### 31338 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

regulatory impact analysis. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– 612, do not apply.

The regulation will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this proposed rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– 612, it is hereby certified that these regulations will not significantly affect a substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule imposes no duties or obligations on small entities.
List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1

Privacy. Part 1, subpart C of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

**PART 1—[AMENDED]**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 31 U.S.C. 321. Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552 as amended. Subpart C also issued under 5
U.S.C. 552a.

■ 2. Section 1.36 paragraph (g)(1)(iii) is amended by adding the following text to the table in numerical order.

**§ 1.36 Systems exempt in whole or in part from provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a and this**  **part.**

(g) * * * (1) * * * (iii) * * *

Number Name of system

* * * * *CC .800 Office of Inspector General Investigations System.

* * * * *

* * * * *

Dated: May 12, 2015. Helen Goff Foster, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Privacy, Transparency, and Records.
[FR Doc. 2015–13166 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4830–33–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**  **AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0824; FRL–9928–34– Region 5]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Michigan; Part 3 Rules**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to the Part 3 rules into the Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP). On December 13, 2013, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) submitted to EPA for approval revisions to Part 3, Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—Particulate Matter (PM), for open burning and electro-static precipitators (ESPs). The revisions for open burning eliminate specific provisions to allow household waste burning, and add a provision to allow for burning of fruit and vegetable storage bins for pest or disease control with specific location limitations. The SIP request also removes rule 330 dealing with operation parameters for electrostatic precipitators because of redundancy, and rule 349 dealing with compliance dates for coke ovens because it is now obsolete. EPA is approving this SIP revision because it will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before July 2, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– OAR–2013–0824, 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.

Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Final Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit
comments.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Carolyn Persoon, Environmental Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)353–8290, persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In the Final Rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the state’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 rule, 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. 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. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register

.

Dated: May 18, 2015. Susan Hedman, Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015–13119 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 271**

**[EPA–R10–RCRA–2015–0307; FRL–9928– 38–Region 10]** 

**Idaho: Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management**  **Program Revision**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).


### 31339 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  Idaho has applied to the EPA for final authorization of certain changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. RCRA allows the EPA to authorize State hazardous waste management programs if the EPA finds that such programs are equivalent to and consistent with the Federal program and provide adequate enforcement of compliance. The EPA has reviewed Idaho’s application, has preliminarily determined these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization, and is proposing to authorize the State’s changes.

**DATES :**  Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before July 2,
2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– RCRA–2015–0307 by one of the following methods:

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

• Email: mccullough.barbara@
epa.gov

.

• Mail: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop AWT–150, Seattle, Washington 98101.

• Hand Delivery: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop AWT–150, Seattle, Washington 98101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the normal business hours of operation; special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R10–RCRA–2015– 0307. The 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 the 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 the 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 through www.regulations.gov, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the 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. For additional information about the EPA’s public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/ epahome/dockets.htm

.

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 EPA Region 10 Library, 1200 Sixth Avenue, First Floor Lobby, Seattle, Washington 98101. The EPA Region 10 Library is open from 9:00 a.m. to noon, and 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. PST Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Region 10 Library telephone number is (206) 553–1289.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop AWT–150, Seattle, Washington 98101, email: mccullough.barbara@
epa.gov or phone number (206) 553–
2416.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Proposed Authorization Revision A. Why are revisions to State programs necessary?

States which have received final authorization from the EPA under RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must change their programs and ask the EPA to authorize their changes. Changes to State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur. Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to the EPA’s regulations codified in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.

B. What decisions have we made in this proposed rule concerning authorization?

The EPA has preliminarily determined that Idaho’s application to revise its authorized program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we are proposing to grant Idaho final authorization to operate its hazardous waste management program with the changes described in the authorization application. Idaho will have responsibility for permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders (except in Indian country) and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised program application, subject to the limitations of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that the EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA, and which are not less stringent than existing requirements, take effect in authorized States before the States are authorized for the requirements. Thus, the EPA will implement those requirements and prohibitions in Idaho, including issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so. C. What will be the effect if Idaho is authorized for these changes?

If Idaho is authorized for these changes, a facility in Idaho subject to RCRA will have to comply with the authorized State requirements in lieu of the corresponding Federal requirements to comply with RCRA. Additionally, such facilities will have to comply with any applicable Federal requirements, such as, for example, HSWA regulations issued by the EPA for which the State has not received authorization, and RCRA requirements that are not supplanted by authorized State requirements. Idaho continues to have enforcement authorities and responsibilities under its State hazardous waste management program for violations of the requirements of this program. However, the EPA retains authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which includes, among others, the authority to:

• Conduct inspections; which may include but are not limited to requiring monitoring, tests, analyses, and/or reports;


### 31340 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

• Enforce RCRA requirements which may include but are not limited to suspending, terminating, modifying and/or revoking permits; and

• Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State has taken its own actions.

The action to approve these revisions will not impose additional requirements on the regulated community because the regulations for which Idaho is requesting authorization are already effective under State law and are not changed by the act of authorization. D. What happens if the EPA receives comments on this action?

If the EPA receives comments on this action, we will address those comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization, you should do so at this time. E. What has Idaho previously been authorized for?

Idaho initially received final authorization for its hazardous waste management program effective April 9, 1990 (55 FR 11015, March 26, 1990). Subsequently, the EPA authorized revisions to the State’s program effective June 5, 1992 (57 FR 11580, April 6, 1992), August 10, 1992 (57 FR 24757, June 11, 1992), June 11, 1995 (60 FR 18549, April 12, 1995), January 19, 1999 (63 FR 56086, October 21, 1998), July 1, 2002 (67 FR 44069, July 1, 2002), March 10, 2004 (69 FR 11322, March 10, 2004), July 22, 2005 (70 FR 42273, July 22, 2005), February 26, 2007 (72 FR 8283, February 26, 2007), December 23, 2008 (73 FR 78647, December 23, 2008) and July 11, 2012 (77 FR 34229, June 11, 2012). F. What changes are we proposing?

On February 11, 2015, Idaho submitted a program revision application to the EPA requesting authorization for all delegable Federal hazardous waste regulations codified as of July 1, 2012, incorporated by reference in IDAPA 58.01.05.000 et seq., which were adopted and effective in the State of Idaho on April 4, 2013. This authorization revision request includes the following federal rules for which Idaho is being authorized for the first time: Removal of Saccharin and its Salts from the Lists of Hazardous Constituents, Hazardous Wastes, and Hazardous Substances, 75 FR 78918, December 17, 2010; Technical Corrections to the Academics Lab Rule, 75 FR 79304, December 20, 2010; Revisions to the Treatment Standards for Carbamate Wastes, 76 FR 34147, June, 13, 2011; Hazardous Waste Manifest Printing Specifications Corrections, 76 FR 36363, June 22, 2011; and Hazardous Waste Technical Corrections and Clarifications Rule, 77 FR 22229, April 13, 2012. The EPA proposes to revise the state’s authorized hazardous waste program in its entirety through July 1, 2013. There were no final federal RCRA hazardous waste regulations promulgated by the EPA from July 1, 2012 to July 1, 2013. Notice and an opportunity for the public to comment on this proposed authorization revision is being provided at this time.

G. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?

Under RCRA section 3009, the EPA may not authorize State law that is less stringent than the Federal program. Any State law that is less stringent does not supplant the Federal regulations. State law that is broader in scope than the Federal program requirements is not authorized. State law that is equivalent to, and State law that is more stringent than, the Federal program may be authorized, in which case those provisions are enforceable by the EPA. This section discusses certain rules where the EPA has made the finding that Idaho’s program is more stringent and will be authorized, and discusses certain portions of the Federal program that are not delegable to the State because of the Federal government’s special role in foreign policy matters and because of national concerns that arise with certain decisions.

The EPA does not authorize States to administer Federal import and export functions in any section of the RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Even though States do not receive authorization to administer the Federal government’s import and export functions, found in 40 CFR part 262, subparts E, F and H, State programs are required to adopt the Federal import and export provisions to maintain their equivalency with the Federal program. Idaho amended its import and export laws to include the Federal rule on Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Requirements; Export Shipments of Spend Lead-Acid Batteries (75 FR 1236, January 8, 2010). The State’s rule is found at IDAPA 58.01.05.006. The EPA will continue to implement those requirements directly through the RCRA regulations.

The EPA has found that Idaho’s Emergency Notification Requirements, (IDAPA 58.01.05.006.02), are more stringent than the Federal program. This is because the State’s regulations require that the State Communications Center be contacted along with the Federal Center. The EPA has found the State’s statutory requirement requiring hazardous waste generators and commercial hazardous waste disposal facilities to file annual hazardous waste generation reports, Idaho Code Section 39–4411(4) and 39–4411(5), to be more stringent than the Federal program. As the EPA can authorize rules that are determined to be more stringent than the Federal program, this requirement is authorized. H. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?

Idaho will continue to issue permits for all the provisions for which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. If the EPA issued permits prior to authorizing Idaho for these revisions, these permits would continue in force until the effective date of the State’s issuance or denial of a State hazardous waste permit, at which time the EPA would modify the existing EPA permit to expire at an earlier date, terminate the existing EPA permit for cause, or allow the existing EPA permit to otherwise expire by its terms, except for those facilities located in Indian Country. The EPA will not issue new permits or new portions of permits for provisions for which Idaho is authorized after the effective date of this authorization. The EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Idaho is not authorized. I. How would authorizing Idaho for these revisions affect Indian country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Idaho?

Idaho is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program in Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Indian country includes:

1. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations within or abutting the State of Idaho;

2. Any land held in trust by the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and

3. Any other land, whether on or off an Indian reservation, that qualifies as Indian country. Therefore, this action has no effect on Indian country. The EPA will continue to implement and administer the RCRA program on these lands. II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This proposed rule seeks to revise the State of Idaho’s authorized hazardous waste program pursuant to section 3006 of RCRA and imposes no requirements other than those currently imposed by State law. This proposed rule complies


### 31341 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

with applicable executive orders and statutory provisions as follows:

A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563

This action will authorize revisions to the federally approved hazardous waste program in Idaho. This type of action is exempt from review under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This proposed rule does not establish or modify any information or recordkeeping requirements for the regulated community.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., generally requires Federal agencies 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 this proposed rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business, as codified in the Small Business Size Regulations at 13 CFR part 121; (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-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. The EPA has determined that this proposed action will not have a significant impact on small entities because the proposed rule will only have the effect of authorizing pre-existing requirements under State law and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. After considering the economic impacts of this action, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. This action imposes no new enforceable duty on any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore this action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small government entities.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action 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 proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action. Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action, the EPA did consult with officials of the State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality in developing this action. In the spirit of E.O. 13132 and consistent with the EPA policy to promote communications between the EPA and state and local governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action from state and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules. Thus, the EPA has determined that Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. The EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action from tribal officials. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5–501 of the E.O. has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it proposes to authorize preexisting State rules.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as defined under Executive Order 12866. I. National Technology Transfer and 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 the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent 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 bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress, through the OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed action does not involve technical standards. Therefore the EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 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.

The EPA has determined that this proposed action will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. This action proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules which are equivalent to, and no less stringent than, existing federal requirements.


### 31342 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Indians-lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority

This proposed action is issued under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

Dated: May 18, 2015. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015–12932 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 435**

**[EPA–HQ–OW–2014–0598; FRL–9928– 58–OW]** 

**RIN 2040–AF35**

**Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Oil and Gas**  **Extraction Point Source Category; Extension of Comment Period** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule, extension of the public-comment period.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received requests for an extension of the period for providing comments on the proposed rule entitled ‘‘Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Oil and Gas Extraction Point Source Category,’’ published in the Federal Register on April 7, 2015. EPA extends the comment period in order to provide the public additional time to submit comments and supporting information.

**DATES :**  Comments: The public comment period for the proposed rule published April 7, 2015, (80 FR 18557, is being extended to July 17, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments: Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to the EPA electronically, by mail, by facsimile or through hand delivery/courier. Please refer to the proposal (80 FR 18557) for the addresses and detailed instructions.

Docket. Publically available documents relevant to this action are available for public inspection either electronically at http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. 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 Water Docket is 202–566–2426. The EPA has established the official public docket No. EPA–HQ–OW–2014–0598.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Lisa Biddle, Engineering and Analysis Division (4303T), Office of Water, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone: 202–566– 0350; email: biddle.lisa@epa.gov. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 435

Environmental protection, Pretreatment, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control, Unconventional oil and gas extraction.

Dated: May 21, 2015. Kenneth J. Kopocis, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2015–13414 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION** 

**NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION** 

**48 CFR Part 2**

**[FAR Case 2015–019; Docket No. 2015– 0019; Sequence No. 1]** 

**RIN 9000–AM96**

**Federal Acquisition Regulation; Definition of Multiple-Award Contract** 

**AGENCY :**  Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to define multiple-award contract.

**DATES :**  Interested parties should submit written comments to the Regulatory Secretariat at one of the addresses shown below on or before August 3, 2015 to be considered in the formation of the final rule. **ADDRESSES :**  Submit comments in response to FAR Case 2015–019 by any of the following methods:

• Regulations.gov: http:// www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2015–019’’. Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2015– 019.’’ Follow the instructions provided at the ‘‘Comment Now’’ screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ‘‘FAR Case 2015–019’’ on your attached document.

• Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat (MVCB), ATTN: Ms. Flowers, 1800 F Street NW., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC
20405.

Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAR Case 2015–019, in all correspondence related to this case. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ms. Mahruba Uddowla, Procurement Analyst, at 703–605–2868, for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat at 202–501–4755. Please cite FAR Case 2015–019.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

On October 2, 2013, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a final rule establishing new policies and procedures for multiple-award contracts and task and delivery orders in the Federal Register at 78 FR 61114. The final rule implemented several provisions of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, Public Law 111–240. Section 1311 of Public Law 111–240 (15 U.S.C. 632(v)) added a definition of ‘‘multiple award contract’’. The SBA final rule included a definition of ‘‘multiple award contract’’ at 13 CFR 125.1(k). II. Proposed FAR Change

The purpose of the proposed FAR change is to define multiple-award contract. The proposed FAR changewould add a definition of multipleaward contract to FAR subpart 2.1, Definitions.

III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits