83 FR 39892 - Air Plan Approval; Maine; Infrastructure Requirement for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 156 (August 13, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 156 (August 13, 2018)
| Page Range | 39892-39894 | |
| FR Document | 2018-17248 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 39892-39894] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-17248] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0269; FRL-9981-93-Region 1] Air Plan Approval; Maine; Infrastructure Requirement for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maine. This revision addresses the interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect to the 2010 primary nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This action approves Maine's demonstration that the State is meeting its obligations regarding the interstate transport of NO2 emissions into other states. This action is being taken under the CAA. DATES: This rule is effective on September 12, 2018. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0269. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Bird, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100 (Mail Code OEP 05-2), Boston, MA 01209-3912, tel. (617) 918-1287, email [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. Table of Contents I. Background and Purpose II. Response to Comments III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose On May 25, 2018 (83 FR 24264), EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding specific Clean Air Act requirements applicable to the State of Maine. In particular, the NPRM proposed approval of Maine's February 21, 2018, SIP submittal for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS as it pertains to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires a state's SIP to include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity within the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts that will contribute significantly to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state. The two clauses of this section are referred to as prong 1 (significant contribution to nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference with maintenance of the NAAQS). In the NPRM, EPA proposed to approve Maine's February 21, 2018, infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS, concluding Maine's SIP submittal adequately addresses prong 1 and prong 2 requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS. The rationale for EPA's proposed action is explained in the NPRM and will not be restated here. II. Response to Comments In response to the May 25, 2018 NPRM, we received a number of anonymous comments that address subjects outside the scope of our proposed action, do not explain (or provide a legal basis for) how the proposed action should differ in any way, and make no specific mention of the proposed action. Consequently, those comments are not germane to this rulemaking and require no further response. EPA received one relevant comment that referred specifically to the proposed rulemaking on the Maine's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS. Comment: The commenter suggests that, under the Plain Writing Act of 2010, EPA should not have used the word ``promulgated'' in the NPRM for this action. Response: The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (``PWA'' or the ``Act''), Public Law [[Page 39893]] 111-274, 124 Stat. 2861, requires EPA to ``use plain writing in every covered document of the agency that the agency issues or substantially revises.'' See PWA section 4(b). The Act defines ``plain writing'' as ``writing that is clear, concise, well-organized, and follows other best practices appropriate to the subject or field and intended audience.'' See PWA section 3(3). The Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') published guidance \1\ on the Act that encourages agencies to follow Federal Plain Language Guidelines available at www.plainlanguage.gov that recommend agencies avoid certain words, including ``promulgate.'' Neither the PWA nor the guidelines, however, bar its use. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ OMB, Final Guidance on Implementing the Plain Writing Act of 2010 (April 13, 2011), available at https://plainlanguage.gov/law/. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the NPRM, EPA used forms of ``promulgate'' twice as follows: ``[o]n February 9, 2010, EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3- year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1- hour daily maximum concentrations'' and ``states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS'' (emphasis added). The Clean Air Act specifically requires EPA to ``promulgate'' NAAQS, CAA section 109(a)(1)(B), and requires states to submit infrastructure SIPs to EPA within three years after the ``promulgation'' of a NAAQS, CAA section 110(a)(1). EPA agrees that it can sometimes be clearer to avoid words like ``promulgate,'' but EPA appropriately used ``promulgated'' and ``promulgation'' in the NPR to refer specifically to these formal CAA requirements. In any event, the comment does not suggest that the commenter misunderstood EPA's proposed action due to the use of these words. See PWA section 2. Nor does the commenter state that EPA should disapprove Maine's submittal. Therefore, we are approving the SIP submittal as proposed. III. Final Action EPA is approving Maine's February 21, 2018, SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS. EPA is taking final action to approve this SIP submittal because Maine's SIP includes adequate provisions to prevent emissions sources within the State from significantly contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of this standard in any other state. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, 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, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 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 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); This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant 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 Clean Air Act; 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where 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). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 12, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: August 6, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 0 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: [[Page 39894]] Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart U--Maine 0 2. Section 52.1020(e) is amended by adding an entry titled ``Interstate Transport SIP to meet Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO 2 NAAQS'' at the end of the table to read as follows: Sec. 52.1020 Identification of plan. * * * * * (e) Nonregulatory. Maine Non Regulatory ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicable State Name of non regulatory SIP geographic or submittal date/ EPA approved date Explanations provision nonattainment area effective date \3\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * Interstate Transport SIP to Statewide......... 2/21/2018 8/13/2018, [Insert This approval addresses meet Infrastructure Federal Register Prongs 1 and 2 of CAA Requirements for the 2010 1- citation]. section hour NO2 NAAQS. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) only. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision. [FR Doc. 2018-17248 Filed 8-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![39892 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
the Administrator of this final rule does ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
not affect the finality of this action for AGENCY EPA.
the purposes of judicial review nor does
40 CFR Part 52 Table of Contents
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed, I. Background and Purpose
[EPA–R01–OAR–2018–0269; FRL–9981–93–
and shall not postpone the effectiveness Region 1] II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
of such rule or action. This action may
Air Plan Approval; Maine; IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section Infrastructure Requirement for the I. Background and Purpose
307(b)(2).) 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National
On May 25, 2018 (83 FR 24264), EPA
Ambient Air Quality Standard
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 published a Notice of Proposed
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding specific
Environmental protection, Air Agency (EPA). Clean Air Act requirements applicable
pollution control, Incorporation by ACTION: Final rule. to the State of Maine. In particular, the
reference, Intergovernmental relations, NPRM proposed approval of Maine’s
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection February 21, 2018, SIP submittal for the
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping Agency (EPA) is approving a State 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS as it pertains
requirements, Volatile organic Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA.
compounds. submitted by the State of Maine. This Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires a
revision addresses the interstate state’s SIP to include provisions
Dated: August 6, 2018. transport requirements of the Clean Air prohibiting any source or other type of
Alexandra Dunn, Act (CAA) with respect to the 2010 emissions activity within the state from
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. primary nitrogen dioxide (NO2) National emitting any air pollutant in amounts
Ambient Air Quality Standard that will contribute significantly to
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the (NAAQS). This action approves Maine’s nonattainment, or interfere with
Code of Federal Regulations is amended demonstration that the State is meeting maintenance, of the NAAQS in another
as follows: its obligations regarding the interstate state. The two clauses of this section are
transport of NO2 emissions into other referred to as prong 1 (significant
PART 52—APPROVAL AND states. This action is being taken under
PROMULGATION OF contribution to nonattainment) and
the CAA. prong 2 (interference with maintenance
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS DATES: This rule is effective on of the NAAQS).
September 12, 2018. In the NPRM, EPA proposed to
■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 ADDRESSES: EPA has established a approve Maine’s February 21, 2018,
continues to read as follows: docket for this action under Docket infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2010
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Identification No. EPA–R01–OAR– primary NO2 NAAQS, concluding
2018–0269. All documents in the docket Maine’s SIP submittal adequately
Subpart H—Connecticut are listed on the https:// addresses prong 1 and prong 2
www.regulations.gov website. Although requirements of CAA section
■ 2. Section 52.377 is amended by listed in the index, some information is 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 primary
adding paragraph(s) to read as follows: not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other NO2 NAAQS. The rationale for EPA’s
information whose disclosure is proposed action is explained in the
§ 52.377 Control strategy: Ozone. restricted by statute. Certain other NPRM and will not be restated here.
* * * * * material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the internet and will be II. Response to Comments
(s) Approval—An attainment
publicly available only in hard copy In response to the May 25, 2018
demonstration for the 1997 8-hour
form. Publicly available docket NPRM, we received a number of
ozone standard to satisfy requirements
materials are available at https:// anonymous comments that address
of section 182(c)(2)(A) of the Clean Air
www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. subjects outside the scope of our
Act, and a Reasonably Available Control
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA proposed action, do not explain (or
Measure (RACM) analysis to satisfy
Region 1 Regional Office, Office of provide a legal basis for) how the
requirements of section 172(c)(1) of the Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality
Clean Air Act for the New York- proposed action should differ in any
Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square— way, and make no specific mention of
Northern New Jersey-Long Island (NY- Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests
NJ-CT) ozone nonattainment area, the proposed action. Consequently,
that if at all possible, you contact the those comments are not germane to this
submitted by the Connecticut contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
Department of Energy and rulemaking and require no further
INFORMATION CONTACT section to response.
Environmental Protection. This schedule your inspection. The Regional EPA received one relevant comment
rulemaking addresses the EPA’s Office’s official hours of business are that referred specifically to the proposed
obligations to act on Connecticut’s Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to rulemaking on the Maine’s
February 1, 2008 SIP revision for the 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2010
1997 ozone NAAQS, as well as the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: primary NO2 NAAQS.
attainment demonstration and RACM
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Patrick Bird, Office of Ecosystem Comment: The commenter suggests
analysis portion of the August 8, 2017 Protection, 5 Post Office Square—Suite that, under the Plain Writing Act of
SIP submittal for the 1997 ozone 100 (Mail Code OEP 05–2), Boston, MA 2010, EPA should not have used the
NAAQS for the Connecticut portion of 01209–3912, tel. (617) 918–1287, email word ‘‘promulgated’’ in the NPRM for
the NY-NJ-CT area. bird.patrick@epa.gov. this action.
[FR Doc. 2018–17245 Filed 8–10–18; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Response: The Plain Writing Act of
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Throughout this document whenever 2010 (‘‘PWA’’ or the ‘‘Act’’), Public Law
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:02 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM 13AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_40048/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 39893
111–274, 124 Stat. 2861, requires EPA to maintenance of this standard in any In addition, the SIP is not approved
‘‘use plain writing in every covered other state. to apply on any Indian reservation land
document of the agency that the agency or in any other area where EPA or an
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
issues or substantially revises.’’ See Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
Reviews
PWA section 4(b). The Act defines tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
‘‘plain writing’’ as ‘‘writing that is clear, Under the Clean Air Act, the Indian country, the rule does not have
concise, well-organized, and follows Administrator is required to approve a tribal implications and will not impose
other best practices appropriate to the SIP submission that complies with the substantial direct costs on tribal
subject or field and intended audience.’’ provisions of the Act and applicable governments or preempt tribal law as
See PWA section 3(3). The Office of Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
published guidance 1 on the Act that submissions, EPA’s role is to approve The Congressional Review Act, 5
encourages agencies to follow Federal state choices, provided that they meet U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Plain Language Guidelines available at the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Business Regulatory Enforcement
www.plainlanguage.gov that Accordingly, this action merely Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
recommend agencies avoid certain approves state law as meeting Federal that before a rule may take effect, the
words, including ‘‘promulgate.’’ Neither requirements and does not impose agency promulgating the rule must
the PWA nor the guidelines, however, additional requirements beyond those submit a rule report, which includes a
bar its use. imposed by state law. For that reason, copy of the rule, to each House of the
In the NPRM, EPA used forms of this action: Congress and to the Comptroller General
‘‘promulgate’’ twice as follows: ‘‘[o]n • Is not a significant regulatory action of the United States. EPA will submit a
February 9, 2010, EPA promulgated a subject to review by the Office of report containing this action and other
new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at Management and Budget under required information to the U.S. Senate,
a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
based on a 3-year average of the 98th October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, the Comptroller General of the United
percentile of the yearly distribution of 1- January 21, 2011); States prior to publication of the rule in
hour daily maximum concentrations’’ • This action is not an Executive the Federal Register. A major rule
and ‘‘states are required to submit SIPs Order 13771 regulatory action because cannot take effect until 60 days after it
meeting the applicable requirements of this action is not significant under is published in the Federal Register.
section 110(a)(2) within three years after Executive Order 12866. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
promulgation of a new or revised • Does not impose an information defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
NAAQS’’ (emphasis added). The Clean collection burden under the provisions Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act specifically requires EPA to of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
‘‘promulgate’’ NAAQS, CAA section U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); this action must be filed in the United
109(a)(1)(B), and requires states to • Is certified as not having a
States Court of Appeals for the
submit infrastructure SIPs to EPA significant economic impact on a
appropriate circuit by October 12, 2018.
within three years after the substantial number of small entities
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
‘‘promulgation’’ of a NAAQS, CAA under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
the Administrator of this final rule does
section 110(a)(1). EPA agrees that it can U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
not affect the finality of this action for
sometimes be clearer to avoid words • Does not contain any unfunded
the purposes of judicial review nor does
like ‘‘promulgate,’’ but EPA mandate or significantly or uniquely
it extend the time within which a
appropriately used ‘‘promulgated’’ and affect small governments, as described
petition for judicial review may be filed,
‘‘promulgation’’ in the NPR to refer in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
specifically to these formal CAA of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism of such rule or action. This action may
requirements. In any event, the not be challenged later in proceedings to
comment does not suggest that the implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, enforce its requirements. (See section
commenter misunderstood EPA’s 307(b)(2).)
proposed action due to the use of these 1999);
• Is not an economically significant List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
words. See PWA section 2. Nor does the
regulatory action based on health or
commenter state that EPA should Environmental protection, Air
safety risks subject to Executive Order
disapprove Maine’s submittal. pollution control, Incorporation by
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
Therefore, we are approving the SIP reference, Intergovernmental relations,
• Is not a significant regulatory action
submittal as proposed. Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
III. Final Action 28355, May 22, 2001); matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
• Is not subject to requirements of requirements.
EPA is approving Maine’s February
21, 2018, SIP revision addressing prongs Section 12(d) of the National Dated: August 6, 2018.
1 and 2 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Technology Transfer and Advancement Alexandra Dunn,
for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS. EPA Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
is taking final action to approve this SIP application of those requirements would Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the
submittal because Maine’s SIP includes be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; Code of Federal Regulations is amended
adequate provisions to prevent and as follows:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
• Does not provide EPA with the
emissions sources within the State from
discretionary authority to address, as PART 52—APPROVAL AND
significantly contributing to
appropriate, disproportionate human PROMULGATION OF
nonattainment or interfering with
health or environmental effects, using IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1 OMB, Final Guidance on Implementing the practicable and legally permissible
Plain Writing Act of 2010 (April 13, 2011), available methods, under Executive Order 12898 ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
at https://plainlanguage.gov/law/. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). continues to read as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:02 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM 13AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_40048/page/2.svg)
![39894 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Transport SIP to meet Infrastructure § 52.1020 Identification of plan.
Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 * * * * *
Subpart U—Maine NAAQS’’ at the end of the table to read (e) Nonregulatory.
■ 2. Section 52.1020(e) is amended by as follows:
adding an entry titled ‘‘Interstate
MAINE NON REGULATORY
Applicable geo- State submittal
Name of non regulatory SIP provision graphic or non- date/effective EPA approved date 3 Explanations
attainment area date
* * * * * * *
Interstate Transport SIP to meet Infra- Statewide ............ 2/21/2018 8/13/2018, [Insert Federal This approval addresses Prongs 1
structure Requirements for the Register citation]. and 2 of CAA section
2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) only.
3 In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this col-
umn for the particular provision.
[FR Doc. 2018–17248 Filed 8–10–18; 8:45 am] Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the inadequacy of existing regulatory
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES, Falls mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
Church, VA 22041; telephone 703–358– manmade factors affecting its continued
2444. If you use a telecommunications existence. The primary causes attributed
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR device for the deaf (TDD), call the to the decline of the hyacinth macaw
Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339. include habitat loss and degradation
Fish and Wildlife Service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (Factor A), hunting (Factor B), predation
(Factor C), competition and low
50 CFR Part 17 Executive Summary reproduction rate (Factor E), and climate
Why we need to publish a rule. Under change (Factor E).
[Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2012–0013; Section 4(d) of the Act authorizes the
the Endangered Species Act (Act), a
4500030115]
species may warrant protection through Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to
RIN 1018–BC79 listing if it is found to be an endangered extend to threatened species the
or threatened species. Listing a species prohibitions provided for endangered
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife as an endangered or threatened species species under section 9 of the Act. Our
and Plants; Listing the Hyacinth can only be completed by issuing a rule. implementing regulations for threatened
Macaw On July 6, 2012, the U.S. Fish and wildlife, found at title 50 of the Code of
Wildlife Service (Service) published in Federal Regulations (CFR) at § 17.31 (50
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, CFR 17.31), incorporate the section 9
the Federal Register (FR) a 12-month
Interior. prohibitions for endangered wildlife,
finding and proposed rule to list the
ACTION: Final rule. hyacinth macaw (Anodorhynchus except when a species-specific rule
hyacinthinus) as an endangered species under section 4(d) of the Act is
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
under the Act (77 FR 39965). On promulgated. For threatened species,
Wildlife Service, determine threatened
November 28, 2016, the Service section 4(d) of the Act gives the Service
species status under the Endangered
published a revised proposed rule to list discretion to specify the prohibitions
Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended,
the hyacinth macaw as a threatened and any exceptions to those
for the hyacinth macaw
species (81 FR 85488), which included prohibitions that are appropriate for the
(Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus), a
a proposed rule under section 4(d) of species, as well as include provisions
species that occurs almost exclusively
the Act that defined the prohibitions we that are necessary and advisable to
in Brazil and marginally in Bolivia and
are extending to the hyacinth macaw provide for the conservation of the
Paraguay. This rule adds this species to
and the exceptions to those species. A rule issued under section 4(d)
the List of Endangered and Threatened
prohibitions, as well as provisions that of the Act allows us to include
Wildlife. We are also establishing a rule
are necessary and advisable for the provisions that are tailored to the
pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act to
species’ conservation. This rule finalizes specific conservation needs of that
further provide for the conservation of
the listing of the hyacinth macaw as a threatened species and which may be
the hyacinth macaw.
threatened species under the Act, and more or less restrictive than the general
DATES: This rule is effective September provisions at 50 CFR 17.31.
establishes a 4(d) rule to further provide
12, 2018. for the species’ conservation. Peer review and public comment. We
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials The basis for our action. Under sought comments from independent
received, as well as supporting section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we determine specialists to ensure that our analysis is
documentation used in the preparation that a species is an endangered or based on scientifically sound data,
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
of this rule, are available for public threatened species based on any of five assumptions, and analyses. We invited
inspection at http:// factors: (A) The present or threatened peer reviewers and the public to
www.regulations.gov under Docket No. destruction, modification, or comment on our listing proposals. All
FWS–R9–ES–2012–0013. curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) substantive information from peer
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don overutilization for commercial, review and public comments was fully
Morgan, Chief, Division of Delisting and recreational, scientific, or educational considered and incorporated into this
Foreign Species, Ecological Services purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) final rule, where appropriate.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM 13AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_40048/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-08-11 00:27:13
Document Modified: 2018-08-11 00:27:13
| 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 | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule is effective on September 12, 2018. | |
| Contact | Patrick Bird, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100 (Mail Code OEP 05-2), Boston, MA 01209-3912, tel. (617) 918-1287, email [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 39892 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR