42018 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

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

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T09–0326 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T09–0326 Safety Zone; Discovery 

World Fireworks, Milwaukee Harbor, 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 

(a) Location. All waters of Milwaukee 

Harbor, including Lakeshore inlet and 

Discovery World Marina, within the arc 

of a circle with a 300-foot radius from 

the fireworks launch site located in 

approximate position 43°02′10.7′′ N, 

087°53′37.5′′ W (NAD 83). 

(b) Effective Period. This safety zone 

will be effective from July 10, 2013, 

until October 5, 2013. This safety zone 

will be enforced from 9 p.m. until 11 

p.m. on July 10; August 3 and 22; and 

October 5, 2013. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 165.23 of 

this part, entry into, transiting, or 

anchoring within this safety zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan 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, 

Lake Michigan or his designated onscene representative. 

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

the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan 

is any Coast Guard commissioned, 

warrant or petty officer who has been 

designated by the Captain of the Port, 

Lake Michigan to act on his behalf. 

(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone shall 

contact the Captain of the Port, Lake 

Michigan or his on-scene representative 

to obtain permission to do so. The 

Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan 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, Lake Michigan, or 

his on-scene representative. 

Dated: July 1, 2013. 

M.W. Sibley, 

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

Port, Lake Michigan. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16807 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0799; FRL–9833–2] 

Determination of Attainment for the 

Sacramento Nonattainment Area for 

the 2006 Fine Particle Standard; 

California; Determination Regarding 

Applicability of Clean Air Act 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

determine that the Sacramento 

nonattainment area in California has 

attained the 2006 24-hour fine particle 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS or standard). This 

determination is based upon complete, 

quality-assured, and certified ambient 

air monitoring data showing that this 

area has monitored attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on 

the 2010–2012 monitoring period. Based 

on the above determination, the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, together with 

reasonably available control measures, a 

reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, 

and contingency measures for failure to 

meet RFP and attainment deadlines are 

suspended for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on August 14, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0799 for 

this action. 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, multi-volume 

reports), and some may not be publicly 

available in either location (e.g., 

Confidential Business Information). 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: John 

Ungvarsky, (415) 972–3963, or by email 

at ungvarsky.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments 

III. EPA’s Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action 

On October 26, 2012 (77 FR 65346), 

EPA proposed to determine that the 

Sacramento nonattainment area in 

California has attained the 2006 24-hour 

NAAQS for fine particles (generally 

referring to particles less than or equal 

to 2.5 micrometers in diameter, PM2.5). 

The 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is 35 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), 

based on a 3-year average of the 98th 

percentile of 24-hour concentrations. 

The Sacramento PM2.5 nonattainment 

area includes Sacramento County, the 

western portions of El Dorado and 

Placer counties, and the eastern portions 

of Solano and Yolo counties. Other than 

the El Dorado County portion of the 

nonattainment area, the Sacramento 

PM2.5 nonattainment area lies within the 

Sacramento Valley Air Basin. 

In our proposed rule, we explained 

how EPA makes an attainment 

determination for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS by reference to complete, 

quality-assured data gathered at a State 

and Local Air Monitoring Station(s) 

(SLAMS) and entered into EPA’s Air 

Quality System (AQS) database and by 

reference to 40 CFR 50.13 (‘‘National 

primary and secondary ambient air 

quality standards for PM2.5’’) and 

appendix N to [40 CFR] part 50 

(‘‘Interpretation of the National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards for PM2.5’’). EPA 

proposed the determination of 

attainment for the Sacramento 

nonattainment area based upon a review 

of the monitoring network and the 

ambient air quality data collected at the 

monitoring sites during the 2009–2011 

period. The monitoring network in the 

area is operated by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB) and three local 

air pollution control agencies in the 

area: Sacramento Metropolitan Air 

Quality Management District, Placer 

County Air Pollution Control District, 

and Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District. Based on these 

reviews, EPA found that complete, 

quality-assured and certified data for the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 42019 

1See letter from Sylvia Vanderspek, Chief, Air 

Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical 

Support Division, CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region IX, 

certifying calendar year 2012 ambient air quality 

data and quality assurance data, May 16, 2013. 

2EPA established the Implementation Rule 

pursuant to subpart 1 (‘‘Nonattainment Areas in 

General’’) of part D (‘‘Plan Requirements for 

Nonattainment Areas’’) of title I of the CAA. 

Subpart 4 (‘‘Additional Provisions for Particulate 

Matter Nonattainment Areas’’) includes more 

prescriptive SIP nonattainment area requirements 

than those set forth in subpart 1. 

3For the purposes of evaluating the effects of this 

determination of attainment under subpart 4, we are 

considering Sacramento to be a ‘‘moderate’’ PM2.5

nonattainment area. Under section 188 of the CAA, 

all areas designated nonattainment areas under 

subpart 4 would initially be classified by operation 

of law as ‘‘moderate’’ nonattainment areas, and 

would remain moderate nonattainment areas unless 

and until EPA reclassifies the area as a ‘‘serious’’ 

nonattainment area. Accordingly, the evaluation of 

the potential impact of subpart 4 requirements is 

limited to those applicable to moderate 

nonattainment areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of 

subpart 4 apply to moderate nonattainment areas 

and include: An attainment demonstration (section 

189(a)(1)(B)); provisions for RACM (section 

189(a)(1)(C)); and quantitative milestones 

demonstrating RFP toward attainment by the 

applicable attainment date (section 189(c)). In 

addition, EPA also evaluates the applicable 

requirements of subpart 1. 

Sacramento nonattainment area showed 

that the 24-hour design value for the 

2009–2011 period was equal to or less 

than 35 m/m3 at all five SLAMs monitor 

sites. 

Since publication of our October 26, 

2012 proposal, CARB and the air 

districts within the Sacramento 

nonattainment area have entered data 

into AQS for the final two quarters of 

2012 and the first quarter of 2013, and 

have certified the data for 2012.1 Thus, 

we now have complete, quality-assured 

for 2010–2012. 

Because we make determinations of 

attainment based on the most recent 3 

years of complete, quality-assured and 

certified data, we have updated the 

proposed determination of attainment 

(which had been based on 2009–2011 

data) to reflect the 2010–2012 period. 

Specifically, we have updated table 1 

(shown below) from the proposed rule 

to reflect the data for 2012, including 

data from the newly established Auburn 

monitoring site. As shown in table 1, the 

design value (31 mg/m3) in the 

Sacramento nonattainment area for the 

2010–2012 period is less than 35 mg/m3

and thus shows that the area has 

attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard. Therefore, we are taking final 

action today to determine that the 

Sacramento nonattainment area has 

attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard based on complete, qualityassured and certified data for 2010– 

2012. Preliminary data for 2013 (not 

shown in table 1 but included in the 

docket for this action) show that the 

area continues to attain the standard. 

TABLE 1—2009–2012 24-HOUR PM2.5 MONITORING SITES AND DESIGN VALUES FOR THE SACRAMENTO NONATTAINMENT

AREA c

Monitoring site AQS Site identification no. 

98th percentile (μg/m3) Design values 

(μg/m3) 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2009– 

2011 2010–2012 

Auburna ................................................................ 06–061–0003 n/a n/a n/a 15.7 n/a n/a 

Roseville ............................................................... 06–061–0006 21.3 20.3 23.0 14.9 22 19 

Sacramento—Del Paso Manor ............................ 06–067–0006 38.7 27.0 39.8 27.1 b35 31 

Sacramento—1309 T Street ................................ 06–067–0010 27.2 27.3 45.1 20.5 33 31 

Sacramento Health Dept—Stockton Blvd ............ 06–067–4001 34.9 26.5 44.8 20.5 a35 31 

Woodland ............................................................. 06–113–1003 27.4 18.6 25.8 14.2 24 20 

aThe Auburn site (AQS ID 06–061–0003) started operating in January, 2012 and, therefore, does not have a valid design value. 

bThe average of the 98th percentile values for 2009–2011 equals 35.2 and 35.4 at the Del Paso Manor and Stockton Blvd. sites, respectively, 

but consistent with applicable rounding conventions in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, section 4.3, 24-hour standard design values are rounded to 

the nearest 1 μg/m3 (decimals 0.5 and greater are rounded up to the nearest whole number, and any decimal lower than 0.5 is rounded down to 

the nearest whole number). cSource: Design Value Report, May 30, 2013 (in the docket to this final action). 

In our proposed rule, based on the 

proposed determination of attainment, 

we also proposed to apply EPA’s Clean 

Data Policy to the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS and thereby suspend the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration and 

associated reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), a reasonable further 

progress (RFP) plan, and contingency 

measures for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. See pages 65348–65350 

of our October 26, 2012 proposed rule. 

In proposing to apply the Clean Data 

Policy to the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, we explained how we are 

applying the same statutory 

interpretation with respect to the 

implications of clean data 

determinations that the Agency has long 

applied in regulations for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and in 

individual rulemakings for the 1-hour 

ozone, PM10 and lead NAAQS. See 77 

FR 65346, at 65349 (October 26, 2012). 

EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, in 

Natural Resources Defense Council v. 

EPA, the DC Circuit remanded to EPA 

the ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule’’ (72 FR 20586, 

April 25, 2007) and the 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)’’ final rule (73 FR 28321, May 

16, 2008) (collectively, ‘‘1997 PM2.5

Implementation Rule’’ or 

‘‘Implementation Rule’’). 706 F.3d 428 

(DC Cir. 2013). While the DC Circuit, in 

its January 4, 2013 decision, remanded 

the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule to 

EPA to re-promulgate the 

Implementation Rule pursuant to 

subpart 4,2 the court did not address the 

merits of that regulation, nor cast doubt 

on EPA’s interpretation of the statutory 

provisions under its Clean Data Policy. 

EPA has taken the Court’s decision 

into consideration in evaluating the 

effects of a determination of attainment 

for the Sacramento nonattainment area 

under subpart 4, in addition to subpart 

1.3 Pursuant to EPA’s Clean Data Policy 

interpretation, a determination that the 

area has attained the standard suspends 

the State’s obligation to submit 

attainment-related planning 

requirements of subpart 4 (as well as the 

applicable provisions of subpart 1) for 

so long as the area continues to attain 

the standard. These include 

requirements to submit an attainment 

demonstration, RFP, RACM, and 

contingency measures, because the 

purpose of these provisions is to help 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

42020 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

4See, e.g., 75 FR 6571 (February 10, 2010) (Baton 

Rouge, Louisiana area); 71 FR 6352 (February 8, 

2006) (Ajo, Arizona area); 71 FR 13021 (March 14, 

2006) (Yuma, Arizona area); 71 FR 40023 (July 14, 

2006) (Weirton, West Virginia area); 71 FR 44920 

(August 8, 2006) (Rillito, Arizona area); 71 FR 

63642 (October 30, 2006) (San Joaquin Valley, 

California area); 72 FR 14422 (March 28, 2007) 

(Miami, Arizona area); and 75 FR 27944 (May 19, 

2010) (Coso Junction, California area). Thus EPA 

has established that, under subpart 4, an attainment 

determination suspends the obligations to submit 

an attainment demonstration, RACM, RFP, 

contingency measures, and other measures related 

to attainment. 

reach attainment, a goal that has already 

been achieved. Thus, under both 

subpart 1 and subpart 4, a determination 

of attainment suspends a state’s 

obligations to submit attainment-linked 

planning requirements for so long as the 

area continues in attainment. 

EPA has long applied its Clean Data 

interpretation under subpart 4 in 

implementing the PM10 standard.4 In 

EPA’s proposed and final rulemakings 

determining that the San Joaquin Valley 

nonattainment area attained the PM10

standard, EPA set forth at length its 

rationale for applying the Clean Data 

Policy to subpart 4. The Ninth Circuit 

upheld EPA’s final rulemaking, and 

specifically EPA’s Clean Data Policy, in 

the context of subpart 4. Latino Issues 

Forum v. EPA, supra. Nos. 06–75831 

and 08–71238 (9th Cir.), Memorandum 

Opinion, March 2, 2009. In rejecting 

petitioner’s challenge to the Clean Data 

Policy under subpart 4 for PM10, the 

Ninth Circuit stated, ‘‘As the EPA 

explained, if an area is in compliance 

with PM10 standards, then further 

progress for the purpose of ensuring 

attainment is not necessary.’’ 

EPA is determining, based on the 

most recent three years of complete, 

quality-assured data meeting the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N, that the Sacramento 

nonattainment area is currently 

attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. In conjunction with and based 

upon our determination that 

Sacramento nonattainment area has 

attained and is currently attaining the 

standard, EPA is also determining that 

the obligation to submit the following 

attainment-related planning 

requirements is not applicable for so 

long as the area continues to attain the 

PM2.5 standard: The part D, subpart 4 

obligations to provide an attainment 

demonstration pursuant to section 

189(a)(1)(B); the RACM provisions of 

section 189(a)(1)(C); the RFP provisions 

of section 189(c); and the related 

attainment demonstration, RACM, RFP 

and contingency measure provisions 

requirements of subpart 1, section 172. 

This determination does not constitute 

a redesignation to attainment under 

CAA section 107(d)(3). 

Please see the October 26, 2012 

proposed rule for more detailed 

information concerning the PM2.5

NAAQS, designations of PM2.5

nonattainment areas, the regulatory 

basis for determining attainment of the 

NAAQS, the Sacramento nonattainment 

area’s PM2.5 monitoring network, and 

EPA’s review and evaluation of the data. 

II. Public Comments 

EPA’s proposed rule provided a 

30-day public comment period. We 

received no comments. 

III. EPA’s Final Action 

For the reasons provided in the 

proposed rule and summarized herein, 

EPA is taking final action to determine 

that the Sacramento nonattainment area 

in California has attained the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on three 

years of complete, quality-assured, and 

certified data in AQS for 2010–2012. 

Preliminary data for 2013 show that this 

area continues to attain the NAAQS. 

EPA is also taking final action, based 

on the above determination of 

attainment, to suspend the requirements 

for the Sacramento nonattainment area 

to submit an attainment demonstration 

and associated RACM, a RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for so 

long as the area continues to attain the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s final 

action is consistent and in keeping with 

its long-held interpretation of CAA 

requirements, as well as with EPA’s 

regulations for similar determinations 

for ozone (see 40 CFR 51.918) for the 

1997 8-hour ozone and in individual 

rulemakings for the 1-hour ozone, PM10

and lead NAAQS. 

Today’s final action does not 

constitute a redesignation of the 

Sacramento nonattainment area to 

attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS under CAA section 107(d)(3) 

because we have not yet approved a 

maintenance plan for the Sacramento 

nonattainment area as meeting the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA or determined that the area has 

met the other CAA requirements for 

redesignation. The classification and 

designation status in 40 CFR part 81 

remain nonattainment for this area until 

such time as EPA determines that 

California has met the CAA 

requirements for redesignating the 

Sacramento nonattainment area to 

attainment. 

If the Sacramento nonattainment area 

continues to monitor attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 

requirements for the area to submit an 

attainment demonstration and 

associated RACM, a RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning requirements related to 

attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS will remain suspended. If after 

today’s action EPA subsequently 

determines, after notice-and-comment 

rulemaking in the Federal Register, that 

the area has violated the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, the basis for the 

suspension of the attainment planning 

requirements for the area would no 

longer exist, and the area would 

thereafter have to address such 

requirements. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final action makes a 

determination of attainment based on 

air quality and suspends certain federal 

requirements, and thus, this action 

would not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For this reason, the final 

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 (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 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 42021 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this final action does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP 

obligations discussed herein do not 

apply to Indian Tribes, and thus this 

action will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by September 13, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate 

Matter, Sulfur oxides, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: June 28, 2013. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.247 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 52.247 Control Strategy and Regulations: 

Fine Particle Matter. 

* * * * * 

(c) Determination of Attainment: 

Effective August 14, 2013, EPA has 

determined that, based on 2010 to 2012 

ambient air quality data, the Sacramento 

PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. This 

determination suspends the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

reasonably available control measures, a 

reasonable further progress plan, 

contingency measures, and other 

planning SIPs related to attainment for 

as long as this area continues to attain 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. If EPA 

determines, after notice-and-comment 

rulemaking, that this area no longer 

meets the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 

the corresponding determination of 

attainment for that area shall be 

withdrawn. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16785 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 120706221–2705–02] 

RIN 0648–XC748 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Commercial Gulf of Mexico 

Aggregated Large Coastal Shark and 

Gulf of Mexico Hammerhead Shark 

Management Groups 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the 

commercial management groups for 

aggregated large coastal sharks (LCS) 

and hammerhead sharks in the Gulf of 

Mexico region. This action is necessary 

because the commercial landings of Gulf 

of Mexico aggregated LCS for the 2012 

fishing season has exceeded 80 percent 

of the available commercial quota as of 

July 5, 2013. 

DATES: The commercial Gulf of Mexico 

aggregated LCS and Gulf of Mexico 

hammerhead shark management groups 

are closed effective 11:30 p.m. local 

time, July 17, 2013, until the end of the 

2013 fishing season on December 31, 

2013 or if NMFS announces, via a notice 

in the Federal Register, that additional 

quota is available and the season is 

reopened. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karyl Brewster-Geisz or Peter Cooper 

301–427–8503; fax 301–713–1917. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Atlantic shark fisheries are managed 

under the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic 

Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery 

Management Plan (FMP), its 

amendments, and its implementing 

regulations (50 CFR part 635) issued 

under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et 

seq.). 

Under § 635.5(b)(1), sharks that are 

first received by dealers from a vessel 

must be submitted electronically on a 

weekly basis through a NMFS-approved 

electronic reporting system by the 

dealer and received by NMFS no later 

than midnight, local time, of the first 

Tuesday following the end of the 

reporting week unless the dealer is 

otherwise notified by NMFS. Under 

§ 635.28(b)(2), when NMFS calculates 

that the landings for any species and/or 

management group of a linked group 

has reached or is projected to reach 80 

percent of the available quota, NMFS 

will file for publication with the Office 

of the Federal Register a notice of 

closure for all of the species and/or 

management groups in a linked group 

that will be effective no fewer than 5 

days from date of filing. From the 

effective date and time of the closure 

until NMFS announces, via a notice in 

the Federal Register, that additional 

quota is available and the season is 

reopened, the fishery for all linked 

species and/or management groups is 

closed, even across fishing years. 

On July 3, 2013 (78 FR 40318), NMFS 

announced the final rule for 

Amendment 5a to the Consolidated 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP), 

which, among other things, established 

new, final adjusted 2013 quotas for 

aggregated LCS and hammerhead sharks 

in the Gulf of Mexico region. The Gulf 

of Mexico aggregated LCS management 

group quota is 157.5 metric tons (mt) 

dressed weight (dw) (347,317 lb dw), 

and the Gulf of Mexico hammerhead 

shark management group quota is 25.3 

metric tons (mt) dressed weight (dw) 

(55,722 lb dw). Dealer reports recently 

received through July 5, 2013, indicate 

that 128.7 mt dw or 82 percent of the 

available Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS 

quota has been landed, and that 9.2 mt 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES