55968 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 226 / Monday, November 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rule and Appendix 

The TSD describes additional 

revisions that we recommend for the 

next time ADEQ modifies the rule and 

appendix. 

D. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, the EPA proposes to fully 

approve the submitted rule and 

appendix because they fulfill all 

relevant requirements. We will accept 

comments from the public on this 

proposal until December 27, 2017. If we 

take final action to approve the 

submitted rule and appendix, our final 

action will incorporate them into the 

federally enforceable SIP. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the 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, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the ADEQ rules described in Table 1 of 

this preamble. The EPA has made, and 

will continue to make, these materials 

available through www.regulations.gov 

and at the EPA Region IX Office (please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 

this preamble for more information). 

IV. 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. 

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 proposed 

action merely proposes to approve 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); 

• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• 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 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; 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). 

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 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). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: November 16, 2017. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2017–25567 Filed 11–24–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 147 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2017–0584; FRL–9970–73– 

OW] 

State of Idaho Voluntary Transfer of 

Primacy of the Class II Underground 

Injection Control Program to the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is providing notice of the 

transfer of the state of Idaho’s 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) 

program for Class II injection wells from 

Idaho to EPA, and is concurrently 

issuing a proposed rule to amend EPA’s 

UIC regulations to reflect such transfer. 

This transfer would be effective upon 

publication in the Federal Register of a 

final rule revising such regulations. 

Idaho submitted a formal request that 

EPA transfer and directly implement the 

Class II UIC Program. Idaho would 

maintain primacy for Class I, III, IV, and 

V injection wells pursuant to their EPAapproved program in 1985. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 11, 2018. A public 

hearing will be held only if there is 

significant public interest. Request for a 

public hearing will be accepted until 

December 12, 2017. Only if requested, a 

public hearing will be held on January 

8, 2018, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., at the 

Banner Bank Building, 950 W. Bannock 

Street, Boise, Idaho. Requests for a 

public hearing may be mailed to: Evan 

Osborne, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 10, 1200 6th Ave., OCE– 

101, Seattle, Washington 98101. For 

additional information regarding the 

public hearing, please contact Evan 

Osborne (206) 553–1747 or 

osborne.evan@epa.gov. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OW–2017–0584, to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or withdrawn. 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 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 226 / Monday, November 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules 55969 

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: 

Colin Dyroff, Drinking Water Protection 

Division, Office of Ground Water and 

Drinking Water (4606M), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 

564–3149; fax number: (202) 564–3754; 

email address: dyroff.colin@epa.gov; or 

Evan Osborne, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 6th 

Ave., OCE–101, Seattle, Washington 

98101; telephone number: (206) 553– 

1747; fax number: (206) 553–1762; 

email address: osborne.evan@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why is EPA taking this action? 

On August 25, 2017, EPA received a 

letter from the Idaho Department of 

Water Resources (IDWR), formally 

requesting that EPA transfer and 

directly implement the Class II UIC 

program in Idaho, pursuant to 40 CFR 

145.34(a). Class II injection wells inject 

fluids (1) that are brought to the surface 

in connection with natural gas storage, 

or oil or natural gas production; or (2) 

for the purpose of enhanced oil or 

natural gas recovery; or (3) for the 

storage of hydrocarbons, which are 

liquid at standard temperature and 

pressure. Idaho received primary 

implementation and enforcement 

authority (primacy) for Class I, II, III, IV, 

and V injection wells under the Safe 

Drinking Water Act, section 1422, on 

July 22, 1985. Idaho has since 

maintained primacy for these injection 

well classes in Idaho, including Class II. 

Class II injection wells were banned 

in Idaho under the state’s regulations in 

1985, when EPA originally approved 

Idaho primacy, and as a result, this ban 

was codified in EPA’s regulations. 

However, in 2013, the state passed 

legislation which allows these wells. 

Although the state’s regulations now 

allow Class II wells, Idaho has not 

issued any Class II permits because EPA 

has not approved the change to Idaho’s 

approved Class II UIC program and the 

wells remain banned under federal law; 

therefore, the state is not authorized to 

issue Class II permits. The voluntary 

transfer of authority for the UIC Class II 

program to EPA would allow EPA to 

issue Class II permits in Idaho. EPA 

would be responsible for the direct 

implementation of the Class II 

underground injection program in 

Idaho, including permitting, 

compliance, and enforcement 

responsibilities, pursuant to the SDWA 

and federal UIC regulations. 

This Federal Register document 

constitutes public notice of the transfer 

of Idaho’s Class II program to EPA, as 

required by 40 CFR 145.34(a)(3). In this 

Federal Register document, EPA also 

proposes to make conforming changes to 

its regulations to reflect such transfer. 

40 CFR part 147 sets forth the applicable 

UIC programs for each of the states. This 

rule would update 40 CFR part 147, 

subpart N, which currently lists Idaho 

as having primacy over Class II, to 

indicate that EPA will directly 

implement the Class II UIC program in 

Idaho. This transfer of authority will be 

effective upon publication of the final 

rule, revising such regulations, in the 

Federal Register. Because the transfer 

and rulemaking will allow wells to be 

permitted that were previously banned, 

EPA finds that there is ‘‘good cause’’ to 

make this rule, when final, effective 

upon publication in the Federal 

Register. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3). 

II. Legal Authorities 

A state with an approved primacy 

program may voluntarily transfer UIC 

program responsibilities to EPA, 

pursuant to 40 CFR 145.34(a). The 

regulations require that EPA provide 

notice of such transfer in the Federal 

Register at least 30 days before the 

transfer is to occur. 40 CFR 145.34(a)(3). 

The regulations do not provide for 

opportunity to comment on whether to 

transfer, and accordingly, EPA is not 

taking comment on such transfer. 

EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR part 147 

set forth the applicable UIC programs 

for each of the states. This rule would 

make ministerial revisions to these 

regulations to reflect the transfer noticed 

herein. Specifically, the rule would 

revise 40 CFR part 147, subpart N, to 

indicate that the Class II UIC program 

for Idaho is to be directly implemented 

by EPA, and consists of the UIC program 

requirements of 40 CFR parts 124, 144, 

146, and 148. EPA is taking comment 

only on these revisions. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing 

Regulations and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs 

This action is not expected to be an 

Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 

because this action is not significant 

under Executive Order 12866. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. OMB has previously approved the 

information collection activities 

contained in the existing regulations 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2040–0042. 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. In making this 

determination, the impact of concern is 

any significant adverse economic 

impact on small entities. An agency may 

certify that a rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities if 

the rule relieves regulatory burden, has 

no net burden or otherwise has a 

positive economic effect on the small 

entities subject to the rule. This rule 

does not impose any requirements on 

small entities; this action withdraws a 

state program and therein transfers 

direct implementation of the Class II 

UIC program to EPA. We have therefore 

concluded that this action will have no 

net regulatory burden for any directly 

regulated small entities. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This rule does not impose 

any mandates on small entities; this 

action withdraws a state program and 

therein transfers direct implementation 

of the Class II UIC program to EPA. 

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
55970 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 226 / Monday, November 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. This action 

contains no federal mandates for state 

and local governments and does not 

impose any enforceable duties on state 

and local governments. This action 

merely withdraws a state program (at 

the voluntary request from Idaho) and 

therein transfers implementation of the 

Class II UIC program to EPA. 

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. This action contains no 

federal mandates for tribal governments 

and does not impose any enforceable 

duties on tribal governments. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. 

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it transfers a state program. 

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

J. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

The EPA has determined that this 

action is not subject to Executive Order 

12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) 

because it does not establish an 

environmental health or safety standard. 

This rule does not impose any health or 

safety standards; this action transfers a 

state program and therein transfers 

direct implementation of the Class II 

UIC program to EPA. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 147 

Environmental protection, Indian— 

lands, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Water supply. 

Dated: November 6, 2017. 

E. Scott Pruitt, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, Title 40 chapter 1 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 147—STATE, TRIBAL, AND EPAADMINISTERED UNDERGROUND 

INJECTION CONTROL PROGRAMS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 147 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300h et seq.; and 42 

U.S.C. 6901 et seq. 

Subpart N—Idaho 

■ 2. Amend § 147.650 by revising the 

section heading and the introductory 

paragraph to read as follows: 

§ 147.650 State-administered program— 

Class I, III, IV, and V wells. 

The UIC program for Class I, III, IV, 

and V wells in the state of Idaho, other 

than those on Indian lands, is the 

program administered by the Idaho 

Department of Water Resources, 

approved by EPA pursuant to section 

1422 of the Safe Drinking Water Act. 

Notice of this approval was published in 

the Federal Register on June 7, 1985; 

the effective date of this program is July 

22, 1985. This program consists of the 

following elements, as submitted to EPA 

in Idaho’s program application. Note: 

because EPA subsequently transferred 

the Class II UIC program from the Idaho 

Department of Water Resources to EPA, 

references to Class II in the following 

elements are no longer relevant or 

applicable for federal UIC purposes. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 147.651 by revising the 

section heading and paragraphs (a) and 

(b) to read as follows: 

§ 147.651 EPA-administered program— 

Class II wells and all wells on Indian lands. 

(a) Contents. EPA administers the UIC 

program for all classes of wells on 

Indian lands and for Class II wells on 

non-Indian lands in the state of Idaho. 

This program consists of the UIC 

program requirements of 40 CFR parts 

124, 144, 146, 148, and any additional 

requirements set forth in the remainder 

of this subpart. Injection well owners 

and operators, and EPA shall comply 

with these requirements. 

(b) Effective dates. The effective date 

of the UIC program for Indian lands in 

Idaho is June 11, 1984. The effective 

date of the UIC program for Class II 

wells on non-Indian lands in Idaho is 

[date of publication of final rule in the 

Federal Register]. 

[FR Doc. 2017–24637 Filed 11–24–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 51 and 52 

[WC Docket No. 17–244, WC Docket No. 

13–97; FCC 17–133] 

Nationwide Number Portability; 

Numbering Policies for Modern 

Communications 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission seeks comment on how 

best to move toward complete 

nationwide number portability (NNP) to 

promote competition among all service 

providers. The NPRM proposes to 

eliminate the N–1 query requirement, 

and also proposes to forbear from the 

dialing parity requirements for 

competitive LECs that remain after the 

2015 USTelecom Forbearance Order as 

they apply to interexchange services. 

The NPRM asserts these changes will 

remove regulatory barriers to NNP and 

better reflect the competitive realities of 

today’s marketplace. The NOI seeks to 

refresh the record in the 2013 Future of 

Numbering NOI. It also seeks comment 

on four NNP models proposed by ATIS: 

Nationwide implementation of local 

routing numbers (LRNs); nonGeographic LRNs (NGLRNs); 

commercial agreements; and iconectiv’s 

GR–2982–CORE. The NOI finally seeks 

comment on the implications of these 

proposals as they relate to public safety, 

access by individuals with disabilities, 

tariffs, and intercarrier compensation. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

December 27, 2017, and reply comments 

are due on or before January 26, 2018. 

Written comments on the Paperwork 

Reduction Act proposed information 

collection requirements must be 

submitted by the public, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and 

other interested parties on or before 

January 26, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by both WC Docket No. 17– 

244, and WC Docket No. 13–97 by any 

of the following methods: 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web site: http://


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1