68808 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

subsequent action based on this 

proposed rule. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: September 25, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2015–28271 Filed 11–5–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 60 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0866; FRL–9935–90– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS43 

Standards of Performance for 

Stationary Compression Ignition 

Internal Combustion Engines 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing amendments 

to the standards of performance for 

stationary compression ignition (CI) 

internal combustion engines to allow 

manufacturers to design the engines so 

that operators can temporarily override 

performance inducements related to the 

emission control system for stationary 

CI internal combustion engines 

operating during emergency situations 

where the operation of the engine or 

equipment is needed to protect human 

life, and to require compliance with Tier 

1 emission standards during such 

emergencies. The EPA is also proposing 

to amend the standards of performance 

for certain stationary CI internal 

combustion engines located in remote 

areas of Alaska. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 21, 2015. 

Public hearing. If anyone contacts us 

requesting to speak at a public hearing 

by November 13, 2015, a public hearing 

will be held on November 23, 2015. If 

you are interested in attending the 

public hearing, contact Ms. Melanie 

King at (919) 541–2469 or 

king.melanie@epa.gov to verify that a 

hearing will be held. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2014–0866, to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or withdrawn. The EPA may 

publish any comment received to its 

public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. The EPA will 

generally not consider comments or 

comment contents located outside of the 

primary submission (i.e. on the web, 

cloud, or other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

The EPA requests that you also 

submit a separate copy of your 

comments to the contact person 

identified below (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). If the comment 

includes information you consider to be 

CBI or otherwise protected, you should 

send a copy of the comment that does 

not contain the information claimed as 

CBI or otherwise protected. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. The EPA 

also relies on materials in Docket ID 

Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708, EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2010–0295, and EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–1032, and incorporates 

those dockets into the record for this 

proposed rule. 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, EPA WJC West 

Building, 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 federal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the Air Docket 

is (202) 566–1742. Visit the EPA Docket 

Center homepage at http://www.epa.

gov/epahome/dockets.htm for 

additional information about the EPA’s 

public docket. 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of this 

proposed rule will be available on the 

World Wide Web (WWW). Following 

signature, a copy of this proposed rule 

will be posted at the following address: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/icengines/. 

Public hearing: If anyone contacts the 

EPA requesting a public hearing by 

November 13, 2015, the public hearing 

will be held on November 23, 2015 at 

the EPA’s campus at 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina. Please contact Ms. 

Melanie King at (919) 541–2469 or at 

king.melanie@epa.gov to register to 

speak at the hearing or to inquire as to 

whether or not a hearing will be held. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Melanie King, Energy Strategies Group, 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

(D243–01), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 

Carolina 27711; telephone number: 

(919) 541–2469; facsimile number: (919) 

541–5450; email address: 

king.melanie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Organization of this document. The 

information presented in this preamble 

is organized as follows: 

I. General Background 

II. Temporary Override of Inducements in 

Emergency Situations 

A. Background 

B. Proposed Amendments 

III. Remote Areas of Alaska 

A. Background 

B. Proposed Amendments 

IV. Impacts of the Proposed Action 

A. Economic Impacts 

B. Environmental Impacts 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

I. General Background 

On July 11, 2006, the EPA 

promulgated standards of performance 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 68809 

1 ‘‘This [tampering] prohibition does not apply in 

any of the following situations: . . . (ii) You need 

to modify the engine/equipment to respond to a 

temporary emergency and you restore it to proper 

functioning as soon as possible.’’ 40 CFR 

1068.101(b)(1)(ii). 

for stationary CI internal combustion 

engines (71 FR 39154). These standards, 

known as new source performance 

standards (NSPS), implement section 

111(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), and 

are issued for categories of sources that 

cause, or contribute significantly to, air 

pollution that may reasonably be 

anticipated to endanger public health or 

welfare. The standards apply to new 

stationary sources of emissions, i.e., 

sources whose construction, 

reconstruction, or modification begins 

after a standard for those sources is 

proposed. The NSPS for stationary CI 

internal combustion engines established 

limits on emissions of particulate matter 

(PM), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon 

monoxide (CO) and non-methane 

hydrocarbons (NMHC). The emission 

standards are generally modeled after 

the EPA’s standards for nonroad and 

marine diesel engines. The nonroad CI 

engine standards are phased in over 

several years and have Tiers with 

increasing levels of stringency. The 

engine model year in which the Tiers 

take effect varies for different size 

ranges of engines. The Tier 4 final 

standards for new stationary nonemergency and nonroad CI engines 

generally begin with either the 2014 or 

2015 model year. 

In 2011, the EPA finalized revisions to 

the NSPS for stationary CI engines that 

amended the standards for engines with 

a displacement greater than 10 liters per 

cylinder, and also for engines located in 

remote areas of Alaska (76 FR 37954). In 

this action, the EPA is proposing 

amendments to the NSPS regarding 

performance inducements for Tier 4 

engines and the criteria for defining 

remote areas of Alaska. The proposed 

amendments are discussed below. 

II. Temporary Override of Inducements 

in Emergency Situations 

A. Background 

Many Tier 4 final engines are 

equipped by the engine manufacturer 

with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) 

to reduce emissions of NOX. The 

consumable reactant in an SCR system 

is typically supplied as a solution of 

urea in water known as diesel exhaust 

fluid (DEF). Engines equipped with SCR 

generally include controls that limit the 

function of the engines if they are 

operated without DEF, or if the engine’s 

electronic control module cannot 

otherwise confirm that the SCR system 

is properly operating. Such controls are 

generally called ‘‘inducements’’ because 

they induce the operator to properly 

maintain the SCR emission control 

system. In normal circumstances, if 

inducements begin, the engine operator 

is expected to perform any necessary 

maintenance to avoid shutdown. 

Manufacturers as well as owners and 

operators of nonroad and stationary CI 

Tier 4 certified engines have raised 

concerns regarding the inducements 

being triggered and engines shutting 

down during emergency situations. 

Triggers could include a temporary 

supply shortage of DEF, a freeze 

warning, a blocked DEF hose, or a 

disconnected or faulty DEF pump or 

sensor. These inducements can be 

triggered because of an actual emission 

problem (such as a blocked DEF line or 

an empty DEF tank), or because of a 

sensor problem that reports a false 

positive problem even though the 

emission controls are still functioning 

properly. While the EPA is confident 

that DEF is now widely available and 

easily obtainable across the United 

States, the EPA is concerned that in 

emergency circumstances, such as the 

aftermath of storms like Hurricane 

Sandy or Hurricane Katrina, there may 

be a possibility of temporary disruptions 

in DEF supply, disruptions in 

communications between operators and 

service centers, or delays in response 

time for engine repair service. In an 

emergency situation, allowing 

inducements to impact engine 

performance may endanger human lives 

for engines that are providing life-saving 

emergency service, such as engines 

providing emergency power for a 

hospital. As an example, the Johns 

Hopkins Health System indicated that 

the availability of emergency power 

‘‘can be the difference between life and 

death for critically ill patients. 

Disruption of emergency power for any 

reason could have catastrophic results 

for patients in surgery, for patients on 

respirators, and for patients receiving 

medical gases, to name a few.’’ (See 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 

0866.) 

The EPA’s existing nonroad and 

stationary engine compliance 

regulations in 40 CFR 1068.101(b)(1)(ii) 

allow operators to temporarily disable 

or remove emission controls to address 

emergency situations, with a limited 

exemption from the prohibition that 

normally applies for tampering with 

certified engines.1 However, until 

recently, the regulations did not allow 

manufacturers to design the emission 

controls to be disabled or removed in 

emergency situations. With modern 

electronically controlled engines, many 

emission controls are integrated into the 

engine’s control software, and there is 

no way for the operator to selectively 

disable emission control software, while 

maintaining engine function. In order to 

permit engine manufacturers to design 

the emission controls to be disabled or 

removed in emergency situations, the 

EPA amended the emission standards 

for nonroad CI engines to allow 

manufacturers of nonroad CI engines to 

give operators the means to temporarily 

override inducements while operating 

in emergency situations (79 FR 46356, 

August 8, 2014). At that time, the EPA 

indicated that the amendments did not 

apply to stationary CI engines. Engine 

manufacturers and owners and 

operators of stationary CI engines have 

indicated that it would be appropriate to 

extend the provisions to stationary CI 

engines, since they can also be used in 

emergency situations, and many engines 

are dual-certified for both nonroad and 

stationary use. To address concerns 

about stationary CI engines shutting 

down during emergency situations and 

endangering human lives, the EPA is 

proposing in this action to allow 

manufacturers of stationary CI engines 

certified to the Tier 4 standards to give 

operators the means to temporarily 

override inducements while operating 

in qualified emergency situations. The 

EPA is also proposing to require engine 

operators to meet the Tier 1 emission 

standard in 40 CFR 89.112 that applies 

to the engine’s rated power during the 

qualified emergency situation. The 

specific amendments the EPA is 

proposing are discussed in more detail 

below. If adopted, these provisions will 

make available stationary engines that 

will allow operators to use the 

flexibility already provided under 40 

CFR 1068.101(b)(1)(ii) to ensure that 

emission controls will not impede the 

engine from providing life-saving 

emergency service. The flexibility the 

EPA is adopting is very narrow and 

contains several provisions to ensure 

the need for the relief. 

B. Proposed Amendments 

As discussed previously, on August 8, 

2014, the EPA promulgated provisions 

allowing manufacturers of nonroad 

engines certified to the emission 

standards in 40 CFR part 1039 to give 

operators the means to temporarily 

override emission control inducements 

while operating in emergency 

situations, such as those where 

operation of the engine is needed to 

protect human life (79 FR 46356). These 

provisions, which are codified in 40 

CFR 1039.665, allow for auxiliary 

emission control devices (AECDs) that 

help to ensure proper function of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

68810 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

2See Docket Id No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0866. 

engines in emergency situations. AECDs 

are any element of design that senses 

temperature, motive speed, engine 

revolutions per minute, transmission 

gear, or any other parameter for the 

purpose of activating, modulating, 

delaying, or deactivating the operation 

of any part of the emission control 

system. The provisions of 40 CFR 

1039.665 allow the engine manufacturer 

to include a dormant feature in the 

engine’s control software that could be 

activated to override emission control 

inducements. In this action, the EPA is 

proposing to adopt those same 

provisions for stationary CI engines 

certified to the standards in 40 CFR part 

1039 and used in qualified emergency 

situations. It is important to emphasize 

that the EPA is confident that Tier 4 

engines will function properly in the 

vast majority of emergency situations. 

Thus, the EPA expects that AECDs 

allowed under this proposed provision 

will rarely be activated. The EPA is 

proposing this provision merely as a 

precaution to ensure that stationary CI 

engines can continue to operate in 

emergencies. 

The proposed amendments allow 

engine manufacturers to design into 

their stationary CI engines a dormant 

AECD that can be activated for up to 120 

engine hours per use during a qualified 

emergency situation to prevent emission 

controls from interfering with engine 

operation. The EPA is proposing that 

engine manufacturers can offer, and 

operators can request, re-activations of 

the AECD for additional time in 

increments of 120 engine hours in cases 

of a prolonged emergency situation. 

During the emergency situation, the 

engine must meet the Tier 1 emission 

standard in 40 CFR 89.112 that applies 

to the engine’s rated power. Operators 

activating the AECD will be required to 

report the incident to the engine 

manufacturers, and engine 

manufacturers will submit an annual 

report to the EPA summarizing the use 

of these AECDs during the prior year. 

These proposed amendments are 

discussed in more detail below. 

1. Definition of Qualified Emergency 

Situation 

The EPA is proposing to use the 

definition of qualified emergency 

situation established in the August 8, 

2014, amendments for nonroad engines. 

This definition is found in the 

introductory text to 40 CFR 1039.665, 

and specifies that a qualified emergency 

situation is one in which the condition 

of an engine’s emission controls poses a 

significant direct or indirect risk to 

human life. An example of a direct risk 

would be an emission control condition 

that inhibits the performance of an 

engine being used to rescue a person 

from a life-threatening situation (for 

example, providing power to a medical 

facility during an emergency situation). 

An example of an indirect risk would be 

an emission control condition that 

inhibits the performance of an engine 

being used to provide electrical power 

to a data center that routes ‘‘911’’ 

emergency response 

telecommunications. 

2. Basic AECD Criteria 

Section 1039.665 specifies provisions 

allowing for AECDs that are necessary to 

ensure proper function of engines and 

equipment in emergency situations. It 

also includes specific criteria that the 

engine manufacturer must meet to 

ensure that any adverse environmental 

impacts are minimized. These criteria 

are: 

• The AECD must be designed so that 

it cannot be activated more than once 

without the specific permission of the 

certificate holder. Reactivation of the 

AECD must require the input of a 

temporary code or equivalent security 

feature. 

• The AECD must become inactive 

within 120 engine hours of becoming 

active. The engine must also include a 

feature that allows the operator to 

deactivate the AECD once the 

emergency is over. 

• The manufacturer must show that 

the AECD deactivates emission controls 

(such as inducement strategies) only to 

the extent necessary to address the 

expected emergency situation. 

• The engine controls must be 

configured to record in non-volatile 

electronic memory the total number of 

activations of the AECD for each engine. 

• The manufacturer must take 

appropriate additional steps to induce 

operators to report AECD activation and 

request resetting of the AECD. The EPA 

recommends including one or more 

persistent visible and/or audible alarms 

that are active from the point when the 

AECD is activated to the point when it 

is reset. 

• The manufacturer must provide 

purchasers with instructions on how to 

activate the AECD in emergency 

situations, as well as information about 

penalties for abuse. 

3. Emission Standards During Qualified 

Emergency Situations 

The EPA is proposing to require 

stationary CI engines to meet different 

emission standards for the very narrow 

period of operation where there is an 

emergency situation with a risk to 

human life and the owner or operator is 

warned that the inducement is about to 

occur. The EPA is proposing that the 

emission standards that apply when the 

AECD is activated during the qualified 

emergency situation are the Tier 1 

standards in 40 CFR 89.112. Engine 

manufacturers indicated that meeting 

the Tier 2 or 3 standards in 40 CFR 

89.112 is not feasible because the base 

engine used in Tier 4 configurations 

does not have exhaust gas recirculation 

(EGR), which is the engine design 

technology used to meet the Tier 2 and 

3 standards. The EGR is not needed for 

Tier 4 because NOX is controlled by the 

SCR.2 The Tier 1 requirement applies 

only when there is a qualified 

emergency situation and bypass of 

inducements is necessary to ensure 

continued operation of the engine. Once 

the emergency situation has ended and 

the AECD is deactivated, the engine 

must comply with the otherwise 

applicable emission standard specified 

in 40 CFR 60.4202. Engine 

manufacturers must provide data 

demonstrating that the engine complies 

with the Tier 1 standard when the 

AECD is activated when applying for 

certification of an engine equipped with 

an AECD. 

4. Approval, Recordkeeping and 

Reporting for Engine Manufacturers 

Manufacturers may ask for approval 

of the use of emergency AECDs at any 

time; however, the EPA encourages 

manufacturers to obtain preliminary 

approval before submitting an 

application for certification. Otherwise, 

the EPA’s review of the AECD, which 

may include many unique features, may 

delay the approval of the application for 

certification. 

The manufacturer is required to keep 

records to document the use of 

emergency AECDs until the end of the 

calendar year 5 years after the onset of 

the relevant emergency situation. The 

manufacturer must submit an annual 

compliance report to the EPA within 90 

calendar days of the end of each 

calendar year in which it authorizes use 

of an AECD. The annual report must 

include a description of each AECD 

activation and copies of the reports 

submitted by owners or operators (or 

statements that an owner or operator did 

not submit a report, to the extent of the 

manufacturer’s knowledge). If an owner 

or operator fails to report the use of an 

emergency AECD to the manufacturer, 

the manufacturer, to the extent it has 

been made aware of the AECD 

activation, must send written 

notification to the operator that failure 

to meet the submission requirements 

may subject the operator to penalties. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 68811 

3 Docket item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0295– 

0012. 

5. Engine Owner or Operator 

Requirements 

Owners or operators who purchase 

engines with this dormant feature will 

receive instructions from the engine 

manufacturer on how to activate the 

AECD in qualified emergency situations, 

as well as information about penalties 

for abuse. The EPA would consider 

appropriate use of this feature to be 

during a situation where operation of a 

stationary CI engine is needed to protect 

human life (or where impaired 

operation poses a significant direct or 

indirect risk to human life), and 

temporarily overriding emission 

controls enables full operation of the 

equipment. The EPA is adopting this 

provision to give operators the means to 

obtain short-term relief one time 

without the need to contact the engine 

manufacturer or the EPA. In a qualified 

emergency situation, delaying the 

activation to obtain approval could put 

lives at risk, and would be 

unacceptable. However, the EPA retains 

the authority to evaluate, after the fact, 

whether it was reasonable to judge that 

there was a significant risk to human 

life to justify the activation of the AECD. 

Where the EPA determines that it was 

not reasonable to judge (1) that there 

was a significant risk to human life; or 

(2) that the emission control strategy 

was curtailing the ability of the engine 

to perform, the owner or operator may 

be subject to penalties for tampering 

with emission controls. The owner or 

operator requirements also include a 

specific prohibition on operating the 

engine with the AECD beyond the time 

reasonably needed for such operation. 

The owner or operator may also be 

subject to penalties for tampering if they 

continue to operate the engine with the 

AECD once the emergency situation has 

ended or the problem causing the 

emission control strategy to interfere 

with the performance of the engine has 

been or can reasonably be fixed. 

Nevertheless, the EPA will consider the 

totality of the circumstances when 

assessing penalties, and retain 

discretion to reduce penalties where the 

EPA determines that an owner or 

operator acted in good faith. 

The owner or operator must send a 

written report to the engine 

manufacturer within 60 calendar days 

after activating an emergency AECD. If 

any consecutive reactivations occur, this 

report is still due 60 calendar days from 

the first activation. The report must 

include: 

• Contact name, mail and email 

addresses, and telephone number for the 

responsible company or entity. 

• A description of the emergency 

situation, the location of the engine 

during the emergency, and the contact 

information for an official who can 

verify the emergency situation (such as 

a county sheriff, fire marshal, or 

hospital administrator). 

• The reason for AECD activation 

during the emergency situation, such as 

the lack of DEF, or the failure of an 

emission-related sensor when the 

engine was needed to respond to an 

emergency situation. 

• The engine’s serial number (or 

equivalent). 

• A description of the extent and 

duration of the engine operation while 

the AECD was active, including a 

statement describing whether or not the 

AECD was manually deactivated after 

the emergency situation ended. 

Paragraph 1039.665(g) specifies that 

failure to provide this information to the 

engine manufacturer within the 

deadline is improper use of the AECD 

and is prohibited. 

III. Remote Areas of Alaska 

A. Background 

1. Original Request From the State of 

Alaska 

The 2006 final NSPS for CI internal 

combustion engines included a 

provision that allowed the state of 

Alaska to submit for EPA approval 

through rulemaking process an 

alternative plan for implementing the 

requirements of the NSPS for publicsector electric utilities located in rural 

areas of Alaska not accessible by the 

Federal Aid Highway System (FAHS). 

The alternative plan was required to be 

based on the requirements of section 

111 of the CAA, including any increased 

risks to human health and the 

environment, and was also required to 

be based on the unique circumstances 

related to remote power generation, 

climatic conditions, and serious 

economic impacts resulting from 

implementation of the final NSPS. 

The EPA communicated with officials 

from the state of Alaska on several 

occasions following the promulgation of 

the 2006 final rule. On October 31, 

2008, the EPA received Alaska’s request 

for several revisions to the NSPS as it 

pertained to engines located in the 

remote part of Alaska not served by the 

FAHS.3 After reviewing the information 

provided by the state of Alaska, the EPA 

agreed that the circumstances in remote 

Alaska required special rules. On June 

28, 2011, the EPA promulgated several 

amendments for engines used in remote 

Alaska (76 FR 37954). The amendments 

of relevance for this action are as 

follows: 

• Exempting all pre-2014 model year 

engines from diesel fuel sulfur 

requirements; 

• Allowing owners and operators of 

stationary CI engines located in remote 

areas of Alaska to use engines certified 

to marine engine standards, rather than 

land-based nonroad engine standards; 

• Removing requirements to meet 

emission standards that would 

necessitate the use of aftertreatment 

devices for NOX, in particular, SCR, for 

engines used in remote Alaska 

(emission standards that are not based 

on the use of aftertreatment devices for 

NOX do apply); 

• Removing requirements to meet 

emission standards that would 

necessitate the use of aftertreatment 

devices for PM until the 2014 model 

year; and 

• Allowing the blending of used 

lubricating oil, in volumes of up to 1.75 

percent of the total fuel, if the sulfur 

content of the used lubricating oil is less 

than 200 parts per million (ppm) and 

the used lubricating oil is ‘‘on-spec,’’ 

i.e., it meets the on-specification levels 

and properties of 40 CFR 279.11. 

In support of its October 31, 2008, 

request, the state of Alaska noted that 

remote communities in Alaska that are 

not accessible by the FAHS rely on 

diesel engines and fuel for electricity. 

These communities are scattered over 

long distances in remote areas and are 

not connected to population centers by 

road or power grid. These communities 

are located in the most severe arctic 

environments in the United States. 

The state of Alaska noted that remote 

villages in Alaska use combined heat 

and power cogeneration plants, which 

are vital to their economy, given the 

high cost of fuel and the substantial 

need for heat in that climate. Heat 

recovery systems are used with diesel 

engines in remote communities to 

provide heat to community facilities 

and schools. Marine-jacketed diesel 

engines are used wherever possible 

because of their superior heat recovery 

and thermal efficiency. The state of 

Alaska indicated that they have noticed 

great reductions in heat recovery when 

using Tier 3 non-marine engines. The 

state noted that reductions in fuel 

efficiency will lead to greater fuel use 

and greater emissions from burning 

extra heating oil. The EPA agreed with 

the state that there are significant 

benefits from using marine engines, and 

finalized a revision allowing engines in 

remote Alaska to use marine-certified 

engines. However, as the state of Alaska 

noted, marine-certified engines, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

68812 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

4Note that this action applies to stationary 

engines only; it is unlikely that such an approach 

would be appropriate for mobile engines, given that 

they are less permanent in a village and can move 

in and out of areas as work requires. 

5See 40 CFR 63.6603(b). 

6The state noted in its letter that nonroad engines 

are typically brought in temporarily by contractors 

and, therefore, the concerns raised for stationary 

engines are not necessarily applicable for nonroad 

engines. 

particularly those below 800 

horsepower (HP), are not required to 

meet more stringent requirements for 

reduction of PM emissions, which is the 

most significant pollutant of concern in 

these areas. Therefore, the EPA required 

that owners and operators of 2014 

model year and later engines in remote 

areas of Alaska must either be certified 

to Tier 4 standards (whether land-based 

nonroad or marine) or must install PM 

reduction technologies on their engines 

to achieve at least 85 percent reduction 

in PM. 

The original request from the state of 

Alaska noted particular concern with 

NOX standards that would likely entail 

the use of SCR in remote Alaska. NOX

reductions are particularly important in 

areas where ozone is a concern, because 

NOX is a precursor to ozone. However, 

the state of Alaska, and remote Alaska 

in particular, does not have any 

significant ozone problems. Moreover, 

the use of SCR entails the supply, 

storage, and use of a DEF that needs to 

be used properly in order to achieve the 

expected emissions reductions, and that 

may have additional operational 

problems in remote arctic climates. As 

noted above, these villages are scattered 

over long distances in remote areas and 

are not connected to population centers 

by road or power grid. The villages are 

located in the most severe arctic 

environments in the United States and 

they rely on stationary diesel engines 

and fuel for electricity and heating, and 

these engines need to be in working 

condition, particularly in the winter. 

The availability of DEF in remote 

villages may be an issue, which is 

notable given the importance of the 

stationary engines in these villages. 

Furthermore, the costs for the 

acquisition, storage, and handling of the 

DEF are greater than for engines located 

elsewhere in the United States due to 

the remote location and severe arctic 

climate of the villages. In order to 

maintain proper availability of the DEF 

during the harsh winter months, new 

heated storage vessels may be needed at 

each engine facility, further increasing 

the compliance costs for these remote 

villages. Given the issues that would 

need to be addressed if SCR were 

required, and the associated costs of this 

technology when analyzed under NSPS 

guidelines, the EPA agreed with the 

state of Alaska’s argument that it is 

inappropriate to require such standards 

for stationary engines in remote Alaska 4

and amended the NSPS for stationary CI 

internal combustion engines to specify 

that owners and operators of new 

stationary engines in remote areas of 

Alaska do not have to meet the Tier 4 

standards for NOX. However, owners 

and operators of model year 2014 and 

later engines that do not meet the Tier 

4 p.m. standards would be required to 

use PM aftertreatment that achieves PM 

reductions of at least 85 percent. The 

use of PM aftertreatment will also 

achieve reductions in CO and NMHC. 

Finally, regarding allowing owners 

and operators to blend up to 1.75 

percent used oil into the fuel system, 

the state noted that there are no 

permitted used oil disposal facilities in 

remote Alaskan communities. The state 

has developed a cost-effective and 

reliable used-oil blending system that is 

currently being used in many remote 

Alaskan communities, disposing of the 

oil in an environmentally beneficial 

manner and capturing the energy 

content of the used oil. The absence of 

allowable blending would necessitate 

the shipping out of the used oil and 

would risk improper disposal and 

storage, as well as spills. According to 

the state, blending waste oil at 1.75 

percent or less will keep the fuel within 

American Society for Testing and 

Materials (ASTM) specifications if the 

sulfur content of the waste oil is below 

200 ppm. The state acknowledged the 

need for engines equipped with 

aftertreatment devices to use fuel 

meeting the sulfur requirements. The 

EPA agreed that the limited blending of 

used oil into the diesel fuel used by 

stationary engines in remote Alaska is 

an environmentally beneficial manner 

of disposing of such oil and is of little 

to no concern when kept within 

appropriate limits. Therefore, the EPA 

finalized amendments that permit the 

blending of fuel oil at such levels for 

engines in remote Alaska. The used oil 

must be ‘‘on-spec,’’ i.e., it must meet the 

on-specification levels and properties in 

40 CFR 279.11. 

2. New Request From the State of Alaska 

On November 28, 2014, the EPA 

received a new request from the state of 

Alaska, which can be found in the 

docket for this rulemaking. The request 

asked that the EPA revise the criteria for 

remote areas of Alaska, which were 

established in the 2011 amendments as 

areas that are not accessible by the 

FAHS, to also include areas that are 

accessible by the FAHS, but face similar 

challenges to areas that are not 

accessible. The letter recommended that 

the EPA adopt the same definition for 

remote areas of Alaska in the NSPS that 

was adopted in the 2013 amendments to 

the National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines (RICE), which can be found at 

40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ. The RICE 

NESHAP definition specifies that 

engines in areas that are accessible by 

the FAHS can be considered remote if 

each of the following conditions is met: 

(1) The only connection to the FAHS is 

through the Alaska Marine Highway 

System, or the stationary CI engine 

operation is within an isolated grid in 

Alaska that is not connected to the 

statewide electrical grid referred to as 

the Alaska Railbelt Grid; (2) at least 10 

percent of the power generated by the 

engine on an annual basis is used for 

residential purposes; and (3) the 

generating capacity of the facility is less 

than 12 megawatts, or the engine is used 

exclusively for backup power for 

renewable energy.5

The state of Alaska provided 

information in a March 2, 2015, letter to 

the EPA to show that the communities 

in these additional FAHS-accessible 

areas face similar challenges to the 

communities in areas that are not 

accessible by the FAHS, and that the 

concerns that led to the 2011 

amendments to the NSPS are also valid 

for the additional areas. As discussed 

previously, these challenges include 

inaccessibility, expense for DEF 

transport and storage, risk of engine 

shutdown, shortage of trained operators, 

and availability and cost of Tier 4 

engines. The state noted that some of 

the communities are only accessible by 

road for a few months each year, or only 

by weekly ferry service; the alternative 

travel method is by floatplane. Thus, the 

delivery of DEF and the travel for engine 

service technicians to these areas would 

be much more costly than for areas that 

are not remote. The need to heat the 

DEF in the communities with a severe 

arctic climate would divert heat that is 

routinely used for space heating. 

Communities in these areas rely on 

diesel engines for electricity and 

heating, similar to the communities that 

are in areas that are not accessible by 

the FAHS, and failure of the engine to 

operate due to a shortage of DEF could 

present a risk to human life. The 

communities also have difficulty 

finding and retaining trained operators 

for the engines and aftertreatment 

devices, according to the state of 

Alaska.6

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 68813 

7Estimates are based on Tier 3 and Tier 4 

emission factors for a 175–300 HP engine provided 

in Table A4 of Exhaust and Crankcase Emission 

Factors for Nonroad Engine Modeling— 

Compression-Ignition. NR–009d. Assessment and 

Standards Division, Office of Transportation and 

Air Quality. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

EPA–420–R–10–018. July 2010. http://www.epa.

gov/otaq/models/nonrdmdl/nonrdmdl2010/

420r10018.pdf. 

Based on the information provided by 

the state, the EPA agrees that the 

circumstances that warranted different 

emission standards for new stationary 

CI internal combustion engines in areas 

of Alaska that are not accessible by the 

FAHS are also present in the additional 

FAHS-accessible remote areas identified 

in the RICE NESHAP definition. 

B. Proposed Amendments 

The EPA is proposing an amendment 

to the NSPS for stationary CI internal 

combustion engines that would align 

the definition of remote areas of Alaska 

with the definition currently used in the 

RICE NESHAP. The amendments 

specify that engines in areas that are 

accessible by the FAHS can be 

considered remote if each of the 

following conditions is met: (1) The 

only connection to the FAHS is through 

the Alaska Marine Highway System, or 

the stationary CI engine operation is 

within an isolated grid in Alaska that is 

not connected to the statewide electrical 

grid referred to as the Alaska Railbelt 

Grid; (2) at least 10 percent of the power 

generated by the engine on an annual 

basis is used for residential purposes; 

and (3) the generating capacity of the 

facility is less than 12 megawatts, or the 

engine is used exclusively for backup 

power for renewable energy. The Alaska 

Railbelt Grid is defined as the service 

areas of the six regulated public utilities 

that extend from Fairbanks to 

Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula. 

These utilities are Golden Valley 

Electric Association; Chugach Electric 

Association; Matanuska Electric 

Association; Homer Electric 

Association; Anchorage Municipal Light 

& Power; and the City of Seward Electric 

System. 

The following provisions that are 

currently present in the NSPS for 

stationary CI internal combustion 

engines for engines that are located in 

areas of Alaska that are not accessible by 

the FAHS will be extended to stationary 

CI internal combustion engines located 

in the areas identified above: 

• Exemption for all pre-2014 model 

year engines from diesel fuel sulfur 

requirements; 

• Allowance for owners and operators 

of stationary CI engines to use engines 

certified to marine engine standards, 

rather than land-based nonroad engine 

standards; 

• No requirement to meet emission 

standards that would necessitate the use 

of aftertreatment devices for NOX, in 

particular, SCR (emission standards that 

are not based on the use of 

aftertreatment devices for NOX will 

apply); 

• No requirement to meet emission 

standards that would necessitate the use 

of aftertreatment devices for PM until 

the 2014 model year; and 

• Allowance for the blending of used 

lubricating oil, in volumes of up to 1.75 

percent of the total fuel, if the sulfur 

content of the used lubricating oil is less 

than 200 ppm and the used lubricating 

oil is ‘‘on-spec,’’ i.e., it meets the onspecification levels and properties of 40 

CFR 279.11. 

IV. Impacts of the Proposed Action 

A. Economic Impacts 

The EPA does not expect any 

significant economic impacts as a result 

of this proposed rule. A significant 

economic impact for the amendment 

allowing the temporary override of 

inducements in emergency situations is 

not anticipated because AECDs are 

expected to be activated rarely (if ever), 

and, thus, the impacts to affected 

sources and consumers of affected 

output will be minimal. 

The economic impact from the change 

to the criteria for remote areas of Alaska 

will be a cost savings for owners or 

operators of engines that are located in 

the additional areas that will now be 

considered remote. The precise savings 

depends on the number and size of 

engines that will be installed each year. 

Information provided by the Alaska 

Energy Authority indicated that one to 

two new engines are expected to be 

installed each year. Information 

provided by the state of Alaska 

indicated that the expected initial 

capital cost savings per engine ranges 

from $28,000 to $163,000, depending on 

the size of the engine. There will also be 

annual operating and maintenance cost 

savings due to avoidance of the need to 

obtain and store DEF. 

B. Environmental Impacts 

The EPA does not expect any 

significant environmental impacts as a 

result of the proposed amendment to 

allow a temporary override of 

inducements in emergency situations. 

The AECDs are expected to be activated 

rarely (if ever) and will only affect 

emissions for a very short period. 

The EPA also does not expect 

significant environmental impacts as a 

result of the proposed amendments to 

the criteria for remote areas of Alaska. 

As an example, allowing the use of a 

Tier 3 engine instead of a Tier 4 engine 

would result in less reductions for a 250 

HP stationary CI engine of 5.4 tons per 

year (tpy) of NOX, 0.1 tpy of NMHC, 1.6 

tpy of CO, and 0.3 tpy of PM, assuming 

the engine operates full time (8,760 

hours per year).7 As stated previously, 

the state of Alaska estimates that only 

one to two new engines will be installed 

each year in the additional remote areas. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. OMB has previously approved the 

information collection activities 

contained in the existing regulations 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0590. The proposed regulatory 

relief for stationary CI engines would be 

voluntary and optional. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. In making this 

determination, the impact of concern is 

any significant adverse economic 

impact on small entities. An agency may 

certify that a rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities if 

the rule relieves regulatory burden, has 

no net burden or otherwise has a 

positive economic effect on the small 

entities subject to the rule. As 

mentioned earlier in this preamble, the 

EPA is harmonizing the NSPS for 

stationary CI engines in this action with 

an existing rule issued by the EPA for 

nonroad CI engines. Thus, this action is 

reducing regulatory impacts to small 

entities as well as other affected entities. 

The EPA is also including additional 

remote areas of Alaska in the regulatory 

flexibility provisions already in the rule 

for remote areas of Alaska, which 

further reduces the burden of the 

existing rule on small entities and other 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

68814 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

affected entities. We have, therefore, 

concluded that this action will relieve 

regulatory burden for all directly 

regulated small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

This action does not contain a federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for the private 

sector in any one year. Engine 

manufacturers have the flexibility to 

choose whether or not to use optional 

AECDs. 

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. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, on 

the relationship between the federal 

government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the federal 

government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

This proposed rule would impose 

compliance costs primarily on engine 

manufacturers, depending on the extent 

to which they take advantage of the 

flexibilities offered. The proposed 

amendments to expand the areas that 

are considered remote areas of Alaska 

would reduce the compliance costs for 

owners and operators of stationary 

engines in those areas. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that the EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not concern an 

environmental health risk or safety risk. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

The EPA believes this action will not 

have potential disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority, lowincome, or indigenous populations. The 

provisions being proposed in this action 

are designed to eliminate risks to human 

life and are expected to be used rarely, 

if at all, and will only affect emissions 

for a very short period. Other changes 

the EPA is proposing to make have 

minimal effect on emissions. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: October 30, 2015. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 60 of 

the Code of the Federal Regulations is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 60—STANDARDS OF 

PERFORMANCE FOR NEW 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 60 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart IIII—Standards of Performance 

for Stationary Compression Ignition 

Internal Combustion Engines 

■ 2. Amend § 60.4201 by revising 

paragraph (f)(1) and adding paragraph 

(h) to read as follows: 

§ 60.4201 What emission standards must I 

meet for non-emergency engines if I am a 

stationary CI internal combustion engine 

manufacturer? 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) Remote areas of Alaska; and 

* * * * * 

(h) Stationary CI ICE certified to the 

standards in 40 CFR part 1039 and 

equipped with auxiliary emission 

control devices (AECDs) as specified in 

40 CFR 1039.665 must meet the Tier 1 

certification emission standards for new 

nonroad CI engines in 40 CFR 89.112 

while the AECD is activated during a 

qualified emergency situation. When the 

qualified emergency situation has ended 

and the AECD is deactivated, the engine 

must resume meeting the otherwise 

applicable emission standard specified 

in this section. 

■ 3. Amend § 60.4202 by revising 

paragraph (g)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 60.4202 What emission standards must I 

meet for emergency engines if I am a 

stationary CI internal combustion engine 

manufacturer? 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) Remote areas of Alaska; and 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 60.4204 by adding 

paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 60.4204 What emission standards must I 

meet for non-emergency engines if I am an 

owner or operator of a stationary CI internal 

combustion engine? 

* * * * * 

(f) Owners and operators of stationary 

CI ICE certified to the standards in 40 

CFR part 1039 and equipped with 

AECDs as specified in 40 CFR 1039.665 

must meet the Tier 1 certification 

emission standards for new nonroad CI 

engines in 40 CFR 89.112 while the 

AECD is activated during a qualified 

emergency situation. A qualified 

emergency situation is defined in 40 

CFR 1039.665. When the qualified 

emergency situation has ended and the 

AECD is deactivated, the engine must 

resume meeting the otherwise 

applicable emission standard specified 

in this section. 

■ 5. Amend § 60.4210 by adding 

paragraph (j) to read as follows: 

§ 60.4210 What are my compliance 

requirements if I am a stationary CI internal 

combustion engine manufacturer? 

* * * * * 

(j) Stationary CI ICE manufacturers 

may equip their stationary CI internal 

combustion engines certified to the 

emission standards in 40 CFR part 1039 

with AECDs for qualified emergency 

situations according to the requirements 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 215 / Friday, November 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 68815 

of 40 CFR 1039.665. Manufacturers of 

stationary CI ICE equipped with AECDs 

as allowed by 40 CFR 1039.665 must 

meet all of the requirements in 40 CFR 

1039.665 that apply to manufacturers. 

Manufacturers must provide data 

demonstrating that the engine complies 

with the Tier 1 standard in 40 CFR 

89.112 when the AECD is activated 

when applying for certification of an 

engine equipped with an AECD as 

allowed by 40 CFR 1039.665. 

■ 6. Amend § 60.4211 by adding 

paragraph (h) to read as follows: 

§ 60.4211 What are my compliance 

requirements if I am an owner or operator 

of a stationary CI internal combustion 

engine? 

* * * * * 

(h) The requirements for operators 

and prohibited acts specified in 40 CFR 

1039.665 apply to owners or operators 

of stationary CI ICE equipped with 

AECDs for qualified emergency 

situations as allowed by 40 CFR 

1039.665. 

■ 7. Amend § 60.4214 by adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 60.4214 What are my notification, 

reporting, and recordkeeping requirements 

if I am an owner or operator of a stationary 

CI internal combustion engine? 

* * * * * 

(e) Owners or operators of stationary 

CI ICE equipped with AECDs pursuant 

to the requirements of 40 CFR 1039.665 

must report the use of AECDs as 

required by 40 CFR 1039.665(e). 

■ 8. Amend § 60.4216 by revising 

paragraphs (b) through (d) and (f) as 

follows: 

§ 60.4216 What requirements must I meet 

for engines used in Alaska? 

* * * * * 

(b) Except as indicated in paragraph 

(c) of this section, manufacturers, 

owners and operators of stationary CI 

ICE with a displacement of less than 10 

liters per cylinder located in remote 

areas of Alaska may meet the 

requirements of this subpart by 

manufacturing and installing engines 

meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 

parts 94 or 1042, as appropriate, rather 

than the otherwise applicable 

requirements of 40 CFR parts 89 and 

1039, as indicated in sections 

§§ 60.4201(f) and 60.4202(g) of this 

subpart. 

(c) Manufacturers, owners and 

operators of stationary CI ICE that are 

located in remote areas of Alaska may 

choose to meet the applicable emission 

standards for emergency engines in 

§§ 60.4202 and 60.4205, and not those 

for non-emergency engines in 

§§ 60.4201 and 60.4204, except that for 

2014 model year and later nonemergency CI ICE, the owner or operator 

of any such engine that was not certified 

as meeting Tier 4 p.m. standards, must 

meet the applicable requirements for 

PM in §§ 60.4201 and 60.4204 or install 

a PM emission control device that 

achieves PM emission reductions of 85 

percent, or 60 percent for engines with 

a displacement of greater than or equal 

to 30 liters per cylinder, compared to 

engine-out emissions. 

(d) The provisions of § 60.4207 do not 

apply to owners and operators of pre2014 model year stationary CI ICE 

subject to this subpart that are located 

in remote areas of Alaska. 

* * * * * 

(f) The provisions of this section and 

§ 60.4207 do not prevent owners and 

operators of stationary CI ICE subject to 

this subpart that are located in remote 

areas of Alaska from using fuels mixed 

with used lubricating oil, in volumes of 

up to 1.75 percent of the total fuel. The 

sulfur content of the used lubricating oil 

must be less than 200 parts per million. 

The used lubricating oil must meet the 

on-specification levels and properties 

for used oil in 40 CFR 279.11. 

■ 9. Amend § 60.4219 by adding in 

alphabetical order the definitions for 

‘‘Alaska Railbelt Grid'' and ‘‘Remote 

areas of Alaska'' to read as follows: 

§ 60.4219 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

* * * * * 

Alaska Railbelt Grid means the 

service areas of the six regulated public 

utilities that extend from Fairbanks to 

Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula. 

These utilities are Golden Valley 

Electric Association; Chugach Electric 

Association; Matanuska Electric 

Association; Homer Electric 

Association; Anchorage Municipal Light 

& Power; and the City of Seward Electric 

System. 

* * * * * 

Remote areas of Alaska means areas 

of Alaska that meet either paragraph (1) 

or (2) of this definition. 

(1) Areas of Alaska that are not 

accessible by the Federal Aid Highway 

System (FAHS). 

(2) Areas of Alaska that meet all of the 

following criteria: 

(i) The only connection to the FAHS 

is through the Alaska Marine Highway 

System, or the stationary CI ICE 

operation is within an isolated grid in 

Alaska that is not connected to the 

statewide electrical grid referred to as 

the Alaska Railbelt Grid. 

(ii) At least 10 percent of the power 

generated by the stationary CI ICE on an 

annual basis is used for residential 

purposes. 

(iii) The generating capacity of the 

source is less than 12 megawatts, or the 

stationary CI ICE is used exclusively for 

backup power for renewable energy. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–28342 Filed 11–5–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 1, 25, 73, and 74 

[GN Docket No. 15–236; FCC 15–137] 

Review of Foreign Ownership Policies 

for Broadcast, Common Carrier and 

Aeronautical Radio Licensees 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) proposes to extend its 

foreign ownership rules and procedures 

that apply to common carrier licensees 

to broadcast licensees, with certain 

modifications to tailor them to the 

broadcast context. The Commission also 

seeks comment on whether and how to 

revise the methodology a licensee 

should use to assess its compliance with 

the 25 percent foreign ownership 

benchmark in section 310(b)(4) of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, in order to reduce regulatory 

burdens on applicants and licensees. 

Finally, the Commission makes several 

proposals to clarify and update existing 

foreign ownership policies and 

procedures for broadcast, common 

carrier and aeronautical licensees. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

December 21, 2015, and replies on or 

before January 20, 2016. The NPRM 

contains potential information 

collection requirements subject to the 

PRA, Public Law 104–13. OMB, the 

general public, and other Federal 

agencies are invited to comment on the 

potential new and modified information 

collection requirements contained in 

this NPRM. If the information collection 

requirements are adopted, the 

Commission will submit the appropriate 

documents to OMB for review under 

Section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the 

general public, and other Federal 

agencies will again be invited to 

comment on the new and modified 

information collection requirements 

adopted by the Commission. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. 15–236, by any 

of the following methods: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS