83 FR 31352 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standard
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 129 (July 5, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 129 (July 5, 2018)
| Page Range | 31352-31354 | |
| FR Document | 2018-14331 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 31352-31354] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-14331] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0441; FRL-9980-34--Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) submission from Maryland addressing the infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2012 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard). The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. EPA is proposing to approve Maryland's submittal addressing the infrastructure requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the requirements of section 110 of the CAA. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 6, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03- OAR-2017-0441 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, [[Page 31353]] comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Calcinore, (215) 814-2043, or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Particle pollution, also referred to as particulate matter (PM), is a complex mixture of small particles and liquid droplets suspended in the air, which causes adverse health effects and is the leading cause of visibility impairment in the United States. Particles with a diameter equal to or less than 2.5 microns referred to as fine particulate matter or PM2.5 , are either emitted directly into the atmosphere or are formed from the chemical reactions of precursor gases, such as sulfur dioxide (SO2 ), nitrogen oxides (NOX ), certain volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and ammonia, in the atmosphere. SO2 and NOX are the primary precursors for the formation of PM2.5 and are emitted primarily from point sources as well as nonpoint, onroad, and nonroad sources. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a new 24-hour and a new annual NAAQS for PM2.5 (62 FR 38652). On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the NAAQS for PM2.5 , tightening the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/ m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\, and retaining the annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15 [micro]g/m\3\ (71 FR 61144). Subsequently, on December 14, 2012, EPA revised the level of the health based (primary) annual PM2.5 NAAQS to 12 [micro]g/m\3\. See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ In EPA's 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS revision, EPA left unchanged the existing welfare (secondary) standards for PM2.5 to address particulate matter (PM) related effects such as visibility impairment, ecological effects, damage to materials, and climate impacts. This includes a secondary annual standard of 15 [micro]g/m\3\ and a 24-hour standard of 35 [micro]g/ m\3\. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must submit ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' a plan that provides for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions and the requirements to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address. EPA commonly refers to such state plans as ``infrastructure SIPs.'' II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis On August 18, 2016, the State of Maryland, through the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), formally submitted a SIP revision in order to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a) of the CAA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The SIP submittal addressed the following infrastructure elements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(I), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). Maryland's infrastructure SIP submittal did not address the following two elements of CAA section 110(a)(2): The portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) pertaining to permit programs, known as nonattainment new source review (NNSR), under part D of the CAA and section 110(a)(2)(I), referred to as ``element (I),'' pertaining to the nonattainment requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. According to the EPA guidance issued on September 13, 2013 (2013 Infrastructure Guidance),\2\ the NNSR permitting program requirement of section 110(a)(2)(C) is to be addressed in a different SIP, therefore does not need to be addressed in this SIP revision. Section 110(a)(2)(I) is not required to be submitted by the 3-year submission deadline of CAA section 110(a)(1) and will be addressed in a separate process if necessary. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA is proposing to approve Maryland's August 18, 2016 infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for approving Maryland's submittal may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this rulemaking action, which is available online at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0441. III. Proposed Action EPA's review of Maryland's August 18, 2016 infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS indicates that MDE's August 18, 2016 submittal satisfies the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve Maryland's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action. 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 CAA and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves 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); [[Page 31354]] 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 EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this proposed rule, which proposes approval of Maryland's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: June 19, 2018. Cosmo Servidio, Regional Administrator, Region III. [FR Doc. 2018-14331 Filed 7-3-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![31352 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
General Services Administration’s V. Statutory and Executive Order tribal implications as specified by
Central Heating and Refrigeration Plant Reviews Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
and the U.S. Capital Power Plant, are Under the CAA, the Administrator is November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
subject to federally enforceable required to approve a SIP submission not approved to apply in Indian country
emissions limits that have already that complies with the provisions of the located in the state, and EPA notes that
resulted in significant emission CAA and applicable federal regulations. it will not impose substantial direct
reductions of NOX over the years as 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). costs on tribal governments or preempt
discussed in detail in EPA’s TSD. Also Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, tribal law.
discussed in the TSD, the District has a EPA’s role is to approve state choices, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
variety of other small non-EGU sources provided that they meet the criteria of
where emissions of NOX and/or VOC are Environmental protection, Air
the CAA. Accordingly, this action pollution control, Incorporation by
controlled through the District’s SIP- merely approves state law as meeting
approved regulations. These provisions reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
federal requirements and does not Volatile organic compounds.
and regulations include reasonably impose additional requirements beyond
available control technology (RACT) for those imposed by state law. For that Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
major stationary sources of NOX and reason, this proposed action: Dated: June 19, 2018.
VOCs, and rules that limit nonpoint • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Cosmo Servidio,
source VOC emissions. An in-depth action’’ subject to review by the Office Regional Administrator, Region III.
review of these provisions and of Management and Budget under
regulations, in addition to further [FR Doc. 2018–14332 Filed 7–3–18; 8:45 am]
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
information regarding the specific BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
sources found in the District and their January 21, 2011);
emissions are discussed in the TSD for • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
this notice, located in FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory AGENCY
www.regulations.gov, docket ID number action because SIP approvals are
EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0701. In the TSD, exempted under Executive Order 12866. 40 CFR Part 52
EPA also analyzed the feasibility of • Does not impose an information
additional control options for District collection burden under the provisions [EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0441; FRL–9980–
sources and determined that the 34—Region 3]
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
District’s relatively small to medium U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Approval and Promulgation of Air
size point sources are already well • Is certified as not having a Quality Implementation Plans;
controlled under the District’s SIP and significant economic impact on a Maryland; Infrastructure Requirements
that there may be limited NOX reduction substantial number of small entities for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter
cost-effectiveness in controlling these under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard
sources further in regards to interstate U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
transport for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. • Does not contain any unfunded AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Due to the District’s small number of mandate or significantly or uniquely Agency (EPA).
sources and the high cost of further affect small governments, as described ACTION: Proposed rule.
reductions as discussed in the TSD, EPA in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
is proposing to determine that the Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
District’s SIP, as presently approved, • Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive state implementation plan (SIP)
contains adequate measures to prevent submission from Maryland addressing
District sources from interfering with Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999); the infrastructure requirements of
maintenance in another state for the section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
2008 ozone NAAQS. • Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or for the 2012 annual fine particulate
IV. Proposed Action safety risks subject to Executive Order matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard).
EPA is proposing to approve the • Is not a significant regulatory action The infrastructure requirements are
remaining portion of the June 13, 2014 subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR designed to ensure that the structural
District of Columbia SIP revision that 28355, May 22, 2001); components of each state’s air quality
addresses prongs 1 and 2 of the • Is not subject to requirements of management program are adequate to
interstate transport requirements for section 12(d) of the National meet the state’s responsibilities under
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 Technology Transfer and Advancement the CAA. EPA is proposing to approve
ozone NAAQS in accordance with Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Maryland’s submittal addressing the
section 110 of the CAA for the reasons application of those requirements would infrastructure requirements for the 2012
discussed in this rulemaking. EPA is be inconsistent with the CAA; and PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the
soliciting public comments on the • Does not provide EPA with the requirements of section 110 of the CAA.
issues discussed in this document. discretionary authority to address, as DATES: Written comments must be
These comments will be considered appropriate, disproportionate human received on or before August 6, 2018.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
before taking final action. health or environmental effects, using ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
In 2015, EPA approved the following practicable and legally permissible identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
infrastructure elements or portions methods, under Executive Order 12898 OAR–2017–0441 at http://
thereof from the June 13, 2014 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). www.regulations.gov, or via email to
submittal: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), In addition, this proposed rule, spielberger.susan@epa.gov. For
(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), addressing the District of Columbia’s comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
(K), (L), and (M). 80 FR 19538 (April 13, interstate transport obligations for the follow the online instructions for
2015). 2008 ozone NAAQS, does not have submitting comments. Once submitted,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 Jul 03, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05JYP1.SGM 05JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_31481/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 31353
comments cannot be edited or removed annual PM2.5 NAAQS to 12 mg/m3. See 110(a)(1) and will be addressed in a
from Regulations.gov. For either manner 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).1 separate process if necessary.
of submission, EPA may publish any Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states EPA is proposing to approve
comment received to its public docket. must submit ‘‘within 3 years (or such Maryland’s August 18, 2016
Do not submit electronically any shorter period as the Administrator may infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012
information you consider to be prescribe) after the promulgation of a PM2.5 NAAQS. A detailed summary of
confidential business information (CBI) national primary ambient air quality EPA’s review and rationale for
or other information whose disclosure is standard (or any revision thereof),’’ a approving Maryland’s submittal may be
restricted by statute. Multimedia plan that provides for the found in the Technical Support
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and Document (TSD) for this rulemaking
accompanied by a written comment. enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The action, which is available online at
The written comment is considered the statute directly imposes on states the www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number
official comment and should include duty to make these SIP submissions and EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0441.
discussion of all points you wish to the requirements to make the III. Proposed Action
make. EPA will generally not consider submissions is not conditioned upon
EPA’s taking any action other than EPA’s review of Maryland’s August
comments or comment contents located 18, 2016 infrastructure SIP submittal for
outside of the primary submission (i.e. promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS indicates that
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing MDE’s August 18, 2016 submittal
system). For additional submission specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such
plan’’ submission must address. EPA satisfies the infrastructure requirements
methods, please contact the person of CAA section 110(a) for the 2012 PM2.5
commonly refers to such state plans as
identified in the FOR FURTHER NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
‘‘infrastructure SIPs.’’
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the approve Maryland’s infrastructure SIP
full EPA public comment policy, II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
information about CBI or multimedia Analysis EPA is soliciting public comments on
submissions, and general guidance on On August 18, 2016, the State of the issues discussed in this document.
making effective comments, please visit Maryland, through the Maryland These comments will be considered
http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ Department of the Environment (MDE), before taking final action.
commenting-epa-dockets. formally submitted a SIP revision in IV. Statutory and Executive Order
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara order to satisfy the requirements of Reviews
Calcinore, (215) 814–2043, or by email section 110(a) of the CAA for the 2012
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
at calcinore.sara@epa.gov. PM2.5 NAAQS. The SIP submittal
required to approve a SIP submission
addressed the following infrastructure
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that complies with the provisions of the
elements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS:
CAA and applicable federal regulations.
I. Background CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
(D)(i)(I), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H),
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
Particle pollution, also referred to as (J), (K), (L), and (M).
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
particulate matter (PM), is a complex Maryland’s infrastructure SIP provided that they meet the criteria of
mixture of small particles and liquid submittal did not address the following the CAA. Accordingly, this action
droplets suspended in the air, which two elements of CAA section 110(a)(2): merely approves state law as meeting
causes adverse health effects and is the The portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) federal requirements and does not
leading cause of visibility impairment in pertaining to permit programs, known impose additional requirements beyond
the United States. Particles with a as nonattainment new source review those imposed by state law. For that
diameter equal to or less than 2.5 (NNSR), under part D of the CAA and reason, this proposed action:
microns referred to as fine particulate section 110(a)(2)(I), referred to as • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
matter or PM2.5, are either emitted ‘‘element (I),’’ pertaining to the action’’ subject to review by the Office
directly into the atmosphere or are nonattainment requirements of part D, of Management and Budget under
formed from the chemical reactions of title I of the CAA. According to the EPA Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
precursor gases, such as sulfur dioxide guidance issued on September 13, 2013 October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), certain (2013 Infrastructure Guidance),2 the January 21, 2011);
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and NNSR permitting program requirement • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
ammonia, in the atmosphere. SO2 and of section 110(a)(2)(C) is to be addressed FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
NOX are the primary precursors for the in a different SIP, therefore does not action because SIP approvals are
formation of PM2.5 and are emitted need to be addressed in this SIP exempted under Executive Order 12866.
primarily from point sources as well as revision. Section 110(a)(2)(I) is not • Does not impose an information
nonpoint, onroad, and nonroad sources. required to be submitted by the 3-year collection burden under the provisions
submission deadline of CAA section of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
new 24-hour and a new annual NAAQS 1 In EPA’s 2012 PM • Is certified as not having a
2.5 NAAQS revision, EPA left
for PM2.5 (62 FR 38652). On October 17, unchanged the existing welfare (secondary) significant economic impact on a
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
2006, EPA revised the NAAQS for standards for PM2.5 to address particulate matter
substantial number of small entities
PM2.5, tightening the 24-hour PM2.5 (PM) related effects such as visibility impairment,
ecological effects, damage to materials, and climate under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
standard from 65 micrograms per cubic impacts. This includes a secondary annual standard U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
meter (mg/m3) to 35 mg/m3, and retaining of 15 mg/m3 and a 24-hour standard of 35 mg/m3. • Does not contain any unfunded
the annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15 mg/m3 2 ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State
mandate or significantly or uniquely
(71 FR 61144). Subsequently, on Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),’’
affect small governments, as described
December 14, 2012, EPA revised the Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
level of the health based (primary) 2013. of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 Jul 03, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05JYP1.SGM 05JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_31481/page/2.svg)
![31354 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
• Does not have federalism Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), remain anonymous). Attachments to
implications as specified in Executive Commerce. electronic comments will be accepted in
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, ACTION: Proposed rule; request for Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF
1999); comments. file formats only.
• Is not an economically significant New England Fishery Management
regulatory action based on health or SUMMARY: This rulemaking proposes Council staff prepared an environmental
safety risks subject to Executive Order regulations to approve and implement assessment (EA) for Northeast Skate
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); measures submitted by the New Complex Framework Adjustment 5 and
• Is not a significant regulatory action England Fishery Management Council 2018–2019 Specifications that describes
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR in Framework Adjustment 5 and 2018– the proposed action and other
28355, May 22, 2001); 2019 Specifications to the Northeast considered alternatives. The EA
• Is not subject to requirements of Skate Complex Fishery Management provides an analysis of the biological,
section 12(d) of the National Plan. This action would implement economic, and social impacts of the
Technology Transfer and Advancement 2018–2019 specifications, allow limited proposed measures and other
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because possession of barndoor skate in the considered alternatives, a preliminary
application of those requirements would skate wing fishery, and exempt vessels Regulatory Impact Review, and
be inconsistent with the CAA; and from some specific domestic skate economic analysis. Copies of the
• Does not provide EPA with the regulations when fishing exclusively Framework 5 EA are available on
discretionary authority to address, as within the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries request from Thomas A. Nies, Executive
appropriate, disproportionate human Organization Regulatory Area. The Director, New England Fishery
health or environmental effects, using action is necessary to establish skate Management Council, 50 Water Street,
practicable and legally permissible specifications to be consistent with the Newburyport, MA 01950. This
methods, under Executive Order 12898 most recent scientific information, and document is also available from the
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). improve management of the skate following internet addresses: http://
In addition, this proposed rule, which fisheries. This proposed action is www.nefmc.org and
proposes approval of Maryland’s intended to establish appropriate catch www.regulations.gov/
infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 limits for the skate fishery and to #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-
PM2.5 NAAQS, does not have tribal provide additional operational 0054.
implications as specified by Executive flexibility to fishery participants. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, DATES: Public comments must be Debra Lambert, Fishery Policy Analyst,
2000), because the SIP is not approved received by August 6, 2018. (301) 427–8560.
to apply in Indian country located in the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
state, and EPA notes that it will not on this document, identified by NOAA-
impose substantial direct costs on tribal NMFS-2018-0054, by either of the Background
governments or preempt tribal law. following methods: The Northeast Skate Complex Fishery
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 • Electronic Submission: Submit all Management Plan (FMP), developed by
electronic public comments via the the New England Fishery Management
Environmental protection, Air Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to Council and implemented in 2003,
pollution control, Incorporation by www.regulations.gov/ manages a complex of seven skate
reference, Intergovernmental relations, #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018- species (barndoor, clearnose, little,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 0054, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, rosette, smooth, thorny, and winter
Reporting and recordkeeping complete the required fields, and enter skate) off the New England and mid-
requirements, Sulfur oxides. or attach your comments. Atlantic coasts. Skates are harvested and
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. • Mail: Submit written comments to managed in two different fisheries: One
Dated: June 19, 2018.
Michael Pentony, Regional for food (the wing fishery) and one for
Administrator, National Marine lobster bait (the bait fishery). Additional
Cosmo Servidio,
Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic information on the skate fisheries can be
Regional Administrator, Region III. Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930–2276. found online at https://
[FR Doc. 2018–14331 Filed 7–3–18; 8:45 am] Mark the outside of the envelope: www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ‘‘Comments on Skate Framework sustainable/species/skate/index.html.
Adjustment 5 and 2018–2019 The regulations implementing the
Specifications.’’ Skate FMP at 50 CFR part 648, subpart
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Instructions: Comments sent by any O, outline the management procedures
other method, to any other address or and measures for the skate fisheries.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric individual, or received after the end of Specifications including the annual
Administration the comment period, may not be catch limit (ACL), annual catch target
considered by NMFS. All comments (ACT), total allowable landings (TAL)
50 CFR Part 648 received are a part of the public record for the skate wing and bait fisheries, and
[Docket No. 180130101–8101–01] and will generally be posted for public possession limits may be specified for
viewing on www.regulations.gov up to 2 years. The current specifications
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
RIN 0648–BH57 without change. All personal identifying were implemented as part of Framework
Fisheries of the Northeastern United information (e.g., name, address, etc.), Adjustment 3 to the FMP and the 2016–
States; Northeast Skate Complex; confidential business information, or 2017 Specifications (81 FR 54744;
Framework Adjustment 5 and 2018– otherwise sensitive information August 17, 2016). The Council is
2019 Specifications submitted voluntarily by the sender will required to develop new specification
be publicly accessible. NMFS will recommendations for the 2018 and 2019
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ fishing years. Though the 2018 fishing
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and A’’ in the required fields if you wish to year began on May 1, 2018, the existing
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 Jul 03, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05JYP1.SGM 05JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_31481/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-07-03 23:40:24
Document Modified: 2018-07-03 23:40:24
| 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. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be received on or before August 6, 2018. | |
| Contact | Sara Calcinore, (215) 814-2043, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 31352 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Sulfur Oxides |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR