27732 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this proposed rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

determined that this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This proposed rule 

involves a change to the operating 

schedule of a drawbridge. It is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph L49 of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. We 

seek any comments or information that 

may lead to the discovery of a 

significant environmental impact from 

this proposed rule. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places, or vessels. 

VI. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We view public participation as 

essential to effective rulemaking, and 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period. 

Your comment can help shape the 

outcome of this rulemaking. If you 

submit a comment, please include the 

docket number for this rulemaking, 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. If your material 

cannot be submitted using http://

www.regulations.gov, contact the person 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

the docket, visit http://

www.regulations.gov/privacynotice. 

Documents mentioned in this SNPRM 

as being available in this docket and all 

public comments, will be in our online 

docket at http://www.regulations.gov 

and can be viewed by following that 

website’s instructions. Additionally, if 

you go to the online docket and sign up 

for email alerts, you will be notified 

when comments are posted or a final 

rule is published. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

and Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise § 117.500 to read as follows: 

§ 117.500 Tchefuncta River. 

The draw of the S22 Bridge, mile 2.5, 

at Madisonville, LA shall open on signal 

from 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. From 6 a.m. to 7 

p.m. the draw need only open on the 

hour and half hour, except that: 

(a) From 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. Monday 

through Friday except federal holidays 

the draw need only open on the hour; 

and 

(b) From 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday 

through Friday except federal holidays 

the draw need not open. 

Dated: June 7, 2018. 

Paul F. Thomas, 

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

Eighth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12742 Filed 6–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0054; FRL–9979– 

42—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Interstate Transport 

Requirements for the 2012 Fine 

Particulate Matter Standard 

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 

Pennsylvania. This revision pertains to 

the infrastructure requirement for 

interstate transport of pollution with 

respect to the 2012 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). EPA is 

approving this revision in accordance 

with the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before July 16, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2018–0054 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

spielberger.susan@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, 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, 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. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 27733 

1 ‘‘Design value’’ means the ‘‘calculated 

concentration according to the applicable appendix 

of [40 CFR part 50] for the highest site in an 

attainment or nonattainment area.’’ 40 CFR 58.1 

(definitions). 

2 ‘‘Information on the Interstate Transport ‘‘Good 

Neighbor’’ Provision for the 2012 Fine Particulate 

Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),’’ 

memorandum from Stephan D. Page, Director, EPA 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Schulingkamp, (215) 814–2021, 

or by email at schulingkamp.joseph@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

15, 2014, the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania submitted, through the 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(PADEP), a revision to its SIP to address 

for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS the elements 

of CAA section 110(a)(2) with the 

exception of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). 

EPA approved portions of that SIP 

revision on May 8, 2015. See 80 FR 

26461. In that action, EPA approved for 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS all elements 

except for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

(relating to the protection of visibility, 

also known as prong 4), for which EPA 

stated it would take later separate 

action. Because the July 15, 2014 SIP 

submittal did not address 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS, EPA took no rulemaking action 

addressing whether Pennsylvania had 

addressed that specific element. EPA’s 

previous approval on that July 15, 2014 

submittal is not at issue in this proposed 

rulemaking action and is mentioned 

herein for background; EPA is not at this 

time taking action on the remaining 

section of PADEP’s July 15, 2014 

submittal relating to visibility protection 

for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On October 11, 2017, the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 

through PADEP submitted a SIP 

revision addressing the infrastructure 

requirements under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

I. Background 

A. General 

Particle pollution is a complex 

mixture of extremely small particles and 

liquid droplets in the air. When inhaled, 

these particles can reach the deepest 

regions of the lungs. Exposure to 

particle pollution is linked to a variety 

of significant health problems. Particle 

pollution also is the main cause of 

visibility impairment in the nation’s 

cities and national parks. PM2.5 can be 

emitted directly into the atmosphere, or 

they can form from chemical reactions 

of precursor gases including sulfur 

dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), 

certain volatile organic compounds 

(VOC), and ammonia. On January 15, 

2013, EPA revised the level of the health 

based (primary) annual PM2.5 standard 

to 12 micrograms per cubic meter 

(mg/m3). See 78 FR 3086. 

B. EPA’s Infrastructure Requirements 

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA, states are required to submit a SIP 

revision to address the applicable 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) within 

three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS or within such 

shorter period as EPA may prescribe. 

Section 110(a)(2) requires states to 

address basic SIP elements to assure 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS—such as requirements for 

monitoring, basic program 

requirements, and legal authority. 

Section 110(a) imposes the obligation 

upon states to make a SIP submission to 

EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but 

the contents of that submission may 

vary depending upon the facts and 

circumstances of each NAAQS and what 

is in each state’s existing SIP. In 

particular, the data and analytical tools 

available at the time the state develops 

and submits the SIP revision for a new 

or revised NAAQS affect the content of 

the submission. The content of such SIP 

submission may also vary depending 

upon what provisions the state’s 

existing SIP already contains. 

Specifically, section 110(a)(1) 

provides the procedural and timing 

requirements for SIP submissions. 

Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements 

that states must meet for infrastructure 

SIP requirements related to a newly 

established or revised NAAQS such as 

requirements for monitoring, basic 

program requirements, and legal 

authority that are designed to assure 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS. 

C. Interstate Pollution Transport 

Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA 

requires a state’s SIP to address any 

emissions activity in one state that 

contributes significantly to 

nonattainment, or interferes with 

maintenance, of the NAAQS in any 

downwind state. The EPA sometimes 

refers to these requirements as prong 1 

(significant contribution to 

nonattainment) and prong 2 

(interference with maintenance), or 

jointly as the ‘‘good neighbor’’ provision 

of the CAA. Further information can be 

found in the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) for this rulemaking 

action, which is available online at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0054. 

II. Summary of SIP Revisions and EPA 

Analysis 

Pennsylvania’s October 11, 2017 SIP 

submittal includes a summary of 

statewide annual emissions of PM2.5, 

coarse particulate matter (PM10), and 

precursors of PM2.5 including oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX), SO2, ammonia, and 

VOCs. Pennsylvania also included 

statewide SO2 and NOX emissions 

specifically from the electric generating 

units (EGU) sector as EGUs are the 

largest contributor to the point source 

emissions. The emissions summary 

shows that, for the years 2011 through 

2015, emissions of all pollutants 

presented have been steadily decreasing 

or remained nearly steady for sources 

that potentially contribute with respect 

to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance of, any other state. The 

submittal also included annual PM2.5

design values (DVs) in Pennsylvania for 

the ten most recent years of available 

data (2006 through 2015).1

Pennsylvania also discussed EPA’s 

March 17, 2016 memorandum (2016 

PM2.5 Memorandum) and the fact that 

EPA’s analysis showed that only one 

monitor in the eastern United States had 

projected PM2.5 data above the 12.0 

mg/m3 NAAQS value (Allegheny 

County, PA).2 Pennsylvania also 

generally discussed the direction of 

prevailing winds as being from west to 

east and that, due to the sheer distance 

of 2,000 to 3,000 miles, Pennsylvania 

should not affect Idaho or California. 

Additionally, Pennsylvania described 

several existing SIP-approved measures 

and other federally enforceable sourcespecific measures, pursuant to 

permitting requirements under the CAA, 

that apply to sources of PM2.5 and its 

precursors within the Commonwealth. 

Pennsylvania alleges with these 

measures, emissions reductions, 

ambient monitored PM2.5 data, and 

meteorological data, the Commonwealth 

does not significantly contribute to, or 

interfere with the maintenance of, 

another state for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. A detailed summary of 

Pennsylvania’s submittal and EPA’s 

review and rationale for approval of this 

SIP revision as meeting CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS may be found in the TSD for 

this rulemaking action, which is 

available online at www.regulations.gov, 

Docket number EPA–R03–OAR–2018– 

0054. 

EPA used the information in the 2016 

PM2.5 Memorandum and additional 

information for the evaluation and came 

to the same conclusion as Pennsylvania. 

As discussed in greater detail in the 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
27734 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

TSD, EPA identified the potential 

downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors identified in the 

2016 PM2.5 Memorandum, and then 

evaluated them to determine if 

Pennsylvania’s emissions could 

potentially contribute to nonattainment 

and maintenance problems in 2021, the 

attainment year for moderate PM2.5

nonattainment areas for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. Specifically, the EPA analysis 

identified the following areas as 

potential nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors: (i) 17 potential 

receptors in California; (ii) one potential 

receptor in Shoshone County, Idaho; 

(iii) data gaps exist for the monitors in 

four counties in Florida; and (iv) data 

gaps exist for all monitors in Illinois. 

For the 17 receptors in California and 

one potential receptor in Idaho, based 

on EPA’s evaluation of distance and 

wind direction, EPA proposes to 

conclude that Pennsylvania’s emissions 

do not significantly impact those 

receptors. For the four counties in 

Florida and the monitors in Illinois with 

data gaps, EPA initially treats those 

receptors as potential nonattainment or 

maintenance receptors, but it is unlikely 

that they will be nonattainment or 

maintenance receptors in 2021 because 

the most recent air quality data (from 

2015–2017 for Florida and from 2015– 

2016 for Illinois) indicates that all 

monitors are likely attaining the PM2.5

NAAQS and are therefore unlikely to be 

nonattainment or maintenance concerns 

in 2021. Therefore, EPA proposes to 

conclude that Pennsylvania emissions 

will not contribute to any of those 

receptors. For these reasons, EPA is 

proposing to find that Pennsylvania’s 

existing SIP provisions as identified in 

the October 11, 2017 SIP submittal are 

adequate to prevent its emission sources 

from significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance in another state with 

respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

Pennsylvania SIP revision addressing 

the interstate transport requirements for 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which was submitted 

on October 11, 2017. EPA is soliciting 

public comments on the issues 

discussed in this document. These 

comments will be considered before 

taking final action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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 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); 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted 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 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 proposed rule, 

regarding Pennsylvania’s interstate 

transport SIP for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Particulate matter. 

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

Dated: June 5, 2018. 

Cosmo Servidio, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12706 Filed 6–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0217; EPA–R03– 

OAR–2014–0299; EPA–R03–OAR–2016– 

0373; FRL–9979–39—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Regional Haze Plan and 

Visibility Requirements for the 2010 

Sulfur Dioxide and the 2012 Fine 

Particulate Matter Standards 

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 State of West Virginia 

(West Virginia) to change reliance on 

the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to 

reliance on the Cross-State Air Pollution 

Rule (CSAPR) with the purpose of 

addressing certain regional haze 

requirements and visibility protection 

requirements for the 2010 sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). Upon EPA’s final 

approval of this SIP revision, EPA is 

proposing to convert the Agency’s June 

7, 2012 limited approval/limited 

disapproval of West Virginia’s regional 

haze SIP to a full approval; and EPA is 

proposing to remove the federal 

implementation plan (FIP) for West 

Virginia issued to address deficiencies 

previously identified in the Agency’s 

limited approval/limited disapproval of 

the State’s regional haze SIP revision. In 

addition, EPA is proposing to approve 

the portions of two previous SIP 

revisions submitted by West Virginia to 

address visibility protection 

requirements for the 2010 SO2 and the 

2012 particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. 

These proposed actions are supported 

by EPA’s recent final determination that 

a state’s participation in CSAPR 

continues to meet EPA’s regional haze 

criteria to qualify as an alternative to the 

application of best available retrofit 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS