### 42686 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: July 12, 2012. A. Stanley Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 2012–17768 Filed 7–19–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0140; FRL–9702–1]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Maryland; the 2002 Base Year Inventory** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to approve the fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) 2002 base year emissions inventory portion of the Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland, through the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), on April 3, 2008. The emissions inventory is part of the Maryland April 3, 2008 SIP revision that was submitted to meet nonattainment requirements related to Maryland’s portion of the Washington DC-MD-VA nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as Maryland Area or Area) for the 1997 PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year PM 2.5 emissions inventory in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before August 20, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2010–0140 by one of the following methods:

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0140, Donna Mastro, Acting Associate Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 0140. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background II. Summary of SIP Revision III. Proposed Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA established the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, including an annual standard of 15.0 mg/m 3 based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour (or daily) standard of 65

mg/m 3 based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. EPA established the standards based on significant evidence and numerous health studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with exposures to PM 2.5 .

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)of the CAA. In 1999, EPA and state airquality agencies initiated the monitoring process for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS and, by January 2001, established a complete set of air-quality monitors. On January5, 2005, EPA promulgated initial airquality designations for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 944), which becameeffective on April 5, 2005, based on airquality monitoring data for calendar years 2001–03.

On April 14, 2005, EPA promulgated a supplemental rule amending the agency’s initial designations (70 FR 19844), with the same effective date (April 5, 2005) at 70 FR 944. As a result of this supplemental rule, PM 2.5 nonattainment designations are in effect for 39 areas, comprising 208 counties within 20 states (and the District of Columbia) nationwide, with a combined population of approximately 88 million. The Maryland Area which is the subject of this rulemaking was included in the list of areas not attaining the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The Maryland Area consists of the following counties in Maryland: Charles, Frederick, Montgomery and Prince Georges.

On January 12, 2009 (74 FR 1146), EPA determined that Maryland had attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS in the Maryland Area. That determination was based upon quality assured, quality controlled and certified ambient air monitoring data that showed the Area had monitored attainment of the 1997
PM 2.5 NAAQS for the 2004–2006 monitoring period and that continued to show attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS based on 2005–2007 data. The


### 42687 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2012 / Proposed Rules

January 12, 2009 determination suspended the requirements for Maryland to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related to attainment of the standard for so long as the nonattainment area continues to meet the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. On March 5, 2012, MDE submitted a request for withdrawal of the Maryland 1997 PM 2.5 SIP revisions including the withdrawal of the attainment plan, analysis of reasonably available control measures, attainment demonstration, contingency plans and mobile source budgets. To meet the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), Maryland did not request the withdrawal of the 2002 base year emission inventory portion of the 1997
PM 2.5 SIP revisions. Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions.
II. Summary of SIP Revision

The 2002 base year emission inventory submitted by MDE on April 3, 2008 includes emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of point sources, non-road mobile sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and biogenic sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are nitrogen oxides (NO X ), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), PM 2.5 , coarse particles (PM 10 ), ammonia (NH 3 ) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ). EPA has reviewed the results, procedures and methodologies for the base year emissions inventory submitted by MDE. The year 2002 was selected by MDE as the base year for the emissions inventory per 40 CFR 51.1008(b). A discussion of the emissions inventory development as well as the emissions inventory can be found in Appendix B of the April 3, 2008 SIP submittal.

Table 1, below, provides a summary of the annual 2002 emissions of NO X , VOCs, PM 2.5 , PM 10 , NH 3 and SO 2 which were included in the Maryland submittal.



### T ABLE 

### 1—E MISSIONS OF 

### P OLLUTANTS IN 

### T ONS PER 

### Y EAR 

### (TPY)

Pollutant NO X VOCs PM 2.5 PM 10 NH 3 SO 2

Emissions (TPY) ...................................... 109,041.17 98,626.04 12,825.42 30,826.06 5,174.36 169,788.65

The CAA section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory is developed by the incorporation of data from multiple sources. States were required to develop and submit to EPA a triennial emissions inventory according to the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) for all source categories (i.e., point, area, nonroad mobile and on-road mobile). The 2002 emissions inventory was based on data developed by the MDE Air and Radiation Management Administration (MDE–ARMA), the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT), the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government (MWCOG), and EPA for biogenic sources. The data were developed according to current EPA emissions inventory guidance ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional Haze Regulations,’’ August 2005. EPA preliminarily agrees that the process used to develop this inventory and the emissions inventory is adequate to meet the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), the implementing regulations, and EPA guidance for emission inventories. More information regarding the review of the base year inventory can be found in the technical support document (TSD) titled ‘‘2002 SIP Base Year Inventory’’ that is located in this docket.
III. Proposed Action

EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year emissions inventory portion of the SIP revision submitted by the State of Maryland through MDE on April 3, 2008. We have made the preliminary determination that this action is consistent with section 110 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 proposes to approve 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 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, 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, pertaining to the PM 2.5 2002 base year emissions inventory portion of the Maryland 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 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.


### 42688 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 140 / Friday, July 20, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: July 10, 2012. W.C. Early, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 2012–17770 Filed 7–19–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE**

**National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration** 

**50 CFR Part 622**

**[Docket No. 120403249–2230–01]**

**RIN 0648–BC03**

**Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Snapper**  **Grouper Management Measures**

**AGENCY :**  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule; request for

comments.

**SUMMARY :**  NMFS publishes this proposed rule to implement a regulatory amendment (Regulatory Amendment 12) to the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP), as prepared by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council). If implemented, this rule would modify the golden tilefish annual catch limit (ACL), which would be equal to the optimum yield (OY), as well as revise the recreational accountability measures (AMs) for golden tilefish in the South Atlantic exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The intent of this rule is to modify management measures for golden tilefish in the commercial and recreational sectors in the South Atlantic based on new stock assessment analyses.

**DATES :**  Written comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before August 20, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments on the proposed rule identified by ‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2012–0087’’ by any of the following methods:

• Electronic submissions: Submitelectronic comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the ‘‘Instructions’’ for submitting comments.

• Mail: Karla Gore, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http:// www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required field if you wish to remain anonymous).

To submit comments through the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov, enter ‘‘NOAA– NMFS–2012–0087’’ in the search field and click on ‘‘search.’’ After you locate the document ‘‘Snapper-Grouper Fishery off the Southern Atlantic States; Snapper-Grouper Management Measures,’’ click the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ link in that row. This will display the comment Web form. You can then enter your submitter information (unless you prefer to remain anonymous), and type your comment on the Web form. You can also attach additional files (up to 10MB) in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

Comments received through means not specified in this rule will not be considered.

For further assistance with submitting a comment, see the ‘‘Commenting’’ section at http://www.regulations.gov/ #!faqs or the Help section at http:// www.regulations.gov.

Electronic copies of documents supporting this proposed rule including an environmental assessment, initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), regulatory impact review, and fishery impact statement may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site

at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sf/ SASnapperGrouperHomepage.htm.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Karla Gore, telephone: 727–824–5305, or email: Karla.Gore@noaa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The snapper-grouper fishery of the South Atlantic is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and is implemented through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
Background

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires NMFS and the regional fishery management councils to prevent overfishing, to achieve (on a continuing basis) the OY from federally managed fish stocks, and to rebuild stocks that have been determined to be overfished. These mandates ensure management of fishery resources for the greatest overall benefit to the nation, particularly with respect to providing food production and recreational opportunities, and protecting marine ecosystems.Reauthorization of the MagnusonStevens Act in 2007 required implementation of new tools to help end and prevent overfishing to achieve the OY from a fishery. The tools are ACLs and AMs.

An ACL is the level of annual catch of a stock that, if met or exceeded, triggers some corrective action through AMs. The AMs are management controls to prevent exceeding the ACLs and to correct for overages of ACLs ifthey occur. An AM might be an inseason closure if catch approaches the ACL, or it may require reducing the ACL for the following fishing year because of an overage that occurred during the previous fishing year. ACLs may not exceed the overfishing limit (OFL) and the acceptable biological catch (ABC). The OFL is an estimate of the catch level above which overfishing is occurring and may come from a stock assessment. The ABC is defined as the level of a stock’s annual catch that accounts for the scientific uncertainty in the estimate of OFL and any other scientific uncertainty, and is based on the Council’s ABC control rule.
Management Measures Contained in This Proposed Rule

This proposed rule, if implemented, would modify the ACL for golden tilefish. In 2011, ACLs and AMs were implemented for golden tilefish through the Amendment 17B to the FMP (75 FR 82280, December 30, 2010). Since then, golden tilefish have been assessed through the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) process using data through 2010. The stock assessment for golden tilefish indicated that the South Atlantic population is not overfished nor undergoing overfishing. Results from the recent stock assessment (SEDAR 25 2011) suggest that the current South Atlantic golden tilefish ACL (326,554 lb (148,122 kg), round weight, or 291,566 lb (132,252 kg), gutted weight), can be increased. The current South Atlantic golden tilefish commercial ACL is 316,757 lb (143,679 kg), round weight, or 282,819 lb (128,285 kg), gutted weight; and the recreational ACL is 1,578 fish. If implemented, the commercial and recreational ACLs for golden tilefish in the South Atlantic would be set at the yield associated with 75 percent fishing mortality that will produce the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) while the population is at equilibrium. Therefore, this proposed rule would