32604 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise § 117.253(a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 117.253 Anacostia River 

(a) The draw of the Frederick 

Douglass Memorial (South Capitol 

Street) bridge, mile 1.2, need not be 

opened for the passage of vessels. 

* * * * * 

Dated: June 25, 2018. 

M.L. Austin, 

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

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15050 Filed 7–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2018–0635] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Ski Show Sylvan Beach; 

Fish Creek, Oneida, NY 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish a temporary safety zone for 

certain waters of Fish Creek during the 

Ski Show Sylvan Beach. This proposed 

rulemaking would prohibit persons and 

vessels from being in the safety zone 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port Buffalo or a designated 

representative. We invite your 

comments on this proposed rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before August 2, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2018–0635 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this proposed 

rulemaking, call or email LCDR Michael 

Collet, Chief of Waterways Management, 

U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; 

telephone 716–843–9322, email D09- 

SMB-SECBuffalo-WWM@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal 

Basis 

On April 8, 2018, Mohawk Valley Ski 

Club Inc. notified the Coast Guard that 

it would be conducting a ski show from 

12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on August 12, 

2018. The show will take place on Fish 

Creek where the creek meets Oneida 

Lake starting at position 43°11′36.6′′ N, 

75°43′53.8′′ W then South to 43°11′33.7′′ 

N, 75°43′51.2′′ W then East to 

43°11′42.4′′ N, 75°43′38.6′′ W then North 

to 43°11′44.5′′ N, 75°43′39.7′′ W then 

returning to the point of origin. The 

Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has 

determined that potential hazards 

associated with a Ski Show Sylvan 

Beach would be a safety concern for 

anyone within the aforementioned zone 

on Fish Creek. 

The purpose of this rulemaking is to 

enhance the safety of vessels and racers 

on the navigable waters within the 

above stated points, before, during, and 

after the scheduled event. The Coast 

Guard proposes this rulemaking under 

authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The COTP proposes to establish a 

temporary safety zone enforced from 

12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on August 12, 

2018 with breaks every 30 minutes to 

allow traffic to pass. The safety zone 

will cover all navigable waters starting 

at position 43°11′36.6′′ N, 75°43′53.8′′ W 

then South to 43°11′33.7′′ N, 75°43′51.2′′ 

W then East to 43°11′42.4′′ N, 

75°43′38.6′′ W then North to 43°11′44.5′′ 

N, 75°43′39.7′′ W then returning to the 

point of origin on Fish Creek, Oneida, 

NY. The duration of the zone is 

intended to enhance the safety of 

vessels and these navigable waters 

before, during, and after the scheduled 

12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Ski Show. No 

vessel or person would be permitted to 

enter the safety zone without obtaining 

permission from the COTP or a 

designated representative. The 

regulatory text we are proposing appears 

at the end of this document. 

IV. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive Orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on a number of these statutes and 

Executive Orders and we discuss First 

Amendment rights of protestors. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess the costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Executive Order 13771 directs agencies 

to control regulatory costs through a 

budgeting process. This NPRM has not 

been designated a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action,’’ under Executive 

Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and 

pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 

from the requirements of Executive 

Order 13771. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the size, location, duration, 

and time-of-day of the safety zone. 

Vessel traffic would not be able to safely 

transit around this safety zone, which 

would impact a small designated area of 

Fish Creek. However, the Coast Guard 

would issue a Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners via VHF–FM marine channel 

16 about the zone, and the rule would 

allow vessels to seek permission to enter 

the zone. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 

requires Federal agencies to consider 

the potential impact of regulations on 

small entities during rulemaking. The 

term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

that are independently owned and 

operated and are not dominant in their 

fields, and governmental jurisdictions 

with populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 

605(b) that this proposed rule would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

While some owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the safety 

zone may be small entities, for the 

reasons stated in section IV.A above, 

this proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on any 

vessel owner or operator. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules 32605 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule. If the 

rule would affect your small business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will 

not retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this 

proposed rule or any policy or action of 

the Coast Guard. 

C. Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would not call for 

a new collection of information under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 

Governments 

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. We have 

analyzed this proposed rule under that 

Order and have determined that it is 

consistent with the fundamental 

federalism principles and preemption 

requirements described in Executive 

Order 13132. 

Also, this proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

If you believe this proposed rule has 

implications for federalism or Indian 

tribes, please contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

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 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 made a 

preliminary determination 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 establishing a safety zone 

lasting 8 hours that would prohibit 

entry for certain waters of Fish Creek. 

Normally such actions are categorically 

excluded from further review under 

paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 

1, of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– 

001–01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record 

of Environmental Consideration (REC) 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble. 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. 

V. 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 NPRM 

as being available in the 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 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T09–0635 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T09–0635 Safety Zone; Ski Show 

Sylvan Beach; Fish Creek, Oneida, NY. 

(a) Location. The safety zone will 

encompass all waters of Fish Creek in 

Oneida, NY, starting at position 

43°11′36.6′′ N, 75°43′53.8′′ W then South 

to 43°11′33.7′′ N, 75°43′51.2′′ W then 

East to 43°11′42.4′′ N, 75°43′38.6′′ W 

then North to 43°11′44.5′′ N, 75°43′39.7′′ 

W then returning to the point of origin 

(NAD 83). 

(b) Enforcement Period. This rule is 

effective from 12:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. 

on August 12, 2018. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 165.23, entry 

into, transiting, or anchoring within this 

safety zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo or his designated on-scene 

representative. 

(2) This safety zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo or his designated on-scene 

representative. 

(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of 

the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any 

Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
32606 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA’s June 22, 2010 final action revoked the two 

1971 primary 24-hour standard of 140 ppb and the 

annual standard of 30 ppb because they were 

determined not to add additional public health 

protection given a 1-hour standard at 75 ppb. See 

75 FR 35520. However, the secondary 3-hour SO2

standard was retained. Currently, the 24-hour and 

annual standards are only revoked for certain of 

those areas the EPA has already designated for the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 50.4(e). 

petty officer who has been designated 

by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act 

on his behalf. 

(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone must 

contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo 

or his on-scene representative to obtain 

permission to do so. The Captain of the 

Port Buffalo or his on-scene 

representative may be contacted via 

VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given 

permission to enter or operate in the 

safety zone must comply with all 

directions given to them by the Captain 

of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene 

representative. 

Dated: July 5, 2018. 

Joseph S. Dufresne, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Buffalo. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14993 Filed 7–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0615; FRL–9980–65- 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Attainment Plan for the 

Indiana, Pennsylvania Nonattainment 

Area for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide 

Primary National Ambient Air Quality 

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 

through the Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection (PADEP), to 

EPA on October 11, 2017, for the 

purpose of providing for attainment of 

the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) primary 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS) in the Indiana, Pennsylvania 

SO2 nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Indiana Area’’ or 

‘‘Area’’). The Indiana Area is comprised 

of Indiana County and a portion of 

Armstrong County (Plumcreek 

Township, South Bend Township, and 

Elderton Borough) in Pennsylvania. The 

major sources of SO2 in the Indiana 

Area emitting over 2,000 tpy of SO2

include several large electric generating 

units (EGUs): Keystone Plant, 

Conemaugh Plant, Homer City 

Generation, and Seward Generation 

Station (hereafter referred to as 

‘‘Keystone,’’ ‘‘Conemaugh,’’ ‘‘Homer 

City,’’ and ‘‘Seward’’). The SIP 

submission is an attainment plan which 

includes the base year emissions 

inventory, an analysis of the reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) 

and reasonably available control 

measure (RACM) requirements, 

enforceable emission limitations and 

control measures, a reasonable further 

progress (RFP) plan, a modeling 

demonstration of SO2 attainment, and 

contingency measures for the Indiana 

Area. As part of approving the 

attainment plan, EPA is also proposing 

to approve into the Pennsylvania SIP 

SO2 emission limits and associated 

compliance parameters for Keystone, 

Conemaugh, Homer City and Seward 

and proposes to find Pennsylvania has 

measures in place to address 

nonattainment new source review. EPA 

proposes to approve Pennsylvania’s 

attainment plan and concludes that the 

Indiana Area will attain the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date and that the plan meets 

all applicable requirements under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 13, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2017–0615 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Megan Goold, (215) 814–2027, or by 

email at goold.megan@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background for EPA’s Proposed Action 

II. Pennsylvania’s Attainment Plan Submittal 

for the Indiana Area 

III. EPA’s Analysis of Pennsylvania’s 

Attainment Plan for the Indiana Area 

A. Pollutants Addressed 

B. Emissions Inventory Requirements 

C. Air Quality Modeling 

D. RACM/RACT 

E. RFP Plan 

F. Contingency Measures 

G. New Source Review 

IV. EPA’s Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background for EPA’s Proposed 

Action 

On June 2, 2010, the EPA 

Administrator signed a final rule 

establishing a new primary SO2 NAAQS 

as a 1-hour standard of 75 parts per 

billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average 

of the annual 99th percentile of daily 

maximum 1-hour average 

concentrations. See 75 FR 35520 (June 

22, 2010), codified at 40 CFR 50.17. This 

action also revoked the existing 1971 

primary annual and 24-hour standards, 

subject to certain conditions.1 EPA 

established the NAAQS based on 

significant evidence and numerous 

health studies demonstrating that 

serious health effects are associated 

with short-term exposures to SO2

emissions ranging from five minutes to 

24 hours with an array of adverse 

respiratory effects including narrowing 

of the airways which can cause 

difficulty breathing 

(bronchoconstriction) and increased 

asthma symptoms. For more 

information regarding the health 

impacts of SO2, please refer to the June 

22, 2010 final rulemaking. See 75 FR 

35520. Following promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS, EPA is required by 

the CAA to designate areas throughout 

the United States as attaining or not 

attaining the NAAQS; this designation 

process is described in section 

107(d)(1)–(2) of the CAA. On August 5, 

2013, EPA promulgated initial air 

quality designations for 29 areas for the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS (78 FR 47191), which 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS