[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 45 (Thursday, March 9, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13081-13084]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04563]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 100 and 165

[Docket No. USCG-2016-1022]
RIN 1625-AA08; AA00

Special Local Regulations and Safety Zones; Annually Recurring
Events in Coast Guard Southeastern New England Captain of the Port Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend a special local regulation
to change the method of providing notice to the public when enforcing
the safety zone associated with the biennial

Newport/Bermuda Race. The Coast Guard also proposes to establish
permanent safety zones in Coast Guard Southeastern New England Captain
of the Port (COTP) Zone for several recurring marine events. When the
special local regulation or safety zones are activated and subject to
enforcement, vessels and people may be restricted from portions of
water areas that may pose a hazard to public safety. The revised
special local regulation and safety zones would expedite public
notification of the applicable marine events, and help protect the
maritime public and event participants from hazards associated with
these recurring marine events. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 10, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-1022 using the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Chief of the
Waterways Management Division at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New
England, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Acronyms

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
LNTM Local Notice To Mariners
NOE Notice of Enforcement
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
TFR Temporary Final Rule
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1226,
1231, 1233; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; and Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to
define safety zones and special local regulations.
    In 33 CFR part 100.119 the Coast Guard is required to publish a NOE
in the Federal Register (FR) for the safety zone associated with the
Newport/Bermuda Race. We have found this process to be cumbersome for
the Coast Guard and of little value to the maritime public, as few read
the FR on a regular basis. For virtually all other recurring marine
events in the Southeastern New England COTP Zone, including those
listed in 33 CFR 165, NOE is required to be published in the weekly
LNTM, a far more widely-read publication among mariners. Consequently,
the Coast Guard is proposing to change the means by which we provide
NOE for the Newport/Bermuda Race safety zone from the FR to the LNTM.
    Likewise, most recurring marine events in the Southeastern New
England COTP Zone are listed in the Table to 33 CFR 165.173. In the
past few years two new recurring marine events, (1) the Fall River
Grand Prix, and (2) the Cape Cod Bay Challenge, have been held in this
Zone, and the Coast Guard has established safety zones through a TFR
each year as necessary. This proposed rule includes these recurring
events in the comprehensive list of recurring marine events in the
Table at 33 CFR 165.173. By including these two newer events in the
permanent regulations at 33 CFR 165, the Coast Guard will eliminate the
need to establish temporary rules each year.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to change the method of providing a NOE to
the public for the biennial Newport to Bermuda Race by deleting the
requirement to post notice in the FR and instead require a NOE to be
posted in the LNTM, as is done for all other Coast Guard-permitted
recurring marine events in the Coast Guard Southeastern New England
COTP zone.
    The Coast Guard also proposes to established safety zones for two
recently-established major annual marine events: (1) The Fall River
Grand Prix, and (2) the Cape Cod Bay Challenge. The two events would be
included in the Table at 33 CFR 165.173, which is a listing of
recurring major marine events in the Coast Guard Southeastern New
England COTP Zone. The TABLE provides the event name, type, and
approximate safety zone dimensions as well as approximate dates, times,
and locations of the events. The specific times, dates, regulated areas
and enforcement period for each event will be provided through the
Local Notice to Mariners.
    This proposed regulation would prevent vessels from transiting
through special local regulation areas or safety zones during the
periods of enforcement to ensure the protection of the maritime public
and event participants from the hazards associated with listed annual
recurring events. Only event sponsors, designated participants, and
official patrol vessels will be allowed to enter safety zones and
special local regulation areas. Spectators and other vessels not
registered as event participants may not enter the regulated areas
without the permission of the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end
of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
    With respect to the change in method of providing the NOE for the
Newport/Bermuda Race, this NPRM proposes utilizing an approach that the
Coast Guard believes is more effective, less costly, and more flexible.
By utilizing an LNTM to provide the NOE for the Newport/Bermuda race,
the Coast Guard will be able to better inform waterway users in a more
timely manner. With respect to the safety zones for the recurring
marine events, this regulatory action determination is based on the
size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessels
will only be restricted from safety zones and special local regulation
areas for a short duration of time; vessels may transit in all portions
of the affected waterway except for those areas covered by the proposed
regulated areas, and vessels may enter or pass through the affected
waterway with the permission of the COTP or the COTP's representative.
By including these two recurring marine events in the permanent
regulation at 33 CFR 165.173, the Coast Guard will eliminate the need
to establish individual temporary rules for each separate event that
occurs on an annual

basis, thereby limiting the costs of cumulative regulations.
    Notifications will be made to the local maritime community through
the LNTM in advance of the events. The Notifications will include the
exact dates and times of enforcement, and no new or additional
restrictions will be imposed on vessel traffic.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zones may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule makes an
administrative change to the method of notification of one marine
event, and involves the establishment of temporary safety zones in
conjunction with two recurring marine events in Southeastern New
England COTP Zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant
Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist
is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record-keeping
requirements, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR parts 100 and 165 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.

0
2. Revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
* * * * *
    (c) Effective date. This section is in effect biennially on a date
and times published in the Local Notice To Mariners.

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
3. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1; 6.04-
1, 6.04-6,and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
4. Add new section 8.4 and 8.5 to the Table at Sec.  165.173.

Sec.  165.173  Safety Zones for annually recurring marine events held
in Coast Guard Southeastern New England Captain of the Port Zone.

* * * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.4 Fall River Grand Prix...........   Event Type: Offshore powerboat race.
                                       Date: One weekend (Friday, Saturday, & Sunday) in August as
                                       announced in the Local Notice to Mariners.
                                       Time: Approximately 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily
                                       Location: Taunton River, Massachusetts, in the vicinity Fall
                                       River and Somerset, MA.
                                       Safety Zone Dimension: Mt Hope Bay and the Taunton River
                                       navigation channel from approximately Mt Hope Bay buoy R10 southwest of
                                       Brayton Point channel, and extending approximately two miles to the
                                       northeast up to and including Mt Hope Bay buoy C17 north of the Braga
                                       Bridge. The safety zone is encompassed by the following coordinates (NAD
                                       83):
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Corner                   Latitude                Longitude
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      SW.                       41[deg]41.40' N.         71[deg]11.15' W.
                                      NW.                       41[deg]41.48' N.         71[deg]11.15' W.
                                      SE.                       41[deg]42.33' N.         71[deg]09.40' W.
                                      NE.                       41[deg]42.42' N.         71[deg]09.47' W.
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.5 Cape Cod Bay Challenge..........   Event Type: Paddleboard excursion.
                                       Date: One weekend day (Saturday or Sunday) in August.
                                       Time: Approximately 4:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
                                       Location: Departing from Scusset Beach, Sandwich, MA, and
                                       transiting to Wellfleet Harbor, Wellfleet, MA.
                                       Position: A line drawn from Scusset Beach at approximate position
                                       41[deg]47' N., 70[deg]30' W., to Wellfleet Harbor at approximate position
                                       41[deg]53' N., 70[deg]02' W. (NAD 83).
                                       Safety Zone Dimension: Approximately 500 yards extending in each
                                       direction from the line described above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Dated: February 22, 2017.
Richard J. Schultz,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Southeastern New
England.
[FR Doc. 2017-04563 Filed 3-8-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


                       Technical Support Document (TSD)
for the Proposed Federal Implementation Plan Addressing Regional Ozone Transport for the
               2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
                      Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0668

Status of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIP Submissions for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS for States Covered by the Proposed Federal Implementation Plan Addressing Regional Ozone Transport for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
                               Proposed Rule TSD

Summary
On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a revision to the ozone national ambient air quality standards (2015 ozone NAAQS), lowering the level of both the primary and secondary standards to 0.070 parts per million (ppm). 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to submit, within 3 years after promulgation of a new or revised standard, state implementation plan (SIP) submissions meeting the applicable requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2). SIP submissions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS were due on October 1, 2018.
This document describes the status of each CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) ("good neighbor") SIP submission for the 2015 ozone NAAQS for states that are the covered by the proposed rule. This document describes any actions taken by EPA on CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIP submissions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS from these states, including any findings of failure to submit CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIP submissions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The descriptions also include any consent decree deadlines applicable to the EPA's final action on these SIP submissions.
This document therefore addresses the following states:
 Alabama
 Arkansas
 California
 Delaware
 Illinois
 Indiana
 Kentucky
 Louisiana
 Maryland
 Michigan
 Minnesota
 Mississippi
 Missouri

 Nevada
 New Jersey
 New York
 Ohio
 Oklahoma
 Pennsylvania
 Tennessee
 Texas
 Utah
 Virginia
 West Virginia
 Wisconsin
 Wyoming

The facts presented in this technical support document support EPA's conclusion that it currently has or will have, upon final action on a proposed SIP disapproval or a formal finding of failure to submit, a legal obligation and the legal authority to finalize each of the good neighbor federal implementation plans (FIPs) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS proposed in the Proposed Federal Implementation Plan Addressing Regional Ozone Transport for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Status of 2015 Ozone NAAQS Transport SIPs for States Covered by the Proposed Federal Implementation Plan Addressing Regional Ozone Transport for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Alabama
On August 27, 2018, the state of Alabama submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The SIP submission became complete by operation of law on February 27, 2019. On December 30, 2019, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register proposing approval of the SIP submission. (84 FR 71854). On March 24, 2020, former EPA Region 4 Administrator Mary Walker signed a document which would have finalized approval of Alabama's SIP submission upon publication in the Federal Register.  However, the March 24, 2020 document was never published in the Federal Register. On January 19, 2021, former EPA Region 4 Administrator Mary Walker signed a second document which would have finalized approval of Alabama's SIP submission upon publication in the Federal Register (https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/epas-approval-2015-8-hour-ozone-interstate-transport-requirements). However, the January 19, 2021 document was never published in the Federal Register. On December 2, 2021, EPA announced in the Federal Register it would not publish either the March 24, 2020 document or the January 19, 2021 document in the Federal Register. (86 FR 68413).
On February 3, 2022, EPA signed a notice withdrawing its proposed approval and proposing disapproval of Alabama's SIP submission. (87 FR 9545 (Feb. 22, 2022)). Therefore, EPA has not taken final action on Alabama's SIP submission. If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Alabama's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Alabama addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Alabama withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Alabama addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, the EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, the EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by the EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Arkansas
On October 10, 2019, the state of Arkansas submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 1, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9798 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Arkansas' good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a good neighbor FIP for the state of Arkansas addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Arkansas withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Arkansas addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, the EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

California
On October 1, 2018, the state of California submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. If EPA proposes and finalizes disapproval of California's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a good neighbor FIP for the state of California addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if California withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for California addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to take final action on California's good neighbor SIP by December 15, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022).

Delaware
On October 11, 2018, the state of Delaware submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On May 1, 2020, EPA published a notice finalizing approval of Delaware's good neighbor SIP. (85 FR 25307, effective June 1, 2020). For the reasons explained in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in Section IV.C., EPA is proposing to find that its approval of Delaware's good neighbor SIP submission was in error. Section 110(k)(6) of the CAA gives the Administrator authority, without any further submission from a state, to revise certain prior actions, including actions to approve SIPs, upon determining that those actions were in error. If finalized, this proposed error correction under CAA section 110(k)(6) would revise EPA's approval of Delaware's good neighbor SIP submission to a disapproval. If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Delaware's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a good neighbor FIP for the state of Delaware addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

Illinois
On May 21, 2019, the state of Illinois submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9838 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Illinois' good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a good neighbor FIP for the state of Illinois addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Illinois withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Illinois addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Indiana
On November 2, 2018, the state of Indiana submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9838 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Indiana's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Indiana addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Indiana withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Indiana addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on November 15, 2021, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, New York et al. v. Regan, et al., No. 1:21-CV-00252 (S.D.N.Y. entered Nov. 15, 2021); Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, the EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Kentucky
On January 9, 2019, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 3, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9498 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Kentucky's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the Commonwealth of Kentucky addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Kentucky withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Kentucky addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on November 15, 2021, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, New York et al. v. Regan, et al., No. 1:21-CV-00252 (S.D.N.Y. entered Nov. 15, 2021); Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Louisiana
On November 13, 2019, the state of Louisiana submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 1, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9798 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Louisiana's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Louisiana addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Louisiana withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Louisiana addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Maryland
On October 16, 2019, the state of Maryland submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 7, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9463 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Maryland's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Maryland addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Maryland withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Maryland addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, the EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Michigan
On March 8, 2019, the state of Michigan submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9838 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Michigan's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Michigan addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Michigan withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Michigan addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on November 15, 2021, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, New York et al. v. Regan, et al., No. 1:21-CV-00252 (S.D.N.Y. entered Nov. 15, 2021); Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Minnesota
On October 1, 2018, the state of Minnesota submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9838 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Minnesota's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Minnesota addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Minnesota withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Minnesota addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan.12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Mississippi
On September 6, 2019, the state of Mississippi submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 3, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9545 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Mississippi's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Mississippi addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Mississippi withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Mississippi addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Missouri
On June 10, 2019, the state of Missouri submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 9, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9533 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Missouri's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Missouri addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Missouri withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Missouri addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Nevada
On September 28, 2018, the state of Nevada submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. If EPA proposes and finalizes disapproval of Nevada's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Nevada addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Nevada withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Nevada addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on Nevada's good neighbor SIP by December 15, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022).

New Jersey
On May 13, 2019, the state of New Jersey submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9484 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of New Jersey's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of New Jersey addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if New Jersey withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for New Jersey addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed federal implementation plan are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

New York
On September 25, 2018, the state of New York submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9484 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of New York's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of New York addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if New York withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for New York addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and a consent decree entered on January 19, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022); Consent Decree, Our Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 20-8232 (S.D.N.Y. entered Jan. 19, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Ohio
On September 28, 2018, the state of Ohio submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9838 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Ohio's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Ohio addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Ohio withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Ohio addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on November 15, 2021, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, New York et al. v. Regan, et al., No. 1:21-CV-00252 (S.D.N.Y. entered Nov. 15, 2021); Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Oklahoma
On October 25, 2018, the state of Oklahoma submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 1, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9798 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Oklahoma's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Oklahoma addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Oklahoma withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Oklahoma addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Pennsylvania
On December 5, 2019, EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. (84 FR 66612, effective January 6, 2020). EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency. Based on this fact, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

Tennessee
On September 17, 2018, the state of Tennessee submitted a state implementation plan submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On December 30, 2019, the EPA published a notice proposing approval of the SIP submission. (84 FR 71854). On March 24, 2020, former EPA Region 4 Administrator Mary Walker signed a document which would have finalized approval of Tennessee's SIP submission upon publication in the Federal Register.  However, the March 24, 2020 document was never published in the Federal Register. On January 19, 2021, former EPA Region 4 Administrator Mary Walker signed a second document which would have finalized approval of Tennessee's SIP submission upon publication in the Federal Register (https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/epas-approval-2015-8-hour-ozone-interstate-transport-requirements). However, the January 19, 2021 document was never published in the Federal Register. On December 2, 2021, EPA announced in the Federal Register it would not publish either the March 24, 2020 document or the January 19, 2021 document in the Federal Register. (86 FR 68413).
On February 3, 2022, EPA signed a notice withdrawing its proposed approval and proposing disapproval of Tennessee's SIP submission. (87 FR 9545 (Feb. 22, 2022)). Therefore, EPA has not yet taken final action on Tennessee's SIP submission. If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Tennessee's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Tennessee addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Tennessee withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Tennessee addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Texas
On September 12, 2018, the state of Texas submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 1, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9798 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Texas' good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Texas addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Texas withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Texas addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on November 15, 2021, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, New York et al. v. Regan, et al., No. 1:21-CV-00252 (S.D.N.Y. entered Nov. 15, 2021); Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Utah
On December 5, 2019, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the state of Utah. (84 FR 66612, effective January 6, 2020). On January 29, 2020, the state of Utah submitted a SIP revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA has not, subsequent to that date, taken final action on the SIP submission. Because EPA made a formal finding that Utah failed to submit a SIP submission and has not yet taken final action on the subsequently provided SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Utah addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

Virginia
On December 5, 2019, EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the Commonwealth of Virginia. (84 FR 66612, effective January 6, 2020). EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency. Based on this fact, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the Commonwealth of Virginia addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

West Virginia
On February 4, 2019, the state of West Virginia submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On February 7, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9516 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of West Virginia's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of West Virginia addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if West Virginia withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for West Virginia addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on November 15, 2021, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, New York et al. v. Regan, et al., No. 1:21-CV-00252 (S.D.N.Y. entered Nov. 15, 2021); Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of both consent decrees, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP submission disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Wisconsin
On September 14, 2018, the state of Wisconsin submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On January 31, 2022, EPA signed a notice proposing disapproval of the SIP submission. (87 FR 9838 (Feb. 22, 2022)). If EPA finalizes the disapproval of Wisconsin's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Wisconsin addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Wisconsin withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Wisconsin addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP submission by April 30, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022). However, under the terms of the consent decree, EPA shall have until December 15, 2022, to take final action on the SIP submission if a proposed SIP revision disapproval and a proposed good neighbor FIP are signed by EPA for publication in the Federal Register by February 28, 2022. Id.

Wyoming
On January 3, 2019, the state of Wyoming submitted a SIP submission to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. If the EPA proposes and finalizes disapproval of Wyoming's good neighbor SIP submission, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Wyoming addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In the alternative, if Wyoming withdraws its good neighbor SIP submission before EPA takes final action, and EPA makes a formal finding of failure to submit, the provisions of CAA section 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for Wyoming addressing the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
In addition, EPA is obligated, pursuant to a consent decree entered on January 12, 2022 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to take final action on Wyoming's good neighbor SIP by December 15, 2022. Consent Decree, Downwinders at Risk et al. v. Regan, No. 21-cv-03551 (N.D. Cal. entered Jan. 12, 2022).


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79998-80002]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27441]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3680; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASW-15]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of and Modification to Restricted Areas; Fort Sill,
OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action establishes 2 new restricted areas (R-5601G and R-
5601H) to the special use airspace (SUA) complex located at Fort Sill,
OK, to provide additional maneuvering airspace for current and planned
hazardous training activities. Specifically, the restricted areas
provide participating fighter and bomber aircraft with non-eye safe
laser firing and maneuvering airspace when training at the Falcon
Bombing Range contained in R-5601C, the West Range Target Area
contained in R-5601B, or the East Range Target Area contained in R-
5601A. Additionally, the using agency information for all Fort Sill
restricted areas is updated for standardization and to reflect the
current organization. This action also updates a number of geographic
coordinates for R-5601A-E, G, and H as a result of more accurate
digital charting capabilities, updates the arc radius distance in R-
5601B and R-5601H from statute miles to nautical miles (NM), and
corrects the controlling agency information for R-5601H. This action
ensures realistic U.S. Army training on current tactics for employing
hazardous targeting laser systems and weapons capabilities at longer
ranges from the target area.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, March 2, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it restructures the restricted airspace at Fort Sill, OK,
enhancing safety and accommodating essential military training.

History

    On October 19, 2015, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (80 FR 63153), Docket No. FAA-
2015-3680, to establish two restricted areas and amend using agency
information for six other restricted areas designated to support
hazardous training activities conducted within the Fort Sill, OK,
special use airspace (SUA) complex. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. One comment from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA) was received.

Discussion of Comments

    In their response to the NPRM, AOPA raised several substantive
issues. AOPA contended the proposed airspace design would have a
negative impact on general aviation aircraft and offered the following
recommendations to mitigate the negative effects: consider other types
of SUA before establishing additional restricted areas; change the
ceiling of R-5601G so it aligns with the Minimum Enroute Altitude (MEA)
of V-436; if

unable to change the ceiling altitude, update the enroute charts to
show V-436 penetrates R-5601G; reduce the northern boundary of V-436 to
provide additional lateral spacing from V-436; and synchronize the
effective date of any new restricted areas to coincide with sectional
chart dates.
    Having considered the issues and recommendations provided by AOPA,
the FAA offers the following responses.

Consider Other Types of Special Use Airspace (SUA) Before Enacting a
Restricted Area

    The purpose of a restricted area is to confine or segregate
activities considered hazardous to nonparticipating aircraft. The FAA
recognizes that R-5601G and H, when activated, would restrict access by
non-participating aircraft. As noted in the NPRM, the U.S. Army
requested this action to allow realistic training on current tactics
developed and refined during recent combat operation for employing
hazardous (non-eye safe) combat targeting laser systems and weapons
capabilities at longer ranges from the target area. It was also noted
that there was no alternative SUA complex within 200 NM where combat
lasers could be employed that would support this aircrew training
requirement. Therefore, the FAA has determined restricted area airspace
is the appropriate SUA solution for conducting the hazardous activities
associated with the U.S. Army's training requirement.

Reduce the Maximum Altitude of R-5601 To Align With the Minimum Enroute
Altitude of VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal Airway V-436

    This recommendation would drop the ceiling of R-5601G from ``to but
not including 8,000 feet MSL'' to 5,400 feet MSL. Such a lowered
ceiling would prevent laser employment at ranges beyond 10 miles due to
graze angle restrictions and result in loss of the increased standoff
ranges proposed for realistic aircrew combat training. Additionally,
the western portion of R-5601G overlies the Wichita Mountains National
Wildlife Refuge. As mitigation to adverse effects when R-5601F was
established in 2007, the Army agreed to restrict flights below 5,500
feet MSL over the Wildlife Refuge. Observing this local flight
restriction to not overfly the Wildlife Refuge below 5,500 feet MSL and
AOPA's recommended restricted area ceiling of 5,400 feet MSL would
actually result in no available restricted area airspace over the
Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge and compression of the
remaining portions of R-5601G to the point that the restricted area
would not meet the military's training requirements any longer. The FAA
does not support lowering the R-5601G ceiling as recommended.
    The R-5601G boundaries description information in the regulatory
text is being amended to reflect the U.S. Army's local flight
restriction to not overfly the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife
Refuge below 5,500 feet MSL and match the corresponding flight
restriction documented in the R-5601F legal description and on the
applicable aeronautical charts.

If Unable To Reduce the Ceiling of R-5601G, Update the Enroute Charts
To Show V-436 Penetrates an Established Restricted Area

    It is common practice for the FAA to depict Air Traffic Service
(ATS) Routes and SUA areas on IFR and VFR aeronautical charts in
accordance with established charting standards. Additionally, SUA times
are published in a tab on the associated IFR and VFR charts to identify
the SUA times of use. As such, V-436 will be charted on the IFR enroute
charts, depicting it running through R-5601G and the R-5601 times of
use will be published on the associated charts.

Truncate the Northern Boundary of R-5601G To Preserve V-436 Through
Lateral Separation

    The FAA acknowledges that amending the proposed R-5601G northern
boundary to provide a 4 NM buffer from the V-436 centerline would allow
unimpeded use of the airway when the restricted area is active.
However, this recommendation reduces the north-south lateral dimension
of R-5601G by approximately 7 NM at its northeast corner. One of the
stated purposes of this action, as noted in the NPRM, was to allow
realistic training on current tactics developed during recent combat
operation for employing hazardous targeting laser systems and weapons
capabilities at longer ranges from the target area. Modern rangefinder
and laser designators can be employed at ranges out to 25 NM. As
proposed, the distance from the target arrays in R-5601C (Falcon Range)
to the northeast corner of R-5601G is approximately 22 NM and the
distance from the targets in R-5601B to the proposed northeast corner
is approximately 17 NM. Amending the R-5601G northern boundary as
recommended by AOPA would reduce these distances to 17 NM and 12 NM,
respectively. As such, the FAA does not support this recommendation
since the reduced distances to the target areas would be inadequate for
the military to conduct realistic training on current tactics employing
targeting laser systems and weapons systems at longer ranges.

Synchronize the Effective Date of Any New Restricted Areas To Coincide
With Sectional Chart Dates

    The FAA normally makes regulatory airspace actions, including
restricted areas, effective on a 56-day enroute chart date; however,
consideration is given to selecting a sectional aeronautical chart date
when deemed appropriate based on the potential aeronautical impacts
associated with the airspace action being taken. This action is being
made effective on a sectional chart date that matches the 56-day
enroute chart dates.

Differences From the NPRM

    Subsequent to publication of the NPRM, the FAA identified a number
of geographic lat./long. coordinate updates to the R-5601A-E, G, and H
boundaries information to more accurately reflect the existing
boundaries using digital charting capabilities. Additionally, the arc
radius distance listed in the R-5601B and R-5601H descriptions was
determined to be described using statute miles and is being updated to
reflect the corresponding nautical mile distance. Finally, the R-5601H
controlling agency title proposed in the NPRM did not match the
controlling agency title for the other R-5601 complex restricted areas
and is being updated to match. The using agency, controlling agency,
and boundaries updates are administrative in nature and do not affect
the overall restricted area boundaries; designated altitudes; times of
designation; or activities conducted within those restricted areas. The
following restricted area updates are incorporated in this action.
    The geographical lat./long. coordinates for the points located on
Interstate Highway 44 (I-44) listed in the R-5601A and R-5601B
descriptions, and a corresponding point listed in the R-5601H
description, are actually located west of I-44. The geographical
coordinates are updated to accurately reflect the points on I-44.
    The 3-mile arc radius distance listed in the existing R-5601B and
proposed R-5601H descriptions is not clear that it is defined in
reference to statute miles. The 3-mile [statute miles] arc radius is
updated to reflect it as 2.6 NM to retain the boundary, unchanged, and
comply with FAA Order JO 7400.2, Procedures for Handling Airspace
Matters, guidance.

    The geographical lat./long. coordinates listed for the eastern-most
point located on the 2.6 NM arc radius (formerly 3-mile arc radius as
noted above) in the existing R-5601B and proposed R-5601H descriptions
is actually located north of the arc. The geographical coordinates are
updated to accurately reflect the point on the 2.6 NM arc.
    The geographical lat./long. coordinates listed for the northern
boundary point located on Oklahoma State Highway No. 115 in the R-5601B
and R-5601C descriptions, and the corresponding point listed in the R-
5601D description, is actually located east of the highway. The
geographical coordinates are updated to accurately reflect the point on
Oklahoma State Highway No. 115.
    The geographical lat./long. coordinates for one point listed in the
R-5601E description does not match the geographical coordinates for the
corresponding point listed in the R-5601B and R-5601C descriptions. The
geographical coordinates for the point are updated to match the
information published in the R-5601B and R-5601C descriptions.
    The geographical lat./long. coordinates for the first point listed
in the R-5601G description does not create a shared boundary with R-
5601F and results in a gap between the two restricted areas. The
geographical lat./long. coordinates for the point are updated to ensure
a shared R-5601F and R-5601G boundary.
    The controlling agency information listed in the R-5601H
description does not match the controlling agency information verbatim
in all the other R-5601 restricted areas. The controlling agency
information is updated to standardize the information in all R-5601
restricted areas.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending 14 CFR part 73 to establish 2 new restricted
areas (R-5601G and R-5601H) at Fort Sill, OK, and update the using
agency information listed for the existing restricted areas (R-5601A-F)
as noted in the NPRM. The FAA is also incorporating the restricted area
updates noted in the Differences from the NPRM section. The FAA is
taking this action to ensure containment of the hazardous activities
associated with aircrew training missions that are incorporating non-
eye safe targeting laser employment and weapons delivery tactics used
by the military today, at increased distances from the target range,
within restricted area airspace. The amendments are as follows:
    R-5601A: The geographic coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long.
98[deg]23'09'' W.,'' in the boundaries description are changed to
``lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long. 98[deg]23'07'' W.,'' and the geographic
coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]24'01'' W.,'' are
changed to ``lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]23'59'' W.,'' to
coincide with I-44.
    R-5601B: The geographic coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long.
98[deg]23'09'' W.,'' in the boundaries description are changed to
``lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long. 98[deg]23'07'' W.,'' and the geographic
coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]24'01'' W.,'' are
changed to ``lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]23'59'' W.,'' to
coincide with I-44. Additionally, the geographic coordinates ``lat.
34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'54'' W.,'' are changed to ``lat.
34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'56'' W.,'' to coincide with Oklahoma
State Highway No. 115. Lastly, the arc radius ``3-mile'' is changed to
``2.6 NM'' to retain the existing boundary defined in terms of NM and
the geographic coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]40'12'' N., long.
98[deg]26'18'' W.,'' are changed to ``lat. 34[deg]40'11'' N., long.
98[deg]26'18'' W.,'' to coincide with the 2.6 NM arc radius.
    R-5601C: The geographic coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long.
98[deg]37'54'' W.,'' in the boundaries description are changed to
``lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'156'' W.,'' to coincide with
Oklahoma State Highway No. 115.
    R-5601D: The geographic coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long.
98[deg]37'54'' W.,'' in the boundaries description are changed to
``lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'56'' W.,'' to coincide with
Oklahoma State Highway No. 115.
    R-5601E: The geographic coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]37'58'' W.,'' in the boundaries description are changed to
``lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long. 98[deg]37'57'' W.,'' to match the
corresponding point in R-5601B and R-5601C.
    R-5601G: Establish R-5601G to abut the northern boundary of R-
5601F, to the north, underlying the Washita MOA. The new restricted
area extends upward from 500 feet above ground level (AGL) to, but not
including 8,000 feet MSL; excluding the airspace below 5,500 feet MSL
over the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge, as noted in the
Discussion of Comments section. R-5601G extends laterally across
approximately three quarters of the restricted area complex, west to
east, and northward between 5 NM to 11 NM along the northern boundary
of R-5601F. Additionally, the geographic coordinates ``lat.
34[deg]46'07'' N., long. 98[deg]25'50'' W.,'' in the proposed
boundaries description are changed to ``lat. 34[deg]46'03'' N., long.
98[deg]25'50'' W.,'' to ensure a shared boundary with R-5601F. Lastly,
the controlling agency ``FAA, Fort Worth Center'' is changed to ``FAA,
Fort Worth ARTCC.''
    R-5601H: Establish R-5601H to fill a small airspace area over Fort
Sill Army Post, OK, surrounded by two continuously active restricted
areas (R-5601A and R-5601B). The new restricted area extends upward
from the surface to FL400. Additionally, the geographic coordinates
``lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long. 98[deg]23'09'' W.,'' in the proposed
boundaries description are changed to ``lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long.
98[deg]23'07'' W.,'' to match the corresponding point in R-5601A.
Lastly, the arc radius ``3-mile'' is changed to ``2.6 NM'' to retain
the existing boundary defined in terms of NM and the geographic
coordinates ``lat. 34[deg]40'12'' N., long. 98[deg]26'18'' W.,'' are
changed to ``lat. 34[deg]40'11'' N., long. 98[deg]26'18'' W.,'' to
coincide with the 2.6 NM arc radius.
    The two new restricted areas allow participating aircraft to
maneuver within the current Fort Sill Approach Control Airspace and
contain the hazardous combat laser energy within restricted airspace.
As noted in the NPRM, R-5601G will be used for aircraft maneuvering and
combat laser targeting employment and R-5601H will be used for aircraft
conducting Close Air Support (CAS) training. There are no changes to
the existing pattern of firing, ordnance delivery runs, or weapons
impact areas and all weapons release continue to occur in R-5601A, R-
5601B, or R-5601C, as they are now. Further, no supersonic flight will
occur.
    This action also changes the using agency information ``U.S. Army,
Commanding General, Fort Sill, OK,'' listed for R-5601A-E to ``U.S.
Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center of Excellence
(USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK'' and the using agency
``Commanding General, United States Army Field Artillery Center
(USAFACFS), Fort Sill, OK,'' listed for R-5601F is changed to ``U.S.
Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center of Excellence
(USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.'' These changes reflect the
current organizational responsibilities and match the using agency
information published in R-5601G and R-5601H.
    The boundaries, designated altitudes, times of designation, and
controlling agency information for restricted areas R-5601A-F are not
changed by this action.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which

frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them
operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action''under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule''under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does
not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects
air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this
rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraphs 6-3.c and 8-2, the
FAA has conducted an independent evaluation of the U.S. Army's Final
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Creation of Restricted Areas
(RAs) R-5601G and R-5601H. The FAA determined that no significant
impacts would occur as a result of the Federal action and therefore,
preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not warranted and a
Finding of No Significant Impact in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.4(e) is
appropriate. Subsequently, and in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.3, the
FAA adopted the U.S. Army's final EA and prepared a Finding of No
Significant Impact/Record of Decision dated November 7, 2016.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C.106 (f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  73.56   [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.56 is amended as follows:

R-5601A Fort Sill, OK [Amended]

    By removing the current boundaries and using agency information and
substituting the following:

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]17'01'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long. 98[deg]20'56'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]38'30'' N., long. 98[deg]21'41'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]38'50'' N., long. 98[deg]22'06'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]39'53'' N.,
long. 98[deg]22'16'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long.
98[deg]23'07'' W.; thence north along the western edge of Interstate
Highway 44 to lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]23'59'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]21'21'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]43'45'' N.,
long. 98[deg]21'01'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]46'06'' N., long.
98[deg]21'01'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]46'06'' N., long. 98[deg]17'01'' W.;
to the point of beginning.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601B Fort Sill, OK [Amended]

    By removing the current boundaries and using agency information and
substituting the following:
    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N., long.
98[deg]23'07'' W.; thence counterclockwise along an arc, 2.6 NM radius
centered at lat. 34[deg]38'18'' N., long. 98[deg]24'07'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]40'11'' N., long. 98[deg]26'18'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N.,
long. 98[deg]26'19'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]37'57'' W.; thence north along Oklahoma State Highway No. 115 to
lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'56'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]42'07''
N., long. 98[deg]37'20'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]43'21'' N., long.
98[deg]36'02'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]35'40'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N., long. 98[deg]23'59'' W.; thence south along
the western edge of Interstate Highway 44 to the point of beginning.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601C Fort Sill, OK [Amended]

    By removing the current boundaries and using agency information and
substituting the following:
    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]37'57'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long. 98[deg]45'21'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]41'47'' N., long. 98[deg]45'21'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]41'47'' N., long. 98[deg]44'17'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]41'21'' N.,
long. 98[deg]44'17'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]41'21'' N., long.
98[deg]40'36'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]40'36'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'56'' W.; thence south along
Oklahoma State Highway No. 115 to the point of beginning.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601D Fort Sill, OK [Amended]

    By removing the current boundaries and using agency information and
substituting the following:
    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]45'21'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long. 98[deg]48'01'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]42'15'' N., long. 98[deg]50'01'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]45'00'' N., long. 98[deg]40'31'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]43'30'' N.,
long. 98[deg]35'40'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]43'21'' N., long.
98[deg]36'02'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]42'07'' N., long. 98[deg]37'20'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]37'56'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]40'54'' N., long. 98[deg]40'36'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]41'21'' N.,
long. 98[deg]40'36'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]41'21'' N., long.
98[deg]44'17'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]41'47'' N., long. 98[deg]44'17'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]41'47'' N., long. 98[deg]45'21'' W.; to the point of
beginning.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601E Fort Sill, OK [Amended]

    By removing the current boundaries and using agency information and
substituting the following:
    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]37'57'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]36'00'' N., long. 98[deg]46'46'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long. 98[deg]48'01'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]38'15'' N., long. 98[deg]45'21'' W.; to the point of beginning.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601F Fort Sill, OK [Amended]

    By removing the current using agency and substituting the
following:
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601G Fort Sill, OK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]46'03'' N., long.
98[deg]25'50'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]45'03'' N., long. 98[deg]29'46'' W.;
thence counterclockwise via the 46 NM arc of SPS VORTAC to lat.
34[deg]43'46'' N., long. 98[deg]49'55'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]47'00'' N.,
long. 98[deg]51'00'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]50'30'' N., long.
98[deg]46'02'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]57'51'' N., long. 98[deg]25'47'' W.;
to the point of beginning. Excluding that airspace below 5,500 feet MSL
over the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge.
    Designated altitudes. 500 feet AGL to, but not including, 8,000
feet MSL.
    Time of designation. Sunrise to 2200 local time, Monday-Friday;
other times by NOTAM.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Fort Worth ARTCC.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

R-5601H Fort Sill, OK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 34[deg]38'15'' N., long.
98[deg]20'56'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'30'' N., long. 98[deg]21'41'' W.;
to lat. 34[deg]38'50'' N., long. 98[deg]22'06'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]39'53'' N., long. 98[deg]22'16'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]40'47'' N.,
long. 98[deg]23'07'' W.; thence counterclockwise along an arc, 2.6 NM
radius centered at lat. 34[deg]38'18'' N., long. 98[deg]24'07'' W.; to
lat. 34[deg]40'11'' N., long. 98[deg]26'18'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]38'15''
N., long. 98[deg]26'19'' W.; to the point of beginning.
    Designated altitudes. Surface to FL 400.
    Time of designation. By NOTAM.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Fort Worth ARTCC.
    Using agency. U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Fires Center
of Excellence (USAFCOE) and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 8, 2016.
Leslie M. Swann,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2016-27441 Filed 11-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Sec.   63.6(h).......................  Opacity/Visible Emission (VE)       No. Subpart BBBBBBB does not contain
                                        Standards.                          opacity or VE standards.
Sec.   63.6(i).......................  Compliance Extension..............  Yes.
Sec.   63.6(j).......................  Presidential Compliance Exemption.  Yes.
Sec.   63.7..........................  Performance Testing Requirements..  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(a)(1)....................  Applicability of Monitoring         Yes.
                                        Requirements.
Sec.   63.8(a)(2)....................  Performance Specifications........  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(a)(3)....................  [Reserved]........................  .....................................
Sec.   63.8(a)(4)....................  Monitoring with Flares............  No.
Sec.   63.8(b)(1)....................  Monitoring........................  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(b)(2)-(3)................  Multiple Effluents and Multiple     Yes.
                                        Monitoring Systems.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)....................  Monitoring System Operation and     Yes.
                                        Maintenance.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(i).................  CMS maintenance...................  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(ii)................  Spare Parts for CMS Malfunction...  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(iii)...............  Compliance with Operation and       No.
                                        Maintenance Requirements.
Sec.   63.8(c)(2)-(3)................  Monitoring System Installation....  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(c)(4)....................  CMS Requirements..................  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(c)(5)....................  COMS Minimum Procedures...........  No. Subpart BBBBBBB does not contain
                                                                            opacity or VE standards.
Sec.   63.8(c)(6)....................  CMS Requirements..................  Yes. Only if you used CEMS to
                                                                            demonstrate compliance.
Sec.   63.8(c)(7)-(8)................  CMS Requirements..................  Yes. Only if you used CEMS to
                                                                            demonstrate compliance.
Sec.   63.8(d).......................  CMS Quality Control...............  Yes. Only if you used CEMS to
                                                                            demonstrate compliance.
Sec.   63.8(e)-(g)...................  CMS Performance Evaluation........  Yes. Only if you used CEMS to
                                                                            demonstrate compliance.
Sec.   63.9..........................  Notification Requirements.........  Yes. Except Initial Notification
                                                                            shall be submitted in accordance
                                                                            with the schedule in Sec.
                                                                            63.11585.
Sec.   63.10(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(viii)- Recordkeeping and Reporting         Yes.
 (xi), (c), (e)(1), (e)(2)(i), (f).     Requirements.
Sec.   63.11.........................  Control Device and Work Practice    Yes.
                                        Requirements.
Sec.   63.12.........................  State Authority and Delegations...  Yes.
Sec.   63.13.........................  Addresses of State Air Pollution    Yes.
                                        Control Agencies and EPA Regional
                                        Offices.
Sec.   63.14.........................  Incorporations by Reference.......  Yes.
Sec.   63.15.........................  Availability of Information and     Yes.
                                        Confidentiality.
Sec.   63.16.........................  Performance Track Provisions......  No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-18537 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P