Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 16509 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

information about the EPA’s public 

docket, visit the EPA Docket Center 

homepage at http://www.epa.gov/ 

epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket. The EPA has established a 

docket for this rulemaking under Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0435. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the EPA Docket Center is 

(202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions about this proposed action, 

contact Mr. Nick Parsons, Sector 

Policies and Programs Division (E143– 

01), Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711; telephone number: 

(919) 541–5372; fax number: (919) 541– 

0246; email address: 

parsons.nick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the 

reasons noted above, the public 

comment period will be reopened until 

March 30, 2012. 

How can I get copies of the proposed 

rule and other related information? 

The proposed rule titled, National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutant Emissions: Group IV Polymers 

and Resins; Pesticide Active Ingredient 

Production; and Polyether Polyols 

Production, was published on January 9, 

2012 (77 FR 1268). EPA has established 

the public docket for the proposed 

rulemaking under docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2011–0435, and a copy of the 

proposed rule is available in the docket. 

Information on how to access the docket 

is presented above in the ADDRESSES

section. 

Dated: March 9, 2012. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Assistant Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2012–6807 Filed 3–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 70 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0955; FRL–9649–4] 

Proposed Approval of Revision of Five 

California Clean Air Act Title V 

Operating Permits Programs 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Operating Permits (Title 

V) programs of the Monterey Bay 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(MBUAPCD), San Luis Obispo County 

Air Pollution Control District 

(SLOCAPCD), Santa Barbara County Air 

Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD), 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

District (SCAQMD), and Ventura County 

Air Pollution Control District 

(VCAPCD). These program revisions 

will require sources with the potential 

to emit (PTE)of greenhouse gas (GHG) 

above the thresholds in EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule that have not been previously 

subject to Title V for other reasons to 

obtain a Title V permit. See ‘‘Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration and Title V 

Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final 

Rule,’’ (the Tailoring Rule), 75 FR 31514 

(June 3, 2010). We are taking comments 

on this proposal and plan to follow with 

a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

April 20, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0955, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: EPA has established a docket 

for this action under EPA–R09–OAR– 

2011–0955. Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105. While all documents are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps, multi-volume 

reports), and some may not be publicly 

available in either location (e.g., CBI). 

To inspect the hard copy materials, 

please schedule an appointment during 

normal business hours with the contact 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roger Kohn, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3973, kohn.roger@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

II. The Part 70 Operating Permits Program 

A. What is the Part 70 operating permits 

program? 

B. How did EPA revise Part 70 to address 

Title V permitting of GHG sources? 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16510 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

C. What is the federal approval process for 

revisions to a Part 70 operating permits 

program? 

III. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules addressed by 

this proposal with the dates that they 

were adopted by the local air agencies 

and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

MBUAPCD ................................. 218 Title V: Federal Operating Permits ................................................ 11/17/10 11/7/11 

SLOCAPCD ............................... 216 Federal Part 70 Operating Permits ............................................... 3/23/11 8/19/11 

SBCAPCD ................................. 1301 Part 70 Operating Permits—General Information ......................... 1/20/11 4/21/11 

SCAQMD ................................... 3000 General .......................................................................................... 11/5/10 11/5/10 

3001 Applicability.

3002 Requirements.

3003 Applications.

3005 Permit Revisions.

3006 Public Participation.

VCAPCD .................................... 33 Part 70 Permits—General ............................................................. 4/12/11 8/19/11 

33 .1 Part 70 Permits—Definitions.

II. The Part 70 Operating Permits 

Program 

A. What is the Part 70 operating permits 

program? 

Title V of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

Amendments of 1990 require all states 

to develop an operating permits 

program that meets federal criteria listed 

in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

Part 70. In implementing this program, 

the states are to require certain sources 

of air pollution to obtain permits that 

contain all applicable requirements 

under the CAA. One purpose of the Part 

70 operating permits program (also 

known as the Title V program) is to 

improve enforcement and compliance 

by issuing each source a single permit 

that consolidates all of the applicable 

CAA requirements into a federallyenforceable document. By consolidating 

all of the applicable requirements for a 

facility into one document, the source, 

the public, and the permitting 

authorities can more easily determine 

what CAA requirements apply and how 

compliance with those requirements is 

determined. 

B. How did EPA revise Part 70 to 

address Title V permitting of GHG 

sources? 

In the Tailoring Rule (75 FR 31514, 

June 3, 2010), we amended the 

definition of ‘‘major source’’ in Part 70 

by codifying EPA’s longstanding 

interpretation that applicability for a 

‘‘major stationary source’’ under CAA 

sections 501(2)(B) and 302(j) and 40 

CFR 70.2 is triggered by sources of 

pollutants ‘‘subject to regulation.’’ We 

also added a definition of ‘‘subject to 

regulation’’ to clarify that this phrase 

means a pollutant subject to either a 

provision in the CAA or a regulation 

adopted by EPA under the CAA that 

requires actual control of emissions of 

that pollutant and that has taken effect 

under the CAA. Finally, to tailor the 

Title V program for GHGs, we also 

included a second component within 

the definition of ‘‘subject to regulation,’’ 

specifying that GHGs are not subject to 

regulation for purposes of defining a 

major source, unless as of July 1, 2011, 

the GHG emissions are from a source 

emitting or having the potential to emit 

100,000 tons per year (tpy) of GHGs on 

a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) 

basis. We defined the term ‘‘greenhouse 

gases’’ with a cross-reference to the 

definition in 40 CFR 86.1818–12(a). The 

combined effect of these Part 70 

amendments is to revise the Title V 

program to require stationary sources 

that have the potential to emit 100,000 

tpy or more of GHGs on a CO2e basis 

to obtain Title V permits, regardless of 

whether they are subject to any CAA 

requirement to control their GHG 

emissions. The five air districts whose 

Title V programs we are proposing to 

revise took differing approaches to 

revising their Title V regulations to 

address the Tailoring Rule’s Title V 

requirements, depending on the 

structure and content of their rules. In 

section III.B., we explain how the 

districts’ revised Title V regulations 

satisfy the new Title V GHG criteria. 

C. What is the federal approval process 

for revisions to a Part 70 operating 

permits program? 

In order for state regulations to be 

approved as part of the federallyenforceable Title V operating permits 

program, states must formally adopt 

regulations consistent with state and 

Federal requirements. This process 

generally includes a public notice, 

public hearing, public comment period, 

and a formal adoption by a stateauthorized rulemaking body. 

Once a state rule, regulation, or 

control strategy is adopted, the state 

submits it to us for inclusion into its 

approved operating permits program. 

We must provide public notice and seek 

additional public comment regarding 

the proposed Federal action on the state 

submission. If adverse comments are 

received, they must be addressed prior 

to any final Federal action by us. 

All state regulations and supporting 

information approved by EPA under 

section 502 of the CAA, including 

revisions to the state program, are 

included in the Federally-approved 

operating permits program. Records of 

such actions are maintained in the CFR 

at Title 40, part 70, appendix A, entitled 

‘‘Approval Status of State and Local 

Operating Permits Programs.’’ 

III. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

The relevant statutory provisions for 

our review of the submitted rules 

include 40 CFR Part 70, as amended by 

the June 3, 2010 Tailoring Rule. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We have reviewed the five districts’ 

revised Title V rules in accordance with 

the rule evaluation criteria described 

above. A discussion for each District is 

provided below. EPA is proposing to 

find that each district’s submittal 

correctly implements the changes in 

Title V applicability required by the 

Tailoring Rule. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 16511 

MBUAPCD revised Rule 218 (Title V: 

Federal Operating Permits) to satisfy the 

Tailoring Rule requirements. The 

District revised the definition of ‘‘Major 

Source’’ in section 2.18.5 of the rule to 

include sources that, as of July 1, 2010, 

emit or have the potential to emit 

‘‘100,000 tpy or more of carbon dioxide 

equivalent (CO2e) greenhouse gas 

emissions and directly emit, or have the 

potential to emit, 100 tons per year (tpy) 

or more of any greenhouse gas,’’ as 

required by the Tailoring Rule. The 

District also revised Section 1.3 of the 

rule to exempt sources that limit their 

PTE of GHG emissions to less than 

100,000 tpy of CO2e greenhouse gas 

emissions, and to exclude greenhouse 

gases from the exemption for sources 

that limit their PTE to less than 100 tpy 

of any air pollutant. The District added 

new definitions for ‘‘Greenhouse Gases’’ 

and ‘‘Carbon Dioxide Equivalent 

Emissions’’. Instead of using a crossreference to 40 CFR 86.1818–12(a), as 

EPA does in the Tailoring Rule, 

MBUAPCD has provided a specific 

definition of Greenhouse Gases in its 

rule, which is consistent with the EPA 

definition. The District’s definition of 

‘‘Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Emissions’’ 

incorporates the Global Warming 

Potential values that EPA lists in Table 

A–1 to Subpart A of 40 CFR Part 98, 

EPA’s Mandatory Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting regulation. All of these 

changes, which are the only changes 

that the District made to Rule 218, are 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Tailoring Rule. We note that the 

applicability date of July 1, 2010 is one 

year earlier than required by the 

Tailoring Rule. This had no practical 

effect in the District because there are 

no sources newly subject to Title V 

based solely on being classified a major 

source for GHG emissions. 

SLOAPCD added a new provision to 

the Applicability section of Rule 216 

(Federal Part 70 Permits). The new 

provision, in paragraph 216.B.2., 

requires sources that emit GHG in 

amounts ‘‘equal to or exceeding the 

thresholds specified in 40 CFR 70.2 in 

effect August 2, 2010’’ to apply for a 

title V permit. The District also added 

a new provision to the definition of ‘‘Air 

Pollutant.’’ The new provision, in 

paragraph 216.C.4.f., adds ‘‘Greenhouse 

gases that are ‘subject to regulation’ as 

defined in 40 CFR 70.2 in effect August 

2, 2010’’ to the list of the air pollutants 

defined in the rule. These crossreferences to 40 CFR 70.2 means that the 

District’s approach to tailoring the 

applicability of its Title V program for 

GHG sources is identical to EPA’s. We 

are proposing to approve these revisions 

to SLOAPCD’s title V program because 

they are consistent with EPA’s approach 

to Title V applicability for GHG sources 

in the Tailoring Rule. 

SBCAPCD revised Rule 1301 (General 

Information), which is one of five rules 

that comprise the District’s Regulation 

XIII (Part 70 Operating Permit Program), 

by adding a cross-reference to 40 CFR 

70.2. Specifically, the District amended 

the definition of ‘‘Part 70 Source’’ in 

section 1301.C. by adding a new 

provision that makes sources with the 

potential to emit ‘‘greenhouse gases that 

are ‘subject to regulation’ as defined in 

40 CFR 70.2 in effect August 2, 2010’’ 

subject to Title V. This cross-reference 

to the 40 CFR 70.2 definition of ‘‘subject 

to regulation’’ means that the District’s 

approach to tailoring the applicability of 

its Title V program to GHG sources is 

identical to EPA’s, and therefore 

approvable. 

In addition to the GHG-related rule 

changes adopted on January 20, 2011, 

SBCAPCD had previously revised the 

definition of ‘‘stationary source’’ in Rule 

1301 to reduce the area in which marine 

vessels associated with a stationary 

source must account for their emissions. 

Rule 1301 now limits the geographic 

area of emissions liability to ‘‘California 

Coastal Waters’’ (as defined in Rule 

1301) adjacent to the District, and 

excludes areas adjacent to the 

neighboring counties of San Luis Obispo 

and Ventura. We are proposing to 

approve this change, which is consistent 

with the District’s jurisdiction in Santa 

Barbara County. 

SCAQMD addressed the Tailoring 

Rule requirements by revising six of the 

seven rules that comprise Regulation 

XXX (Title V Permits). Specifically, 

SCAQMD revised Rule 3000 (General) to 

add definitions of ‘‘Carbon Dioxide 

Equivalent’’, ‘‘Global Warming 

Potential’’, and ‘‘Greenhouse Gas.’’ 

SCAQMD also revised Rule 3001 

(Applicability) to require that any 

facility that, as of July 1, 2011, has the 

potential to emit 100,000 tpy or more of 

GHG on a CO2e basis and a potential to 

emit more than 100 tpy of any GHG on 

a mass basis apply for a Title V permit 

within 180 days. SCAQMD provided a 

specific definition of GHG in Rule 3000 

which is consistent with the EPA 

definition. The District’s definition of 

‘‘CO2 equivalent’’ is based on the same 

Global Warming Potential values that 

EPA lists in Table A–1 to Subpart A of 

40 CFR Part 98, EPA’s Mandatory 

Greenhouse Gas Reporting regulation. 

SCAQMD’s definition of ‘‘Global 

Warming Potential’’ uses the same 

language as EPA’s definition in 40 CFR 

Section 98.6. Finally, SCAQMD revised 

Rule 3003 (Applications), Rule 3005 

(Permit Revisions), and Rule 3006 

(Public Participation), to make the cross 

references to Rule 3000 within those 

rules consistent with the revised 

numbering sequence in that rule. Since 

the District’s Title V program changes 

are consistent with EPA’s approach to 

Title V in the Tailoring Rule, we are 

proposing to approve them as a revision 

to SCAQMD’s Title V program. 

VCAPCD addressed the applicability 

of title V permitting for major GHG 

sources by revising the applicability 

provisions of Rule 33 (Part 70 Permits— 

General). Specifically, the District 

revised subsection 33.B.1., which 

requires stationary sources with a PTE 

of 100 tpy or more of any regulated air 

pollutant to obtain a title V permit. 

VCAPCD added language to this 

provision to make it applicable to 

sources that emit greenhouse gases, 

effective July 1, 2011, if a source also 

has a PTE of 100,000 tons per year or 

more on a CO2 equivalent basis. 

In addition the District added a new 

definition of ‘‘CO2 Equivalent (CO2e)’’ to 

Rule 33.1 (Part 70 Permits—Definitions) 

that is based on EPA’s definition of ‘‘tpy 

CO2 equivalent emissions’’ in 40 CFR 

70.2, and refers to the Global Warming 

Potentials that appear in Table 1 of Rule 

2 (Definitions). (Rule 2 has been 

submitted to EPA for approval into the 

Ventura County portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan. We will take 

action on that rule in a separate 

rulemaking.) We are approving the 

District’s definition because, while it is 

not identical to the 70.2 definition, it is 

sufficiently similar to, and fully 

consistent with, our definition. The 

District also revised two definitions in 

Rule 33.1. The definition of ‘‘regulated 

air pollutant’’ now includes greenhouse 

gases if the source has a potential to 

emit of 100,000 tons per year or more 

CO2 equivalent emissions. The 

definition of ‘‘Insignificant Activity’’ 

now excludes greenhouse gases from the 

emission level of 2 tpy of any regulated 

pollutant that otherwise qualifies an 

activity as insignificant. 

VCAPCD also made one revision that 

is unrelated to GHG. The District 

revised the definition of ‘‘FederallyEnforceable Requirement’’ in Rule 33.1. 

The District added language to 

Subparagraph 33.1.12.a, which lists 

Title I requirements of the CAA that are 

federally enforceable, to clarify that 

federally enforceable Title I 

requirements are ‘‘not limited to’’ the 

requirements listed in the definition. 

The additional language ensures that the 

definition includes other Title I 

requirements that may be promulgated 

by the EPA Administrator in the future. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16512 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

We are proposing to approve the Title 

V program revisions submitted by 

VCAPCD because the GHG provisions of 

the revised rules are consistent with 

EPA’s approach to Title V in the 

Tailoring Rule, and the revision to the 

definition of ‘‘Federally-Enforceable 

Requirement’’ clarifies the definition 

and is consistent with EPA’s definition 

of ‘‘applicable requirement’’ in 40 CFR 

70.2. 

C. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

EPA believes the submitted rules 

fulfill all of the Tailoring Rule’s Title V 

requirements; therefore we are 

proposing to approve these rule 

changes, adopted in 2010 and 2011, as 

revisions to the Title V programs of all 

five districts. We will accept comments 

from the public on this proposal for the 

next 30 days. Unless we receive 

convincing new information during the 

comment period, we intend to publish 

a final approval action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Today’s proposed action merely 

proposes to approve 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’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the action 

is not approved to apply in Indian 

country located in the State, and EPA 

notes that it will not impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide, 

Carbon dioxide equivalents, Greenhouse 

gases, Hydrofluorocarbons, 

Intergovernmental relations, Methane, 

Nitrous oxide, Perfluorocarbons, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur hexafluoride, 

Incorporation by Reference. 

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

Dated: March 8, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–6676 Filed 3–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2011–0096; 

4500030114] 

RIN 1018–AX38 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for the Southern Selkirk 

Mountains Population of Woodland 

Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

comment period and announcement of 

public hearing. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

reopening of the comment period on our 

November 30, 2011, proposed rule to 

designate critical habitat for the 

southern Selkirk Mountains population 

of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus 

caribou) under the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are 

reopening the public comment period to 

allow all interested parties another 

opportunity to comment on the 

proposed rule. Comments previously 

submitted need not be resubmitted and 

will be fully considered in preparation 

of the final rule. We will also hold a 

public informational session and 

hearing (see DATES and ADDRESSES). 

DATES: Written Comments: We will 

consider comments received or 

postmarked on or before May 21, 2012. 

Comments must be received by 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on 

the closing date. 

Public informational session and 

public hearing: We will hold a public 

informational session from 9:30 a.m. to 

11:30 a.m., followed by a public hearing 

from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., on April 28, 2012, 

in Bonners Ferry, Idaho (see 

ADDRESSES). 

ADDRESSES: Written Comments: You 

may submit comments by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. In the 

Search box, enter the Docket number for 

this proposed rule, which is FWS–R1– 

ES–2011–0096. Please ensure that you 

have found the correct rulemaking 

before submitting your comment. 

(2) U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. 

FWS–R1–ES–2011–0096; Division of 

Policy and Directives Management; U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. 

Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM; 

Arlington, VA 22203. 

We request that you send comments 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all comments on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Public Comments section below for 

more information). 

Public informational session and 

public hearing: The public 

informational session and hearing will 

be held at the Bonners Ferry High 

School, 6485 Tamarack Lane, Bonners 

Ferry, ID 83805. People needing 

reasonable accommodations in order to 

attend and participate in the public 

hearing should contact Brian Kelly, 

State Supervisor, Idaho Fish and 

Wildlife Office, at (208) 378–5243, as 

soon as possible (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Kelly, State Supervisor, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 1387 South Vinnell 

Way, Room 368, Boise, ID 83709; 

telephone 208–378–5243; facsimile 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS