Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 52485 

significantly to nonattainment in, or 

interfere with maintenance by, any 

other state, and (D)(i)(II), with respect to 

visibility requirements for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS as EPA is acting 

separately on these elements. 

VII. 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 

(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 some state law 

as meeting federal requirements and 

disapproves other state law because it 

does not meet federal requirements; this 

proposed action 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 (Public Law 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, this rule does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by 

reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds, 

Incorporation by reference. 

Dated: August 8, 2013. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20662 Filed 8–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0576; FRL–9900–25– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan, Maricopa County 

Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Maricopa County Area 

portion of the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern particulate matter 

(PM) emissions from fugitive dust 

sources. We are approving local statutes 

that regulate these emission sources 

under the Clean Air Act as amended in 

1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking 

comments on this proposal and plan to 

follow with a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

September 23, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number [EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0576], by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 942– 

3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action. 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

52486 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the statutes addressed by 

this proposal with the dates that they 

were signed into law by the Governor 

and submitted by the Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Arizona statute Statute title Signed Submitted Revised 

submittal 

9–500.27 .......... Off-road vehicle ordinance; applicability; violation; classification ........ July 2, 2007 ...... May 25, 2012 ... May 21, 2013. 

11–871 ............. Emissions control; no burn; exemptions; penalty ................................ July 2, 2007 ...... May 25, 2012 ... May 21, 2013. 

28–1098 ........... Vehicle loads; restrictions; civil penalties ............................................ July 2, 2007 ...... May 25, 2012 ... May 21, 2013. 

49–457.03 ........ Off-road vehicles; pollution advisory days; applicability; penalties ..... July 2, 2007 ...... May 25, 2012 ... May 21, 2013. 

49–457.04 ........ Off-highway vehicle and all-terrain vehicle dealers; informational material; outreach; applicability.July 2, 2007 ...... May 25, 2012 ... May 21, 2013. 

49–501 ............. Unlawful open burning; exceptions; fine; definition ............................. July 2, 2007 ...... May 25, 2012 ... May 21, 2013. 

On July 20, 2012, EPA determined 

that the May 25, 2012 submittal of 

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 9– 

500.27, 11–871, 28–1098, 49–457.03, 

49–457.04 and 49–501 met the 

completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 

Appendix V, which must be met before 

formal EPA review. On May 21, 2013 

ADEQ identified several statute 

subsections included in the May 25, 

2012 submittal for which Arizona no 

longer requested EPA SIP approval and 

provided a revised submittal. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

There are no previous versions of 

these statutes in the SIP, although the 

Maricopa Association of Governments 

submitted them with the 2007 Five 

Percent Plan for PM–10, which was 

subsequently withdrawn. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

PM contributes to effects that are 

harmful to human health and the 

environment, including premature 

mortality, aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

PM emissions. These statutes regulate 

PM emissions from off-highway 

vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, off-road 

recreational motor vehicles, residential 

wood burning and vehicle loads. EPA’s 

technical support documents (TSDs) 

have more information about these 

statutes. The State is not taking 

emission reduction credits for these 

statutes. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate these requirements 

consistently include the following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations; 

Clarification to Appendix D of 

November 24, 1987 Federal Register 

Notice,’’ (Blue Book), notice of 

availability published in the May 25, 

1988 Federal Register. 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for 

Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas, 

and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 

Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 

FR 41998 (August 16, 1994). 

5. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’ 

EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993. 

6. ‘‘Fugitive Dust Background 

Document and Technical Information 

Document for Best Available Control 

Measures,’’ EPA 450/2–92–004, 

September 1992. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these statutes are 

consistent with the relevant policy and 

guidance regarding enforceability and 

SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

The TSDs describes additional rule 

revisions that we recommend for the 

next time Arizona modifies the rules but 

are not currently the basis for rule 

disapproval. 

D. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

statutes fulfill all relevant requirements, 

we are proposing to fully approve them 

as described in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act. We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate these rules 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. 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 proposes to approve 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 52487 

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 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 8, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20654 Filed 8–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 130402317–3707–01] 

RIN 0648–XC611 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

2014 Atlantic Shark Commercial 

Fishing Season 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

establish opening dates and adjust 

quotas for the 2014 fishing season for 

the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries. 

Quotas would be adjusted as allowable 

based on any over- and/or 

underharvests experienced during 2013 

and previous fishing seasons. In 

addition, NMFS proposes season 

openings based on adaptive 

management measures to provide, to the 

extent practicable, fishing opportunities 

for commercial shark fishermen in all 

regions and areas. The proposed 

measures could affect fishing 

opportunities for commercial shark 

fishermen in the northwestern Atlantic 

Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico 

and Caribbean Sea. 

DATES: Written comments will be 

accepted until September 23, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2013–0112, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=

NOAA-NMFS-2013-0112, click the 

‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the 

required fields, and enter or attach your 

comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, 

MD 20910. Please mark the outside of 

the envelope ‘‘Comments on the 

Proposed Rule to Establish Quotas and 

Opening Dates for the 2014 Atlantic 

Shark Commercial Fishing Season.’’ 

• Fax: 301–427–8503, Attn: Karyl 

Brewster-Geisz or Guy ́ DuBeck. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address, etc.), 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter 

‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish 

to remain anonymous). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF 

file formats only. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy ́

DuBeck or Karyl Brewster-Geisz at 301– 

427–8503. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background 

The Atlantic commercial shark 

fisheries are managed under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The 2006 

Consolidated Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) 

and its amendments are implemented 

by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. For 

the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries, 

the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and 

its amendments established, among 

other things, commercial quotas for 

species and management groups, 

accounting measures for under- and 

overharvests for the shark fisheries, and 

adaptive management measures such as 

flexible opening dates for the fishing 

season and inseason adjustments to 

shark trip limits, which provide 

management flexibility in furtherance of 

equitable fishing opportunities, to the 

extent practicable, for commercial shark 

fishermen in all regions and areas. 

Accounting for Under- and 

Overharvests 

This proposed rule would adjust the 

quota levels for the different shark 

stocks and management groups for the 

2014 Atlantic commercial shark fishing 

season based on over- and 

underharvests that occurred during 

2013 and previous fishing seasons, 

consistent with existing regulations at 

50 CFR 635.27(b)(2). Over- and 

underharvests are accounted for in the 

same region and/or fishery in which 

they occurred the following year or, for 

overharvests, spread over a number of 

subsequent fishing years to a maximum 

of 5 years. Shark stocks or management 

groups that contain one or more stocks 

that are overfished, have overfishing 

occurring, or that have an unknown 

status, will not have underharvest 

carried over in the following year. 

Stocks that are not overfished and have 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS