Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 220 / Monday, November 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules 70727 

26Nebraska’s SIP submission appears to rely on 

EPA’s 2011 air quality modeling because at that 

time, the D.C. Circuit’s decision in EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA held that EPA must first 

quantify each state’s transport obligation before 

states had an obligation to make a SIP submission. 

See 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012). Accordingly, 

Nebraska cites a November 19, 2012, memorandum 

from Assistant Administrator Gina McCarthy, 

which describes the D.C. Circuit’s holding that ‘‘a 

SIP cannot be deemed deficient for failing to meet 

the good neighbor obligation before the EPA 

quantifies that obligation.’’ See Memo at 2, 

available at http://www3.epa.gov/airtransport/pdfs/ 

CSAPR_Memo_to_Regions.pdf. The memorandum 

also communicated the Agency’s intentions to ‘‘act 

in accordance with the [D.C. Circuit] decision 

during the pendency of the appeal,’’ id., but on 

appeal the Supreme Court reversed that holding. 

See EPA v. EME Homer City Gen., 134 S. Ct. 1584, 

1609–10 (2014). 

contribute 0.8 ppb or more to 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment or maintenance in 

another state are identified as states 

with contributions to downwind 

attainment and maintenance sites large 

enough to warrant further analysis.’’ 

Nebraska noted that 0.8 ppb cutoff 

equates to a one percent threshold, 

which was the threshold EPA used in 

that rulemaking for the previous 1997 

ozone NAAQS. According to Nebraska, 

the rule stands for the proposition that 

‘‘states whose contributions are below 

these thresholds do not significantly 

contribute or interfere with maintenance 

of the relevant NAAQS.’’ Nebraska 

noted that, pursuant to the modeling 

discussed in that rule (76 FR 48245), 

Nebraska’s largest downwind 

contribution to any identified 

nonattainment or maintenance receptors 

for ozone was 0.2 ppb. Nebraska 

concluded that because this modeling 

contribution represents far less than one 

percent of the 2008 ozone NAAQS at 

issue here, it ‘‘does not have any 

obligations’’ to reduce emissions to 

address interstate transport as to that 

standard. 

The EPA notes that the modeling 

Nebraska relies upon was conducted by 

EPA in 2011, for purposes of evaluating 

upwind state contributions and 

downwind air quality problems as to a 

prior, less-stringent ozone NAAQS, and 

that the modeling evaluated a 2012 

compliance year. Accordingly, the fact 

that this modeling showed downwind 

contribution less than one percent of the 

2008 ozone NAAQS is not necessarily 

dispositive of Nebraska’s obligations 

under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).26

However, as discussed above, the EPA 

has conducted more updated modeling 

subsequent to the state’s SIP submission 

that confirms the underlying conclusion 

of our 2011 modeling, and of Nebraska’s 

SIP submission. 

Based on the modeling data and the 

information and analysis provided in 

Nebraska’s SIP, EPA is proposing to 

approve Nebraska’s interstate transport 

SIP for purposes of meeting the CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements as 

to the 2008 ozone standard. The EPA’s 

modeling confirms the results of the 

State’s analysis: Nebraska does not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2008 ozone standard 

in any other state. 

V. What action is EPA proposing? 

Based upon review of the state’s 

infrastructure SIP submission for the 

2008 O3 NAAQS, with respect to the 

requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D(i)(I)—prongs 1 and 2, and 

relevant statutory and regulatory 

authorities and provisions referenced in 

these submissions or referenced in 

Nebraska’s SIP, EPA is proposing to 

approve this element of the February 11, 

2013 SIP submission. 

We are hereby soliciting comment on 

this proposed action. Final rulemaking 

will occur after consideration of any 

comments. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

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, 

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 proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under the terms of Executive 

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 

1993) and is therefore not subject to 

review under Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 

2011). 

• 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). 

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). 

Statutory Authority 

The statutory authority for this action 

is provided by section 110 of the CAA, 

as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: November 2, 2015. 

Mark Hague, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2015–28908 Filed 11–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0701; FRL–9936–95– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Sewage 

Sludge Incinerators State Plan and 

Small Municipal Waste Combustors 

Negative Declaration for Designated 

Facilities and Pollutants 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70728 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 220 / Monday, November 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Michigan‘s State Plan to control air 

pollutants from Sewage Sludge 

Incinerators (SSI). The Michigan 

Department of Environmental Quality 

submitted the State Plan on September 

21, 2015, following the required public 

process. The State Plan is consistent 

with the Emission Guidelines 

promulgated by EPA on March 21, 2011. 

This approval means that EPA finds that 

the State Plan meets applicable Clean 

Air Act requirements for subject SSI 

units. Once effective, this approval also 

makes the State Plan Federally 

enforceable. EPA is also announcing 

that we have received from Michigan a 

negative declaration for Small 

Municipal Waste Combustors (SMWC). 

The Michigan Department of 

Environmental Quality submitted on 

July 27, 2015 a negative declaration 

certifying that there are no SMWC units 

currently operating in the state of 

Michigan. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 16, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2015–0071, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: nwia.jacqueline@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2566. 

4. Mail: Jacqueline Nwia, Acting 

Chief, Toxics and Global Atmosphere 

Section, Air Toxics and Assessment 

Branch (AT–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Jacqueline Nwia, 

Acting Chief, Toxics and Global 

Atmosphere Section, Air Toxics and 

Assessment Branch (AT–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Margaret Sieffert, Environmental 

Engineer, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard (AT–18J), Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 353–1151, 

sieffert.margaret@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Rules section of this Federal Register, 

EPA is approving through a direct final 

rulemaking Michigan’s State Plan for 

control of air pollutants from SSI 

sources, and is amending 40 CFR part 

62 to reflect the State’s submittal of the 

negative declaration as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, we will 

withdraw the direct final rule and will 

address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. Please note 

that if EPA receives adverse comment 

on an amendment, paragraph, or section 

of this rule, and if that provision can be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. For additional 

information, see the direct final rule 

which is located in the Rules section of 

this Federal Register. 

Dated: October 29, 2015. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2015–28910 Filed 11–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

45 CFR Part 1329 

RIN 0985–AA10 

Independent Living Services and 

Centers for Independent Living 

AGENCY: Administration for Community 

Living, HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

implement the Workforce Innovation 

and Opportunity Act enacted on July 22, 

2014 and reflects the transfer of 

Independent Living Services and 

Centers for Independent Living 

programs from the Department of 

Education to the Department of Health 

and Human Services. The previous 

regulations were issued by the 

Department of Education. This proposed 

rule will consolidate the Independent 

Living (IL) regulations into a single part, 

align the regulations with the current 

statute and HHS policies, and will 

provide guidance to IL grantees. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

January 15, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

in one of following ways (no duplicates, 

please): Written comments may be 

submitted through any of the methods 

specified below. Please do not submit 

duplicate comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: You 

may (and we encourage you to) submit 

electronic comments on this regulation 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the instructions under the ‘‘submit a 

comment’’ tab. Attachments should be 

in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, or 

Excel; however, we prefer Microsoft 

Word. 

• Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail: 

You may mail written comments to the 

following address ONLY: 

Administration for Community Living, 

Attention: IL NPRM, U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, 

Washington, DC 20201. Please allow 

sufficient time for mailed comments to 

be received before the close of the 

comment period. 

• Individuals with a Disability: We 

will provide an appropriate 

accommodation, including alternative 

formats, upon request. To make such a 

request, please contact Marlina MosesGaither, (202) 357–3552 (Voice) or at 

marlina.moses-gaither@acl.hhs.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Molly Burgdorf, Administration for 

Community Living, telephone (202) 

357–3411 (Voice). This is not a toll-free 

number. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act of 2014 

The Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act (‘‘WIOA,’’ Pub. L. 113– 

128), signed into law on July 22, 2014, 

included significant changes to title VII 

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. WIOA 

transfers the Independent Living 

Services and Centers for Independent 

Living programs authorized under 

chapter 1, title VII of the Rehabilitation 

Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act or Act), 

as amended by WIOA (Pub. L. 113–128) 

from the Rehabilitation Services 

Administration (RSA), U.S. Department 

of Education (ED), to the Administration 

for Community Living (ACL), U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). WIOA also transferred 

the National Institute on Disability, 

Independent Living, and Rehabilitation 

Research, and the Assistive Technology 

Act programs to ACL. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS