81 FR 7491 - Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in a Rulemaking Proceeding
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 29 (February 12, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 29 (February 12, 2016)
| Page Range | 7491-7492 | |
| FR Document | 2016-02899 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 29 (Friday, February 12, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 7491-7492] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-02899] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: [email protected]. Paul Murray, Policy and Rules Division, Offiice of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-0688, email: [email protected]. 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 [[Page 7492]] Comment Filing System at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. The Commission will not send a copy of this Notice pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(l)(A) because this notice does not have an impact on any rules of particular applicability. Number of Petitions Filed: 12. Federal Communications Commission. Gloria J. Miles, Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 2016-02899 Filed 2-11-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 29 / Friday, February 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules 7491
The EPA also reviewed regulatory CAA and applicable Federal regulations. Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and
provisions to control future new sources 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). recordkeeping requirements.
of nitrogen oxide emissions in Idaho. Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the Dated: January 27, 2016.
We note that on April 17, 2014, we EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Dennis J. McLerran,
approved Idaho’s NO2 infrastructure SIP provided that they meet the criteria of
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
(79 FR 21669). In that action, we stated the CAA. Accordingly, this action
that Idaho generally regulates emissions [FR Doc. 2016–02846 Filed 2–11–16; 8:45 am]
merely approves state law as meeting
of nitrogen oxides through its SIP- Federal requirements and does not BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
approved new source review permitting impose additional requirements beyond
programs and operating permit those imposed by state law. For that
regulations. Idaho’s new source review reason, this action: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
permitting rules are found at IDAPA • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory COMMISSION
58.01.01.200 through 228. These rules action’’ subject to review by the Office
help ensure that no new or modified of Management and Budget under 47 CFR Parts 15 and 74
source of nitrogen oxides will cause or Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, [OET Docket Nos. 14–165, 14–166 and 12–
contribute to violation of the NO2 October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 268; Report No. 3037]
NAAQS. In addition, Idaho’s Tier II January 21, 2011);
operating permit regulations at IDAPA • does not impose an information Petitions for Reconsideration of Action
58.01.01.400 through 410 require that to collection burden under the provisions in a Rulemaking Proceeding
obtain an operating permit, the of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
applicant must demonstrate the source U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); AGENCY: Federal Communications
will not cause or significantly contribute • is certified as not having a Commission.
to a violation of any ambient air quality significant economic impact on a ACTION: Petition for reconsideration.
standard. These rules state that Idaho substantial number of small entities
DEQ will require a Tier II source under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 SUMMARY: Petitions for Reconsideration
operating permit if Idaho DEQ U.S.C. 601 et seq.); (Petitions) have been filed in the
determines emission rate reductions are • does not contain any unfunded Commission’s Rulemaking proceeding
necessary to attain or maintain any mandate or significantly or uniquely by Howard S. Shapiro, on behalf of
ambient air quality standard or affect small governments, as described Audio-Technica U.S., Inc., Laura
applicable prevention of significant in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Stefani, on behalf of Sennheiser
deterioration increment. of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Electronic Corp., Paul Margie, on behalf
Based on our review of the Idaho • does not have Federalism of Google Inc., Paula Boyd, on behalf of
submittal, air quality monitoring data, implications as specified in Executive Microsoft Corporation, Stephen E.
and provisions in the current Federally- Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Coran, on behalf of Wireless Internet
approved Idaho SIP regulating new 1999); Service Providers Association, Rick
sources, we believe it is reasonable to • is not an economically significant Kaplan, on behalf of National
conclude that emissions from Idaho do regulatory action based on health or Association of Broadcasters, Lawrence J.
not significantly contribute to safety risks subject to Executive Order Movshin, on behalf of WMTS Coalition,
nonattainment of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Catherine Wang, on behalf of Shure
We also do not expect the monitors in • is not a significant regulatory action Incorporated, Ari Q. Fitzgerald, on
states bordering Idaho, identified in subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR behalf GE Healthcare, Gordon Moore, on
Table 1 above, to have difficulty 28355, May 22, 2001); behalf of Lectrosonics, Inc. and
maintaining the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. We • is not subject to requirements of Telecommunications Law Professionals
believe it is reasonable to conclude that Section 12(d) of the National PLLC, on behalf of Carlson Wireless
emissions from Idaho do not interfere Technology Transfer and Advancement Technologies, Inc. and Cal.net, Inc.
with maintenance of the 2010 NO2 Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because DATES: Oppositions to the Petitions
NAAQS in any other state. this action does not involve technical must be filed on or before February 29,
standards; and 2016. Replies to an opposition must be
III. Proposed Action • does not provide the EPA with the filed on or before March 25, 2016.
The EPA has reviewed the December discretionary authority to address, as ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
24, 2015 submittal from the Idaho DEQ appropriate, disproportionate human Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
demonstrating that sources in Idaho do health or environmental effects, using Washington, DC 20554.
not significantly contribute to practicable and legally permissible
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
nonattainment, or interfere with methods, under Executive Order 12898
maintenance, of the NO2 NAAQS in any (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Hugh Van Tuyl, Policy and Rules
other state. We have also reviewed In addition, the SIP is not approved Division, Office of Engineering and
recent monitoring data and regulatory to apply on any Indian reservation land Technology, (202) 418–7506, email:
provisions in the Federally-approved or in any other area where the EPA or Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov. Paul Murray,
Idaho SIP. Based on our review, we are an Indian Tribe has demonstrated that a Policy and Rules Division, Offiice of
proposing to find that the Idaho SIP Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418–
asabaliauskas on DSK9F6TC42PROD with PROPOSALS
meets the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Indian country, the rule does not have 0688, email: Paul.Murray@fcc.gov.
interstate transport requirements for the Tribal implications as specified by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, summary of Commission’s document,
November 9, 2000). Report No. 3037, released January 12,
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders 2016. The full text of the Petitions is
Review List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 available for viewing and copying in
Under the CAA, the Administrator is Environmental protection, Air Room CY–B402, 445 12th Street SW.,
required to approve a SIP submission pollution control, Incorporation by Washington, DC or may be accessed
that complies with the provisions of the reference, Intergovernmental relations, online via the Commission’s Electronic
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Feb 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12FEP1.SGM 12FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_7520/page/1.svg)
![7492 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 29 / Friday, February 12, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Comment Filing System at http:// I. Summary of Petition of brake regenerators to increase vehicle
apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. The Commission On April 14, 2012, David K. Aberizk, efficiency. With an operator-initiated
will not send a copy of this Notice P.E., petitioned NHTSA requesting slowing feature added to existing RBSs,
pursuant to the Congressional Review development of safety standards for a Mr. Aberizk claims that overall
Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(l)(A) because this driver-activated vehicle regenerative efficiency increases by 6 percent in
notice does not have an impact on any braking interface with a distinct rear hybrid and electric vehicles, and by at
rules of particular applicability. indicator lamp.1 On July 14, 2013, Mr. least 2.5 percent for mild-hybrid
Number of Petitions Filed: 12. Aberizk submitted additional vehicles. As presented, the slowing
Federal Communications Commission. information in the format of a petition concept relies on the driver to manually
Gloria J. Miles, for rulemaking. The agency considers engage the regenerator to slow the
these two submissions as one petition vehicle, independent of the brake pedal
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the
Secretary. for rulemaking because both pertain to application. Finally, Mr. Aberizk
the same concept of driver-activated included a summary of the comment
[FR Doc. 2016–02899 Filed 2–11–16; 8:45 am]
vehicle regenerative braking. and the attachment he submitted to
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
Specifically, Mr. Aberizk requests that NHTSA’s notice of proposed rulemaking
NHTSA define the location and (NPRM) to establish Corporate Average
geometric parameters for a brake control Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards for
device and the actions required for safe model years 2017 and beyond.3
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
operation. Additionally, Mr. Aberizk II. Analysis of Petition
National Highway Traffic Safety requests that NHTSA define the
Administration Although the submission met the
parameters for a rear lamp to signal
requirements to be accepted as a
vehicle slowing.
49 CFR Part 571 rulemaking petition, NHTSA does not
Mr. Aberizk states that regenerator
endorse specific products, designs, or
technology is currently integrated as a
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety equipment, as Mr. Aberizk requests.
component of the conventional friction
Standards; Denial of Petition for NHTSA develops and issues Federal
braking system in electric or hybrid
Rulemaking motor vehicle safety standards in order
electric motor vehicles, which limits the
to reduce crashes, deaths and injuries
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic potential of the device to recover
resulting from motor vehicle crashes.4
Safety Administration (NHTSA), energy. He claims that hybrid and
Motor vehicle safety standards are
Department of Transportation (DOT). electric vehicles with driver-activated
primarily performance standards,
regenerative braking systems (RBS)
ACTION: Denial of petition for intended to allow manufacturers to
increases overall efficiency by 6 percent
rulemaking. choose which products, designs, and
over existing RBS.2
equipment best satisfy the requirements.
SUMMARY: Based on the agency’s Mr. Aberizk recommends that the
That said, in the interest of
evaluation, NHTSA denies a petition for agency establish a new safety standard
completeness, the agency conducted a
rulemaking from Mr. David K. Aberizk, for regenerator engagement to adopt
technical review of Mr. Aberizk’s
P.E., of Integrated Consultants performance requirements, which he
petition. Because the petition involves
Incorporated, who requests the believes will interest automakers in
topics related to multiple FMVSSs, the
development of safety standards for a embracing increased efficiency
agency’s technical review of the slowing
driver-activated vehicle regenerative concepts, such as his operator-initiated
device was separate from its review of
braking interface with distinct rear slowing design. Mr. Aberizk provided
the illumination indicator.
lighting indication. The petitioner graphic illustrations showing potential
claims that the recommended changes locations for an activation control Slowing Device
to the relevant safety standards would device on the steering wheel or gear Mr. Aberizk requests that NHTSA
allow vehicle manufacturers to better selector, and an expanded center high- define the location and geometric
utilize the regenerator technology to mounted stop lamp (CHMSL) assembly. parameters for an operator activated
increase vehicle efficiency. NHTSA In his first information submission, Mr. slowing control device with a human-
finds that some features of the suggested Aberizk refers the reader to the machine interface required for safe
concept are not prohibited by existing Integrated Consultants Incorporated operation. Mr. Aberizk offers anecdotal
Federal motor vehicle safety standards Web site for additional details on the observations and evaluations, but did
(FMVSS) and notes that Mr. Aberizk did driver-activated RBS empirical test not submit quantitative data. For
not demonstrate how the other features findings and his U.S. patent, Vehicle vehicles configured with the slowing
address a motor vehicle safety need. Regenerative Deceleration Actuator and device, he claims a ‘noticeable’ increase
FMVSS Nos. 108 and 135 currently Indicator System and Method. in range for test distances of 15 miles or
specify performance requirements In his supplemental submission, Mr. greater, as well as a 50 to 75 percent
relevant to certain permitted Aberizk states that current RBS reduction in brake pedal usage. The
technologies identified in the petition. technologies underutilize the potential petition does not, however, assess how
DATES: February 12, 2016. 1 Original petition available at http://
these factors, if accurate, would lead to
asabaliauskas on DSK9F6TC42PROD with PROPOSALS
www.regulations.gov, Docket No. NHTSA–2012– safety benefits attributable to the driver-
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
0010–0003. activated slowing concept. Additionally,
Lisa Gavin, Office of Crash Avoidance 2 Mr. Aberizk does not specify whether Graph 1 NHTSA is not aware of any data that
Standards, National Highway Traffic in Appendix A–1 of the additional data collected establish a correlation between
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey and reported July 14, 2013 refers to the overall
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. efficiency of the vehicle at turning power into
3 Mr. Aberizk’s comment to that NPRM can be
movement, or to the efficiency of the regenerative
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: braking system in particular. As discussed further viewed at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No.
I. Summary of Petition below, however, it is irrelevant to the agency’s NHTSA–2010–0131–0278.
II. Agency Analysis determination of whether to begin rulemaking to 4 See 49 U.S. Code § 30101, Purpose and Policy,
III. Agency Decision establish a new FMVSS. section (1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Feb 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12FEP1.SGM 12FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_7520/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2016-02-12 01:24:28
Document Modified: 2016-02-12 01:24:28
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Petition for reconsideration. | |
| 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. | |
| Contact | Hugh Van Tuyl, Policy and Rules Division, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-7506, email: [email protected] Paul Murray, Policy and Rules Division, Offiice of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-0688, email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 7491 | |
| CFR Citation | 47
CFR
15 47 CFR 74 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR