Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Notices 20625 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose 

or provide information to or for a 

Federal agency. This includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, 

acquire, install, and utilize technology 

and systems for the purposes of 

collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements which have subsequently 

changed; train personnel to be able to 

respond to a collection of information; 

search data sources; complete and 

review the collection of information; 

and transmit or otherwise disclose the 

information. 

The ICR provides a detailed 

explanation of the Agency’s estimate, 

which is only briefly summarized here: 

Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 1403. 

Frequency of response: On occasion. 

Estimated total average number of 

responses for each respondent: 1. 

Estimated total annual burden hours: 

578,381 hours. 

Estimated total annual costs: 

$38,057,653 including $37,384,641 

annualized labor costs and $673,012 

annualized capital or O&M costs. 

What is the next step in the process for 

this ICR? 

EPA will consider the comments 

received and amend the ICR as 

appropriate. The final ICR package will 

then be submitted to OMB for review 

and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue 

another Federal Register notice 

pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to 

announce the submission of the ICR to 

OMB and the opportunity to submit 

additional comments to OMB. If you 

have any questions about this ICR or the 

approval process, please contact the 

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Dated: March 28, 2012. 

Suzanne Rudzinski, 

Director, Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8201 Filed 4–4–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2012–0211; FRL–9655–5] 

Air Pollution Control: Proposed Action 

on Clean Air Act Grants to the Idaho 

Department of Environmental Quality; 

Proposed Determination With Request 

for Comments; and a Notice of 

Opportunity for a Public Hearing 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice; Proposed determination 

with request for comments; and a notice 

of opportunity for a public hearing. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. EPA has made a 

proposed determination that reduction 

in expenditures of non-Federal funds for 

the Idaho Department of Environmental 

Quality (IDEQ) in support of its 

continuing air program under Clean Air 

Act (CAA) Section 105 for the period of 

calendar year 2010 was not selective 

relative to the expenditures of all other 

executive branch agencies in the State 

for the same period. This determination, 

when final, will reset IDEQ’s required 

recipient maintenance of effort level for 

2010 and 2011, retain its federal award 

for the 2010 and 2011 grant years, and 

allow IDEQ to remain eligible for a § 105 

grant for 2012 and beyond. 

DATES: Comments and/or requests for a 

public hearing must be received by EPA 

at the address stated below by May 7, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2012–0211, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov, Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: McGown.Michael@epa.gov 

• Mail: Michael McGown, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 10, 1435 North Orchard, Boise, 

ID 83706. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael McGown, Region 10, Idaho 

Operations Office, 1435 North Orchard, 

Boise, ID 83706, phone: (208)–378– 

5764, fax: (208)–378–5744, or email 

address at mcgown.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

105 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) provides 

grant support for the continuing air 

programs of eligible state, local and 

tribal agencies. Section 105 contains 

two cost-sharing provisions to initially 

qualify for a § 105 grant under 

§ 105(a)(1)(A). An eligible entity must 

meet a minimum match and to remain 

eligible for Section 105 grant funds, an 

eligible entity must continue to meet the 

match as well as meet a maintenance of 

effort (MOE) requirement under 

§ 105(c)(1). The match requires that at 

least 2⁄5 of the total costs for approved 

§ 105 program activities must be paid by 

the state/local recipient. Program 

activities relevant to the match consist 

of both recurring and non-recurring 

(unique, one-time only) expenses. 

The MOE provision requires that a 

state or local agency spend at least the 

same dollar level of funds as it did in 

the previous grant year but only for the 

costs of recurring activities. Specifically, 

§ 105(c)(1) [42 U.S.C. 7405(c)(1)], 

provides that ‘‘no agency shall receive 

any grant under this section during any 

fiscal year when its expenditures of 

non-Federal funds for recurrent 

expenditures for air pollution control 

programs will be less than its 

expenditures were for such programs 

during the preceding fiscal year. 

Pursuant to CAA § 105(c)(2), however, 

EPA may still award a grant to an 

agency not meeting the requirements of 

§ 105(c)(1), ‘‘if the Administrator, after 

notice and opportunity for public 

hearing, determines that a reduction in 

expenditures is attributable to a nonselective reduction in the expenditures 

in the programs of all Executive branch 

agencies of the applicable unit of 

Government.’’ These statutory 

requirements are repeated in EPA’s 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR 

35.140 through 35.148. 

EPA issued additional guidance to 

recipients on what constitutes a 

nonselective reduction on September 

30, 2011. In consideration of legislative 

history, the guidance clarified that a 

non-selective reduction does not 

necessarily mean that each Executive 

branch agency need be reduced in equal 

proportion. However, it must be clear to 

EPA, from the weight of evidence, that 

a recipient’s CAA-related air program is 

not being disproportionately impacted 

or singled out for a reduction. 

A § 105 recipient must submit a final 

financial status report no later than 90 

days from the close of its grant period 

that documents all of its federal and 

non-federal expenditures for the 

completed period. The recipient seeking 

an adjustment to its MOE for that period 

must provide the rationale and the 

documentation necessary to enable EPA 

to make a determination that a nonselective reduction has occurred. In 

order to expedite that determination, the 

recipient must provide details of the 

budget action and the comparative fiscal 

impacts on all the jurisdiction’s 

executive branch agencies, the recipient 

agency itself, and the agency’s air 

program. The recipient should identify 

any executive branch agencies or 

programs that should be excepted from 


Tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
20626 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Notices 

comparison and explain why. The 

recipient must provide evidence that the 

air program is not being singled out for 

a reduction or being disproportionately 

reduced. Documentation in two key 

areas will be needed: Budget data 

specific to the recipient’s air program 

and comparative budget data between 

the recipient’s air program, the agency 

containing the air program and the other 

executive branch agencies. EPA may 

also request information from the 

recipient about how impacts on the its 

program operations will affect its ability 

to meet its CAA obligations and 

requirements. 

In the case of IDEQ, EPA provides 

annual grant funding under the 

authority CAA § 105 to help IDEQ 

support the operation of its CAA-related 

continuing air pollution control 

program. IDEQ’s § 105 annual grant 

period is based on the calendar year and 

as such is always impacted by two State 

budget years since the annual Idaho 

state budget cycle runs from July 1 of 

the current through June 30 of the 

following year. For the 2010 grant year 

EPA awarded the IDEQ $1,497,516 in 

§ 105 funds. This represented 27.8% of 

the total approved program funding 

based on IDEQ’s stated prospective 

contribution of $3,891,016 in its own 

non-federal funds to cover the costs of 

both non-recurring and recurring 

activities. The State’s portion of the total 

recurring costs was to have been at least 

$3,842,589. This was the State’s final 

level of recurrent expenditures for the 

2009 grant year and constituted the 

required MOE level for the 2010 grant 

year. 

However, on March 8, 2011, IDEQ 

informed EPA in writing that due to 

continued reductions in the State’s 

overall budget for executive branch 

agencies, particularly in the State’s 

SFY2011 budget (which funded the last 

6 months of the calendar year 2010 

grant), IDEQ would fall short of its 

required MOE level by $452,789. The 

resulting contribution of $3,389,800 

would be 11.78% below the required 

level. EPA examined the IDEQ’s request 

and confirmed that its 2010 final 

financial status report indicated a State 

contribution level of $3,389,800 of 

recurrent expenditures. 

In its March 8, 2011 letter to EPA, 

IDEQ requested an adjustment of its 

2010 MOE level based upon a nonselective reduction. IDEQ also sought to 

retain its 2011 § 105 award based on this 

lowered recipient contribution level. In 

support of its request IDEQ provided 

legislative appropriations information 

on State general fund levels by major 

departmental categories for the 2009, 

2010 and 2011 budget years. In June, 

July and October of 2011, EPA requested 

additional clarifying information from 

IDEQ on the full range of state-only 

executive branch, IDEQ and air program 

appropriations and expenses for the 

2010 grant period. IDEQ supplied 

additional information to EPA on July 

21, July 25, October 17, October 27, and 

November 15th that further 

distinguished general fund, dedicated 

fund and federal stimulus resources. On 

November 28 and November 30, 2011 

IDEQ further clarified its direct and 

indirect air program expenditures 

compared to changes in overall IDEQ 

environmental program expenditure 

levels, overall State general fund levels 

and overall State appropriations levels 

for the affected period. A summary of 

this information is shown in the tables 

below. 

TABLE 1—IDEQ GENERAL FUND CHANGES FROM SFY 2009 THROUGH SFY 2010 

[Final amounts in $s] 

IDEQ budget unit 2009 2010 Difference % Change 

Administration (Recurring Appropriation)* ....................................................... 3,115,800 2,823,700 ¥292,000 ¥9.37 

Administration (One Time Appropriation)* ....................................................... 47,700 0 ¥47,700 ¥100.00 

Air Program (Recurring Appropriation) ............................................................ 3,075,700 2,769,200 ¥306,500 ¥9.97 

Air Program (One Time Appropriation) ............................................................ 1,023,700 32,000 ¥991,700 ¥96.87 

Water Program (Recurring Appropriation) ....................................................... 7,847,700 6,012,700 ¥1,835000 ¥23.38 

Water Program (One Time Appropriation) ...................................................... 36,000 120,000 84,000 233.33 

Waste Program (Recurring Appropriation) ...................................................... 2,769,200 2,450,500 ¥318,700 ¥11.51 

Waste Program (One Time Appropriation) ...................................................... 0 0 0 n/a 

INL Oversight Program .................................................................................... 164,500 103,400 ¥61,100 ¥37.14 

Coeur D’Alene Basin Commission .................................................................. 98,400 104,300 5,900 6.00 

Total: Recurring Appropriation .................................................................. 17.071,300 14,263,800 ¥2,807,500 ¥16.45 

Total: One Time Appropriation ................................................................. 1,107,400 152,000 ¥955,400 ¥86.27 

Total: IDEQ ............................................................................................... 18,178,700 14,415,800 ¥3,762,900 ¥20.70 

Notes: Table reflects comparison of general funds only. Dedicated state funds (e.g., non-Title V permit fees) are not included. Administration 

costs also need to be attributed to the various other program units. Addition of these funds would bring state recurring air totals for 2009 and 

2010 to $3,842,589 and $3,389,800, respectively. Federal funds including ARRA funds are not included. 

Table 1 compares overall IDEQ 

general funds expenses for years 2009 

and 2010. While this table only shows 

general fund dollars, the inclusion of 

other dedicated funds by program unit 

shows similar results. As noted earlier, 

maintenance of effort is based solely on 

recurring program expenditures. The 

decline in recurring air program costs of 

just under 10% is less than the overall 

IDEQ budget decline of about 16.5% as 

well as the other individual program 

units of administration, water and 

waste. Only the smaller Coeur D’Alene 

Basin Commission showed any increase. 

Based on this information, a comparison 

of air program funding levels to other 

IDEQ programs shows that the air 

program was not singled out for a 

disproportionate or selective reduction. 

Table 2 compares both IDEQ and IDEQ 

Air program funding levels to the 

balance of other state agencies and 

programs. With only a few exceptions, 

the change in the IDEQ air program 

general funding level is consistent with 

changes in the budgets other state 

agencies and programs from 2009 to 

2010. Comparison with all state 

agencies’ aggregate budgets—totals that 

also include dedicated sources of funds, 

i.e., inclusion of revenue streams or 

sources that may not be subject to direct 

executive branch control—shows a more 

variable picture. EPA considered the 

relative size of the agencies and their 

budgets, their mission (e.g., public 

safety, health, education) and their 

sources of funding. Based upon these 

considerations, EPA concluded that 

neither the air program nor IDEQ overall 

was singled out for a disproportionate or 

selective reduction when compared to 

all the other executive agencies from 

2009 to 2010. 


Tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Notices 20627 

Accordingly, consistent with criteria 

set forth in CAA § 105(c)(2) and 

consistent with the Agency’s September 

30, 2011 Guidance on qualifying for a 

non-selective reduction, EPA has 

determined that it is appropriate to 

approve IDEQ’s request for a non 

selective reduction in its level of 

recurring expenditures for the 2010 

grant year for its air program grant. The 

revised MOE level for 2010 and 2011 

grant years is $3,389,800. 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


Tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
20628 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Notices 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C 


Tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICESEN05AP12.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Notices 20629 

This notice constitutes a request for 

public comment and an opportunity for 

public hearing as required by the Clean 

Air Act. All written comments received 

by May 7, 2012 on this proposal will be 

considered. EPA will conduct a public 

hearing on this proposal only if a 

written request for such is received by 

EPA at the address above by May 7, 

2012. If no written request for a hearing 

is received, EPA will proceed to the 

final determination. While notice of the 

final determination will not be 

published in the Federal Register, 

copies of the determination can be 

obtained by sending a written request to 

Michael McGown at the above address. 

Dated: March 22, 2012. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8200 Filed 4–4–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

Information Collection Being 

Submitted for Review and Approval to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort 

to reduce paperwork burden and as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3502– 

3520), the Federal Communications 

Commission invites the general public 

and other Federal agencies to take this 

opportunity to comment on the 

following information collection(s). 

Comments are requested concerning: 

(a) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology; and (e) ways to 

further reduce the information 

collection burden on small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 employees. 

The FCC may not conduct or sponsor 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. No person shall be subject to 

any penalty for failing to comply with 

a collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 

does not display a valid OMB control 

number. 

DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) comments should be 

submitted on or before May 7, 2012. If 

you anticipate that you will be 

submitting PRA comments, but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, you should 

advise the FCC contact listed below as 

soon as possible. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your PRA comments 

to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), via fax 

at 202–395–5167 or via Internet at 

Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov and 

to Judith B. Herman, Federal 

Communications Commission, via the 

Internet at Judith-b.herman@fcc.gov. To 

submit your PRA comments by email 

send them to: PRA@fcc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Judith B. Herman, Office of Managing 

Director, FCC, at 202–418–0214. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–1147. 

Title: Wireless E911 Phase II Location 

Accuracy Requirements, Third Report 

and Order, FCC 11–107. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Type of Review: Revision of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Individuals and 

households; business or other for-profit 

entities; Not-for-profit institutions and 

State, Local, or Tribal Government. 

Number of Respondents: 4,898 

respondents; 9,514 responses. 

Estimated Time per Response: 

5.5867143 hours (average). 

Frequency of Response: On occasion 

reporting requirement and third party 

disclosure requirement. 

Obligation to Respond: Mandatory. 

Statutory authority for this information 

collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 

Sections 151, 154 and 332 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended. 

Total Annual Burden: 53,152 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: N/A. 

Privacy Impact Assessment: N/A. 

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: 

No questions of a confidential nature are 

asked. 

Needs and Uses: The Commission 

obtained OMB approval for this new 

collection in March 2011. The 

Commission is now seeking OMB 

approval for another revision to this 

information collection. The Commission 

will submit this information collection 

to the OMB after publication of this 30 

day notice. 

The Commission adopted and 

released a Third Report and Order, FCC 

11–107, PS Docket No. 07–114, which 

provides that new Commercial Mobile 

Radio Service (CMRS) providers, 

meeting the definition of covered CMRS 

providers in Section 20.18 and 

deploying networks subsequent to the 

effective date of the Third Report and 

Order that are not an expansion or 

upgrade of an existing CMRS network, 

must meet the handset-based location 

accuracy standard from the start. 

Consequently, the rule requires new 

CMRS providers launching new standalone networks during the eight-year 

implementation period for handsetbased CMRS wireless licensees to meet 

the applicable handset-based location 

accuracy standard in effect of the time 

of deployment. Therefore, new rule 

section 20.18(h)(2)(iv) specifies that new 

CMRS providers must comply with 

paragraphs (h)(2)((i–iii) of Section 20.18, 

which are the location accuracy 

requirements for handset-based carriers. 

OMB approved the information 

collection for those rule paragraphs, 

which the Second Report and Order 

adopted, on March 30, 2011, under 

OMB Control No. 3060–1147. The 

Commission announced OMB’s 

approval and the effective date in 76 FR 

23713 of the Federal Register. 

As a result, under the new rule 

section adopted by Third Report and 

Order, all new CMRS providers, in 

delivering emergency calls for Enhanced 

911 service, must satisfy the handsetbased location accuracy standard at 

either a county-based or Public Safety 

Answering Point (PSAP)-based 

geographic level. Similarly, in 

accordance with the new rule and under 

the paragraph provision of Section 

20.18(h)(2)(ii), new CMRS providers 

may exclude up to 15 percent of the 

counties or PSAP areas they serve due 

to heavy forestation that limits handsetbased technology accuracy in those 

counties or areas. 

Therefore, new CMRS providers will 

be required to file a list of the specific 

counties where they are utilizing their 

respective exclusions. In its September 

2010 Second Report and Order, 75 FR 

70604, the Commission found that 

permitting this exclusion properly but 

narrowly accounts for the known 

technical limitations of handset-based 

location accuracy technologies, while 

ensuring that the public safety 

community and the public at large are 

sufficiently informed of these 

limitations. 

When they have begun deploying 

their new networks, the new CMRS 

providers must submit initial reports, as 

the Commission will announce after 

OMB approval of this revised 

information collection, with a list of the 


Tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES