7042 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

Thea D. Rozman Kendler, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02536 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2022–0028] 

Security Zone; Potomac River and 

Anacostia River, and Adjacent Waters; 

Washington, DC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of 

regulation. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce 

a security zone along the Potomac River 

and Anacostia River, and adjacent 

waters at Washington, DC, for activities 

associated with the U.S. President’s 

State of the Union Address before a 

Joint Session of Congress. The zone will 

be enforced on March 1, 2022 through 

the early morning hours on March 2, 

2022. This action is necessary to protect 

government officials, mitigate potential 

terrorist acts and incidents, and enhance 

public and maritime safety and security 

immediately before, during, and after 

this activity. During the enforcement 

period, entry into or remaining within 

the zone is prohibited unless authorized 

by the Captain of the Port or his 

designated representative. 

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 

165.508 will be enforced from 9 a.m. on 

March 1, 2022 until 2 a.m. on March 2, 

2022, for the security zone locations 

identified in 33 CFR 165.508(a)(6). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this notice of 

enforcement, call or email Mr. Ron 

Houck, U.S. Coast Guard Sector 

Maryland-National Capital Region 

(Waterways Management Division); 

telephone 410–576–2674, email D05- 

DG-SectorMD-NCR-Prevention-WWM@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard will enforce regulations in 33 

CFR 165.508 for the zone locations 

identified in paragraph (a)(6) from 9 

a.m. on March 1, 2022 to 2 a.m. on 

March 2, 2022. This action is being 

taken to protect government officials, 

mitigate potential terrorist acts and 

incidents, and enhance public and 

maritime safety and security 

immediately before, during, and after 

this event. Our regulations for the 

Security Zone; Potomac River and 

Anacostia River, and adjacent waters; 

Washington, DC, § 165.508(a)(6), 

specifies the location for this security 

zone as an area that includes all 

navigable waters described in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3), which 

includes Zones 1, 2, and 3. 

• Security Zone 1, paragraph (a)(1); 

all navigable waters of the Potomac 

River, from shoreline to shoreline, 

bounded to the north by the Francis 

Scott Key (US–29) Bridge, at mile 113, 

and bounded to the south by a line 

drawn from the Virginia shoreline at 

Ronald Reagan Washington National 

Airport, at 38°51′21.3′′ N, 077°02′00.0′′ 

W, eastward across the Potomac River to 

the District of Columbia shoreline at 

Hains Point at position 38°51′24.3′′ N, 

077°01′19.8′′ W, including the waters of 

the Boundary Channel, Pentagon 

Lagoon, Georgetown Channel Tidal 

Basin, and Roaches Run. 

• Security Zone 2, paragraph (a)(2); 

all navigable waters of the Anacostia 

River, from shoreline to shoreline, 

bounded to the north by the John Philip 

Sousa (Pennsylvania Avenue) Bridge, at 

mile 2.9, and bounded to the south by 

a line drawn from the District of 

Columbia shoreline at Hains Point at 

position 38°51′24.3′′ N, 077°01′19.8′′ W, 

southward across the Anacostia River to 

the District of Columbia shoreline at 

Giesboro Point at position 38°50′52.4′′ 

N, 077°01′10.9′′ W, including the waters 

of the Washington Channel. 

• Security Zone 3 paragraph (a)(3); all 

navigable waters of the Potomac River, 

from shoreline to shoreline, bounded to 

the north by a line drawn from the 

Virginia shoreline at Ronald Reagan 

Washington National Airport, at 

38°51′21.3′′ N, 077°02′00.0′′ W, eastward 

across the Potomac River to the District 

of Columbia shoreline at Hains Point at 

position 38°51′24.3′′ N, 077°01′19.8′′ W, 

thence southward across the Anacostia 

River to the District of Columbia 

shoreline at Giesboro Point at position 

38°50′52.4′′ N, 077°01′10.9′′ W, and 

bounded to the south by the Woodrow 

Wilson Memorial (I–95/I–495) Bridge, at 

mile 103.8. 

During the enforcement period, as 

specified in § 165.508(b), entry into or 

remaining in these zones is prohibited 

unless authorized by the Coast Guard 

Captain of the Port Maryland-National 

Capital Region. Public vessels and 

vessels already at berth at the time the 

security zone is implemented do not 

have to depart the security zone. All 

vessels underway within the security 

zone at the time it is implemented are 

to depart the zone at the time the 

security zone is implemented. To seek 

permission to transit the zone, the 

Captain of the Port Maryland-National 

Capital Region can be contacted at 

telephone number (410) 576–2693 or on 

Marine Band Radio, VHF–FM channel 

16 (156.8 MHz). Coast Guard vessels 

enforcing this zone can be contacted on 

Marine Band Radio, VHF–FM channel 

16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard may 

be assisted by other Federal, state or 

local law enforcement agencies in 

enforcing this regulation. If the Captain 

of the Port or his designated on-scene 

patrol personnel determines the security 

zone need not be enforced for the full 

duration stated in this notice, a 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be 

used to suspend enforcement and grant 

general permission to enter the security 

zone. 

In addition to this notice of 

enforcement in the Federal Register, the 

Coast Guard plans to provide 

notification of this enforcement period 

via the Local Notice to Mariners, and 

marine information broadcasts. 

Dated: February 3, 2022. 

James R. Bendle, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Captain of the Port Maryland-National 

Capital Region. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02583 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2022–0107; FRL–9426–03– 

R9] 

Determination To Defer Sanctions; 

Arizona; Maricopa County; Power 

Plants 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final determination. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is making an interim final 

determination that the Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ) has submitted a revised rule on 

behalf of the Maricopa County Air 

Quality Department (MCAQD or 

County) that corrects deficiencies in its 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) state 

implementation plan (SIP) provisions 

concerning ozone nonattainment 

requirements for controlling oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX) at power plants. This 

determination is based on a proposed 

approval, published elsewhere in this 

Federal Register, of MCAQD’s Rule 322 

regulating that source category. The 

effect of this interim final determination 

is that the imposition of sanctions that 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7043 

were triggered by a previous 

disapproval by the EPA in 2020 is now 

deferred. If the EPA finalizes its 

approval of MCAQD’s submission, relief 

from these sanctions will become 

permanent. 

DATES: This determination is effective 

on February 8, 2022. However, 

comments will be accepted on or before 

March 10, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2022–0107 at https://

www.regulations.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. 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 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. If you need 

assistance in a language other than 

English or if you are a person with 

disabilities who needs a reasonable 

accommodation at no cost to you, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Gong, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105. By phone: (415) 972–3073 or by 

email at gong.kevin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On July 20, 2020 (85 FR 43692), the 

EPA issued a final disapproval for 

MCAQD’s Rule 322 that had been 

submitted by the ADEQ to the EPA for 

inclusion into the Arizona SIP. The 

2020 action addressed the requirement 

that the MCAQD implement reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) for 

emissions sources in ozone 

nonattainment areas under the Act. In 

that action, we determined that the Rule 

322 submittal included several 

deficiencies that precluded our approval 

of the rule into the SIP, and thus failed 

to implement RACT. Therefore, our 

2020 action included a disapproval of 

the SIP revision under title I, part D of 

the Act, relating to requirements for 

nonattainment areas. Pursuant to 

section 179 of the CAA and our 

regulations at 40 CFR 52.31, this 

disapproval action under title I, part D 

started a sanctions clock for imposition 

of offset sanctions 18 months after the 

action’s effective date of August 19, 

2020, and highway sanctions 6 months 

later. 

On June 23, 2021, the MCAQD revised 

Rule 322 and on June 24, 2021, ADEQ 

submitted the SIP revision to the EPA 

for approval into the Arizona SIP. The 

revision is intended to address the 

disapproval issues under title I, part D 

that we identified in our 2020 action. In 

the Proposed Rules section of this 

Federal Register, we have proposed 

approval of the revised MCAQD Rule 

322. Based on this proposed approval 

action, we are also taking this interim 

final determination, effective on 

publication, to defer imposition of the 

offset sanctions and highway sanctions 

that were triggered by our 2020 action’s 

disapproval, because we believe that the 

2020 submittal corrects the deficiencies 

that triggered such sanctions. 

The EPA is providing the public with 

an opportunity to comment on this 

deferral of sanctions. If comments are 

submitted that change our assessment 

described in this interim final 

determination and the proposed full 

approval of MCAQD Rule 322 with 

respect to the title I, part D deficiencies 

identified in our 2020 action, we would 

take final action to lift this deferral of 

sanctions under 40 CFR 52.31. If no 

comments are submitted that change our 

assessment, then all sanctions and any 

sanction clocks triggered by our 2020 

action would be permanently 

terminated on the effective date of our 

final approval of MCAQD Rule 322. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

We are making an interim final 

determination to defer CAA section 179 

sanctions associated with our 

disapproval action on July 20, 2020, of 

MCAQD Rule 322 with respect to the 

requirements of part D of title I of the 

CAA. This determination is based on 

our concurrent proposal to fully 

approve Rule 322, which resolves the 

deficiencies that triggered sanctions 

under section 179 of the CAA. 

Because the EPA has preliminarily 

determined that MCAQD’s submittal of 

Rule 322 addresses the deficiencies 

under part D of title I of the CAA 

identified in our 2020 action and is fully 

approvable, relief from sanctions should 

be provided as quickly as possible. 

Therefore, the EPA is invoking the good 

cause exception under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 

not providing an opportunity for 

comment before this action takes effect 

(5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However, by this 

action, the EPA is providing the public 

with a chance to comment on the EPA’s 

determination after the effective date, 

and the EPA will consider any 

comments received in determining 

whether to reverse such action. 

The EPA believes that notice-andcomment rulemaking before the 

effective date of this action is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. The EPA has reviewed the 

State’s submittal and, through its 

proposed action, is indicating that it is 

more likely than not that the State has 

submitted a revision to the SIP that 

corrects deficiencies under part D of the 

Act that were the basis for the action 

that started the sanctions clocks. 

Therefore, it is not in the public interest 

to impose sanctions. The EPA believes 

that it is necessary to use the interim 

final rulemaking process to defer 

sanctions while the EPA completes its 

rulemaking process on the approvability 

of the State’s submittal. Moreover, with 

respect to the effective date of this 

action, the EPA is invoking the good 

cause exception to the 30-day notice 

requirement of the APA because the 

purpose of this notice is to relieve a 

restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action defers sanctions and 

imposes no additional requirements. 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.); 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
7044 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

• 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 the 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). 

• 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 and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

• Is subject to the Congressional 

Review Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., 

and the EPA will submit a rule report 

to each House of the Congress and to the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. The CRA allows the issuing 

agency to make a rule effective sooner 

than otherwise provided by the CRA if 

the agency makes a good cause finding 

that notice and comment rulemaking 

procedures are impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has 

made a good cause finding for this rule 

as discussed in section II of this 

preamble, including the basis for that 

finding. 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by April 11, 2022. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the EPA 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for the 

purpose of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements (see CAA 

section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

nitrogen, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: February 1, 2022. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02463 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 64 

[CG Docket No. 17–59; FCC 20–187; FCC 

21–126; FR ID 70178] 

Advanced Methods To Target and 

Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, Fourth 

Report and Order and Order on 

Reconsideration 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission or FCC) announces that 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has approved the public 

information collections associated with 

the Advanced Methods to Target and 

Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, Fourth 

Report and Order and Order on 

Reconsideration. This document is 

consistent with the Fourth Report and 

Order and Order on Reconsideration 

which stated that the Commission 

would publish a document in the 

Federal Register announcing OMB 

approval and the effective date of the 

information collection requirements. 

DATES: The additions of § 64.1200(k)(10) 

and (n)(2), published at 86 FR 17726, 

April 6, 2021, and revision of 

§ 64.1200(k)(10), published at 86 FR 

74373, December 30, 2021, are effective 

March 10, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerusha Burnett, Jerusha.Burnett@

fcc.gov or (202) 418–0526, of the 

Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau, Consumer Policy Division. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document announces that, on October 4, 

2021, OMB approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

Commission’s Advanced Methods to 

Target and Eliminate Unlawful 

Robocalls Fourth Report and Order, FCC 

20–187, published at 86 FR 17726, April 

6, 2021, and Order on Reconsideration, 

FCC 21–126, published at 86 FR 74373, 

December 30, 2021. The OMB Control 

Numbers are 3060–1292. The 

Commission publishes this document as 

an announcement of the effective date of 

the information collection requirements. 

Synopsis 

As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), 

the FCC is notifying the public that it 

received OMB approval for the 

information collection requirements 

contained in the Commission’s rules on 

October 4, 2021 and the non-substantive 

changes in the Order on 

Reconsideration were approved by OMB 

on January 20, 2022. 

No person shall be subject to any 

penalty for failing to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that does not 

display a current, valid OMB control 

number which is 3060–1292. 

The foregoing notification is required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, Public Law 104–13, October 1, 

1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507. 

The total annual reporting burdens 

and costs for the respondents are as 

follows: 

OMB Control No.: 3060–1292. 

OMB Approval Date: October 4, 2021. 

OMB Expiration Date: October 31, 

2024. 

Title: Advanced Methods to Target 

and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, 

Fourth Report and Order, CG Docket No. 

17–59, FCC 20–187. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities. 

Number of Respondents: 6,493 

respondents and 582,434 annual 

responses. 

Estimated Time per Response: .25 to 

40 hours. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion 

reporting requirement, On-going 

reporting requirement and Third-party 

Disclosure requirement. 

Obligation to Respond: Required to 

obtain or retain benefits. Statutory 

authority for these collections are 

contained in 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 201, 202, 

217, 227, 251(e), 303(r) and 403. 

Total Annual Burden: 199,412 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: No cost. 

Needs and Uses: The Commission 

adopted a new information collection 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES