50426 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

quality planning in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. Required partners 

covered by Florida’s consultation 

procedures include Federal, state and 

local transportation and air quality 

agency officials. The state and local 

transportation agency officials are most 

directly impacted by transportation 

conformity requirements and are 

required to provide public involvement 

for their activities including the analysis 

demonstrating how they meet 

transportation conformity requirements. 

Also, FDEP has agreements with eight 

county air pollution control agencies 

(Duval, Orange, Hillsborough, Pinellas, 

Sarasota, Palm Beach, Broward, and 

Miami-Dade) that delineate the 

responsibilities of each county in 

carrying out Florida’s air program, 

including the Florida SIP. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Florida’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate consultation 

with affected local entities related to the 

2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS when 

necessary. 

V. Proposed Action 

With the exception of interstate 

transport provisions pertaining to the 

contribution to nonattainment or 

interference with maintenance in other 

states and visibility protection 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

and (II) (prongs 1 and 2). EPA is 

proposing to approve Florida’s 

infrastructure submission submitted on 

December 14, 2015, for the 2012 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the above described 

infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is 

proposing to approve Florida’s 

infrastructure SIP submission for the 

2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS because the 

submission is consistent with section 

110 of the CAA. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

See 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 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); 

• 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 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, 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 as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it 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, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: July 20, 2016. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2016–18013 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2014–0291, FRL–9949–57– 

Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; Maine: Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration; PM2.5

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of Maine 

relating to the regulation of fine 

particulate matter (that is, particles with 

an aerodynamic diameter less than or 

equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometer, 

generally referred to as ‘‘PM2.5’’) within 

the context of Maine’s Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. 

EPA is also proposing to approve other 

minor changes to Maine’s PSD program. 

Actions related to this proposed rule are 

being taken in accordance with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 31, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– 

OAR–2014–0291 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email 

bird.patrick@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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 50427 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Bird, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, Air Permits, Toxics, and 

Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, (mail code OEP05– 

2), Boston, MA 02109–3912; telephone 

number: (617) 918–1287; email address: 

bird.patrick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action rule, 

no further activity is contemplated. If 

EPA receives adverse comments, the 

direct final rule will be withdrawn and 

all public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: July 5, 2016. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 2016–17829 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0304; FRL–9949–71– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds Emissions From 

Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Materials 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the 

state implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Maryland for 

the purpose of establishing Maryland’s 

adoption of the requirements in EPA’s 

control technique guidelines (CTG) for 

fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. 

In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section 

of this Federal Register, EPA is 

approving the State’s SIP submittal as a 

direct final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this action, no further 

activity is contemplated. If EPA receives 

adverse comments, the direct final rule 

will be withdrawn and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by August 31, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2016–0304 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

fernandez.cristina@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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gavin Huang, (215) 814–2042, or by 

email at huang.gavin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

Dated: July 15, 2016. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2016–17808 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0119; FRL–9948–25– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Modoc County Air Pollution 

Control District, Permit Programs 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Modoc County Air 

Pollution Control District (MCAPCD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern MCAPCD’s 

administrative and procedural 

requirements to obtain preconstruction 

permits that regulate emission sources 

under the Clean Air Act as amended in 

1990 (CAA or the Act). We are 

proposing to approve these local rules 

under the CAA. 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by August 31, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0119 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

R9airpermits@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 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS