50816 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 162 / Friday, August 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

4The Postal Service references files from FY 2014 

Annual Compliance Report, USPS–FY14–32 and 

two additional files attached electronically. 

C. Rationale 

The Postal Service’s rationale for 

Proposal Ten is that clerk costs in Cost 

Segment 4 have increased recently as 

clerks are appointed or assigned to 

former postmaster positions. Id. at 5. 

Moreover, because the CAG criterion 

using revenue amount to define Cost 

Segment 4 is sufficiently different from 

the transaction volumes used in 

POStPlan to designate post offices for 

reduction in hours, CAG K costs are not 

a valid proxy for POStPlan office costs. 

Id. The Postal Service further says the 

cost classification rationale for Cost 

Segment 4 is similar to Cost Segment 3 

cost components because CAG K and L 

clerks perform a corresponding mix of 

activities such as mail processing, 

window service, and administrative 

components. However, Cost Segment 4 

has limited IOCS sample data and some 

products have no Cost Segment 4 tallies, 

which results in zero measured costs in 

a given year. 

The Postal Service concludes that 

incorporating Cost Segment 4 costs with 

other post office costs would be a more 

reliable analysis for cost attribution and 

in line with Cost Segment 3 

methodology. It would result in a better 

assessment of clerk costs and avoid 

distortions from analyzing Cost Segment 

4 separately. Id. 

Proposal Ten includes a table 

demonstrating the impact of merging 

Cost Segment 4 costs with Cost Segment 

3 costs by product. It shows a cost 

difference from a merger of $1,412,000 

out of $12,945,185,000 or a 0.01 percent 

difference.4 Id. at 6. 

III. Initial Commission Action 

The Commission establishes Docket 

No. RM2015–19 for consideration of 

matters raised by the Petition. 

Additional information concerning the 

Petition may be accessed via the 

Commission’s Web site at http://

www.prc.gov. Interested persons may 

submit comments on the Petition and 

Proposal Ten no later than September 

17, 2015. Reply comments are due no 

later than September 28, 2015. Pursuant 

to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission 

designates Kenneth R. Moeller to serve 

as an officer of the Commission (Public 

Representative) representing the 

interests of the general public in this 

proceeding. 

IV. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

No. RM2015–19 for consideration of the 

matters raised by the Petition of the 

United States Postal Service Requesting 

Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider a 

Proposed Change in Analytical 

Principles (Proposal Ten), filed August 

12, 2015. 

2. Comments are due no later than 

September 17, 2015. Reply comments 

are due no later than September 28, 

2015. 

3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the 

Commission appoints Kenneth R. 

Moeller to serve as an officer of the 

Commission (Public Representative) to 

represent the interests of the general 

public in this docket. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this order in the Federal 

Register. 

By the Commission. 

Shoshana M. Grove, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20633 Filed 8–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0564; FRL–9932–82– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; State of 

Kansas; Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for the State of Kansas 

submitted on March 30, 2015. This SIP 

revision provides Kansas’ statedetermined allowance allocations for 

existing electric generating units (EGUs) 

in the State for the 2016 control periods 

and replaces the allowance allocations 

for the 2016 control periods established 

by EPA under the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR). The CSAPR 

addresses the ‘‘good neighbor’’ 

provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

Act) that requires states to reduce the 

transport of pollution that significantly 

affects downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. EPA is proposing to 

approve Kansas’ SIP revision, 

incorporate the state-determined 

allocations for the 2016 control periods 

into the SIP, and amend the regulatory 

text of the CSAPR Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) to reflect 

approval and inclusion of the statedetermined allocations. EPA is 

proposing to approve Kansas’ SIP 

revision because it meets the 

requirements of the CAA and the 

CSAPR requirements to replace EPA’s 

allowance allocations for the 2016 

control periods. This action is being 

proposed pursuant to the CAA and its 

implementing regulations. EPA’s 

allocations of CSAPR trading program 

allowances for Kansas for control 

periods in 2017 and beyond remain in 

place until the State submits and EPA 

approves state-determined allowance 

allocations for those control periods 

through another SIP revision. The 

CSAPR FIPs for Kansas remain in place 

until such time as the State decides to 

replace the FIPs with a SIP revision. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

September 21, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2015–0564, by mail to Lachala 

Kemp, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Comments may 

also be submitted electronically or 

through hand delivery/courier by 

following the detailed instructions in 

the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 

rule located in the rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lachala Kemp, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

(913) 551–7214 or by email at 

kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the state’s 

SIP revision as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

revision amendment and anticipates no 

relevant adverse comments to this 

action. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action, 

no further activity is contemplated in 

relation to this action. If EPA receives 

relevant adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on part of 

this rule and if that part can be severed 

from the remainder of the rule, EPA may 

adopt as final those parts of the rule that 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 162 / Friday, August 21, 2015 / Proposed Rules 50817 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxides. 

Dated: August 12, 2015. 

Mark Hague, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20628 Filed 8–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0537; FRL–9932–54- 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; District 

of Columbia; Interstate Pollution 

Transport Requirements for the 2006 

24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the District of 

Columbia addressing the infrastructure 

requirements for interstate transport 

pollution with respect to the 2006 24- 

hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). In the Final Rules section of 

this Federal Register, EPA is approving 

the District’s SIP submittal as a direct 

final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this action, no further 

activity is contemplated. If EPA receives 

adverse comments, the direct final rule 

will be withdrawn and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by September 21, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0537 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0537, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0537. 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 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., 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 in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the District of Columbia 

Department of the Environment, Air 

Quality Division, 1200 1st Street NE., 

5th Floor, Washington, DC 20002. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emlyn Ve ́lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or 

by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. 

Dated: August 7, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20526 Filed 8–20–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1994–0009; FRL—9932– 

76–Region 4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the National Southwire Aluminum 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete the National 

Southwire Aluminum Superfund Site 

(Site) located in Hawesville in Hancock 

County, Kentucky, from the National 

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Kentucky, through the 

Kentucky Division of Waste 

Management (KDWM), have determined 


rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS