34096 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1Oregon was not part of the CSAPR rulemaking. 

The EPA approved the Oregon SIP as meeting the 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements for the 

1997 ozone and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS on June 9, 2011 

(76 FR 33650) and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on 

January 16, 2015 (80 FR 2313). 

maintenance of the relevant NAAQS 

downwind; and (4) for states that are 

found to have emissions that 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the relevant NAAQS 

downwind, reducing the identified 

upwind emissions through adoption of 

permanent and enforceable measures. 

This framework was applied with 

respect to PM2.5 in the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR), designed to 

address both the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

standards, as well as the 1997 ozone 

standard.1

In its submission, ODEQ reviewed air 

quality monitoring data for several 

surrounding western states to identify 

potential downwind receptors that may 

have problems attaining or maintaining 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. ODEQ then 

reviewed geographical distance, 

topography, meteorology (local 

stagnation events), air monitoring 

trends, industrial source emissions near 

the state border, and Western Regional 

Air Partnership (WRAP) modeling to 

determine if emissions from Oregon 

may impact these specific areas. From 

this analysis and consultation with 

neighboring state air agencies, ODEQ 

concluded that Oregon does not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

As discussed in the TSD for this 

action, we came to the same conclusion 

as the state. In our evaluation, potential 

downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors were identified 

in other states. The EPA evaluated these 

potential receptors to determine first if, 

based on review of relevant data and 

other information, there would be 

downwind nonattainment or 

maintenance problems, and if so, 

whether Oregon contributes to such 

problems in these areas. After reviewing 

air quality reports, modeling results, 

designation letters, designation 

technical support documents, 

attainment plans and other information 

for these areas, we find there is no 

contribution sufficient to warrant 

additional SIP measures. Therefore, we 

are proposing to approve the Oregon SIP 

as meeting CAA section 110(a)(2)(i)(I) 

interstate transport requirements for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. What action is the EPA taking? 

The EPA is proposing to approve 

ODEQ’s October 20, 2015, submission 

certifying that the Oregon SIP is 

sufficient to meet the interstate 

transport requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), specifically prongs one 

and two, as set forth above. The EPA is 

requesting comments on the proposed 

approval. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: July 3, 2018. 

Chris Hladick, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15353 Filed 7–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 74 

[MB Docket No. 18–119; DA 18–669] 

FM Translator Interference: Media 

Bureau Grants Extension of Time To 

File Comments and Reply Comments 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: This document announces 

that the Media Bureau of the Federal 

Communications Commission granted 

the Motion for Extension of Time to 

extend the comment and reply comment 

deadlines, filed by Beasley Media 

Group, LLC; Educational Media 

Foundation; Gradick Communications, 

LLC; iHeart Communications, Inc.; 

Neuhoff Corp.; Radio One Licenses, 

LLC/Urban One, Inc.; and Withers 

Broadcasting Companies (Petitioners), 

in MB Docket 18–119. 

DATES: Comments may be filed on or 

before August 6, 2018, and reply 

comments may be filed on or before 

September 5, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of 

the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, by any of the following methods: 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34097 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http://apps.fcc.gov/ 

ecfs/. 

D Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. 

D Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

D All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St. SW, Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand 

deliveries must be held together with 

rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes and boxes must be disposed 

of before entering the building. 

D Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 

Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 

20701. 

D U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW, 

Washington DC 20554. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) 

418–0432. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 

18–119, FCC 18–60, adopted May 10, 

2018, and released May 10, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Albert Shuldiner, Chief, Audio Division, 

Media Bureau, (202) 418–2721; James 

Bradshaw, Deputy Division Chief, 

Media Bureau (202) 418–2739. Direct 

press inquiries to Janice Wise at (202) 

418–8165. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Media Bureau’s Order, 

DA 18–669, adopted June 27, 2018, and 

released June 27, 2018. Petitioners filed 

a Motion for Extension of Time seeking 

to extend the deadlines to file comments 

and reply comments to August 6, 2018, 

and September 5, 2018, respectively, in 

FM Translator Interference, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 

18–119, FCC 18–60 (rel. May 10, 2018), 

83 FR 26229, June 6, 2018. For good 

cause shown, the Media Bureau, 

pursuant to delegated authority, granted 

the request. Comments were originally 

due July 6, 2018, and reply comments 

on August 6, 2018. Grant of the request 

makes comments due on August 6, 

2018, and reply comments due on 

September 5, 2018. This proceeding is 

treated as ‘‘permit but disclose’’ for 

purposes of the Commission’s ex parte 

rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.200–1.216. 

As a result of the permit but disclose 

status of this proceeding, ex parte 

presentations will be governed by the 

procedures set forth in Section 1.1206 of 

the Commission’s rules applicable to 

non-restricted proceedings. 

The full text of this document is 

available electronically via the FCC’s 

Electronic Document Management 

System (EDOCS) website at http://

https://www.fcc.gov/edocs or via the 

FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing 

System (ECFS) website at http://https:// 

www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. (Documents will be 

available electronically in ASCII, 

Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) 

This document is also available for 

public inspection and copying during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Information Center, which is 

located in Room CY–A257 at FCC 

Headquarters, 445 12th Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20554. The Reference 

Information Center is open to the public 

Monday through Thursday from 8:00 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday from 8:00 

a.m. to 11:30 a.m. The complete text 

may be purchased from the 

Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th 

Street SW, Room CY–B402, Washington, 

DC 20554. Alternative formats are 

available for people with disabilities 

(braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), by sending an email to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or calling the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Federal Communications Commission. 

James Bradshaw, 

Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15275 Filed 7–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS