15090 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

reporting processes. When awards are 

made, grantees will already be fully 

aware of reporting requirements. 

If you want to comment on the 

proposed information collection 

requirements, please send your 

comments to the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: 

Desk Officer for U.S. Department of 

Education. Send these comments by 

email to OIRA_DOCKET@omb.gov or by 

fax to (202) 395–6974. You may also 

send a copy of these comments to the 

Department contact named in the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble or 

submit electronically through the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov by selecting 

Docket ID number ED–2014–OPE–0036. 

Please be advised that the public 

comment period for submitting 

comments on the notice of proposed 

priorities (NPP) is the same for 

submitting comments on the 

information collection (IC); therefore, 

use the NPP Docket number as the 

identifier for both sets of comments. 

You may, however, submit the NPP 

comments and the IC comments 

separately in the regulations.gov site. 

We have prepared an ICR for this 

collection. In preparing your comments 

you may want to review the ICR, which 

is available at www.reginfo.gov. Click on 

Information Collection Review. This 

proposed collection is identified as 

proposed collection 1840–0796 ED– 

2014–OPE–0036. 

We consider your comments on this 

proposed collection of information in— 

• Deciding whether the proposed 

collection is necessary for the proper 

performance of our functions, including 

whether the information will have 

practical use; 

• Evaluating the accuracy of our 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection, including the validity of our 

methodology and assumptions; 

• Enhancing the quality, usefulness, 

and clarity of the Information we 

collect; and 

• Minimizing the burden on those 

who must respond. This includes 

exploring the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques. 

OMB is required to make a decision 

concerning the collection of information 

contained in these proposed regulations 

between 30 and 60 days after 

publication of this document in the 

Federal Register. Therefore, to ensure 

that OMB gives your comments full 

consideration, it is important that OMB 

receives your comments by April 17, 

2014. This does not affect the deadline 

for your comments to us on the 

proposed regulations. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

Part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the program contact person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: March 12, 2014. 

Lynn B. Mahaffie, 

Senior Director, Policy Coordination, 

Development, and Accreditation Service, 

delegated the authority to perform the 

functions and duties of the Assistant 

Secretary for Postsecondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05855 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 35 

[EPA–R09–0AR–2014–0120; FRL–9908–06– 

Region 9] 

Clean Air Act Grant: South Coast Air 

Quality Management District; 

Opportunity for Public Hearing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed Action; determination 

with request for comments and notice of 

opportunity for public hearing. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) has made a proposed 

determination that the reduction in 

expenditures of non-Federal funds for 

the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD) in 

support of its continuing air program 

under section 105 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), for the calendar year 2013 is a 

result of non-selective reductions in 

expenditures. This determination, when 

final, will permit the SCAQMD to 

receive grant funding for FY2014 from 

the EPA under section 105 of the Clean 

Air Act. 

DATES: Comments and/or requests for a 

public hearing must be received by EPA 

at the address stated below by April 17, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2014–0120, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions. 

2. Email to: lance.gary@epa.gov or 

3. Mail to: Gary Lance (Air-8), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 

Lance, EPA Region IX, Grants & Program 

Integration Office, Air Division, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105; phone: (415) 972–3992, fax: (415) 

947–3579 or email address at 

lance.gary@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. In accordance with CAA 

section 105(a)(1)(A) and 40 CFR 

35.145(a), the Regional Administrator 

may provide air pollution control 

agencies up to three-fifths of the 

approved costs of implementing 

programs for the prevention and control 

of air pollution. Section 105 contains 

two cost-sharing provisions which 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules 15091 

recipients must meet to qualify for a 

CAA section 105 grant. An eligible 

entity must meet a minimum 40% 

match. In addition, to remain eligible for 

section 105 funds, an eligible entity 

must continue to meet the minimum 

match requirement as well as meet a 

maintenance of effort (MOE) 

requirement under section 105(c)(1) of 

the CAA and 40 CFR 35.146. Program 

activities relevant to the match consist 

of both recurring and non-recurring 

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, section 105(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 section 

105(c)(2), however, EPA may still award 

a grant to an agency not meeting the 

requirements of section 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 section 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 

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 its 

program operations will affect its ability 

to meet its CAA obligations and 

requirements; and documentation 

which explains the cause of the 

reduction, such as legislative changes or 

the issuance of a new executive order. 

In FY2013, EPA awarded the 

SCAQMD $5,135,895, which 

represented approximately 5% of the 

SCAQMD budget. In FY–2014, EPA 

intends to award the SCAQMD an 

estimate of $5,039,863, which 

represents approximately 5% of the 

SCAQMD budget. 

SCAQMD’s final Federal Financial 

Report for FY–2012 indicated that 

SCAQMD’s maintenance of effort (MOE) 

level was 108,291,832. SCAQMD’s final 

Federal Financial Report for FY–2013 

indicates that SCAQMD’s maintenance 

of effort (MOE) level is at $105,096,053. 

The projected MOE is not sufficient to 

meet the MOE requirements under the 

CAA section 105 because it is not equal 

to or greater than the MOE for the 

previous fiscal year. In order for the 

SCAQMD to be eligible to receive its 

FY2014 CAA section 105 grant, EPA 

must make a determination, after notice 

and an opportunity for a public hearing, 

that the reduction in expenditures is 

attributable to a non-selective reduction 

in the expenditures in the programs of 

the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District. The shortfall 

stems from a decline of 8.9% in 

stationary sources revenue from 

FY2008–09 to FY2012–13, as reflected 

in the table below: 

COMPARISON OF STATIONARY SOURCE REVENUES

Description Actual FY 2008–09 Actual FY 2012–13 Difference 

Stationary Source Revenues ................................................................... $91,472,243 $83,307,359 ($8,164,884) 

The SCAQMD is a single-purpose 

agency whose primary source of funding 

is emission fee revenue. It is the ‘‘unit 

of government for section 105 (c)(2) 

purposes.’’ 

The decline in stationary source 

revenues would have been even more 

pronounced had it not been for the 

SCAQMD Governing Board-adopted fee 

increases totaling 7.9% over the last 

four years. The net loss of stationary 

revenues has given SCAQMD no choice 

but to reduce its budget and find less 

costly ways to meet its mandates. Over 

the past several years, actions were 

undertaken by SCAQMD to balance its 

budget by reducing overall 

expenditures, including deleting or not 

funding vacant positions, implementing 

a hiring freeze, enacting pension reform, 

reducing services and supplies 

expenditures, and utilizing reserves. 

Since FY2009–10, SCAQMD has 

supplemented revenues with $27.4 

million in reserves to balance the budget 

and meet program requirements. 

In addition to the conditions 

described above, an increase in nonrecurrent capital expenditures has also 

contributed to the decrease in the FY13 

MOE level. 

Based on: (1) SCAQMD’s inability to 

levy taxes, (2) regulated and voluntary 

emissions reductions, (3) the general 

economic downturn, (4) voter approval 

of Proposition 26, (5) an overall decline 

in stationary source revenue, (6) 

expenditure cuts, (7) use of financial 

reserves to balance the budget, and (8) 

an increase in non-recurrent capital 

expenditures, the request for a reset of 

SCAQMD’s MOE meets the criteria for 

a non-selective reduction determination. 

Although SCAQMD receives less than 

5 percent of its support from the section 

105 grant, the loss of that funding would 

seriously impact SCAQMD’s ability to 

carry out its clean air program. The 

revenue generated from Stationary 

Sources over the last 10 years is detailed 

below. 

Year Stationary 

sources 

2003 ...................................... 62,835,710 

2004 ...................................... 61,461,482 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

15092 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Year Stationary 

sources 

2005 ...................................... 64,613,635 

2006 ...................................... 68,483,189 

2007 ...................................... 75,200,253 

2008 ...................................... 82,800,004 

2009 ...................................... 91,472,243 

2010 ...................................... 81,097,647 

2011 ...................................... 78,787,371 

2012 ...................................... 79,815,562 

2013 ...................................... 83,307,359 

The SCAQMD’s MOE reduction 

resulted from a loss of revenues due to 

circumstances beyond its control. EPA 

proposes to determine that the 

SCAQMD lowering the FY2013 MOE 

level to $105,096,053 meets the CAA 

section 105(c) (2) criteria as resulting 

from a non-selective reduction of 

expenditures. 

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 April 17, 2014 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 April 17, 

2014. 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 

Gary Lance at the above address. 

Dated: March 5, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05906 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0817; FRL–9908–01– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Missouri State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) which were 

submitted to EPA on July 12, 2012. This 

submission revises two heavy duty 

diesel vehicle idling rules that are 

applicable in Kansas City and St. Louis. 

This revision provides clarity to the 

rules in the applicability section by 

listing owners and operators of 

passenger load/unload locations where 

commercial, public and institutional 

heavy-duty vehicles load or unload 

passengers. The affected parties were 

unintentionally omitted from the 

applicability section of the rule even 

though they are required to comply with 

the rule in the general provisions 

section. These revisions do not have an 

adverse affect on air quality. EPA’s 

approval of these SIP revisions is being 

done in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Comment by April 17, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2013–0817, by mail to Paula 

Higbee, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Comments may 

also be submitted electronically or 

through hand delivery/courier by 

following the detailed instructions in 

the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 

rule located in the rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Paula Higbee, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913–551–7028, 

or by email at Higbee.paula@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the state’s 

SIP revision as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

revision and anticipates no relevant 

adverse comments to this action. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

relevant adverse comments are received 

in response to this action, no further 

activity is contemplated in relation to 

this action. If EPA receives relevant 

adverse comments, the direct final rule 

will be withdrawn and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed action. EPA will not institute 

a second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on part of this rule and if that 

part can be severed from the remainder 

of the rule, EPA may adopt as final 

those parts of the rule that are not the 

subject of an adverse comment. For 

additional information, see the direct 

final rule which is located in the rules 

section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: March 3, 2014. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05823 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 69 

[WC Docket No. 05–25, RM–10593; DA 14– 

302] 

Special Access Proceeding; Comment 

Deadline Extended 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment and reply comment period. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) 

extends the deadline for filing 

comments and reply comments on 

section IV.B of the Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking in the special 

access proceeding. This extension is 

necessary to allow time for the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) to collect data on the 

special access market prior to the 

submission of comments and replies. 

DATES: Comments for section IV.B are 

due on or before October 6, 2014, and 

reply comments are due on or before 

November 17, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by WC Docket No. 05–25 and 

RM–10593 by any of the following 

methods: 

D Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web site: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

D People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– 

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Layton, Pricing Policy Division, 

Wireline Competition Bureau, 202–418– 

0868 or William.Layton@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s 

document, WC Docket No. 05–25, RM– 

10593; DA 14–302, released March 5, 

2014. The full text of this document is 

available for public inspection and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS