12558 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 46 / Tuesday, March 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

46 Id. 

47Op. at *41. 

48Op. at *41. 

49 Id. 

50The statement in the text reflects the 

Commission’s approach in its consideration of costs 

and benefits for all of its Dodd-Frank rules, unless 

otherwise specified for a particular issue or issues 

in a particular rulemaking. 

51Op. at *40. 

52See, e.g., Portfolio Reconciliation Rule, 77 FR 

at 55945–46, 55948–49 & nn.79, 84, 98, 108 

(considering ISDA data regarding U.S. and foreign 

firms, and factoring in European proposals); Risk 

Management Rule, 77 FR at 20177 n.104 (relying on 

UK FSA study); Swaps Entity Registration Rule, 77 

FR at 2624–25 (stating in response to comments that 

Commission ‘‘does not believe that foreign-based 

Swaps Entities will bear higher costs associated 

with the registration process’’ and giving 

explanation); SDR Reporting Rule, 77 FR at 2192 

(considering costs and benefits of swap identifiers, 

including in cross-border activities). 

53Op. at *39. 

54Op. at *39. 

55Op. at *41. 

56Op. at *36–*37. 

57However, as it has done in the past, the 

Commission will continue to consider the proper 

interpretation and application of section 2(i) in 

particular circumstances. 

was so.46 The court further noted that 

foreign swaps regulations passed since 

the promulgation of the rules at issue in 

the litigation ‘‘may now raise issues of 

duplicative regulatory burdens’’ but that 

‘‘the CFTC may well conclude that its 

policy of substituted compliance largely 

negates these costs.’’ 47

4. Finally, the court noted that 

‘‘[p]laintiffs raise no complaints 

regarding the CFTC’s evaluation of the 

general, often unquantifiable, benefits 

and costs of the domestic application of 

the Title VII Rules.’’ 48 As a result, the 

court held, ‘‘[o]n remand, the CFTC 

would only need to make explicit which 

of those benefits and costs similarly 

apply to the Rules’ extraterritorial 

applications.’’ 49

III. Supplement to Preambles of 

Remanded Rulemakings Regarding the 

Scope of the Commission’s 

Consideration of Costs and Benefits 

The Commission hereby clarifies that 

it considered costs and benefits based 

on the understanding that the swaps 

market functions internationally, with 

many transactions involving U.S. firms 

taking place across international 

boundaries; with leading industry 

members typically conducting 

operations both within and outside the 

United States; and with industry 

members commonly following 

substantially similar business practices 

wherever located. The Commission 

considered all evidence in the record, 

and in the absence of evidence 

indicating differences in costs and 

benefits between foreign and domestic 

swaps activities, the Commission did 

not find occasion to characterize 

explicitly the identified costs and 

benefits as foreign or domestic. Thus, 

where the Commission did not 

specifically refer to matters of location, 

its discussion of costs and benefits 

referred to the effects of its rules on all 

business activity subject to its 

regulations, whether by virtue of the 

activity’s physical location in the 

United States or by virtue of the 

activity’s connection with or effect on 

U.S. commerce under section 2(i).50 In 

the language of the district court, the 

Commission ‘‘functionally considered 

the extraterritorial costs and 

benefits,’’ 51 and this was because the 

evidence in the record did not suggest 

that differences existed, with certain 

limited exceptions that the Commission 

addressed.52 For example, as the district 

court found, at the time of the 

promulgation of the rules at issue, 

foreign swaps regulations generally 

were still being developed so any costs 

associated with potentially duplicative 

or inconsistent regulations remained 

hypothetical.53 Thus, as the court noted, 

the plaintiffs in SIFMA v. CFTC did not 

‘‘identify any specific data that the 

CFTC failed to take into account.’’ 54

IV. Request for Comments 

As noted above, the district court 

stated that, on remand, the Commission 

‘‘would only need to make explicit’’ 

which of the costs and benefits 

identified in the rule preambles 

‘‘similarly apply to the Rules’ 

extraterritorial applications.’’ 55 In order 

to assist the Commission in determining 

whether any further consideration or 

explanation—beyond that contained in 

the original rule preambles and this 

release—is needed to respond to this 

mandate, the Commission requests 

comments on the following questions: 

1. Are there any benefits or costs that 

the Commission identified in any of the 

rule preambles that do not apply, or 

apply to a different extent, to the 

relevant rule’s extraterritorial 

applications? 

2. Are there any costs or benefits that 

are unique to one or more of the rules’ 

extraterritorial applications? If so, 

please specify how. 

3. Put another way, are the types of 

costs and benefits that arise from the 

extraterritorial application of any of the 

rules different from those that arise from 

the domestic application? If so, how and 

to what extent? 

4. If significant differences exist in the 

costs and benefits of the extraterritorial 

and domestic application of one or more 

of the rules, what are the implications 

of those differences for the substantive 

requirements of the rule or rules? 

Comments should specify, in the 

header of the comment, the particular 

rule or rules that they address. The 

Commission requests that comments 

focus on information and analysis 

specifically relevant to the inquiry 

specified by the district court’s remand 

order. Consistent with the district 

court’s holding that the Commission is 

not required to address the issue of what 

the geographical scope of its rules 

should be in the challenged 

rulemakings,56 the purpose of this 

request for comments is to further 

consider the cross-border costs and 

benefits of the substance of the rules, 

not to initiate a process to address the 

rules’ cross-border scope, which, as the 

district court held, is prescribed by 

section 2(i).57 The Commission further 

requests that commenters supply the 

Commission with relevant data to 

support their comments. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 4, 

2015, by the Commission. 

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

Note: The following appendix will not 

appear in the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Appendix to Initial Response to District 

Court Remand Order in Securities 

Industry and Financial Markets 

Association, et al. v. United States 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission—Commission Voting 

Summary 

On this matter, Chairman Massad and 

Commissioners Wetjen, Bowen, and 

Giancarlo voted in the affirmative. No 

Commissioner voted in the negative. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05413 Filed 3–9–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 317 

[DOD–2008–OS–0068] 

RIN 0790–AJ23 

DCAA Privacy Act Program 

AGENCY: Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Contract Audit 

Agency (DCAA) is amending the DCAA 

Privacy Act Program Regulation. 

Specifically, DCAA is adding an 

exemption section to include an 

exemption for RDCAA 900.1, DCAA 

Internal Review Case Files. This rule 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 46 / Tuesday, March 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 12559 

provides policies and procedures for the 

DCAA’s implementation of the Privacy 

Act of 1974, as amended. 

DATES: This rule is effective on April 9, 

2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Keith Mastromichalis, FOIA/PA 

Management Analyst, DCAA HQ, 703– 

767–1022. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

revisions to this rule are part of DoD’s 

retrospective plan under EO 13563 

completed in August 2011. DoD’s full 

plan can be accessed at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!docket

Browser;rpp=25;po=0;dct

=N%252BFR%252BPR%252BO;D

=DOD-2011-OS-0036. 

Executive Summary 

I. Purpose of This Regulatory Action 

a. This rule provides policies and 

procedures for DCAA’s implementation 

of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended. 

b. Authority: Privacy Act of 1974, 

Pub. L. 93–579, Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 

552a). 

II. Summary of the Major Provisions of 

This Regulatory Action 

DCAA is adding an exemption section 

to include an exemption for RDCAA 

900.1, DCAA Internal Review Case 

Files. 

III. Costs and Benefits of This 

Regulatory Action 

This regulatory action imposes no 

monetary costs to the Agency or public. 

The benefit to the public is the accurate 

reflection of the Agency’s Privacy 

Program to ensure that policies and 

procedures are known to the public. 

Public Comments 

On Thursday, February 6, 2014 (79 FR 

7114–7117), the Department of Defense 

published a proposed rule requesting 

public comment. No comments were 

received on the proposed rule, and no 

changes have been made in the final 

rule. 

Regulatory Procedures 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

It has been determined that this rule 

is not a significant regulatory action 

under these Executive Orders. This rule 

does not (1) Have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy; a sector of the economy; 

productivity; competition; jobs; the 

environment; public health or safety; or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities; (2) Create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another Agency; (3) Materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs, or 

the rights and obligations of recipients 

thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in these Executive Orders. 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C Chapter 6) 

It has been certified that this rule does 

not have significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

because it is concerned only with the 

administration of Privacy Act within the 

Department of Defense. 

Public Law 95–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been determined that this rule 

imposes no information collection 

requirements on the public under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

Section 202, Public Law 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been determined that this rule 

does not involve a Federal mandate that 

may result in the expenditure by State, 

local and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more and that such 

rulemaking will not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been determined that this rule 

does not have federalism implications. 

This rule does 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. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 317 

Privacy. 

Accordingly 32 CFR part 317 is 

revised to read as follows: 

PART 317—DCAA PRIVACY ACT 

PROGRAM 

Sec. 

317.1 Purpose. 

317.2 Applicability and scope. 

317.3 Policy. 

317.4 Responsibilities. 

317.5 Procedures. 

317.6 Procedures for exemptions. 

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 

(5 U.S.C. 552a). 

§ 317.1 Purpose. 

This part provides policies and 

procedures for the Defense Contract 

Audit Agency’s (DCAA) implementation 

of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 

552a) and 32 CFR part 310, and is 

intended to promote uniformity within 

DCAA. 

§ 317.2 Applicability and scope. 

(a) This part applies to all DCAA 

organizational elements and takes 

precedence over all regional regulatory 

issuances that supplement the DCAA 

Privacy Program. 

(b) This part shall be made applicable 

by contract or other legally binding 

action to contractors whenever a DCAA 

contract provides for the operation of a 

system of records or portion of a system 

of records to accomplish an Agency 

function. 

§ 317.3 Policy. 

(a) It is DCAA policy that personnel 

will comply with the DCAA Privacy 

Program; the Privacy Act of 1974; and 

the DoD Privacy Program (32 CFR part 

310). Strict adherence is necessary to 

ensure uniformity in the 

implementation of the DCAA Privacy 

Program and create conditions that will 

foster public trust. It is also Agency 

policy to safeguard personal information 

contained in any system of records 

maintained by DCAA organizational 

elements and to make that information 

available to the individual to whom it 

pertains to the maximum extent 

practicable. 

(b) DCAA policy specifically requires 

that DCAA organizational elements: 

(1) Collect, maintain, use, and 

disseminate personal information only 

when it is relevant and necessary to 

achieve a purpose required by statute or 

Executive Order. 

(2) Collect personal information 

directly from the individuals to whom 

it pertains to the greatest extent 

practical. 

(3) Inform individuals who are asked 

to supply personal information for 

inclusion in any system of records: 

(i) The authority for the solicitation. 

(ii) Whether furnishing the 

information is mandatory or voluntary. 

(iii) The intended uses of the 

information. 

(iv) The routine disclosures of the 

information that may be made outside of 

DoD. 

(v) The effect on the individual of not 

providing all or any part of the 

requested information. 

(4) Ensure that records used in 

making determinations about 

individuals and those containing 

personal information are accurate, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

12560 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 46 / Tuesday, March 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

relevant, timely, and complete for the 

purposes for which they are being 

maintained before making them 

available to any recipients outside of 

DoD, other than a Federal agency, 

unless the disclosure is made under 

DCAA Regulation 5410.8, DCAA 

Freedom of Information Act Program. 

(5) Keep no record that describes how 

individuals exercise their rights 

guaranteed by the First Amendment to 

the U.S. Constitution, unless expressly 

authorized by statute or by the 

individual to whom the records pertain 

or is pertinent to and within the scope 

of an authorized law enforcement 

activity. 

(6) Notify individuals whenever 

records pertaining to them are made 

available under compulsory legal 

processes, if such process is a matter of 

public record. 

(7) Establish safeguards to ensure the 

security of personal information and to 

protect this information from threats or 

hazards that might result in substantial 

harm, embarrassment, inconvenience, or 

unfairness to the individual. 

(8) Establish rules of conduct for 

DCAA personnel involved in the design, 

development, operation, or maintenance 

of any system of records and train them 

in these rules of conduct. 

(9) Assist individuals in determining 

what records pertaining to them are 

being collected, maintained, used, or 

disseminated. 

(10) Permit individual access to the 

information pertaining to them 

maintained in any system of records, 

and to correct or amend that 

information, unless an exemption for 

the system has been properly 

established for an important public 

purpose. 

(11) Provide, on request, an 

accounting of all disclosures of the 

information pertaining to them except 

when disclosures are made: 

(i) To DoD personnel in the course of 

their official duties. 

(ii) Under DCAA Regulation 5410.8, 

DCAA Freedom of Information Act 

Program. 

(iii) To another agency or to an 

instrumentality of any governmental 

jurisdiction within or under control of 

the United States conducting law 

enforcement activities authorized by 

law. 

(12) Advise individuals on their rights 

to appeal any refusal to grant access to 

or amend any record pertaining to them, 

and file a statement of disagreement 

with the record in the event amendment 

is refused. 

§ 317.4 Responsibilities. 

(a) The Assistant Director, Resources 

has overall responsibility for the DCAA 

Privacy Act Program and will serve as 

the sole appellate authority for appeals 

to decisions of respective initial denial 

authorities. 

(b) The Chief, Administrative 

Management Division under the 

direction of the Assistant Director, 

Resources, shall: 

(1) Establish, issue, and update 

policies for the DCAA Privacy Act 

Program; monitor compliance with this 

part; and provide policy guidance for 

the DCAA Privacy Act Program. 

(2) Resolve conflicts that may arise 

regarding implementation of DCAA 

Privacy Act policy. 

(3) Designate an Agency Privacy Act 

Advisor, as a single point of contact, to 

coordinate on matters concerning 

Privacy Act policy. 

(4) Make the initial determination to 

deny an individual’s written Privacy 

Act request for access to or amendment 

of documents filed in Privacy Act 

systems of records. This authority 

cannot be delegated. 

(c) The DCAA Privacy Act Advisor 

under the supervision of the Chief, 

Administrative Management Division 

shall: 

(1) Manage the DCAA Privacy Act 

Program in accordance with this part 

and applicable DCAA policies, as well 

as DoD and Federal regulations. 

(2) Provide guidelines for managing, 

administering, and implementing the 

DCAA Privacy Act Program. 

(3) Implement and administer the 

Privacy Act program at the 

Headquarters. 

(4) Ensure that the collection, 

maintenance, use, or dissemination of 

records of identifiable personal 

information is in a manner that assures 

that such action is for a necessary and 

lawful purpose; that the information is 

timely and accurate for its intended use; 

and that adequate safeguards are 

provided to prevent misuse of such 

information. 

(5) Prepare promptly any required 

new, amended, or altered system notices 

for systems of records subject to the 

Privacy Act and submit them to the 

Defense Privacy Office for subsequent 

publication in the Federal Register. 

(6) Conduct training on the Privacy 

Act program for Agency personnel. 

(d) Heads of Principal Staff Elements 

are responsible for: 

(1) Reviewing all regulations or other 

policy and guidance issuances for 

which they are the proponent to ensure 

consistency with the provisions of this 

part. 

(2) Ensuring that the provisions of this 

part are followed in processing requests 

for records. 

(3) Forwarding to the DCAA Privacy 

Act Advisor, any Privacy Act requests 

received directly from a member of the 

public, so that the request may be 

administratively controlled and 

processed. 

(4) Ensuring the prompt review of all 

Privacy Act requests, and when 

required, coordinating those requests 

with other organizational elements. 

(5) Providing recommendations to the 

DCAA Privacy Act Advisor regarding 

the releasability of DCAA records to 

members of the public, along with the 

responsive documents. 

(6) Providing the appropriate 

documents, along with a written 

justification for any denial, in whole or 

in part, of a request for records to the 

DCAA Privacy Act Advisor. Those 

portions to be excised should be 

bracketed in red pencil, and the specific 

exemption or exemptions cites which 

provide the basis for denying the 

requested records. 

(e) The General Counsel is responsible 

for: 

(1) Ensuring uniformity is maintained 

in the legal position, and the 

interpretation of the Privacy Act; 32 

CFR part 310; and this part. 

(2) Consulting with DoD General 

Counsel on final denials that are 

inconsistent with decisions of other 

DoD components, involve issues not 

previously resolved, or raise new or 

significant legal issues of potential 

significance to other Government 

agencies. 

(3) Providing advice and assistance to 

the Assistant Director, Resources; 

Regional Directors; and the Regional 

Privacy Act Officer, through the DCAA 

Privacy Act Advisor, as required, in the 

discharge of their responsibilities. 

(4) Coordinating Privacy Act litigation 

with the Department of Justice. 

(5) Coordinating on Headquarters 

denials of initial requests. 

(f) Each Regional Director is 

responsible for the overall management 

of the Privacy Act program within their 

respective regions. Under his/her 

direction, the Regional Resources 

Manager is responsible for the 

management and staff supervision of the 

program and for designating a Regional 

Privacy Act Officer. Regional Directors 

will, as designee of the Director, make 

the initial determination to deny an 

individual’s written Privacy Act request 

for access to or amendment of 

documents filed in Privacy Act systems 

of records. This authority cannot be 

delegated. 

(g) Regional Privacy Act Officers will: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 46 / Tuesday, March 10, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 12561 

(1) Implement and administer the 

Privacy Act program throughout the 

region. 

(2) Ensure that the collection, 

maintenance, use, or dissemination of 

records of identifiable personal 

information is in compliance with this 

part to assure that such action is for a 

necessary and lawful purpose; that the 

information is timely and accurate for 

its intended use; and that adequate 

safeguards are provided to prevent 

misuse of such information. 

(3) Prepare input for the annual 

Privacy Act Report when requested by 

the DCAA Information and Privacy 

Advisor. 

(4) Conduct training on the Privacy 

Act program for regional and FAO 

personnel. 

(5) Provide recommendations to the 

Regional Director through the Regional 

Resources Manager regarding the 

releasability of DCAA records to 

members of the public. 

(h) Managers, Field Audit Offices 

(FAOs) will: 

(1) Ensure that the provisions of this 

part are followed in processing requests 

for records. 

(2) Forward to the Regional Privacy 

Act Officer, any Privacy Act requests 

received directly from a member of the 

public, so that the request may be 

administratively controlled and 

processed. 

(3) Ensure the prompt review of all 

Privacy Act requests, and when 

required, coordinating those requests 

with other organizational elements. 

(4) Provide recommendation to the 

Regional Privacy Act Officer regarding 

the releasability of DCAA records to 

members of the public, along with the 

responsive documents. 

(5) Provide the appropriate 

documents, along with a written 

justification for any denial, in whole or 

in part, of a request for records to the 

Regional Privacy Act Officer. Those 

portions to be excised should be 

bracketed in red pencil, and the specific 

exemption or exemptions cited which 

provide the basis for denying the 

requested records. 

(i) DCAA Employees will: 

(1) Not disclose any personal 

information contained in any system of 

records, except as authorized by this 

part. 

(2) Not maintain any official files 

which are retrieved by name or other 

personal identifier without first 

ensuring that a notice for the system has 

been published in the Federal Register. 

(3) Report any disclosures of personal 

information from a system of records or 

the maintenance of any system of 

records that are not authorized by this 

part to the appropriate Privacy Act 

officials for their action. 

§ 317.5 Procedures. 

Procedures for processing material in 

accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 

are outlined in DoD 5400.11–R, DoD 

Privacy Program (32 CFR part 310). 

§ 317.6 Procedures for exemptions. 

(a) General information. There are two 

types of exemptions, general and 

specific. The general exemption 

authorizes the exemption of a system of 

records from all but a few requirements 

of the Privacy Act. The specific 

exemption authorizes exemption of a 

system of records or portion thereof, 

from only a few specific requirements. 

If a new system of records originates for 

which an exemption is proposed, or an 

additional or new exemption for an 

existing system of records is proposed, 

the exemption shall be submitted with 

the system of records notice. No 

exemption of a system of records shall 

be considered automatic for all records 

in the system. The systems manager 

shall review each requested record and 

apply the exemptions only when this 

will serve significant and legitimate 

Government purposes. 

(b) Specific exemptions. (1) System 

identifier and name: RDCAA 900.1, 

DCAA Internal Review Case Files 

(i) Exemption: Any portions of this 

system of records which fall under the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) and 

(k)(5) may be exempt from the following 

subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a: (c)(3), (d), 

(e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (f). 

(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) and 

(k)(5) 

(iii) Reason: (A) From subsection 

(c)(3) because disclosures from this 

system could interfere with the just, 

thorough and timely resolution of the 

complaint or inquiry, and possibly 

enable individuals to conceal their 

wrongdoing or mislead the course of the 

investigation by concealing, destroying 

or fabricating evidence or documents. 

(B) From subsection (d) because 

disclosures from this system could 

interfere with the just, thorough and 

timely resolution of the complaint or 

inquiry, and possibly enable individuals 

to conceal their wrongdoing or mislead 

the course of the investigation by 

concealing, destroying or fabricating 

evidence or documents. Disclosures 

could also subject sources and witnesses 

to harassment or intimidation which 

jeopardize the safety and well-being of 

themselves and their families. 

(C) From subsection (e)(1) because the 

nature of the investigation functions 

creates unique problems in prescribing 

specific parameters in a particular case 

as to what information is relevant or 

necessary. Due to close liaison and 

working relationships with other 

Federal, state, local, foreign country law 

enforcement agencies, and other 

governmental agencies, information may 

be received which may relate to a case 

under the investigative jurisdiction of 

another government agency. It is 

necessary to maintain this information 

in order to provide leads for appropriate 

law enforcement purposes and to 

establish patterns of activity which may 

relate to the jurisdiction of other 

cooperating agencies. 

(D) From subsection (e)(4)(G) through 

(H) because this system of records is 

exempt from the access provisions of 

subsection (d). 

(E) From subsection (f) because the 

agency’s rules are inapplicable to those 

portions of the system that are exempt 

and would place the burden on the 

agency of either confirming or denying 

the existence of a record pertaining to a 

requesting individual might in itself 

provide an answer to that individual 

relating to an on-going investigation. 

The conduct of a successful 

investigation leading to the indictment 

of a criminal offender precludes the 

applicability of established agency rules 

relating to verification of record, 

disclosure of the record to that 

individual, and record amendment 

procedures for this record system. 

(2) [Reserved] 

Dated: March 4, 2015. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05374 Filed 3–9–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2014–0275; A–1–FRL– 

9924–17–Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode 

Island; Transportation Conformity 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Rhode Island 

on February 21, 2014. This revision 

includes a regulation adopted by Rhode 

Island that establishes procedures to 

follow for transportation conformity 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES