40834 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

• 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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: June 14, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–14894 Filed 6–22–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0698; FRL–9948–00– 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the Indiana Portion of 

the Louisville Area to Attainment of the 

1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is issuing a supplement to 

its July 11, 2013, proposed approval of 

Indiana’s request to redesignate the 

Indiana portion of the Louisville, 

Indiana-Kentucky, area to attainment for 

the 1997 annual national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS or standard) 

for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). After 

EPA’s proposed redesignation in 2013, 

an audit of the Kentucky monitoring 

program identified problems which 

invalidated monitoring data for 2012 

and the beginning of 2013. Because of 

this invalid data, the area could not 

meet the requirement that the entire 

area must demonstrate attainment of the 

standard using the most current three 

years of data. This supplemental 

proposal provides new quality-assured, 

quality-controlled data for the most 

recent three years of data showing that 

the entire area attains the 1997 PM2.5

standard. In the supplemental proposal 

EPA is proposing that the entire 

Louisville area is attaining the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS based on the most recent 

three years of data. EPA also discusses 

the maintenance plan out-year emission 

projections, and the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR) remanded 

budgets impact on the Louisville area— 

because the status of these issues has 

changed from the initial proposal to 

now. EPA is seeking comment only on 

the issues raised in this supplemental 

proposal, and is not re-opening for 

comment other issues raised in the July 

11, 2013, proposed approval. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 25, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0698 at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carolyn Persoon, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290, 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background for the 

supplemental proposal? 

II. On what specific issues is EPA taking 

comment? 

A. Louisville Area Design Values for 2013– 

2015; Entire Area Monitoring Attainment 

B. Demonstration of Maintenance 

C. CAIR and CSAPR 

III. Summary of Proposed Actions 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for the 

supplemental proposal? 

On June 16, 2011, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for EPA to approve the 

redesignation of the Indiana portion of 

the Louisville (KY-IN) (Madison 

Township, Indiana, Jefferson County, 

Kentucky and Clark and Floyd Counties, 

Indiana) nonattainment area to 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 annual 

standard. Indiana’s June 16, 2011, 

redesignation submittal contained 

complete, quality-assured and certified 

air monitoring data for the years 2008– 

2010. 

On July 11, 2013, EPA proposed to 

determine that the Indiana portion of 

the Louisville area had met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) (78 FR 41735). This proposal was 

based upon our review of ambient air 

monitoring data from 2009–2011, and 

preliminary data from 2012. It contained 

several related actions. 

First, EPA proposed to approve the 

request from IDEM to change the legal 

designation of the Indiana portion of the 

Louisville area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA also proposed to approve 

Indiana’s PM2.5 maintenance plan for 

the Indiana portion of the Louisville 

area as a revision to the Indiana state 

implementation plan (SIP) because the 

plan met the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA. In addition, EPA 

proposed to approve emissions 

inventories for primary PM2.5, and all its 

precursors as satisfying the requirement 

in section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for a 

comprehensive, current emission 

inventory. Finally, EPA proposed a 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 40835 

motor vehicle emissions budget for the 

Indiana portion of the Louisville area. 

EPA did not receive adverse comments 

on the proposed rulemaking. 

In August 2013, EPA issued results of 

a technical systems audit on the PM2.5

laboratory in Kentucky, which 

invalidated the Jefferson County 

monitoring data for all of 2012, and a 

small portion of the monitoring data 

from 2013 (a portion of the first quarter). 

See the docket for the technical systems 

audit information. Since the area could 

no longer demonstrate attainment of the 

standard for the entire area, EPA did not 

finalize its proposal. Kentucky began 

collecting valid data in early 2013 (the 

end of the first quarter) after the 

monitoring audit issues had been 

addressed, resulting in a valid design 

value for the area using 2013–2015 data. 

Both Indiana and Kentucky certified 

valid data for 2015 in the beginning of 

2016. EPA has approved the use of this 

quality-assured, quality-controlled 

certified complete data for use in 

regulatory actions. 

Today, EPA is publishing a 

supplement to its July 11, 2013, 

proposed rulemaking. The supplement 

is based on valid design values for the 

2013–2015 period, demonstrating 

attainment of the standard for the entire 

Louisville area using the most recent 

three years of data. Preliminary data for 

2016 shows that the entire Louisville 

area continues to attain the standard. 

This proposal also discusses the 

maintenance plan emission projections 

of 2025 and the impact of the budgets 

remanded under CSAPR on the 

Louisville area because the status of 

these issues has changed from the initial 

proposal. 

II. On what specific issues is EPA 

taking comments? 

In this portion of EPA’s supplemental 

proposal, EPA is soliciting comment on 

the limited issue of the 2013–2015 

design values demonstrating attainment 

of the standard for the entire Louisville 

area, the maintenance plan emission 

projections for 2025, and the impact on 

the Louisville area of the 2015 D.C. 

Circuit decision remanding certain 

CSAPR budgets. 

A. Louisville Area Design Values for 

2013–2015; Entire Area Monitoring 

Attainment 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Louisville area is attaining the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS based upon the 

most recent three years of complete, 

certified and quality-assured data. 

Under EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 50.7, 

the annual primary and secondary PM2.5

standards are met when the annual 

arithmetic mean concentration, as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix N, is less than or 

equal to 15.0 micrograms per cubic 

meter(mg/m3)at all monitoring sites in 

the area. Data are considered to be 

sufficient for comparison to the NAAQS 

if three consecutive complete years of 

data exist. A complete year of air quality 

data is comprised of four calendar 

quarters, with each quarter containing 

data from at least 75% capture of the 

scheduled sampling days. In this case, 

the 2009–2011 values were calculated 

prior to the audit invalidating data 

collected in the Kentucky portion of 

Louisville for 2012 and beginning of 

2013 (portion of the first quarter). The 

2013–2015 values are based on qualityassured, quality-controlled, certified 

complete data, and only included valid 

data collected after the audit issues were 

corrected. Preliminary data for 2016 

shows the area continues to attain the 

standard. The Louisville design value 

for the most current three years of data 

is 11.7 mg/m3. 

TABLE 1—THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR THE LOUISVILLE MONITOR WITH COMPLETE DATA FOR THE

2009–2011,1 AND 2013–2015 DESIGN VALUE IN μg/m3

County Site 

Design value 

2009–2011 

(μg/m3) 

Design value 

2013–2015 

(μg/m3) 

Clark County, IN .......................................................................................................................... 180190006 13.5 11.4 

Clark County, IN .......................................................................................................................... 180190008 11.4 9.3 

Floyd County, IN .......................................................................................................................... 180431004 12.3 10.0 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110043 12.6 11.3 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110051 12.7 11.7 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110067 12.1 10.5 

1 2009–2011 design values are the desigh values for the area prior to date issues, and design values for 2013–2015 are the most recent three 

years of monitoring data showing that the area is attaining the standard. 

Data recorded at monitors in 2013, 

2014, and 2015 are considered valid and 

were collected after corrective actions 

resulting from the technical systems 

audit. These are the data on which EPA 

is basing its decision that the Louisville 

area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

B. Demonstration of Maintenance 

Along with the redesignation request, 

Indiana submitted a revision to its PM2.5

SIP to include a maintenance plan for 

the Indiana portion of the Louisville 

area, as required by section 175A of the 

CAA. Indiana’s plan demonstrates 

maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard through 2025 by showing that 

current and future emissions of oxides 

of nitrogen (NOX), directly emitted 

PM2.5, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) in the 

area remain at or below attainment year 

emission levels. Section 175A requires a 

state seeking redesignation to 

attainment to submit a SIP revision 

which provides for the maintenance of 

the NAAQS in the area ‘‘for at least 10 

years after the redesignation.’’ See 

September 4, 1992, memorandum from 

John Calcagni, entitled ‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment,’’ p. 9. Where the 

emissions inventory method of showing 

maintenance is used, its purpose is to 

show that emissions during the 

maintenance period will not increase 

over the attainment year inventory. 

Calcagni Memorandum, pp. 9–10. 

As discussed in detail in the section 

below, the state’s maintenance plan 

submission expressly documents that 

the area’s emissions inventories will 

remain below the attainment year 

inventories through 2025. In addition, 

for the reasons set forth below, EPA 

believes that the state’s submission, in 

conjunction with additional supporting 

information, further demonstrates that 

the area will continue to maintain the 

PM2.5 standard at least through 2026. 

Thus, if EPA finalizes its proposed 

approval of the redesignation request 

and maintenance plan in 2016, it will be 

based on a showing, in accordance with 

section 175A, that the state’s 

maintenance plan provides for 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40836 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

maintenance for at least ten years after 

redesignation. 

Indiana’s plan demonstrates 

maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS through 2025 by showing that 

current and future emissions of NOX, 

directly emitted PM2.5 and SO2 for the 

area remain at or below attainment year 

emission levels. 

The rate of decline in emissions of 

PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 from the 

attainment year 2008 through 2025 

(calculated from Table 2) indicates that 

emissions inventory levels not only 

significantly decline between 2008 and 

2025, but that the reductions will 

continue in 2026 and beyond. The 

average annual rate of decline is 4,472 

tons per year (tpy) for SO2, 1,052 tpy of 

NOX, and 8.73 tpy of direct PM for the 

Indiana portion of the Louisville area, 

and average annual rate of decline is 

4,436 tpy for SO2, 2,239 tpy of NOX, and 

98.1 tpy of direct PM for the entire 

Louisville area. These rates of decline 

are consistent with monitored and 

projected air quality trends, emissions 

reductions achieved through emissions 

controls and regulations that will 

remain in place beyond 2026 and 

through fleet turnover that will continue 

beyond 2026, among other factors. We 

are proposing to find the mobile source 

contribution to these emissions is 

expected to remain insignificant in 2026 

and beyond because of fleet turnover in 

upcoming years that will result in 

cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels. 

A maintenance demonstration need 

not be based on modeling. See Wall v. 

EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 

2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099– 

53100 (October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413, 

25430–25432 (May 12, 2003), 78 FR 

53272 (August 29, 2013). Indiana uses 

emissions inventory projections for the 

years 2015 and 2025 to demonstrate 

maintenance for the entire Louisville 

area. The projected emissions were 

estimated by Indiana, with assistance 

from the Lake Michigan Air Directors 

Consortium (LADCO) and the Kentucky 

Regional Planning and Development 

Agency (KIPDA), who used the 

MOVES2010a model for mobile source 

projections. Projection modeling of 

inventory emissions was done for the 

2015 interim year emissions using 

estimates based on the 2008 and 2015 

LADCO modeling inventory, using 

LADCO’s growth factors, for all sectors. 

The 2025 maintenance year emission 

estimates were based on emissions 

estimates from the 2015 LADCO 

modeling. Table 2 shows the 2008 

attainment base year emission estimates 

and the 2015 and 2025 emission 

projections for the Louisville area, taken 

from Indiana’s June 16, 2011, 

submission. 

TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF 2008, 2015 AND 2025 NOX, DIRECT PM2.5 AND SO2 EMISSION TOTALS (tpy) FOR THE

LOUISVILLE AREA

SO2 NOX PM2.5

2008 (baseline) ......................................................................................................................................... 151,503.01 ........... 97,533.93 ............. 6,724.02. 

2015 .......................................................................................................................................................... 76,958.54 ............. 69,936.67 ............. 5,540.29. 

2025 .......................................................................................................................................................... 76,082.07 ............. 59,455.17 ............. 5,055.61. 

Change 2008–2025 .................................................................................................................................. ¥75,420.94 .......... ¥38,078.76 .......... ¥1,668.41. 

50% decrease ...... 39% decrease ...... 25% decrease. 

Table 2 shows that, for the period 

between 2008 and the maintenance 

projection for 2025, the Louisville area 

will reduce NOX emissions by 38,078 

tpy; direct PM2.5 emissions by 1,668 tpy; 

and SO2 emissions by 75,420 tpy. The 

2025 projected emissions levels are 

significantly below attainment year 

inventory levels, and, based on the rate 

of decline, it is highly improbable that 

any increases in these levels will occur 

in 2026 and beyond. Thus, the 

emissions inventories set forth in Table 

2 show that the area will continue to 

maintain the annual PM2.5 standards 

during the maintenance period and at 

least through 2026. 

As Table 1 and 2 demonstrate, 

monitored PM2.5 design value 

concentrations in the Louisville area are 

well below the NAAQS in the years 

beyond 2008, an attainment year for the 

area. Further, those values are trending 

downward as time progresses. Based on 

the future projections of emissions in 

2025 showing significant emissions 

reductions in direct PM2.5, NOX, and 

SO2, it is very unlikely that monitored 

PM2.5 values in 2026 and beyond will 

show violations of the NAAQS. 

Additionally, the 2013–2015 design 

value of 11.7 mg/m3 provides a sufficient 

margin for the 1997 standard in the 

unlikely event emissions rise slightly in 

the future. 

C. CAIR and CSAPR 

In its redesignation request and 

maintenance plan, the state identified 

the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) as 

a permanent and enforceable measure 

that contributed to attainment in the 

Louisville Area. CAIR created regional 

cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2

and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states, 

including Indiana, that contributed to 

downwind nonattainment or interfered 

with maintenance of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 

2005). Indiana adopted CAIR budgets 

into its SIP on November 1, 2006, with 

emission reductions beginning in 2010 

and extending into 2015. By 2007, the 

beginning of the attainment time period 

identified by Indiana, CAIR had begun 

achieving emission reductions in the 

state. 

In 2008, the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) vacated CAIR, 

North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 

(D.C. Cir. 2008); but ultimately 

remanded the rule to EPA without 

vacatur to preserve the environmental 

benefits provided by CAIR, North 

Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 

(D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 

FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit’s 

remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR to 

replace CAIR and, thus, to address the 

interstate transport of emissions 

contributing to nonattainment and 

interfering with maintenance of the two 

air quality standards covered by CAIR as 

well as the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. CSAPR 

requires substantial reductions of SO2

and NOX emissions from emission 

generating units (EGUs) in 28 states in 

the eastern United States. As a general 

matter, because CSAPR is CAIR’s 

replacement, emissions reductions 

associated with CAIR will for most areas 

be made permanent and enforceable 

through implementation of CSAPR. 

Numerous parties filed petitions for 

review of CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit, 

and on August 21, 2012, the court 

issued its ruling, vacating and 

remanding CSAPR to EPA and ordering 

continued implementation of CAIR. 

EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. 

EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The 

D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of CSAPR was 

reversed by the United States Supreme 

Court on April 29, 2014, and the case 

was remanded to the D.C. Circuit to 

resolve remaining issues in accordance 

with the high court’s ruling. EPA v. EME 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 40837 

1 2009–2011 design values are the design values 

for the area prior to data issues, and design values 

for 2013–2015 are the most recent three years of 

monitoring data showing that the area is attaining 

the standard. 

2The D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City II remanded 

the SO2 trading program budgets for four states, 

none of which were identified as contributing to the 

Louisville area. Moreover, updated air quality 

modeling performed for the CSAPR identified that 

the Louisville area can attain and maintain the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS and no modeled issues for the 2012 

NAAQS 76 FR 48207, 48241 (August 8, 2011) and 

Page memo, March 17, 2016. 

Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 

1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. 

Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most 

respects, but invalidated without 

vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as 

to a number of states. EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 

(D.C. Cir. 2015) (EME Homer City II). 

The Phase 2 annual and ozone season 

NOX and SO2 budgets for Indiana are 

not affected by the Court’s decision. The 

litigation over CSAPR ultimately 

delayed implementation of that rule for 

three years, from January 1, 2012, when 

CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs were 

originally scheduled to replace the CAIR 

cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 

2015. CSAPR’s Phase 2 budgets were 

originally promulgated to begin on 

January 1, 2014, and are now scheduled 

to begin on January 1, 2017. CSAPR will 

continue to operate under the existing 

emissions budgets until EPA addresses 

the D.C. Circuit’s remand. The Court’s 

decision did not affect Indiana’s CSAPR 

emissions budgets; therefore, CSAPR 

ensures that the NOX and SO2 emissions 

reductions associated with CAIR and 

CSPAR throughout Indiana are 

permanent and enforceable.1

In its redesignation request, Indiana 

noted that a number of states 

contributed to PM2.5 concentrations in 

the Louisville area based on EPA air 

quality modeling. Additionally, an air 

quality modeling analysis conducted by 

IDEM demonstrates that the Louisville 

area would be able to attain the PM2.5

standard even in the absence of either 

CAIR or CSAPR. See appendices H and 

I of Indiana’s redesignation request 

found in the docket. This modeling is 

available in the docket for this proposed 

redesignation action. 

To the extent that Louisville relies on 

CSAPR for maintenance of the standard, 

EPA has identified the Louisville area as 

having been significantly impacted by 

pollution transported from other states 

in both CAIR and CSAPR, and these 

rules greatly reduced the tons of SO2

and NOX emissions generated in the 

states upwind of the area. The air 

quality modeling performed for the 

CSAPR rulemaking identified the 

following states as having contributed to 

PM2.5 concentrations in the Louisville 

area: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, 

Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia 

and Wisconsin. See 76 FR 48208(August 

8, 2011). Even though the first phase of 

CAIR implementation for SO2 did not 

begin until 2010, many sources began 

reducing their emissions well in 

advance of the first compliance deadline 

because of the incentives offered by 

CAIR for early compliance with the rule. 

The emission reductions in the states 

upwind of the Louisville area achieved 

by CAIR, and made permanent by 

CSAPR, are unaffected by the D.C. 

Circuit’s remand of CSAPR.2

III. Summary of Proposed Actions 

EPA is issuing a supplement to its 

action, published July 11, 2013, which 

proposed to redesignate the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville area to 

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, to approve the associated 

maintenance plan, and to approve the 

state’s emission inventory. EPA is 

concluding that the most current three 

year design values show that the area is 

attaining the standard and preliminary 

values show the area continues to attain 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

also determined that the projections 

used in the states submittal meet the 

requirements of the maintenance plan 

out-year emission projections. EPA 

concluded that the CSAPR remanded 

budgets did not affect the area’s ability 

to attain through permanent and 

enforceable measures and will not affect 

the area’s ability to maintain the 

standard. EPA is seeking comment only 

on the issues raised in this 

supplemental proposal, and is not reopening comment on other issues 

addressed in its prior proposal. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, 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, these proposed 

actions do not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law and the CAA. For that reason, 

these proposed actions: 

• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ 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); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Are 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.); 

• Do 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); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are 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 

• Do 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 does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because a 

determination of attainment is an action 

that affects the status of a geographical 

area and does not impose any new 

regulatory requirements on tribes, 

impact any existing sources of air 

pollution on tribal lands, nor impair the 

maintenance of ozone national ambient 

air quality standards in tribal lands. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40838 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: June 1, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–14806 Filed 6–22–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[150306232–6491–01] 

RIN 0648–BE96 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Monkfish; Framework 

Adjustment 9 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are proposing to approve 

and implement regulations submitted by 

the New England and Mid-Atlantic 

Fishery Management Councils in 

Framework Adjustment 9 to the 

Monkfish Fishery Management Plan. 

This action is necessary to better 

achieve the goals and objectives of the 

management plan and achieve optimum 

yield. The proposed action is intended 

to enhance the operational and 

economic efficiency of existing 

management measures and increase 

monkfish landings. 

DATES: Public comments must be 

received by July 8, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2015–0045, by either of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015- 

0045, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

John K. Bullard, Regional 

Administrator, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic 

Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930–2276. 

Mark the outside of the envelope: 

‘‘Comments on Monkfish Framework 

9.’’ 

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 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). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF 

file formats only. 

New England Fishery Management 

Council staff prepared an environmental 

assessment (EA) for Monkfish 

Framework Adjustment 9 that describes 

the proposed action and other 

considered alternatives. The EA 

provides a thorough analysis of the 

biological, economic, and social impacts 

of the proposed measures and other 

considered alternatives, a preliminary 

Regulatory Impact Review, and 

economic analysis. Copies of the 

Framework 9 EA are available on 

request from Thomas A. Nies, Executive 

Director, New England Fishery 

Management Council, 50 Water Street, 

Newburyport, MA 01950. This 

document is also available from the 

following internet addresses: http://

www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

or http://www.nefmc.org. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Allison Murphy, Fishery Policy Analyst, 

(978) 281–9122. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The monkfish fishery is jointly 

managed under the Monkfish Fishery 

Management Plan (FMP) by the New 

England and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery 

Management Councils. The fishery 

extends from Maine to North Carolina 

from the coast out to the end of the 

continental shelf. The Councils manage 

the fishery as two management units, 

with the Northern Fishery Management 

Area (NFMA) covering the Gulf of 

Maine (GOM) and northern part of 

Georges Bank (GB), and the Southern 

Fishery Management Area (SFMA) 

extending from the southern flank of GB 

through Southern New England (SNE) 

and into the Mid-Atlantic (MA) Bight to 

North Carolina. 

Monkfish are often caught while 

fishing for Northeast (NE) multispecies, 

particularly in the NFMA. This has 

resulted in two closely related fisheries 

as a majority of monkfish vessels 

operating in the NFMA are issued both 

monkfish and NE multispecies permits. 

Because this action proposes to modify 

some requirements for NE multispecies 

sector vessels, it is also considered 

Framework Adjustment 54 to the NE 

Multispecies FMP. 

The monkfish fishery is primarily 

managed by landing limits and a yearly 

allocation of monkfish days-at-sea 

(DAS) calculated to enable vessels 

participating in the fishery to catch, but 

not exceed, the target total allowable 

landings (TAL) and the annual catch 

target (ACT, the TAL plus an estimate 

of expected discards) in each 

management area. Both the ACT and the 

TAL are calculated to maximize yield in 

the fishery over the long term. Based on 

a yearly evaluation of the monkfish 

fishery, the Councils may revise existing 

management measures through the 

framework provisions of the FMP, 

including DAS allocations and landing 

limits, to better achieve the goals and 

objectives of the FMP and achieve 

optimum yield (OY), as required by the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act. 

Amendment 5 (76 FR 30265; May 25, 

2011) defined OY as fully harvesting the 

ACT. 

We completed an operational stock 

assessment in May 2013 to update the 

state of the monkfish stocks and provide 

projections to assist with setting future 

catch levels. The 2013 assessment 

update revised existing biological 

reference points, including a substantial 

reduction in the overfishing level, and 

concluded that the two monkfish stocks 

are neither overfished nor subject to 

overfishing. 

The monkfish fishery has failed to 

fully harvest the available ACT each 

year since 2011, particularly in the 

NFMA where the under-harvest has 

been more substantial. As a result, the 

fishery has not been achieving OY in 

either area in recent years. The Councils 

developed Framework 9 to enhance the 

operational efficiency of existing 

management measures in an effort to 

better achieve OY. 

Proposed Measures 

1. Monkfish Possession Limits in the 

NFMA 

This action would revise monkfish 

possession limits specified in 50 CFR 

648.94 to help increase monkfish 

landings and better achieve the ACT 

caught in the NFMA. Specifically, this 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS