 CFR part 51, subpart 

T and 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. The 

transportation conformity rule requires 

the states to develop their own 

processes and procedures for 

interagency consultation and resolution 

of conflicts meeting the criteria in 40 

CFR 93.105. The SIP revision did 

include processes and procedures to be 

followed by the MPO, state DOT, and 

U.S. DOT in consulting with the state 

and local air quality agencies and EPA 

before making transportation conformity 

determinations. Their transportation 

conformity SIP also included processes 

and procedures for the state and local 

air quality agencies and EPA to 

coordinate the development of 

applicable SIPs with MPOs, state DOTs, 

and U.S. DOT, and requires written 

commitments to control measures and 

mitigation measures (40 CFR 

93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 93.125(c)). 

EPA’s review of the Wisconsin SIP 

revision indicates that is consistent with 

the Act as amended by SAFETEA–LU 

and EPA regulations (40 CFR part 93 

and 40 CFR 51.390) governing state 

procedures for transportation 

conformity and interagency consultation 

and has concluded that the submittal is 

approvable. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving a SIP revision 

submitted by the State of Wisconsin, for 

the purpose of establishing 

transportation conformity criteria and 

procedures related to interagency 

consultation, and enforceability of 

certain transportation related control 

and mitigation measures. 

We are publishing this action without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

state plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective April 28, 2014 without further 

notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by March 31, 

2014. If we receive such comments, we 

will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should 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. If we do not receive any 

comments, this action will be effective 

April 28, 2014. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Act, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act 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 Act. Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this 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 Act; 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). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

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 action 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). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by April 28, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Volatile 

organic compounds. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
10998 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: February 10, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.2584 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2584 Control strategy; Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(c) Approval—On August 1, 2013, the 

State of Wisconsin submitted a revision 

to their Particulate Matter State 

Implementation Plan. The submittal 

established transportation conformity 

‘‘Conformity’’ criteria and procedures 

related to interagency consultation, and 

enforceability of certain transportation 

related control and mitigation measures. 

■ 3. Section 52.2585 is amended by 

adding paragraph (bb) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2585 Control strategy; Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(bb) Approval—On August 1, 2013, 

the State of Wisconsin submitted a 

revision to their Ozone State 

Implementation Plan. The submittal 

established transportation conformity 

‘‘Conformity’’ criteria and procedures 

related to interagency consultation, and 

enforceability of certain transportation 

related control and mitigation measures. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04168 Filed 2–26–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES