### 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 reducesthe 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,


### 40655 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2013 / Proposed Rules

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 Parkersburg**  **Marietta, 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 PM 2.5 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 tovacate 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.