Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules 65313 

in accordance with § 2004.34(a) within 

10 days of the date of the determination. 

The petition must contain a clear and 

concise statement of the basis for the 

reconsideration with supporting 

authorities. Determinations about 

petitions for reconsideration are within 

the discretion of the United States Trade 

Representative or his/her designee, and 

are final. 

(c) Pursuant to section 704 of the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 

704, a petition for reconsideration of a 

final determination under this section is 

a prerequisite to judicial review. 

§ 2004.39 Fees. 

(a) USTR may condition the 

production of records, information or an 

employee’s appearance on advance 

payment of reasonable costs, which may 

include but are not limited to those 

associated with employee search time, 

copying, computer usage, and 

certifications. 

(b) Witness fees will include fees, 

expenses and allowances prescribed by 

the rules applicable to the particular 

legal proceeding. If no fees are 

prescribed, USTR will base fees on the 

rule of the federal district court closest 

to the location where the witness will 

appear. Such fees may include but are 

not limited to time for preparation, 

travel and attendance at the legal 

proceeding. 

Janice Kaye, 

Chief Counsel for Administrative Law, Office 

of the U.S. Trade Representative. 

[FR Doc. 2016–22864 Filed 9–21–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3290–F6–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 38 

RIN 2900–AP74 

Authority To Solicit Gifts and 

Donations; Withdrawal 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) is withdrawing VA’s 

proposed rulemaking, published on July 

11, 2016, to amend its regulation giving 

the Under Secretary of Memorial Affairs 

(USMA), or his designee, authority to 

solicit gifts and donations. VA received 

two supportive comments and no 

adverse comments concerning the 

proposed rule and its companion 

substantially identical direct final rule 

published in the Federal Register on the 

same date. Accordingly, this document 

withdraws as unnecessary the proposed 

rule. 

DATES: The proposed rule published on 

July 11, 2016, 81 FR 44827, is 

withdrawn. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Howard, Chief of Staff, National 

Cemetery Administration (NCA), 

Department of Veterans Affairs, (40A), 

810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20420, (202) 461–6215. (This is not 

a toll-free number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

proposed rule published in the Federal 

Register on July 11, 2016, 81 FR 44827, 

VA proposed to amend 38 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) 38.603(b) that 

prohibits the solicitation of 

contributions. On the same date, VA 

published a substantially identical 

direct final rule at 81 FR 44792. The 

direct final rule and proposed rule each 

provided a 30-day comment period that 

ended on August 10, 2016. Two public 

comments were received, both in 

support of the rulemakings. Because no 

adverse comments were received, VA is 

withdrawing the proposed rule as 

unnecessary. In a companion document 

in this issue of the Federal Register, VA 

is confirming the effective date of 

September 9, 2016 for the direct final 

rule, RIN 2900–AP75, published at 81 

FR 44792. 

Signing Authority 

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or 

designee, approved this document and 

authorized the undersigned to sign and 

submit the document to the Office of the 

Federal Register for publication 

electronically as an official document of 

the Department of Veterans Affairs. Gina 

S. Farrisee, Deputy Chief of Staff, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 

approved this document on September 

16, 2016, for publication. 

Dated: September 19, 2016. 

Jeffrey Martin, 

Office Program Manager, Office of Regulation 

Policy & Management, Office of the Secretary, 

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2016–22833 Filed 9–21–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2016–0359; FRL–9952–73– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; TN; Revisions to the 

Knox County Portion of the TN SIP 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), on January 11, 

2016. The proposed revision was 

submitted by TDEC on behalf of the 

Knox County Department of Air Quality 

Management, which has jurisdiction 

over Knox County, Tennessee. The 

revision that EPA is proposing for 

approval amends the Knox County Air 

Quality Management Department’s 

regulations, which are part of the 

Tennessee SIP, to address EPA’s startup, 

shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) SIP 

call for Knox County. EPA is proposing 

approval of the January 11, 2016, SIP 

revision because the Agency has 

determined that it is in accordance with 

the requirements for SIP provisions 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 24, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2016–0359 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Madolyn Sanchez, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9644. 

Ms. Sanchez can also be reached via 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
65314 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1 40 CFR 51.212(c); see also ‘‘Credible Evidence 

Revisions,’’ 62 FR 8314 (Feb. 24, 1997). 

electronic mail at sanchez.madolyn@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What action is EPA proposing today? 

EPA is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Tennessee SIP at Knox 

County Regulation Section 32.0, ‘‘Use of 

Evidence.’’ The revision would remove 

the existing text of provision Section 

32.1(C), which states: ‘‘A determination 

that there has been a violation of these 

regulations or orders issued pursuant 

thereto shall not be used in any lawsuit 

brought by any private citizen.’’ This 

text would be replaced with 

‘‘(Reserved).’’ TDEC submitted the 

January 11, 2016, SIP revision to 

address EPA’s final action entitled 

‘‘State Implementation Plans: Response 

to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement 

and Update of EPA’s SSM Policy 

Applicable to SIPs; Findings of 

Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls 

To Amend Provisions Applying to 

Excess Emissions During Periods of 

Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction,’’ 

80 FR 33839 (June 12, 2015), hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘SSM SIP Action.’’ 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

On June 30, 2011, the Sierra Club (the 

Petitioner) filed a petition for 

rulemaking with the EPA Administrator, 

asking EPA to take action on specific 

provisions in the SIPs of 39 states. The 

petition included interrelated requests 

concerning state rule treatment of excess 

emissions by sources during periods of 

SSM. Exemptions from emission limits 

during periods of SSM exist in a number 

of state rules, some of which were 

adopted and approved into SIPs by EPA 

many years ago. The petition alleged 

that SSM exemptions undermine the 

emission limits in SIPs and threaten 

states’ abilities to achieve and maintain 

compliance with national ambient air 

quality standards, thereby threatening 

public health and public welfare. The 

Petitioner requested that EPA either (i) 

notify the states of the substantial 

inadequacies in their SIPs and finalize 

a rule requiring them to revise their 

plans pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5) 

(referred to as a ‘‘SIP call’’), or (ii) 

determine that EPA’s action approving 

the implementation plan provisions was 

in error and revise those approvals so 

that the SIPs are brought into 

compliance with the requirements of the 

CAA pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(6). 

On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12459), 

EPA proposed an action that would 

either grant or deny the Sierra Club 

petition with respect to each of the SIP 

provisions alleged to be inconsistent 

with the CAA. That proposal 

summarizes EPA’s review of all of the 

provisions that were identified in the 

petition, providing a detailed analysis of 

each provision and explaining how each 

one either does or does not comply with 

the CAA with regard to excess emission 

events. For each SIP provision that 

appeared to be inconsistent with the 

CAA, EPA proposed to find that the 

existing SIP provision was substantially 

inadequate to meet CAA requirements 

and thus proposed to issue a SIP call 

under CAA section 110(k)(5) of the 

CAA. 

On May 22, 2015, the EPA 

Administrator signed the final SSM SIP 

Action. That action responds to the 

Sierra Club petition by granting it with 

respect to the provisions determined to 

be deficient and denying it with respect 

to the others. The final action responds 

to all public comments received on the 

proposed action and calls for 36 states 

to submit corrective SIP revisions by 

November 22, 2016, to bring specified 

provisions into compliance with the 

CAA. In addition, the final action 

reiterates EPA’s interpretation of the 

CAA regarding excess emissions during 

SSM periods and clarifies EPA’s 

longstanding SSM Policy as it applies to 

SIPs. 

With regard to the Knox County 

portion of the Tennessee SIP, the 

Petitioner objected to Regulation 

32.1(C), arguing that the provision 

prevents required reports of SSM 

conditions from being used as evidence 

in citizen suits, thereby undermining 

the express authorization of citizen 

enforcement actions under the CAA. 

After consideration of public comments 

on the SSM SIP proposal, EPA agreed 

that the Knox County rule is 

inconsistent with the fundamental 

requirements of CAA sections 113(e)(1), 

114(c) and 304 and the credible 

evidence rule 1 for the reasons fully 

explained in Section IX.E.11 of the SSM 

SIP proposal. Therefore, EPA 

determined in its final SIP call action 

that Knox County Regulation 32.1(C) is 

substantially inadequate to meet CAA 

requirements and thus issued a SIP call 

requiring the State to submit a 

corrective SIP revision addressing this 

provision. See 80 FR 33965. 

III. Why is EPA proposing this action? 

In the SSM SIP Action, EPA granted 

the Sierra Club’s petition with respect to 

Knox County Regulation 32.1(C), 

finding this provision substantially 

inadequate to meet CAA requirements. 

Today’s action, if finalized, would 

remove the existing text of this 

provision from Knox County’s EPAapproved SIP regulation. EPA is 

proposing to find that this revision is 

consistent with the CAA and that it 

adequately addresses the SSM SIP call 

with respect to the Knox County portion 

of the Tennessee SIP. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the Knox County Regulation 32.0 

entitled ‘‘Use of Evidence,’’ effective 

November 12, 2015, which replaces the 

language previously included in Section 

32.1(C) with ‘‘(Reserved).’’ EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

materials generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA 

Region 4 office (please contact the 

person identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section of this 

preamble for more information). 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

Tennessee SIP revision consisting of 

replacing the language in Section 

32.1(C) currently in the EPA-approved 

SIP for Knox County with ‘‘(Reserved).’’ 

EPA is proposing approval of the 

January 11, 2016, SIP revision because 

the Agency has determined that it is in 

accordance with the requirements for 

SIP provisions under the CAA. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

See 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 proposed 

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 

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); 

• 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 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules 65315 

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 as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: September 13, 2016. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2016–22761 Filed 9–21–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2003–0010; FRL–9952– 

80–Region 7] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the Omaha Lead Superfund 

Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) Region 7 is 

issuing a Notice of Intent to Delete 294 

residential parcels of the Omaha Lead, 

Superfund Site (Site) located in Omaha, 

Nebraska, from the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Nebraska, through the 

Nebraska Department of Environmental 

Quality, determined that all appropriate 

Response actions under CERCLA were 

completed at the identified parcels. 

However, this deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains to 294 

residential parcels. The remaining 

parcels will remain on the NPL and are 

not being considered for deletion as part 

of this action. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 24, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–2003–0010, by one of the 

following methods: http://

www.regulations.gov; by email to 

kemp.steve@epa.gov or 

freeman.tamara@epa.gov; or by mail to 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, KS 66219 Attention: Steve 

Kemp, SUPR Division or Tamara 

Freeman, ECO Office. For comments 

submitted to Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For any manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

The docket contains the information 

that was the basis for the partial 

deletion, specifically the documentation 

regarding the results of soil cleanup 

activities. Information regarding the 

optional voluntary cleanup activities 

such as the lead-based paint 

stabilization and interior dust sampling 

is not provided in the docket but is 

available from EPA on a case-by-case 

basis. Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in the hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Region 7 Records Center/docket at 

11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, 

Kansas 66219. The Omaha public 

libraries also have computer resources 

available to assist the public. The W. 

Dale Clark Library, located at 215 S. 

15th Street, Omaha, NE 68102 is 

centrally located within the site 

boundary. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Kemp, Remedial Project Manager, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, SUPR/LMSE, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, KS 66219, telephone 

(913) 551–7194, email: kemp.steve@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section 

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Background and Basis for Intended Partial 

Site Deletion 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 7 is proposing to delete 

294 residential parcels of the Omaha 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS