Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39035 

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). 

The action approving Maryland’s and 

Virginia’s redesignation request for their 

respective portions of the Washington 

Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS as well 

as the District’s, Maryland’s, and 

Virginia’s maintenance plan for the 

Washington Area, is not approved to 

apply on any Indian reservation land as 

defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: July 24, 2018. 

Cosmo Servidio, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16882 Filed 8–7–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0699; FRL–9981– 

42—Region 6] 

Air Plan Approval; Arkansas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is proposing to approve portions of the 

revisions to the Arkansas State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the Arkansas Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) on 

March 24, 2017. Most of the revisions 

are administrative in nature and make 

the SIP current with Federal rules. The 

EPA is also proposing to make 

ministerial changes to the Code of 

Federal Register (CFR) to reflect SIP 

actions pertaining to the Arkansas 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) program. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received on or before September 7, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by EPA–R06–OAR–2017– 

0699, at http://www.regulations.gov or 

via email to paige.carrie@epa.gov. For 

additional information on how to 

submit comments see the detailed 

instructions in the ADDRESSES section of 

the direct final rule located in the rules 

section of this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Carrie Paige, (214) 665–6521, 

paige.carrie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of this issue of the 

Federal Register, the EPA is approving 

the State’s SIP submittal as a direct rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action 

no further activity is contemplated. If 

the EPA receives relevant 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. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period. Any 

parties interested in commenting on this 

action should do so at this time. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule, which is located in the 

rules section of this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

Dated: July 31, 2018. 

Anne Idsal, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16905 Filed 8–7–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0492; FRL–9981– 

67—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Delaware; Interstate Transport 

Requirements for the 2010 1-Hour 

Sulfur Dioxide Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of a state implementation plan 

(SIP) revision submittal from the State 

of Delaware. This revision addresses the 

infrastructure requirement for interstate 

transport of pollution with respect to 

the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS). This action is being taken 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 7, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2013–0492 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

spielberger.susan@epa.gov. For 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
39036 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1For the EPA’s explanation of its ability to act on 

discrete elements of section 110(a)(2), see 80 FR 

2865 (Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; District of Columbia; 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide, and 2010 Sulfur Dioxide 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Approval 

of Air Pollution Emergency Episode Plan (January 

21, 2015)). 

2This proposed approval action is based on the 

information contained in the administrative record 

for this action, and does not prejudge any other 

future EPA action that may make other 

determinations regarding any of the subject state’s 

air quality status. Any such future actions, such as 

area designations under any NAAQS, will be based 

on their own administrative records and the EPA’s 

analyses of information that becomes available at 

those times. Future available information may 

include, and is not limited to, monitoring data and 

modeling analyses conducted pursuant to the EPA’s 

SO2 Data Requirements Rule (80 FR 51052, August 

21, 2015) and information submitted to the EPA by 

states, air agencies, and third-party stakeholders 

such as citizen groups and industry representatives. 

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: 

Joseph Schulingkamp, (215) 814–2021, 

or by email at schulingkamp.joseph@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 

29, 2013, the State of Delaware, through 

the Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control 

(DNREC) submitted a SIP revision 

addressing the infrastructure 

requirements under section 110(a)(2) of 

the CAA for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. 

I. Background 

A. General 

On June 2, 2010, the EPA 

promulgated a revised primary SO2

standard, establishing a new 1-hour 

primary standard at the level of 75 parts 

per billion (ppb), based on the 3-year 

average of the annual 99th percentile of 

1-hour daily maximum concentrations 

(hereafter ‘‘the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS’’). At the same time, the EPA 

also revoked the previous 24-hour and 

annual primary SO2 standards. See 75 

FR 35520 (June 22, 2010). See 40 CFR 

50.11. The previous SO2 air quality 

standards were set in 1971, including a 

24-hour average primary standard at 140 

ppb and an annual average primary 

standard at 30 ppb. See 36 FR 8186 

(April 30, 1971). 

Current scientific evidence links 

short-term exposures to SO2, ranging 

from five minutes to 24 hours, with an 

array of adverse respiratory effects 

including bronchoconstriction and 

increased asthma symptoms. These 

effects are particularly important for 

asthmatics at elevated ventilation rates 

(e.g., while exercising or playing). 

Studies also show a connection between 

short-term exposure and increased visits 

to emergency departments and hospital 

admissions for respiratory illnesses, 

particularly in at-risk populations 

including children, the elderly, and 

asthmatics. 

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 include 

adequate provisions prohibiting 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–2013–0492. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

On May 29, 2013, Delaware 

submitted, through DNREC, a revision 

to its SIP to satisfy the infrastructure 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, 

including the interstate transport 

requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). On January 22, 2014 

(79 FR 3506), the EPA approved 

Delaware’s infrastructure SIP submittal 

for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for all 

applicable elements of section 110(a)(2) 

with the exception of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). 

This proposed rulemaking action is 

addressing the portions of Delaware’s 

infrastructure submittal for the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS that pertain to 

transport requirements.1 2

The portions of Delaware’s May 29, 

2013 SIP submittal addressing interstate 

transport (for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) 

discuss how Delaware does not 

significantly contribute with respect to 

the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance in, any other state and 

discusses prevailing wind direction in 

the region. Additionally, Delaware 

described in its submittal several 

existing SIP-approved measures and 

other federally enforceable sourcespecific measures, pursuant to 

permitting requirements under the CAA, 

that apply to SO2 sources within the 

state. 

Based on EPA’s analysis, EPA agrees 

with Delaware’s general conclusion that 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39037 

the existing Delaware SIP is adequate to 

prevent sources in Delaware from 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance in another state with 

respect to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 

A detailed summary of EPA’s review 

and rationale for proposed approval of 

this SIP revision as meeting CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS may be found in the 

TSD. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions of Delaware’s May 29, 2013 SIP 

revision addressing interstate transport 

for the 2010 1-hr SO2 NAAQS as these 

portions meet the requirements in 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. 

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, 

addressing Delaware’s interstate 

transport requirements for the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 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, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

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

Dated: July 12, 2018. 

Cosmo Servidio, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16796 Filed 8–7–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 665 

[Docket No. 180208146–8690–01] 

RIN 0648–XG025 

Pacific Island Pelagic Fisheries; 2018 

U.S. Territorial Longline Bigeye Tuna 

Catch Limits 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed specifications; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes a 2018 limit 

of 2,000 metric tons (t) of longlinecaught bigeye tuna for each U.S. Pacific 

territory (American Samoa, Guam, and 

the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands (CNMI)). NMFS would 

allow each territory to allocate up to 

1,000 t each year to U.S. longline fishing 

vessels in a specified fishing agreement 

that meets established criteria. As an 

accountability measure, NMFS would 

monitor, attribute, and restrict (if 

necessary) catches of longline-caught 

bigeye tuna, including catches made 

under a specified fishing agreement. 

The proposed catch limits and 

accountability measures would support 

the long-term sustainability of fishery 

resources of the U.S. Pacific Islands. 

DATES: NMFS must receive comments 

by August 23, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2018–0026, by either of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018- 

0026, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Send written comments to 

Michael D. Tosatto, Regional 

Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands 

Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg. 

176, Honolulu, HI 96818. 

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 http://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). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebecca Walker, NMFS PIRO 

Sustainable Fisheries, 808–725–5184. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

proposes to specify a 2018 catch limit of 

2,000 t of longline-caught bigeye tuna 

for each U.S. Pacific territory. NMFS 

would also authorize each U.S. Pacific 

territory to allocate up to 1,000 t of its 

2,000 t bigeye tuna limit to U.S. longline 

fishing vessels that are permitted to fish 

under the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for 

Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific 

(FEP). Those vessels must be identified 

in a specified fishing agreement with 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS