Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 64495 

modalities for treating pain that we 

should consider? 

7. Can health care utilization and 

treatment regimens employed by 

physicians to manage patient pain 

provide objective insights into the 

intensity and persistence of pain? When 

should those regimens not be an 

indication of the severity of an 

individual’s pain? 

8. Is there any additional information 

that we should consider when we 

evaluate pain in our disability program? 

Will we respond to your comments? 

We will consider all relevant public 

comments we receive in response to this 

notice, but we will not respond directly 

to them. If we decide to propose specific 

revisions to our rules, we will publish 

a notice of proposed rulemaking in the 

Federal Register, and you will have a 

chance to comment on any revisions we 

propose. 

List of Subjects 

20 CFR Part 404 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Blind, Disability benefits, 

Old-age, Survivors and Disability 

Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Social Security. 

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 416 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Blind, Disability benefits, 

Supplemental Security Income, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Social Security. 

Nancy A. Berryhill, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27169 Filed 12–14–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2018–0008; Notice No. 

177] 

RIN 1513–AC40 

Proposed Establishment of the West 

Sonoma Coast Viticultural Area 

Correction 

In proposed rule document C1–2018– 

26321 appearing on page 63824 in the 

issue of Wednesday, December 12, 2018, 

make the following corrections: 

1. On page 63824, in the third 

column, the fourth line from the bottom 

of the page ‘‘January 7, 2018’’ should 

read ‘‘January 7, 2019.’’ 

2. On page 63824, in the third 

column, the third line from the bottom 

of the page ‘‘February 4, 2018’’ should 

read ‘‘February 4, 2019.’’ 

[FR Doc. C2–2018–26321 Filed 12–14–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1301–00–D 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2018–0790; FRL–9987–51- 

Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; Massachusetts; 

High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This 

revision provides for the Massachusetts 

Department of Transportation 

(MassDOT) to construct and operate 

specified transit facilities and high 

occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes 

established therein. Implementation and 

continued monitoring of these projects 

will help reduce the use of automobiles 

and improve traffic operations on the 

region’s roadways, resulting in 

improved air quality. This action will 

have a beneficial effect on air quality 

because it is intended to reduce vehicle 

miles traveled (VMT) and traffic 

congestion in the Boston Metropolitan 

Area. Massachusetts has adopted these 

revisions to reduce emissions of volatile 

organic compounds (VOC), particulate 

matter (PM), and nitrogen oxides (NOX). 

This action is being taken under the 

Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 16, 2019. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– 

OAR–2018–0790 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

rackauskas.eric@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the 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. The 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 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

at https://www.regulations.gov or at the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA New England 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: Eric 

Rackauskas, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA New England Regional Office, 5 

Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail 

code: OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109– 

3912, telephone number (617) 918– 

1628, fax number (617) 918–0628, email 

rackauskas.eric@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Purpose 

II. Administrative Changes 

III. Summary of Changes to the Amended 

High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes 

Regulation 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background and Purpose 

On July 9, 1996, the Massachusetts 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(MassDEP) submitted a revision to the 

Massachusetts State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) consisting of amendments to 

310 CMR 7.37: High Occupancy Vehicle 

Lanes. The submitted amended 310 

CMR 7.37 contains added definitions, 

revised due dates for certain 

requirements, minor technical 

amendments, and clarifying language. 

This regulation is designed to help 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
64496 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

reduce the use of automobiles in the 

Metropolitan Boston Area, and to 

improve traffic operations on the 

region’s roadways. Reducing the 

number of vehicles on the road and 

easing traffic conditions on major 

highways will result in a reduction in 

VMT, which eases traffic congestion and 

will lead to improved air quality by 

lowering mobile source emissions. 

EPA previously approved 310 CMR 

7.37 into the Massachusetts SIP on 

October 4, 1994 (59 FR 50495). That SIP 

revision required Massachusetts to 

study the feasibility of constructing 

HOV lanes on certain roadways to 

reduce VMT and traffic congestion. The 

1994 SIP revision also required the 

construction of HOV lanes for certain 

roadways, i.e. on Interstate-93 (I–93) 

southbound, north of Boston, and south 

of Boston on I–93 (both northbound and 

southbound) between Interstate-90 (I– 

90) and Route 3. 

The SIP-approved 310 CMR 7.37 

roadway trip time threshold standards 

were established to reflect a significant 

increase in traffic volume above 

baseline roadway conditions which, if 

exceeded, would trigger construction of 

additional HOV lanes. The threshold 

standards were calculated to represent 

an average weekday peak trip time 

increase of 35% from baseline roadway 

conditions. The SIP-approved regulation 

also established monitoring and 

reporting standards to ensure and 

enforce the successful implementation 

and desired outcome of HOV lanes, and 

to determine the feasibility and 

necessity of constructing additional 

HOV lanes. The updated regulation 

being proposed for SIP approval in this 

rulemaking addresses and incorporates 

into the regulation a number of 

comments and suggestions made by the 

public, including EPA, during the 

Commonwealth’s public comment 

period on the regulation. 

II. Administrative Changes 

It is EPA’s understanding that in June 

2009, Governor Deval Patrick signed 

Chapter 25 of the Acts of 2009, ‘‘An Act 

Modernizing the Transportation 

Systems of the Commonwealth of 

Massachusetts.’’ This transportation 

reform legislation integrated 

transportation agencies and authorities 

into a new, streamlined MassDOT, 

which is a merger of the Executive 

Office of Transportation and 

Construction (EOTC), and its divisions, 

with the Massachusetts Turnpike 

Authority (MTA), the Massachusetts 

Highway Division (MHD), the Registry 

of Motor Vehicles (RMV), the 

Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission 

(MAC), and the Tobin Bridge. On 

December 8, 2015, EPA approved into 

the Massachusetts SIP a transportationrelated regulation that reflected this 

reorganization. See 80 FR 76225. These 

changes did not interfere with 

attainment, reasonable further progress, 

or any other applicable Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requirement, satisfying CAA 

section 110(l) and, for the regulation in 

question, made the Massachusetts SIP 

consistent with the Commonwealth’s 

administrative agency organizational 

structure. 

This proposed rulemaking publication 

will use ‘‘MassDOT’’ in lieu of all 

references to the former agencies (MTA, 

MHD, and EOTC) referenced within the 

submitted 310 CMR 7.37. Though 

MassDOT did not exist at the time the 

regulation was written, it is EPA’s 

understanding that MassDOT has 

replaced or absorbed all referenced 

transit agencies found within the 

regulation we are proposing to approve 

today. 

III. Summary of Changes to the 

Amended High Occupancy Vehicle 

Lanes Regulation 

The Commonwealth’s July 9, 1996 

submittal of 310 CMR 7.37 contains 

several minor changes compared to the 

SIP-approved version. These changes 

contain new and revised definitions of 

certain terms for the existing HOV 

regulation. The updated regulation also 

contains revised due dates for certain 

actions and reporting requirements, and 

new language clarifying certain sections 

of the regulation. The main updates are 

summarized as follows: 

Definitions: Notably, the updated 

definitions establish the Baseline 

Roadway Conditions to be the average 

weekday peak hour trip time in minutes 

for each roadway segment based on 

monitoring of traffic and recording of 

trip times during the 12 months period 

from April 1, 1992 to April 1, 1993. This 

section also establishes the Roadway 

Threshold Standards to be the Baseline 

Roadway Conditions increased by 35%. 

Attainment of Performance 

Standards: MassDOT is required to 

monitor the referenced roadways and 

HOV performance, as measured by trip 

times, during peak periods of travel, to 

ensure HOV performance standards are 

being met. Trip times are required to be 

measured at least monthly and during at 

least five sample days each month. 

MassDOT is required to use all 

appropriate and feasible measures to 

maintain compliance with the HOV lane 

performance standards. MassDOT is 

also required to submit performance 

standard reports for each HOV facility 

or HOV lane being monitored. The 

updated regulation also removed the 

language ‘‘not increase congestion in 

general purpose traffic flow lanes,’’ 

found in the original SIP-approved 

regulation. EPA and MassDEP believed 

this language could have been 

interpreted to mean that HOV lanes 

could be moving as slowly or slower 

than general traffic, without giving 

MassDOT the ability to take corrective 

action. 

Substitute HOV Projects: This section 

has been updated to include stronger 

language than in the previous version of 

the regulation for deeming a substitute 

project appropriate. If studies 

demonstrate that an HOV lane is 

infeasible, MassDOT must substitute an 

alternative project by petitioning 

MassDEP. All such petitions shall 

include a demonstration that the 

substitute project achieves equal or 

greater emission reductions of VOC, CO, 

and NOX from mobile sources than the 

installation of an HOV lane. The 

petition must also show that the 

substitute project provides for greater 

improvement in air quality for these 

pollutants in the area where the 

required HOV lane is targeted, both in 

the short and long term. 

EPA’s review of this regulation 

indicates that the implementation and 

operation of HOV lanes will result in 

improved air quality by both reducing 

vehicle trips and easing traffic 

congestion. A reduction in VMT results 

in a reduction in total vehicle 

emissions. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve, and 

incorporate into the Massachusetts SIP, 

revised regulation 310 CMR 7.37, High 

Occupancy Vehicle Lanes. This 

regulation was submitted to EPA on July 

9, 1996. This updated regulation 

includes technical amendments, 

changes in due dates for certain actions, 

and clarifying language in relation to the 

previous SIP-approved version of 310 

CMR 7.37. EPA is proposing to approve 

310 CMR 7.37 into the Massachusetts 

SIP because EPA has found that the 

requirements are consistent with the 

CAA, including CAA section 110(l) in 

that the regulation will not interfere 

with attainment, reasonable further 

progress, or any other applicable CAA 

requirement. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document or on other relevant 

matters. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

Interested parties may participate in the 

Federal rulemaking procedure by 

submitting written comments to this 

proposed rulemaking by following the 

instructions listed in the ADDRESSES

section of this Federal Register. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2018 / Proposed Rules 64497 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference of 

310 CMR 7.37, High Occupancy Vehicle 

Lanes. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these documents 

generally available through https://

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 1 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

VI. 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 proposed 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); 

• This action is not expected to be 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). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: December 10, 2018. 

Alexandra Dunn, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27170 Filed 12–14–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0631; FRL–9988–00– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; NOX SIP 

Call and CAIR 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to 

conditionally approve a portion of a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC) with a letter dated 

February 27, 2017, to establish a SIPapproved state control program to 

comply with the obligations of the 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) SIP Call with 

respect to certain sources. EPA is also 

proposing to fully approve the 

remaining portion of the same 

Tennessee SIP revision to remove the 

SIP-approved portions of the State’s 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) 

Program rules from the Tennessee SIP. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to fully 

approve a revision to the Tennessee SIP 

submitted with a letter dated April 3, 

2018, to remove regulations related to a 

previous NOX trading program. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 16, 2019. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2018–0631 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

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, 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: 

Madolyn Sanchez, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Sanchez can 

be reached by telephone at (404) 562– 

9644 or via electronic mail at 

sanchez.madolyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Under Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which EPA has 

traditionally termed the good neighbor 

provision, states are required to address 

the interstate transport of air pollution. 

Specifically, the good neighbor 

provision requires that each state’s 

implementation plan contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit air pollutant 

emissions from within the state that 

significantly contribute to 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1