83 FR 16262 - Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 73 (April 16, 2018)
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 73 (April 16, 2018)
| Page Range | 16262-16265 | |
| FR Document | 2018-07906 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 16262-16265] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-07906] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration 23 CFR Part 790 [Docket No. FHWA-2013-0018] RIN 2125-AF63 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The FHWA withdraws its August 4, 2014, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to establish a weighting factor of 5.0, to be used in determining the weighted population of fine particulate (PM2.5 ) nonattainment areas. The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) language for the CMAQ Program funds that must be obligated for PM2.5 projects in PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas (referred to in this document as a ``set-aside'') instructs that the set-aside be calculated based on ``weighted population'' in PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Because the statute did not specify the values to be applied to determine the weighted population, FHWA had previously initiated a rulemaking to establish the weighting factor. After reviewing the record in this matter, FHWA withdraws the NPRM. DATES: The NPRM ``Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program,'' RIN 2125-2013-0018, published August 4, 2014 (79 FR 45146), is withdrawn as of April 16, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Cecilia Ho, Office of Natural Environment, 202-366-9862, or Ms. Diane Mobley, Office of the Chief Counsel, 202-366-1366, Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Access and Filing This document, the 2014 NPRM, and all comments received may be viewed online through the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov. The website is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded by accessing the Office of the Federal Register's home page at https://www.federalregister.gov. Background The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914) established the CMAQ Program. The program provides funding to State and local governments for transportation projects and programs to help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). Funding is available to reduce congestion and improve air quality for areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), or particulate matter (i.e., nonattainment areas), and for areas that were out of compliance but have [[Page 16263]] now met the standards (i.e., maintenance areas). The program was reauthorized under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107) in 1998, under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144) in 2005, under MAP-21 (Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405) in 2012, and most recently under the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312) in 2015. Section 1113(b)(6) of MAP-21 amended 23 U.S.C. 149 by adding subsection (k)(1) requiring priority use of CMAQ funds in areas that are designated nonattainment or maintenance for the PM2.5 NAAQS.\1\ Specifically, 23 U.S.C. 149(k)(1) states: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The EPA has set both an annual and a 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.5 (40 CFR 50.7). For any State that has a nonattainment or maintenance area for fine particulate matter, an amount equal to 25 percent of the funds apportioned to each State under section 104(b)(4) for a nonattainment or maintenance area that are based all or in part on the weighted population of such area in fine particulate matter nonattainment shall be obligated to projects that reduce such fine particulate matter emissions in such area, including diesel --------------------------------------------------------------------------- retrofits. Although the statute requires that the PM2.5 set-aside must be calculated based on ``weighted population,'' it was not specific regarding what that weighting factor should be. Because the language did not specify values to be applied to determine the weighted population, FHWA must make that determination as the Agency implementing the CMAQ Program. Since October 1, 2012, a State's CMAQ apportionment has been determined by multiplying a State's total amount for all apportioned programs under MAP-21 by the share of the State's total Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 apportionments for the CMAQ Program apportionment relative to the State's total apportionments under all programs for FY 2009, based on the statutory formula at the time.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(4). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the PM2.5 set-aside calculation, FHWA follows the prior statutory approach to weighted population formulas. To determine the 25 percent that States must set-aside for PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas, FHWA must determine weighted populations for ozone, CO, and PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas. The weighted population numbers provide a means to reflect the severity of the air quality problems among the populations of the areas in nonattainment and maintenance for ozone, CO, and PM2.5 . The FHWA is using the weighting factors in the most recent statutory apportionment formula from SAFETEA-LU for ozone and CO. However, since MAP-21 and prior legislation did not include a PM2.5 weighting factor in CMAQ apportionment formulas, FHWA continues to use the weighted population formula, which was used in prior statutes, to determine the PM2.5 set-aside under MAP- 21. The use of the previous weighted population formula for the PM2.5 set-aside calculation is based on the congressional description of the set-aside and requires two main mathematical steps, with multiple sub-steps. The PM2.5 set-aside calculation is based on the State's net CMAQ apportionment, which is the State's total CMAQ apportionment minus required set-asides for the Transportation Alternatives Program and State Planning & Research. The first main step is to determine the amount of the State's net CMAQ apportionment that is attributable to PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance. County-level weighted populations are calculated by taking the population in each of the State's counties with a nonattainment or maintenance area and multiplying by the weighting factors for each pollutant for which the county is in nonattainment or maintenance status. The State's total weighted population for all three criteria pollutants (ozone, CO, and PM2.5 ) is determined by combining the weighted populations of all counties in nonattainment or maintenance for any of the pollutants. The State's PM2.5 weighted population is determined by combining the weighted populations of all counties in nonattainment or maintenance for PM2.5 . The State's PM2.5 weighted population is divided by the State's total weighted population to determine the percentage of the State's total weighted population attributable all or in part to PM2.5 . The net CMAQ apportionment amount then is multiplied by the PM2.5 percentage to determine the amount of the net CMAQ apportionment amount attributable to PM2.5 pollutants. The second main step is to multiply the resulting number by 25 percent to arrive at the PM2.5 set-aside under 23 U.S.C. 149(k)(1). States are to spend that set-aside only on PM2.5 projects, as chosen by the States, in the nonattainment or maintenance areas for PM2.5 . This is not meant to be a limit on the amount of funds to be spent; areas may spend additional CMAQ funds above the 25 percent set-aside on PM2.5 projects. To calculate the weighted population of an area under 23 U.S.C. 149(k)(1), FHWA uses updated populations based on the most recent data available from the U.S. Census Bureau for each county, or part of a county, that is designated nonattainment or maintenance for ozone, CO, or PM2.5 . The U.S. Census Bureau provides annual estimates of county populations, and FHWA historically has used this jurisdictional level to determine CMAQ apportionments. Updated populations are then given a relative value--a weighting--that corresponds to the nonattainment designation and severity of the criteria pollutant classification of the area, as established under the CAA. Beginning in 2013, FHWA implemented the MAP-21 changes by an administrative determination to use a weighting factor of 1.2 for PM2.5 areas. The justification for this determination was outlined in the August 2014 NPRM. The FHWA issued a NPRM on August 4, 2014, proposing to set a weighting factor of 5.0 for PM2.5 areas. The FHWA solicited comments on this weighting factor and specifically requested comments on whether setting the weighting factor at 5.0 may present any implementation concerns for States or local transportation agencies, and if so, how FHWA could address those concerns. The FHWA received 28 \3\ sets of comments on the NPRM. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ The docket shows receipt of 31 comments; however, 3 sets were duplicates. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NPRM Comments Generally One State DOT commented that a weighting factor of 5.0 does not fully consider the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analysis for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA's analysis predicted that the implementation of Federal controls will ensure more than 90 percent of areas will attain the PM2.5 NAAQS by the year 2020. The EPA expects that fewer than 10 counties, out of the more than 3,000 counties in the U.S., will need to consider any local actions to reduce fine particle pollution in order to meet the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by 2020. The rest of the country can rely on air quality improvements from Federal rules already on the books to meet this new standard. It is not clear to the commenter that a proposed weighting factor of 5.0 sufficiently considered this EPA information and the associated reduction in potentially harmful health impacts. One metropolitan planning organization (MPO) commented that setting the weighting factor at 5.0 could [[Page 16264]] inhibit the region's ability to meet existing reduction commitments for ground-level ozone and place a fast-growing region at a disadvantage for dealing with increased congestion. A weighting factor of 5.0 does not take into account resources available at the State and local level. The commenter is concerned that increasing the PM2.5 weighting factor from the interim value of 1.2 to 5.0 will significantly reduce the flexibility of a State or region to develop air quality projects that best meet the needs of the affected local population. One State DOT disagreed with FHWA's characterization of the impact of moving from a weighting factor of 1.2 to a weighting factor of 5.0 as producing a ``modest difference.'' The commenter pointed out that the amount of the set-aside shown in an example set forth in the NPRM \4\ increases by more than 15 percent. If the weighting factor were to be increased from the current 1.2 to the proposed 5.0, the amount required to be set-aside for the 7 counties in Michigan would increase from $11.5 million to $15.6 million, an increase of more than $4.1 million per year, or roughly 36 percent. Every dollar and the strings attached to each dollar, matter greatly to the State. The comments submitted by a transportation association and supported by 10 State DOTs and other transportation organizations recommended that the final rule provide the specific weightings to be used for each possible combination of nonattainment and maintenance areas. They commented that the following combinations were not addressed in the proposed rule, and should be added to the final rule: (1) Ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas that are also designated as PM2.5 maintenance areas; (2) CO nonattainment or maintenance areas that are also designated as PM2.5 nonattainment areas; (3) CO nonattainment or maintenance areas that are also designated as PM2.5 maintenance areas; (4) Ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas that are also designated as CO nonattainment or maintenance areas and are designated as PM2.5 nonattainment areas; and (5) Ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas that are also designated as CO nonattainment or maintenance areas and are designated as PM2.5 maintenance areas. These combinations should be addressed specifically in the final rule even if the weighting for one or more of the individual pollutants (e.g., CO) is 1.0. The benefit of specifying the weighting factor for each possible combination is that it ensures clarity and certainty in implementation of the rule. The same transportation association with the supporting State DOTs also expressed their opposition to the proposed 5.0 weighting. They believed that the reasoning presented for selecting the weighting factor of 5.0 is inadequately supported in the proposed rulemaking. They commented that increasing the PM2.5 weighting factor from 1.2 to 5.0 will significantly reduce the flexibility of a State or region to develop air quality projects that best meet the needs of the affected local population. They recommended retaining the existing weighting of 1.2 for the following reasons: (1) The earlier Senate version of MAP-21 included a 1.2 weighting factor for an apportionment formula for areas designated nonattainment or maintenance for PM2.5 : (2) The weighting factors used prior to MAP-21 (to determine CMAQ apportionments) ranged from 1.0 for CO to 1.4 for the highest ozone classification--as the NPRM notes, a weighting factor of 1.2 is in the midpoint value of that range, and a reasonable inference is that Congress intended for FHWA to adopt a weighting factor within the range of those already in use; and (3) The factor only establishes a minimum investment level for PM2.5 projects. A State can invest additional funding in such projects if it determines this is the best use of its CMAQ funding. They do not believe there is sufficient support for concluding that PM2.5 should be assigned a weighting factor that is twice as great as the other two pollutants combined. Such a factor has no basis in the legislation nor does the scientific information cited in the NPRM provide a compelling basis for assigning such a weighting. They further commented that even if FHWA concluded that the highest existing factor should be doubled, there is an error in the logic proposed in this NPRM. The highest possible weighting factor should be 1.2 multiplied by 1.4, or 1.68 for an area that is nonattainment or maintenance for CO and is also extreme nonattainment for ozone. Thus, if the intent is to double the highest possible weighting factor under current law and policy, the weighting factor should be no higher than 3.36. In the event that a weighting factor of 1.2 is not retained for PM2.5 nonattainment areas, the commenters recommended adopting a weighting factor no higher than the current highest weighting factor of 1.4 for ``extreme'' ozone nonattainment areas. This approach would ensure that the weighting for PM2.5 nonattainment areas is within the range contemplated by Congress when it enacted MAP-21 while also reflecting the heightened severity of PM2.5 health effects. Five commenters (two State DOTs and three MPOs) support FHWA setting the PM2.5 weighting factor at 5.0. These commenters cited the serious health impacts associated with PM2.5 emissions. They agreed that setting the weighting factor at 5.0 for PM2.5 set-aside calculations was intended to improve and benefit overall public health by targeting PM2.5 emissions. The commenters also agreed that it is reasonable to set a weighting factor for PM2.5 that is higher than the weighting factor for ozone and CO given the potential health impacts. One commenter suggests that an even higher weighting factor (higher than 5.0) for PM2.5 nonattainment areas could be supported if cost effectiveness of CMAQ projects were taken into account. For example, the Carl Moyer Program administered by the California Air Resources Board has, for many years, taken the health impacts and toxicity of PM2.5 into account in its cost effectiveness formula that is used to determine which projects are funded. They urged FHWA to consider the rationale for a higher weighting of PM2.5 emission reductions relative to nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds, and CO, as well. One MPO commented that a wide variety of projects eligible under the CMAQ Program reduce PM2.5 as well as other criteria pollutants. The flexibility that FHWA has provided to select projects that demonstrate criteria pollutant emissions for CMAQ funding is beneficial and appreciated. This commenter requests that FHWA continue this flexibility with respect to the types of projects that reduce PM2.5 and are counted toward the obligation targets for such projects. This allows each region to effectively target investment opportunities specific to its unique strategies to meet air quality as well as other planning objectives. FHWA Decision To Withdraw the NPRM Based on the current record, including comments received in response to the NPRM indicating that the 1.2 weighting factor was sufficient and provided States necessary flexibilities, FHWA has decided to withdraw the August 2014 NPRM and, accordingly, cancels the plans to develop a final rule. If FHWA determines changes to the weighting factor currently in use are necessary and advisable in the future, a new rulemaking would be initiated that will [[Page 16265]] incorporate any appropriate recommendations from the comments received through this rulemaking. The FHWA will continue to use the weighting factor in use since 2013. The NPRM proposing to establish a weighting factor to be used in determining the weighted population of PM2.5 nonattainment areas are withdrawn. Issued on: April 10, 2018. Brandye L. Hendrickson, Acting Administrator, Federal Highway Administration. [FR Doc. 2018-07906 Filed 4-13-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
![16262 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Designations and Reporting Points, Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final Rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to
dated August 3, 2017, and effective regulatory action. establish a weighting factor of 5.0, to be
September 15, 2017. FAA Order used in determining the weighted
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
7400.11B is publicly available as listed population of fine particulate (PM2.5)
in the ADDRESSES section of this Airspace, Incorporation by reference, nonattainment areas.
document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Navigation (air). The Moving Ahead for Progress in the
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, The Proposed Amendment 21st Century Act (MAP–21) language for
air traffic service routes, and reporting the CMAQ Program funds that must be
points. Accordingly, pursuant to the obligated for PM2.5 projects in PM2.5
authority delegated to me, the Federal nonattainment and maintenance areas
The Proposal Aviation Administration proposes to (referred to in this document as a ‘‘set-
The FAA is proposing an amendment amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: aside’’) instructs that the set-aside be
to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations calculated based on ‘‘weighted
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, population’’ in PM2.5 nonattainment
(14 CFR) part 71 by modifying Class E
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR areas. Because the statute did not
airspace extending upward from 700
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND specify the values to be applied to
feet above the surface at Lyons-Rice
REPORTING POINTS determine the weighted population,
County Municipal Airport, Lyons, KS,
and the geographic coordinates to ■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR FHWA had previously initiated a
coincide with the FAA’s aeronautical part 71 continues to read as follows: rulemaking to establish the weighting
database. factor. After reviewing the record in this
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, matter, FHWA withdraws the NPRM.
Airspace reconfiguration is necessary 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,
due to the decommissioning and 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. DATES: The NPRM ‘‘Congestion
cancellation of the Lyons NDB, and Mitigation and Air Quality
NDB approach, which would enhance § 71.1 [Amended] Improvement (CMAQ) Program,’’ RIN
the safety and management of the ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 2125–2013–0018, published August 4,
standard instrument approach 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B, 2014 (79 FR 45146), is withdrawn as of
procedures for IFR operations at the Airspace Designations and Reporting April 16, 2018.
airport. Points, dated August 3, 2017, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Class E airspace designations are effective September 15, 2017, is Cecilia Ho, Office of Natural
published in paragraph 6005 of FAA amended as follows: Environment, 202–366–9862, or Ms.
Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Diane Mobley, Office of the Chief
and effective September 15, 2017, which Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Counsel, 202–366–1366, Federal
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Above the Surface of the Earth. Highway Administration, 1200 New
71.1. The Class E airspace designations * * * * * Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590.
listed in this document will be Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30
published subsequently in the Order. ACE KS E5 Lyons, KS [Amended] p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
Lyons-Rice County Municipal Airport, KS except Federal holidays.
Regulatory Notices and Analyses (Lat. 38°20′31″ N, long. 98°13′38″ W)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The FAA has determined that this That airspace extending upward from 700
regulation only involves an established feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile Electronic Access and Filing
body of technical regulations for which radius of Lyons-Rice County Municipal This document, the 2014 NPRM, and
frequent and routine amendments are Airport.
all comments received may be viewed
necessary to keep them operationally Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on April 5, 2018. online through the Federal eRulemaking
current, is non-controversial and Christopher L. Southerland, portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
unlikely to result in adverse or negative Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, The website is available 24 hours each
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ATO Central Service Center. day, 365 days each year. An electronic
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under [FR Doc. 2018–07664 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am] copy of this document may also be
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a BILLING CODE 4910–13–P downloaded by accessing the Office of
‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT the Federal Register’s home page at
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 https://www.federalregister.gov.
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
does not warrant preparation of a Background
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated Federal Highway Administration The Intermodal Surface
impact is so minimal. Since this is a Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
routine matter that will only affect air 23 CFR Part 790 (Pub. L. 102–240, 105 Stat. 1914)
traffic procedures and air navigation, it [Docket No. FHWA–2013–0018] established the CMAQ Program. The
is certified that this rule, when program provides funding to State and
promulgated, would not have a RIN 2125–AF63 local governments for transportation
significant economic impact on a projects and programs to help meet the
substantial number of small entities Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
Improvement (CMAQ) Program
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
under the criteria of the Regulatory (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). Funding is
Flexibility Act. AGENCY: Federal Highway available to reduce congestion and
Administration (FHWA), U.S. improve air quality for areas that do not
Environmental Review
Department of Transportation (DOT). meet the National Ambient Air Quality
This proposal will be subject to an ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon
environmental analysis in accordance monoxide (CO), or particulate matter
with FAA Order 1050.1F, SUMMARY: The FHWA withdraws its (i.e., nonattainment areas), and for areas
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and August 4, 2014, Notice of Proposed that were out of compliance but have
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:39 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM 16APP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_16335/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 16265
incorporate any appropriate 410–576–2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@ 38°19′18.4″ N, longitude 075°04′26.9″
recommendations from the comments uscg.mil. W, thence westward to latitude
received through this rulemaking. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
38°19′27.0″ N, longitude 075°05′03.0″
FHWA will continue to use the W, thence northward to point of origin,
weighting factor in use since 2013. The I. Table of Abbreviations located adjacent to Ocean City, MD. The
NPRM proposing to establish a safety zone will encompass all navigable
weighting factor to be used in CFR Code of Federal Regulations waters within a rectangular area
COTP Captain of the Port approximately 7,000 feet in length and
determining the weighted population of
DHS Department of Homeland Security
PM2.5 nonattainment areas are 3,000 feet in width, parallel to the
FR Federal Register
withdrawn. NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking shoreline at Ocean City, MD. The
Issued on: April 10, 2018. § Section duration of the zone is intended to
U.S.C. United States Code ensure the safety of persons and vessels
Brandye L. Hendrickson,
on the specified navigable waters before,
Acting Administrator, Federal Highway during, and after the scheduled 2 p.m.
Administration.
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis air show. No vessel or person would be
[FR Doc. 2018–07906 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am]
permitted to enter the safety zone
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P On February 21, 2018, the Town of
without obtaining permission from the
Ocean City, MD, notified the Coast
COTP or a designated representative.
Guard that it will be conducting the
The regulatory text we are proposing
Canadian Snowbirds Air Show
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND appears at the end of this document.
Featurette from 2 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on
SECURITY May 23, 2018. Details of the event were IV. Regulatory Analyses
Coast Guard provided to the Coast Guard on March We developed this proposed rule after
7, 2018. The air show consists of a considering numerous statutes and
33 CFR Part 165 single public performance by the Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Canadian Forces 431 Air Demonstration Below we summarize our analyses
[Docket Number USCG–2018–0270] Squadron conducting a 40-minute based on a number of these statutes and
aerobatic performance of high-speed, Executive orders s and we discuss First
RIN 1625–AA00 low-flying fixed-wing military aircraft Amendment rights of protestors.
operating within a Federal Aviation
Safety Zone; North Atlantic Ocean, A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Administration-designated air show
Ocean City, MD
box, located above the North Atlantic Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Ocean adjacent to Ocean City, MD. direct agencies to assess the costs and
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Hazards from the air show include benefits of available regulatory
participants operating adjacent to a alternatives and, if regulation is
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to designated navigation channel and necessary, to select regulatory
establish a temporary safety zone for interfering with vessels intending to approaches that maximize net benefits.
certain waters of the North Atlantic operate within that channel, as well as Executive Order 13771 directs agencies
Ocean adjacent to Ocean City, MD. This aircraft mishaps that involve crashing to control regulatory costs through a
action is necessary to provide for the during an air show aerobatic budgeting process. This NPRM has not
safety of life on the navigable waters performance conducted above navigable been designated a ‘‘significant
during an air show on May 23, 2018. waters located near the shoreline. The regulatory action,’’ under Executive
This action would prohibit persons and COTP Maryland-National Capital Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
vessels from entering the safety zone Region has determined that potential has not been reviewed by the Office of
unless authorized by the Captain of the hazards associated with the air show Management and Budget (OMB), and
Port Maryland-National Capital Region would be a safety concern for anyone pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
or a designated representative. We intending to operate within certain from the requirements of Executive
invite your comments on this proposed waters of the North Atlantic Ocean Order 13771.
rulemaking. adjacent to Ocean City, MD. This regulatory action determination
DATES: Comments and related material The purpose of this rulemaking is to is based on the size, location, duration,
must be received by the Coast Guard on ensure the safety of persons and vessels and day-of-week of the safety zone.
or before May 16, 2018. on certain waters of the North Atlantic Vessel traffic will be able to safely
Ocean before, during, and after the transit around this safety zone, which
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
scheduled event. The Coast Guard would impact a small designated area of
identified by docket number USCG–
proposes this rulemaking under the North Atlantic Ocean for less than
2018–0270 using the Federal
authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. 3 hours during a Wednesday before
eRulemaking Portal at http://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public III. Discussion of Proposed Rule Memorial Day when vessel traffic is
Participation and Request for normally low. The Coast Guard will
The COTP proposes to establish a issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via
Comments’’ portion of the safety zone from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. on
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
VHF–FM marine band channel 16 to
May 23, 2018. The safety zone would provide information about the safety
further instructions on submitting
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
cover all waters of the North Atlantic zone.
comments. Ocean, within an area bounded by the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If following coordinates: Commencing at a B. Impact on Small Entities
you have questions about this proposed point near the shoreline at latitude The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
rulemaking, call or email Mr. Ron 38°20′33.3″ N, longitude 075°04′37.7″ 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
Houck, Sector Maryland-National W, thence eastward to latitude requires Federal agencies to consider
Capital Region Waterways Management 38°20′24.9″ N, longitude 075°04′01.5″ the potential impact of regulations on
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone W, thence southward to latitude small entities during rulemaking. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:32 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM 16APP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_16335/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-04-14 02:19:17
Document Modified: 2018-04-14 02:19:17
| 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 | Proposed rule; withdrawal. | |
| Dates | The NPRM ``Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program,'' RIN 2125-2013-0018, published August 4, 2014 (79 FR 45146), is withdrawn as of April 16, 2018. | |
| Contact | Ms. Cecilia Ho, Office of Natural Environment, 202-366-9862, or Ms. Diane Mobley, Office of the Chief Counsel, 202-366-1366, Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 16262 | |
| RIN Number | 2125-AF63 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR