Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 29 / Friday, February 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules 7489 

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: January 28, 2016. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2016–02844 Filed 2–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0751; FRL–9942–06– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) issued a proposed rule in 

the Federal Register on December 2, 

2015, proposing to approve a revision to 

the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The 

December 2, 2015 proposal provided for 

a 30-day public comment period ending 

January 4, 2016. One document in the 

docket for this proposal was not listed 

at www.regulations.gov until after the 

comment period had closed. EPA is 

reopening the comment period for 15 

days to ensure the public has an 

opportunity to review and comment on 

all material in the docket. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

February 29, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2015–0751 at 

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

For comments submitted at 

Regulations.gov, follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

For either 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 

4126, Law.Nicole@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document reopens the public comment 

period established in the proposed rule 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 2, 2015 (80 FR 75442) (FRL– 

9939–64–Region 9). In that document, 

EPA solicited comments on a proposed 

rule to approve revisions to the 

SJVUAPCD’s Rule 4702 (Internal 

Combustion Engines) and referenced a 

technical support document (TSD) 

containing further information about the 

rule. Due to an administrative error, the 

TSD was not available on 

www.regulations.gov until after the 

close of the comment period on January 

4, 2016. Although EPA did not receive 

any public comments on this proposal 

or any requests for the TSD, EPA is 

reopening the comment period for 

another 15 days to ensure that the 

public has an opportunity to review and 

comment on all material in the docket. 

Accordingly, any comments on this 

proposed rule must be received on or 

before February 29, 2016. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: February 2, 2016. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2016–02845 Filed 2–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2015–0855; FRL–9942–14– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Idaho: 

Interstate Transport Requirements for 

the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

submittal by the Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality (Idaho DEQ) 

demonstrating that the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) meets certain 

interstate transport requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) for the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) promulgated for nitrogen 

dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010. 

Specifically, the Idaho DEQ reviewed 

monitoring and modeling data to show 

that sources within Idaho do not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the NO2 NAAQS in any 

other state. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 14, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2015–0855 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

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, the full 


asabaliauskas on DSK9F6TC42PROD with PROPOSALS
7490 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 29 / Friday, February 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1See NOX SIP Call, 63 FR 57371 (October 27, 

1998); CAIR, 70 FR 25172 (May 12, 2005); and 

Transport Rule or Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, 76 

FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 

2http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html. 

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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information that is 

restricted by statute from disclosure. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at EPA Region 10, Office of Air, 

Waste and Toxics, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 

Seattle, Washington 98101. The EPA 

requests that you contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information please contact John Chi at 

(206) 553–1185, or chi.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Evaluation 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. Background 

On January 22, 2010, the EPA 

established a primary NO2 NAAQS at 

100 parts per billion (ppb), averaged 

over one hour, supplementing the 

existing annual standard (75 FR 6474). 

Within three years after promulgation of 

a new or revised standard, states must 

submit SIPs meeting the requirements of 

CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2), often 

referred to as infrastructure 

requirements. On December 24, 2015, 

the Idaho DEQ submitted a SIP revision 

to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

requirements. The submittal included 

monitoring and modeling data analysis 

to demonstrate that sources within 

Idaho do not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the 2010 NO2 and 2010 

sulfur dioxide NAAQS in any other 

state. This action addresses the 2010 

NO2 NAAQS only. We intend to address 

the 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS in a 

separate, future action. 

II. Evaluation 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires 

state SIPs to contain adequate 

provisions prohibiting any source or 

other type of emissions activity within 

a state from contributing significantly to 

nonattainment, or interfering with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in any other 

state. 

In the December 24, 2015 submittal, 

the Idaho DEQ reviewed air quality 

monitoring data for the United States 

and found that all monitored areas in 

the country met the 2010 NO2 NAAQS 

for the design value period 2008 

through 2010. The Idaho DEQ also 

reviewed estimated background 

concentrations for the 1-hour NO2

standard for the design value period 

2009 through 2011. The modeled design 

values for that period were well below 

the 1-hour NO2 NAAQS of 100 ppb. The 

Idaho DEQ concluded that based on 

monitoring data and modeled 

background concentrations Idaho does 

not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

In addition to reviewing Idaho’s 

submittal, the EPA reviewed more 

recent monitoring data for NO2

throughout the United States. Using 

previous EPA methodology,1 EPA 

evaluated specific monitors identified as 

having nonattainment and/or 

maintenance problems, which we refer 

to as ‘‘receptors.’’ EPA identifies 

nonattainment receptors as any monitor 

that has violated the NO2 NAAQS in the 

most recent three-year period. 

Meanwhile, EPA identifies NO2

maintenance receptors as any monitor 

that violated the NO2 NAAQS in either 

of the prior monitoring cycles (2010– 

2012 and 2011–2013), but attained in 

the most recent monitoring cycle (2012– 

2014). During the three most recent 

design value periods of 2010 through 

2012, 2011 through 2013, and 2012 

through 2014, we found no monitors 

violating the 2010 NO2 NAAQS in the 

United States.2 Using this methodology, 

the EPA found no monitors meeting the 

criteria as a nonattainment receptor 

and/or as a maintenance receptor. 

Further, we note that available 

information indicates that monitored 

values are well below the 100 ppb 

1-hour NO2 NAAQS in states bordering 

Idaho. The highest design value in 

bordering states for the most recent 

period is 68 ppb, at Utah County, Utah, 

as shown in the table below. 

TABLE 1—1-HOUR NO2 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES IN STATES BORDERING IDAHO

State County Site 2012–2014 DV 

(ppb) 

MT .................................................... Rosebud .................................................................................................... 300870001 7 

NV .................................................... Washoe ..................................................................................................... 320310016 54 

OR .................................................... Multnomah ................................................................................................. 410510080 35 

UT .................................................... Cache ........................................................................................................ 490050004 49 

UT .................................................... Carbon ....................................................................................................... 490071003 31 

UT .................................................... Salt Lake ................................................................................................... 490353006 55 

UT .................................................... Utah ........................................................................................................... 490490002 68 

WY ................................................... Campbell ................................................................................................... 560050892 35 

WY ................................................... Fremont ..................................................................................................... 560130099 5 

WY ................................................... Sublette ..................................................................................................... 560350101 22 

WY ................................................... Sweetwater ................................................................................................ 560370300 20 

WY ................................................... Uinta .......................................................................................................... 560410101 12 


asabaliauskas on DSK9F6TC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 29 / Friday, February 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules 7491 

The EPA also reviewed regulatory 

provisions to control future new sources 

of nitrogen oxide emissions in Idaho. 

We note that on April 17, 2014, we 

approved Idaho’s NO2 infrastructure SIP 

(79 FR 21669). In that action, we stated 

that Idaho generally regulates emissions 

of nitrogen oxides through its SIPapproved new source review permitting 

programs and operating permit 

regulations. Idaho’s new source review 

permitting rules are found at IDAPA 

58.01.01.200 through 228. These rules 

help ensure that no new or modified 

source of nitrogen oxides will cause or 

contribute to violation of the NO2

NAAQS. In addition, Idaho’s Tier II 

operating permit regulations at IDAPA 

58.01.01.400 through 410 require that to 

obtain an operating permit, the 

applicant must demonstrate the source 

will not cause or significantly contribute 

to a violation of any ambient air quality 

standard. These rules state that Idaho 

DEQ will require a Tier II source 

operating permit if Idaho DEQ 

determines emission rate reductions are 

necessary to attain or maintain any 

ambient air quality standard or 

applicable prevention of significant 

deterioration increment. 

Based on our review of the Idaho 

submittal, air quality monitoring data, 

and provisions in the current Federallyapproved Idaho SIP regulating new 

sources, we believe it is reasonable to 

conclude that emissions from Idaho do 

not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. 

We also do not expect the monitors in 

states bordering Idaho, identified in 

Table 1 above, to have difficulty 

maintaining the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. We 

believe it is reasonable to conclude that 

emissions from Idaho do not interfere 

with maintenance of the 2010 NO2

NAAQS in any other state. 

III. Proposed Action 

The EPA has reviewed the December 

24, 2015 submittal from the Idaho DEQ 

demonstrating that sources in Idaho do 

not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the NO2 NAAQS in any 

other state. We have also reviewed 

recent monitoring data and regulatory 

provisions in the Federally-approved 

Idaho SIP. Based on our review, we are 

proposing to find that the Idaho SIP 

meets the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

interstate transport requirements for the 

2010 NO2 NAAQS. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders 

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, 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); 

• 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 

this action does not involve technical 

standards; and 

• does not provide the 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 the 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). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: January 27, 2016. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2016–02846 Filed 2–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 15 and 74 

[OET Docket Nos. 14–165, 14–166 and 12– 

268; Report No. 3037] 

Petitions for Reconsideration of Action 

in a Rulemaking Proceeding 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: Petitions for Reconsideration 

(Petitions) have been filed in the 

Commission’s Rulemaking proceeding 

by Howard S. Shapiro, on behalf of 

Audio-Technica U.S., Inc., Laura 

Stefani, on behalf of Sennheiser 

Electronic Corp., Paul Margie, on behalf 

of Google Inc., Paula Boyd, on behalf of 

Microsoft Corporation, Stephen E. 

Coran, on behalf of Wireless Internet 

Service Providers Association, Rick 

Kaplan, on behalf of National 

Association of Broadcasters, Lawrence J. 

Movshin, on behalf of WMTS Coalition, 

Catherine Wang, on behalf of Shure 

Incorporated, Ari Q. Fitzgerald, on 

behalf GE Healthcare, Gordon Moore, on 

behalf of Lectrosonics, Inc. and 

Telecommunications Law Professionals 

PLLC, on behalf of Carlson Wireless 

Technologies, Inc. and Cal.net, Inc. 

DATES: Oppositions to the Petitions 

must be filed on or before February 29, 

2016. Replies to an opposition must be 

filed on or before March 25, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hugh Van Tuyl, Policy and Rules 

Division, Office of Engineering and 

Technology, (202) 418–7506, email: 

Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov. Paul Murray, 

Policy and Rules Division, Offiice of 

Engineering and Technology, (202) 418– 

0688, email: Paul.Murray@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of Commission’s document, 

Report No. 3037, released January 12, 

2016. The full text of the Petitions is 

available for viewing and copying in 

Room CY–B402, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC or may be accessed 

online via the Commission’s Electronic 


asabaliauskas on DSK9F6TC42PROD with PROPOSALS