40654 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

so that all oil or hazardous materialladen tank barges carrying 5,000 or more 

barrels of petroleum or other hazardous 

material would require pilots under all 

circumstances. The RA acknowledges 

that the independent pilotage 

requirement proposed provides 

additional decision support and 

experience on the tug when transiting 

Buzzards Bay, and significantly reduces 

the probability of a human factorinduced incident. 

Escort Tugs: The Coast Guard is 

considering establishing certain 

thresholds, the exceedance of which 

would trigger the requirement for an 

escort tug for double-hull tank barges 

laden with 5,000 or more barrels of oil 

or hazardous material. These thresholds 

could be expressed in terms of 

meteorological conditions such as wind 

speed, wave height or visibility, or any 

other factors deemed appropriate, such 

as equipment limitations or defects. 

Specifically, the Coast Guard seeks the 

input of operators, pilots, industry 

associations, regulators, members of the 

Area Committee, and concerned citizens 

on the potential threshold conditions 

which would trigger the requirement of 

an escort tug for double-hull tank barges 

laden with 5,000 or more barrels of oil 

or hazardous material. 

Once these threshold conditions are 

fixed, industry would have the 

flexibility to determine if the need to 

transit during these high-risk periods is 

offset by the additional cost of the 

escort, or if a delay in transit awaiting 

more favorable conditions is a better 

option. 

In a comparative ranking of measures 

that would mitigate risk of an oil spill, 

the RA quotes a National Academy of 

Science study indicating that double 

hulls result in a 75 to 83 percent 

reduction in the probability of a spill, 

should a grounding, collision or allision 

occur. Therefore, escort tugs would 

continue to accompany all single-hulled 

tank barges laden with 5,000 or more 

barrels of petroleum or other hazardous 

material through Buzzards Bay until 

single-hulled tank barges are phased out 

January 1, 2015. 

F. Information Requested 

This advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking invites public comment on 

the merits, advantages, and 

disadvantages of changing certain vessel 

reporting and participation 

requirements of the Buzzards Bay 

VMRS; Federal Pilots, not a member of 

the crew, on board tugs towing both 

single- and double-hulled tank barges; 

and Escort Tugs for double-hull tank 

barges during adverse conditions. 

G. Preliminary Regulatory Analysis 

This document is issued under 

authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 33 CFR 

1.05–30. 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. The U.S. 

Supreme Court, in the cases of United 

States v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89 (2000) and 

Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 435 U.S. 

151 (1978) has ruled that certain 

categories of regulation issued pursuant 

to the Ports and Waterways Safety Act 

of 1972, as amended, are reserved 

exclusively to the Coast Guard, and that 

State regulation in these areas is 

preempted. In general, only the federal 

government may regulate the design, 

construction, alteration, repair, 

maintenance, operation, equipping, 

personnel qualification, and manning of 

tank vessels. Similarly, where the Coast 

Guard enacts regulations that control 

vessel traffic or are otherwise intended 

to protect navigation and the marine 

environment, or affirmatively 

determines that such regulation is 

unnecessary or inappropriate, a State 

may not enact rules that conflict with 

the Coast Guard’s determination in that 

area, including situations in which the 

State rules are identical to the federal 

rules. 

As noted previously in our 2007 

rulemaking (See 72 FR 50052), the Coast 

Guard believes that State law is 

preempted on the subjects discussed in 

this ANPRM, specifically with regard to 

the subjects of vessel routing, manning, 

and tug escort requirements in Buzzards 

Bay. 

Nevertheless, the Coast Guard 

recognizes the key role State and local 

governments may have in making 

regulatory determinations. Sections 4 

and 6 of Executive Order 13132 require 

that for any rules with preemptive 

effect, the Coast Guard shall provide 

elected officials of affected State and 

local governments and their 

representative national organizations 

the notice and opportunity for 

appropriate participation in any 

rulemaking proceedings, and to consult 

with such officials early in the 

rulemaking process. 

Therefore, we invite affected State 

and local governments and their 

representative national organizations to 

indicate their desire for participation 

and consultation in this rulemaking 

process by submitting comments to this 

notice. In accordance with Executive 

Order 13132, the Coast Guard will 

provide a federalism impact statement 

to document (1) the extent of the Coast 

Guard’s consultation with State and 

local officials that submit comments to 

this advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking, (2) a summary of the nature 

of any concerns raised by State or local 

governments and the Coast Guard’s 

position thereon, and (3) the extent to 

which the concerns of State and local 

officials have been met. We will also 

report to the Office of Management and 

Budget any written communications 

with the States. 

Dated: May 30, 2013. 

D.B. Abel, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

First Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16252 Filed 7–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0026, FRL–9830–9] 

Approval, Disapproval and 

Promulgation of Implementation Plans; 

State of Wyoming; Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan; Federal 

Implementation Plan for Regional 

Haze; Notice of Public Hearings 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of public hearings; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: EPA has scheduled additional 

public hearings for our proposed action 

on Wyoming’s State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) addressing regional haze 

under. We are making this change in 

response to letters submitted by the 

Governor of Wyoming on June 13, 2013, 

the Wyoming Congressional Delegation 

on June 14, 2013, and the Wyoming 

Department of Environmental Quality 

on June 14, 2013. The comment period 

for this action was scheduled to close on 

August 9, 2013. EPA is extending the 

comment period to August 26, 2013 to 

allow for a full 30 days for the 

submission of additional comments 

following the public hearings. 

DATES: Public hearings for this proposal 

are scheduled to be held on July 17, 

2013 at the Laramie County Library, 

Cottonwood Room, 2200 Pioneer 

Avenue, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 

and on July 26, 2013 at the Oil & Gas 

Conservation Commission, Meeting 

Room 129, 2211 King Boulevard, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules 40655 

Casper, Wyoming 82602. The public 

hearings will be held from 1 p.m. until 

5 p.m. and again from 6 p.m. until 8 

p.m. at both locations. The comment 

period for the proposed rule published 

June 10, 2013 at 78 FR 34738 is 

extended. Comments must be received 

on or before August 26, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurel Dygowski, EPA Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 

312–6144, dygowski.laurel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

10, 2013, we published a proposed rule 

partially approving and partially 

disapproving Wyoming’s 40 CFR 

51.309(g) regional haze SIP. 78 FR 

34738. In our June 10, 2013 proposed 

rule, we provided notification that we 

were holding a public hearing on June 

24, 2013, in Cheyenne, Wyoming. To 

partially accommodate requests for both 

additional time to prepare for public 

hearings and an extension to the public 

comment period in letters from the 

Governor of Wyoming on June 13, 2013, 

the Wyoming Congressional Delegation 

on June 14, 2013, and the Wyoming 

Department of Environmental Quality 

on June 14, 2013, we have scheduled 

additional public hearings as stated 

above and extended the public comment 

period to August 26, 2013. 

The public hearings will provide 

interested parties the opportunity to 

present information and opinions to 

EPA concerning our proposal. Interested 

parties may also submit written 

comments, as discussed in the proposed 

rulemaking. Written statements and 

supporting information submitted 

during the comment period will be 

considered with the same weight as any 

oral comments and supporting 

information presented at the public 

hearings. 

Dated: June 21, 2013. 

Howard M. Cantor, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16295 Filed 7–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0386; FRL–9829–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Redesignation of the West 

Virginia Portion of the ParkersburgMarietta, WV–OH 1997 Annual Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

to Attainment and Approval of the 

Associated Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. 

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a supplement 

to its proposed approval of the State of 

West Virginia’s request to redesignate 

the West Virginia portion of the 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV–OH fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment 

area (Parkersburg-Marietta Area or Area) 

to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS). This supplemental proposal 

revises and expands the basis for 

proposing approval of the State’s 

request in light of developments since 

EPA issued its initial proposal on 

December 11, 2012. This supplemental 

proposal addresses the effects of two 

decisions of the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

(D.C. Circuit Court): The D.C. Circuit 

Court’s August 21, 2012 decision to 

vacate and remand to EPA the CrossState Air Pollution Control Rule 

(CSAPR); and the D.C. Circuit Court’s 

January 4, 2013 decision to remand to 

EPA two final rules implementing the 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is seeking comment 

only on the issues raised in this 

supplemental proposal and is not 

reopening for comment other issues 

raised in its prior proposal. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 7, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2012–0386 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0386, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 

3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012– 

0386. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. 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 either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the West Virginia 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 

57th Street SE., Charleston, West 

Virginia 25304. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS