Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 7655 

the requester within the initial 20-day 

period. Such extensions should not be 

routine and should not normally exceed 

an additional 30 days. If the decision 

affirms the adverse determination in 

whole or in part, the notification will 

include a brief statement of the reason(s) 

for the affirmation, including any 

exemptions applied, and will inform the 

appellant of the Privacy Act provisions 

for judicial review of the appellate 

authority’s decision, a description of the 

steps the individual may take to obtain 

judicial review of such a decision, a 

statement that the individual may file a 

concise statement with SSS setting forth 

the individual’s reasons for his 

disagreement with the decision, and the 

procedures for filing such a statement of 

disagreement. The Director of Selective 

Service has the authority to determine 

the conciseness of the statement, 

considering the scope of the 

disagreement and the complexity of the 

issues. Upon the filing of a proper, 

concise statement by the individual, any 

subsequent disclosure of the 

information in dispute will be clearly 

noted so that the fact that the record is 

disputed is apparent, which shall 

include a copy of the concise statement 

furnished and a concise statement by 

SSS setting forth its reasons for not 

making the requested changes, if SSS 

chooses to file such a statement. A 

notation of a dispute is required to be 

made only if an individual informs SSS 

of their disagreement with its 

determination in accordance with 

paragraphs (a) through (c) of this 

section. A copy of the individual’s 

statement, and if it chooses, SSS’s 

statement will be sent to any prior 

transferee of the disputed information 

who is listed on the accounting required 

by 5 U.S.C. 552a(c). If the reviewing 

official determines that the record 

should be amended in accord with the 

individual’s request, SSS will promptly 

correct the record, advise the 

individual, and inform previous 

recipients if an accounting of the 

disclosure was made pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 552a(c). The notification of 

correction pertains to information 

actually disclosed. If the adverse 

determination is reversed or modified, 

in whole or in part, the appellant will 

be notified in writing of this decision 

and the request will be reprocessed in 

accordance with that appeal decision. 

(e) In order to seek a judicial review 

of a denial of a request for access to 

records, a requester must first file an 

appeal under this section. 

(f) An appeal ordinarily will not be 

acted on if the request becomes a matter 

of litigation. 

■ 6. Amend § 1665.6 by revising 

paragraph (c)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 1665.6 Schedule of fees. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) Remittance shall be in the form of 

cash, a personal check or bank draft 

drawn on a bank in the United States, 

or postal money order. Remittances 

shall be made payable to the order of the 

Selective Service System and mailed or 

delivered to the records manager, 

Selective Service System, 1501 Wilson 

Blvd., Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22209. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 1665.7 by revising the 

section heading and paragraphs (a) and 

(b) and removing paragraph (c) to read 

as follows: 

§ 1665.7 Information available to the public 

or to those seeking confirmation of SSS 

registration status to convey benefits 

related to registration. 

(a) SSS maintains a record which 

contains the name, Selective Service 

number, and registration status of those 

that have registered with SSS. 

(b) Any compensated employee of 

SSS may disclose to an entity seeking to 

convey a benefit related to SSS 

registration status by law whether the 

individual has or has not registered with 

SSS. 

■ 8. Revise § 1665.8 to read as follows: 

§ 1665.8 Systems of records exempted 

from certain provisions of this act. 

The SSS will not provide requesters 

information exempt from disclosure 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k), (e.g., the 

SSS will not reveal to the suspected 

violator the informant’s name or other 

identifying information relating to the 

informant). 

These proposed regulations were 

reviewed and approved by Joel C. 

Spangenberg, Acting Director of 

Selective Service. 

Daniel A. Lauretano, Sr., 

Selective Service System General Counsel & 

Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2024–02119 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8015–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2023–0565; FRL–11415– 

01–R3] 

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 

Allegheny County Open Burning 

Revision and Addition of Mon Valley 

Air Pollution Episode Requirements 

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 Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(PADEP) on behalf of the Allegheny 

County Health Department (ACHD). The 

SIP submission requests EPA to 

incorporate into the Pennsylvania SIP 

particulate matter emission mitigation 

requirements for industry operating in 

the portion of Allegheny County known 

as the ‘‘Mon Valley’’ during weatherrelated pollution episodes. It also 

amends a portion of Allegheny County’s 

open burning regulation, which was 

previously incorporated into 

Pennsylvania’s SIP. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 6, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2023–0565 at 

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

gordon.mike@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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7656 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1 52 FR 24634 (July 1, 1987). Effective July 31, 

1987. 

2Effective December 18, 2006. 

3 In this same action, EPA revised the form of the 

24-hour PM10 standard to be based on the 3-year 

average of the 99th percentile of 24-hour PM10

concentrations at each monitor within an area. 

4The primary and secondary standards were set 

at the same level for both the 24-hour and the 

annual PM2.5 standards. 

5Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 

primary and secondary 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

are attained when the annual arithmetic mean 

concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, appendix N, is less than or equal to 

35 mg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in the 

subject area, averaged over a 3-year period. 

6 December 14, 2012 is the signature date of the 

action. The action was published in the Federal 

Register on January 15, 2013 with an effective date 

of March 18, 2013. See 78 FR 3086. 

7 80 FR 2206 (January 15, 2015) and 80 FR 18535 

(April 7, 2015). For the 1987 p.m.10 NAAQS, a 

portion of Allegheny County was designated as 

nonattainment. The area has since been 

redesignated to attainment. 68 FR 53515 (September 

11, 2003). The PM10 area is comprised of the 

Boroughs of Liberty, Lincoln, Port Vue, and 

Glassport and the City of Clairton in Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania. 

8An exceedance is determined by an air quality 

measurement at a specific monitor at a specific 

time. Since the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS design value is 

a three-year average of the 98th percentile, an 

exceedance at a monitor does not equal a violation. 

9See August 23, 2023 SIP submission which can 

be found in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. Page 7. 

10Section 2106.06(d) defines the Mon Valley Air 

Pollution Episode Area as including the following 

municipalities: City of Clairton, City of Duquesne, 

City of McKeesport, Borough of Braddock, Borough 

of Braddock Hills, Borough of Chalfant, Borough of 

Dravosburg, Borough of East McKeesport, Borough 

of East Pittsburgh, Borough of Elizabeth, Borough of 

Forest Hills, Borough of Glassport, Borough of 

Jefferson Hills, Borough of Liberty, Borough of 

Lincoln, Borough of Munhall, Borough of North 

Braddock, Borough of Port Vue, Borough of Rankin, 

Borough of Swissvale, Borough of Turtle Creek, 

Borough of Versailles, Borough of Wall, Borough of 

West Elizabeth, Borough of West Mifflin, Borough 

of White Oak, Borough of Wilmerding, Borough of 

Whitaker, Elizabeth Township, Forward Township, 

North Versailles Township, and Wilkins Township. 

See the technical support document (TSD) portion 

of Pennsylvania’s August 23, 2023 Mon Valley Air 

Pollution Episode SIP submission, section 2.2 

Extent of Area, to learn more about how ACHD 

determined the area of focus within Allegheny 

County. The SIP submission and incorporated TSD 

are located in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. 

11 Definitions of major source and synthetic 

minor source can be found in ACHD Article XXI, 

section 2101.20, Definitions. 

12ACHD completed an analysis of the 

composition of PM2.5 in the Mon Valley to 

determine which sources should be applicable to 

section 2106.06. It was determined that the majority 

of excess PM2.5 in the Mon Valley is primary in 

nature and caused by point source emissions from 

within the area. For additional information, see 

sections 2.3 and 2.4 of ACHD’s TSD which is 

located in the docket for this proposed rulemaking. 

13According to ACHD, as of October 31, 2023, all 

currently applicable sources have submitted 

approved mitigation plans. 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Schmitt, Planning & 

Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1600 John 

F Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone 

number is (215) 814–5787. Ms. Schmitt 

can also be reached via electronic mail 

at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA 

received a SIP submission from ACHD 

on August 23, 2023 requesting that EPA 

incorporate into Pennsylvania’s SIP, 

revisions to ACHD Air Pollution Control 

Rules and Regulations in Article XXI. 

These revisions include amendments to 

section 2105.50 regarding open burning, 

and adding new section 2106.06, which 

focuses on mitigating particulate matter 

air pollution episodes in the Mon 

Valley. 

I. Background 

EPA’s particulate matter national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

address particles with diameters that are 

generally two and half micrometers or 

smaller (fine particulate matter or PM2.5) 

and particles with diameters that are 

generally 10 micrometers or smaller 

(coarse particulate matter or PM10). On 

July 1, 1987, EPA promulgated two 

primary standards for PM10: A 24-hour 

(daily) standard of 150 micrograms per 

cubic meter (mg/m3) and an annual 

standard of 50 mg/m3. EPA also 

promulgated secondary PM10 standards 

that were identical to the primary 

standards.1 On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 

61144),2 EPA revoked the annual PM10

standards but retained the 24-hour 

standards. 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA 

revised the NAAQS for particulate 

matter to add new standards for PM2.5, 

establishing primary and secondary 

annual and 24-hour standards.3 The 

annual standard was set at 15.0 mg/m3

based on a 3-year average of annual 

mean PM2.5 concentrations, and the 24- 

hour standard was set at 65 mg/m3 based 

on the 3-year average of the annual 98th 

percentile values of 24-hour PM2.5

concentrations at each populationoriented monitor within an area.4

On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), 

EPA retained the annual average PM2.5

NAAQS at 15.0 mg/m3 but lowered the 

level of the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 

mg/m3 based on a 3-year average of the 

annual 98th percentile values of 24-hour 

concentrations.5

On December 14, 2012, EPA 

promulgated the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

including lowering the annual standard 

to 12.0 mg/m3 based on a 3-year average 

of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. 

EPA maintained the 24-hour standard of 

35 mg/m3 based on a 3-year average of 

the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations.6 Allegheny County was 

designated as nonattainment for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.7 Since the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS designation, monitors 

within Allegheny County have 

periodically recorded exceedances 8 of 

the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. According to 

ACHD, many of these exceedances have 

occurred during lengthy temperature 

inversions which trap pollutants closer 

to the earth’s surface.9

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

On August 23, 2023, EPA received 

from PADEP, a SIP submission that 

pertains to proposed revisions to the 

Allegheny County portion of the 

Pennsylvania SIP. The submission seeks 

to incorporate into Pennsylvania’s SIP a 

new section (2106.06, Mon Valley Air 

Pollution Episode) to Allegheny County 

Article XXI, which focuses on 

mitigating particulate matter air 

pollution episodes in the Mon Valley. 

The August 2023 submission also seeks 

to incorporate into the Pennsylvania SIP 

related changes to Article XXI, section 

2105.50, Open Burning. 

Article XXI, section 2106.06, Mon 

Valley Air Episodes, is aimed at 

emission mitigation requirements for 

industry operating in the portion of the 

county known as the ‘‘Mon Valley’’ 

during weather-related pollution 

episodes.10 Section 2106.06 applies to 

the following sources located within the 

prescribed Mon Valley Pollution 

Episode Area: (1) all major and 

synthetic minor sources of PM2.5; 11 (2) 

all sources that have combined 

allowable emissions from all emissions 

units of 6.5 tons or more per year of 

PM2.5; and (3) all sources that have 

combined allowable emissions from all 

emission units of 10 tons per year of 

PM10.12

Section 2106.06 requires applicable 

sources to submit a mitigation plan to 

reduce particulate matter emissions for 

review and approval by ACHD.13 Each 

applicable source’s mitigation plan must 

include a Mon Valley Air Pollution 

Watch Phase and a Mon Valley Air 

Pollution Warning Phase, that the 

source must be prepared for and follow. 

A Mon Valley Air Pollution Watch shall 

be issued by ACHD if ‘‘the air quality 

forecast for at least the next 24-hour 

period atmospheric conditions will exist 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 7657 

14Article XXI section 2106.06(c). Article XXI 

section 2106.06 provides that the ‘‘Mon Valley 

PM2.5 threshold level’’ for purposes of defining a 

Watch and Warning is the value of the primary 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

15See ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required 

Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24- 

hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards,’’ William T. Harnett, Director, 

EPA’s Air Quality Policy Division, September 25, 

2009. This document can be found in the docket for 

this action. 

16Nothing contained in Article XXI section 

2106.06 shall impact ACHD’s power to issue an 

Emergency Order pursuant to section 2019.05 of the 

same Article. 

which indicate that the 24-hour average 

ambient concentration of PM2.5 in one or 

more of the Mon Valley municipalities 

is forecasted to exceed’’ the value of the 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 mg/m3.14

Pursuant to section 2106.06(e), each 

source’s mitigation plan must include 

procedures for when a Mon Valley Air 

Pollution Watch is issued. These 

procedures are to ensure that equipment 

is maintained in good working 

condition, that equipment is operating 

in a manner consistent with good 

engineering practice, and that the source 

has sufficient staff and resources 

available to implement the Warning 

Phase within 24 hours of ACHD’s 

notification to the source of a Watch. 

Sources must also show that they have 

procedures in place for record keeping 

and reporting to ACHD during the 

Watch period. 

ACHD shall issue a Mon Valley Air 

Pollution Warning if during a rolling 24- 

hour averaging period, an official 

monitoring station in an applicable 

municipality exceeds the Mon Valley 

PM2.5 threshold, 35 mg/m3, and ACHD 

has determined that atmospheric 

conditions will continue for the next 24- 

hour period. Each source’s mitigation 

plan must also contain a Warning Phase 

section which includes measures to 

reduce PM2.5 and PM10, the timeframe 

for implementing each measure, and an 

estimate of the PM2.5 and PM10

emissions reductions during the Mon 

Valley Air Pollution Warning period. 

Additional subsections within 

2106.06 outline the following: (f) a 

submission schedule for the Mitigation 

Plans; (g) procedures for review and the 

effective date of the Mitigation Plans; (h) 

details regarding ACHD’s notification of 

Mon Valley Air Pollution Episodes; (i) 

termination procedures for Mon Valley 

Air Pollution Episodes; and (j) 

clarification that this section does not 

affect ACHD’s authority to issue an 

Emergency Order under section 

2109.05. 

To support the reduction of 

particulate matter pollution during a 

Mon Valley Air Pollution Watch or 

Warning, ACHD is also requesting that 

EPA incorporate into the SIP, ACHD’s 

amendment to Article XXI, section 

2105.50, Open Burning, which was 

previously approved into the 

Commonwealth’s SIP. The amendment 

clarifies that wood burning activities 

should not occur in the Mon Valley 

Episode Area when a Watch or Warning 

has been issued, with the exception of 

conducting such burning for the 

commercial preparation of food. 

After review of the August 2023 SIP 

submission, EPA has determined that 

the changes to Article XXI are overall 

SIP strengthening. With the addition of 

section 2106.06 and the amendment to 

section 2105.50, Article XXI builds on 

the protections found under the Federal 

requirements for air pollution 

emergency episodes found in 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) part 51, 

subpart H. While the regulations in 40 

CFR part 51, subpart H do not address 

PM2.5 specifically and do not identify a 

significant harm level or priority 

classification levels for PM2.5, EPA has 

recommended that states only need to 

develop contingency plans for those 

areas that have monitored and recorded 

24-hour PM2.5 levels greater than 140.4 

mg/m3.15 EPA has evaluated PM2.5

regulatory monitoring data in the Mon 

Valley since 2012 and have confirmed 

that no values greater than 140.4 mg/m3

have been recorded. 

By incorporating Allegheny County 

Article XXI section 2106.06 into the 

Pennsylvania SIP, ACHD adds an 

additional measure by which the county 

can help control particulate matter 

emissions in the Mon Valley, with a 

relatively quick turn-around time. The 

amendment to section 2105.50 further 

supports this measure. This revision 

will support ACHD’s efforts to reduce 

air pollution emissions in order to 

minimize the impact on public health.16

III. Proposed Action 

EPA has determined that the SIP 

submission requesting EPA to 

incorporate Allegheny County Article 

XXI section 2106.06 and the amended 

Article XXI section 2105.50 into the 

Pennsylvania SIP is SIP strengthening. 

The proposed revision will assist ACHD 

in reducing particulate matter air 

emissions, thereby assisting in the 

protection of public health in Allegheny 

County. EPA is proposing to approve 

into the SIP the August 23, 2023 ACHD 

submission, as EPA has determined that 

the addition of Article XXI section 

2106.06 and the amendment to Article 

XXI section 2105.50 is SIP 

strengthening. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

Allegheny County Article XXI section 

2106.06 and Article XXI section 

2105.50, as described in section II of 

this preamble. EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region III Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

V. 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); 

• 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); and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7658 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines 

environmental justice (E.J.) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

ACHD did not evaluate environmental 

justice considerations as part of its SIP 

submission; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and 

did not consider EJ in this proposed 

rulemaking. Due to the nature of the 

proposed action being taken here, this 

proposed rulemaking is expected to 

have a neutral to positive impact on the 

air quality of the affected area. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of 

achieving environmental justice for 

people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

In addition, this proposed 

rulemaking, amending Article XXI 

section 2105.50 and adding Article XXI 

section 2106.06 to Pennsylvania’s SIP, 

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 

Commonwealth, and EPA notes that it 

will not impose substantial direct costs 

on tribal governments or preempt tribal 

law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Adam Ortiz, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2024–02215 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 665 

[Docket No. 240130–0028] 

RIN 0648–BM65 

Pacific Island Fisheries; Annual Catch 

Limits and Accountability Measures for 

Main Hawaiian Islands Kona Crab for 

Fishing Years 2024–2026 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to implement 

an annual catch limit (ACL) and an 

annual catch target (ACT) for main 

Hawaiian Islands (MHI) Kona crab for 

fishing years 2024, 2025, and 2026. This 

proposed action would not revise, add, 

or remove current accountability 

measures (AMs) in the regulations. 

NMFS will close Federal waters to Kona 

crab fishing for the remainder of the 

fishing year if NMFS projects the fishery 

will reach the ACT. NMFS will reduce 

the ACT and ACL the subsequent 

fishing year by the overage if landings 

exceed the ACL. This proposed rule 

supports the long-term sustainability of 

MHI Kona crab. 

DATES: NMFS must receive comments 

by March 6, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposed rule, identified by 

NOAA–NMFS–2024–0017, by either of 

the following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and enter 

NOAA–NMFS–2024–0017, in the 

Search box (note: copying and pasting 

the FDMS Docket Number directly from 

this document may not yield search 

results). Click on the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Send written comments to 

Sarah Malloy, Acting Regional 

Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands 

Regional Office (PIRO), 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 will not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on https://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). 

Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act, the Western 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

(Council) and NMFS prepared a 2021 

environmental assessment (EA) and 

draft 2023 supplemental information 

report (SIR) that support this proposed 

action. The EA and SIR are available at 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Savannah Lewis, NMFS Pacific Islands 

Regional Office (PIRO) Sustainable 

Fisheries, 808–725–5144. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS and 

the Council manage the Kona crab 

fishery in the U.S. Exclusive Economic 

Zone (Federal waters) around Hawaii 

under the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for 

the Hawaiian Archipelago (FEP), as 

authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (50 CFR 

part 665). The FEP contains a process 

for the Council and NMFS to specify 

ACLs, ACTs, and AMs (see 50 CFR 

665.4). NMFS must specify ACLs and 

AMs for each stock and stock complex 

of each management unit species (MUS) 

in an FEP, as recommended by the 

Council, and must consider the best 

available scientific, commercial, and 

other information about the fishery. If a 

fishery exceeds an ACL, the regulations 

require the Council to take action (e.g., 

an AM reducing the ACL for the 

subsequent fishing year by the amount 

of the overage). ACTs can be used as an 

additional management measure to help 

ensure catch does not exceed the ACL. 

This proposed rule would establish 

for the MHI Kona crab an ACL of 30,802 

lb (13,972 kg) and an ACT of 25,491 lb 

(11,563 kg) (see table 1). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1