[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 11, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45830-45835]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19600]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0582; FRL-9983-53--Region 10]

Air Plan Approval; ID, Pinehurst PM10 Redesignation,
Limited Maintenance Plan; West Silver Valley 2012 Annual
PM2.5 Emission Inventory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving the redesignation request and limited
maintenance plan for the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality
Standard developed for the City of Pinehurst PM10
Nonattainment Area and the Pinehurst PM10 Expansion
Nonattainment Area. This redesignation will change the status of both
areas from nonattainment to attainment. The limited maintenance plan
for these contiguous nonattainment areas addresses maintenance of the
PM10 standard for a ten-year period beyond redesignation.
Related to this action, the EPA is taking final agency action on the
September 15, 2013, high wind exceptional event at the Pinehurst
monitoring station. Additionally, the EPA is finalizing approval of the
emissions inventory for the West Silver Valley 2012 annual
PM2.5 nonattainment area.

DATES: This action is effective on October 11, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0582. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information the disclosure
of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact
section for additional availability information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Spenillo at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background Information
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

I. Background Information

    On May 11, 2018, the EPA proposed to approve the redesignation
request and limited maintenance plan (LMP) submitted by the Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) on September 29, 2017, for
the City of Pinehurst PM10 Nonattainment Area and the
Pinehurst PM10 Expansion Nonattainment Area, collectively
referred to as the Pinehurst PM10 Nonattainment Area
(Pinehurst PM10 NAA).
    Related to this action, the EPA is taking final agency action on
the EPA's concurrence with the IDEQ's request for

exclusion of data measured on September 15, 2013, as a high wind
exceptional event at the Pinehurst monitoring station, as set forth in
the March 2, 2017 letter to the IDEQ, included in the docket. The Clean
Air Act (CAA) allows for the exclusion of air quality monitoring data
from design value calculations when there are exceedances caused by
events, such as wildfires or high wind events, that meet the criteria
for an exceptional event identified in the EPA's implementing
regulations, the Exceptional Events Rule at 40 CFR 50.1, 50.14 and
51.930. In 2013, emissions from a high wind event entrained dust and
impacted PM10 concentrations recorded at the Pinehurst
monitor. The EPA evaluated the IDEQ's exceptional event demonstration
for the flagged values of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for
September 15, 2013, at the monitor in Pinehurst, Idaho, with respect to
the requirements of the EPA's Exceptional Events Rule and determined
that IDEQ met the rule requirements.
    Separately, the EPA also proposed approval of the base year
emissions inventory for the West Silver Valley (WSV) PM2.5
Nonattainment Area (NAA). Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires a state
with an area designated as nonattainment to submit a ``comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant'' for the NAA. The IDEQ developed a 2013 base year
emissions inventory for the WSV annual PM2.5 NAA. The base
year emissions inventory includes data from 2013 and 2014 and in large
part was extracted from the 2014 periodic emissions inventory which is
used to populate the EPA's National Emissions Inventory. The 2013 base
year inventory is one of the three years used to designate the area as
nonattainment. This base year inventory presents direct
PM2.5 emissions (condensable and filterable) and emissions
of all PM2.5 precursors (NOX, VOCs,
NH3, and SO2) to meet the emissions inventory
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1). The EPA
has reviewed the results, procedures, and methodologies for the WSV
Annual PM2.5 NAA base year emissions inventory. The EPA
determined that the 2013 base year emissions inventory for the WSV
annual PM2.5 NAA met the requirements of CAA section
172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1).
    An explanation of the CAA requirements, a detailed analysis of the
submittal, and the EPA's reasons for proposing approval were provided
in the notice of proposed rulemaking (83 FR 21976), and will not be
restated here. The public comment period for this proposed rule ended
on June 11, 2018. The EPA received adverse comments on the proposal.

II. Response to Comments

    The Idaho Conservation League (ICL) submitted adverse comments on
our proposed approval of the Pinehurst PM10 NAA
redesignation request and LMP. Within this section, we have summarized
the adverse comments and provided our responses. A full copy of
comments received is available in the docket for this final action.

Comment--Permanent and Enforceable Emissions Reductions

    Summary--The ICL comment letter asserts the ``EPA must reject Idaho
DEQ's request for redesignation of the Pinehurst NAA'' because the
state has not met the redesignation requirements in CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii). The ICL cites the EPA's September 4, 1992, guidance,
which, among other things, addresses emissions reductions based on
permanent and enforceable measures (Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, EPA Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests
to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' (Calcagni Memo)). The ICL comment
letter provides examples of nonattainment areas redesignated for
PM10 and ozone in Ohio, Colorado, and Idaho, which use local
rules, laws, and ordinances to provide for permanent and enforceable
emissions reductions. The comment letter states that the IDEQ and City
of Pinehurst were aware of the need for permanent and enforceable
measures, citing discussion notes taken during a 2016 advisory
committee session for the West Silver Valley PM2.5 NAA, an
overlapping area designated nonattainment for the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The ICL comment letter concludes that the
control measures and associated emissions reductions are not permanent
nor enforceable.
    Response--We disagree with the commenter. Measures to attain the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS were submitted by IDEQ on April 14, 1992,
and approved into the SIP on August 25, 1994 (59 FR 43745). In the
August 25, 1994 action, the EPA evaluated the IDEQ's submittal with
respect to the CAA section 172 requirements, including the Reasonably
Available Control Measures and their enforceability. The EPA approved
the control measures into the SIP at 40 CFR part 52, subpart N as
meeting CAA requirements and making them, along with the attainment
plan itself, federally enforceable (59 FR 43745). Once approved, the
state is subject to CAA section 179(a)(4), which provides that a state
can be subject to federal sanctions for not implementing any
requirement of an approved plan or part of an approved plan, unless the
deficiency is corrected within 18 months.
    Reviewing the specific plan measures, the IDEQ has implemented
woodstove replacements and home weatherization since the early 1990s in
the Pinehurst PM10 NAA. As identified in Table 9 of the IDEQ
submittal, the woodstove changeout program resulted in 76 uncertified
woodstoves being replaced by 1994, with an additional 87 between 1995
and 2014 and 40 more between 2015 and 2017. These measures have been
implemented through a variety of programs and agencies. Changeouts of
uncertified woodstoves were completed through a combined Federal
assistance grant and state and local loan program. This combined
program was administered by the Northern Idaho Community Action Agency.
The home weatherization program was run through the Idaho Economic
Opportunity Office with loan and grant funding supplied by the Idaho
Department of Water Resources, Farmers Home Administration, Washington
Water Power, and North Idaho Community Action Agency. In terms of
emissions reductions, when comparing the emissions inventories from
residential wood combustion from 1988 to 2013, they dropped 80.25 lb/
day (27.45%) during the winter season when particulate matter emissions
are often the highest (Table 8 of the IDEQ submittal). These reductions
are permanent in that both the woodstove replacement and the reduced
energy needs from improved home energy efficiency via weatherization
generally last and extend throughout the life of the home.\1\ Any
subsequent home modification would likely improve, if not maintain,
emissions reductions, and benefits are expected to be net positive
given that emissions of EPA-certified stoves are estimated to be on
average three to four times lower than uncertified stoves.\2\ The
remaining measures, including the public awareness campaign focused on
clean burning practices and the voluntary woodsmoke curtailment
programs are all helpful in supporting the reduction of woodsmoke
emissions in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Department of Energy Weatherization Program, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/06/f52/EERE_WAP_Fact%20Sheet-v2.pdf.
    \2\ See EPA Burnwise Program, https://www.epa.gov/burnwise/burn-wise-energy-efficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the EPA recently awarded IDEQ a 2015 Targeted Airshed

Grant for the West Silver Valley PM2.5 NAA. As a condition
of the grant agreement with the EPA, the IDEQ committed to replace 183
uncertified wood heating devices and provide the associated emissions
reductions. Each homeowner receiving a changeout must sign a
certification document to ensure that they will remove an uncertified
wood heating device from their home and agree to have two follow-up
home inspections on the new certified device, commit to proper wood
burning practices, and commit to not replacing the device with another
solid fuel burning device. All removed stoves are rendered permanently
and irreversibly inoperable and are properly disposed. We believe the
grant terms and conditions and the homeowner certifications provide
additional enforceability for purposes of maintaining the
PM10 standard in the area.
    While not specifically taken credit for in the original attainment
plan nor the LMP, road dust control has played an important part in the
area. It is the second largest source of pollution according to the
emissions inventory, and the area has taken measures to reduce
emissions through paving roads, maintenance of roads, and adjusting
street sweeping to reduce particulate matter. With respect to
permanence of road controls, once paved their associated emissions will
be reduced and road maintenance will ensure lasting emissions
reductions. We received clarification from the IDEQ that since 2016,
the majority of roads (over 10 miles in a city roughly 1 square mile)
in the Pinehurst area have been rebuilt or sealed.
    We have reviewed monitoring data for the area with respect to the
permanence of the emissions reductions. In Table 2 of the IDEQ
submittal, monitoring data is provided from 1986 through 2015. From
1986 through 1993, the Pinehurst PM10 NAA was regularly
recording values above 100 [micro]g/m\3\, and exceeded the 3-year
expected exceedances design value of 1.0. From 1994 through 2015, Table
2 shows that the area has consistently met the 24-hour PM10
standard, and the EPA has reviewed and confirmed the data. As noted in
the submittal, the area came into attainment in the same timeframe as
the IDEQ's completion of the first batch of woodstove changeouts (76 by
1994). The area has continued to meet the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
design value since 1994, and it has also shown a continued decrease in
maximum annual 24-hr PM10 concentrations. Additionally, the
EPA has determined that the Pinehurst PM10 NAA meets the 5-
year average design value for LMP qualification as identified in the
proposal.
    Since the proposal, the IDEQ has submitted and the EPA has reviewed
and concurred on the IDEQ's demonstration that elevated PM10
concentrations on three days in September 2017 were attributable to
wildfire exceptional events and qualify for exclusion under EPA's
Exceptional Events Rule. The August 24, 2018 concurrence letter to the
IDEQ is included in the docket. With the exceptional event days
excluded, the area continues to meet the LMP average design value for
the most recent 5-year period, through 2017. The EPA intends to propose
final agency action on these 2017 exceptional events in a forthcoming
action.
    Based on the IDEQ PM10 LMP submission and the EPA's
review of air quality monitoring data, it is reasonable to conclude
that the measures to reduce PM10 in the Pinehurst
PM10 NAA have contributed to permanent emissions reductions.
Emissions reductions in the area have been maintained since 1994, and
enforceable control measures remain in place as approved into the SIP.
We therefore conclude that the area has met its obligations with regard
to permanent and enforceable measures to maintain the 24-hour
PM10 standard and that no further action is required.

Comment--Annual PM10 NAAQS

    Summary--The ICL requests that the EPA explain why the LMP and the
EPA's subsequent analysis only evaluated the 24-hour PM10
LMP design value and not the annual PM10 LMP design value.
The commenter asserts that both are required.
    Response--On August 9, 2001, the EPA issued guidance on streamlined
maintenance plan provisions for certain moderate PM10
nonattainment areas seeking redesignation to attainment (Memorandum
from Lydia Wegman, Director, Air Quality Standards and Strategies
Division, entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM10 Nonattainment Areas'' (LMP Option Memo)). Section IV of
the LMP Option Memo discusses LMP qualification and qualifying design
values specifically. It states that ``[t]he area should be attaining
the NAAQS and the average PM10 design value for the area,
based on the most recent 5 years of air quality data at all monitors in
the area, should be at or below 40 [mu]g/m\3\ for the annual
PM10 NAAQS and 98 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 24-hr PM10
NAAQS with no violations at any monitor in the nonattainment area.''
    To qualify for the LMP option, the area must meet the design value
test with respect to the standard for which the area was designated
nonattainment.\3\ The Pinehurst PM10 NAA was designated
nonattainment for the 24-hr PM10 NAAQS and therefore the
appropriate statistical test is with respect to the 98 [micro]g/m\3\ 5-
year average design value. The EPA has confirmed that the area meets
the 5-year average design value of 98 [micro]g/m\3\. We believe that
the IDEQ has met the requirements of the LMP with regards to the 24-hr
PM10 standard and the IDEQ does not need to address the
annual PM10 standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See LMP Option Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment--Federal Clean Air Deregulation

    Summary--The ICL states that they are concerned about recent
actions and statements by federal agencies that may affect vehicle
emissions reductions in the future, and how that may affect the
Pinehurst PM10 NAA ability to attain and its permanence. The
ICL comment letter specifically points to the IDEQ's reference to Tier
3 vehicle standards and the EPA's proposal to reduce Corporate Average
Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The comment then requests that the EPA
``identify any and all of its models and analyses that may be impacted
by current and proposed deregulation of vehicle emissions. Furthermore,
we request that any vehicle emission model or emission factor for
PM10 be revised such that the models and factors are not
based on any federal emission regulation currently under judicial or
administrative review.''
    Response--We do not agree with the commenter's assertion regarding
the impact of current or proposed changes to motor vehicle emissions
standards on the proposed action, because the Pinehurst PM10
NAA does not rely on motor vehicle emissions reductions for attainment
or its continued maintenance of the NAAQS. Additionally, there are no
proposed changes to Tier 3 vehicle standards and proposed CAFE
standards have minimal effect on criteria pollutants, their focus
instead being on greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
    When reviewing the submitted Pinehurst PM10 2013
Emissions Inventory in Table 7 of the IDEQ's submittal, the primary
source of PM10 is residential wood combustion at 17.75 tons
per year (TPY), which is 44.5% of the PM10 emissions in the
area. Road dust, paved and unpaved, is the next largest contributor at
a cumulative 8.91 TPY, or 22.3% of emissions. Cumulatively, residential
wood combustion and road dust make up

66.8% of the emissions inventory. During winter days when particulate
matter levels are often higher, residential wood combustion is 212.05
lb/day, which is 82.17% of the PM10 emissions in the area
(Table 8). Paved road dust (unpaved is no longer part of the emissions
inventory), is the next largest contributor at a 25.38 lb/day, or 9.83%
of emissions. Residential wood combustion currently makes up the
majority of the emissions inventory. Motor vehicle emissions by
comparison make up a very small portion of the emissions inventory at
1.84 TPY(annual) and 11.09 lb/day(winter), or less than 5% of both the
annual and winter emissions inventories. This is expected as motor
vehicle emissions do not contribute large quantities of
PM10.
    As described in section 3.4 Control Measures and section 3.2.2
Emissions Inventory Results and Adequacy Determination, the Pinehurst
PM10 LMP focuses primarily on the reduction of
PM10 emissions from residential woodsmoke and from road dust
from paved and unpaved roads. The Pinehurst PM10 LMP itself
does not take credit for emissions reductions from motor vehicle
emissions reductions nor does it rely on it for continued attainment of
the PM10 NAAQS.
    As mentioned in the proposal, the Pinehurst area has met the
PM10 3-year design value of expected exceedance of 1.0 or
less since 1994. Additionally, the Pinehurst area has only recorded one
value (in 2010) above 98 [micro]g/m\3\ since 1999 that was not the
result of an exceptional event. The area has demonstrated, and EPA has
confirmed, that the 3-yr and 5-yr design values qualify for the LMP
option. Additionally, the area has demonstrated that it meets the LMP
motor vehicle regional analysis, which assesses increases in emissions
based on the area's growth rate as applied to paved road dust
emissions, unpaved road dust emissions, and mobile source emissions. It
is this last category where the ICL comment questions if any changes in
federal emissions requirements would affect the area's ability to
attain. As explained above, motor vehicle emissions in the Pinehurst
NAA are not expected to affect the areas ability to continue to attain
as they are less than 5% and were not taken credit for in the
attainment plan, nor the redesignation request and LMP.
    While we do not believe that any changes to motor vehicle emissions
are relevant to the area's ability to attain, we did a basic evaluation
to determine if the area would continue to meet the LMP motor vehicle
regional analysis. The only portion of the calculation that would
change would be the on-road mobile source. Currently, that value is
calculated using the formula in the LMP Option Memo: DV mobile * VMT
paved, where the DV mobile provides a 3.6509 [mu]g/m\3\ contribution to
the design value and VMT paved is the 0.0166 percent growth rate
(3.6509 * 0.0166 = 0.06 [mu]g/m\3\ contribution). Given that the growth
rate in Pinehurst is very small, any potential changes to the emissions
standards would have a small effect on the design value. Taking a
conservative assumption and doubling the DV mobile from 3.6509 [mu]g/
m\3\ to 7.3018 [mu]g/m\3\, and applying the 0.0166 growth rate would
only increase the mobile contribution from 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\
contribution to 0.12 [micro]g/m\3\ contribution and the Pinehurst area
would still be able meet the motor vehicle regional analysis test.
Given the small contribution of motor vehicle emissions and low growth
rate in the Pinehurst area, we believe the Pinehurst PM10
NAA LMP is sufficient and no further action is required.
    The ICL's request that the EPA identify and revise all of its
models, analyses, and emissions factors that may be impacted by current
or proposed changes to vehicle emissions standards is outside of the
scope of this action.

Comment--Emission Factors

    Summary--The ICL requested that the EPA confirm that all woodstoves
replaced were ``Phase II,'' and to require that the IDEQ revise
calculations in the case that any of the replacements were not Phase
II. The ICL asserts that the IDEQ used incorrect emissions factors
based on a comparison of AP-42 emissions factors to those used by IDEQ
in the Pinehurst PM10 LMP, and requests an explanation for
this or revision, whichever is more appropriate.
    Response--We disagree that the IDEQ used incorrect emissions
factors and do not believe that any further calculations are needed. In
1988, the EPA finalized the residential wood heaters new source
performance standards (NSPS) that required performance standards for
woodstoves. These performance standards were released in two phases;
Phase I went into effect immediately in 1988, and Phase II went into
effect in 1990. The Phase II performance standards required that
catalytic stoves have an emission rate of 4.1g/hr or less and non-
catalytic stoves have an emissions rate of 7.5 g/hr or less. All stoves
that have been replaced in Pinehurst occurred after Phase II standards
were in place. Additionally, we have received confirmation from IDEQ
that these changeouts were completed and that they were Phase II EPA
certified stoves.
    With regard to the ICL's request for explanation of the emissions
factors used, we reviewed the emissions factors (EFs) for residential
wood combustion that IDEQ used and found them consistent with the EPA
EFs and methodology used in the 2014 National Emissions Inventory. The
IDEQ used EFs derived from EPA's Residential Wood Combustion Emissions
Estimation Tool version 3.1 (October 2016) that are more up to date
than the EFs in AP-42, which were last updated in 1996 for this source
category. We have included in the docket the documentation for v3.1 and
3.2 of the Residential Wood Combustion Emissions Estimation Tool, which
has the emissions factors used and the references for those EFs. Both
versions of the tool use the same EFs.
    In response to the comment, we have confirmed with the IDEQ that
the changeouts were with phase II or better EPA certified stoves. We
have also confirmed that the IDEQ emissions inventory assumptions and
calculations are correct and that the appropriate EFs were used.

Comment--Contingency Plan

    Summary--The ICL requested that the EPA further explain how the
IDEQ's Contingency Plan is compliant with section 175A of the CAA. The
comment provides a summary with references to CAA section 175A, the
Calcagni Memo that provides guidance for maintenance plans, and the LMP
Option Memo that provides guidance for LMPs.
    Response--While the commenter correctly identifies that CAA section
175A provides the statutory requirements for maintenance plan
requirements, and that the LMP Option Memo provides guidance for
contingency provisions under the LMP option, the ICL's contention that
contingency provisions \4\ must be fully adopted and take effect within
one year and without further legislative action is incorrect. These
requirements do not appear in the CAA section 175A requirements nor the
LMP Option Memo, and are contradicted by the Calcagni Memo, EPA's long-
standing interpretation of redesignation and maintenance plan
requirements. There, it states, ``For the purposes of section 175A, a
State is not required to have fully adopted contingency measures that
will take effect without further action by the State in order for the
maintenance

plan to be approved.'' Calcagni Memo at 12; see also Greenbaum v. EPA,
370 F.3d 527, 541 (6th Cir. 2004) (upholding this portion of the
Calcagni Memo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The IDEQ submittal and ICL comment letter use the
terminology ``contingency measures,'' when referring to the CAA
section 175A ``contingency provisions'' requirements. ``Contingency
measures'' are associated with attainment planning and have
different requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 175A(d) and EPA's interpretation of that provision as
set out in the Calcagni Memo and the LMP Option Memo provide the
standards by which the EPA must evaluate contingency plans. Section
175A(d) states that ``[e]ach plan revision submitted under this section
shall contain such contingency provisions as the Administrator deems
necessary to assure that the State will promptly correct any violation
of the standard which occurs after the redesignation of the area as an
attainment area. Such provisions shall include a requirement that the
State will implement all measures with respect to the control of the
air pollutant concerned which were contained in the State
implementation plan for the area before redesignation of the area as an
attainment area.'' The Calcagni Memo and the LMP Option memo further
elaborate that ``Section 175A of the Act states that a maintenance plan
must include contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct
any violation of the NAAQS which may occur after redesignation of the
area to attainment. These contingency measures do not have to be fully
adopted at the time of redesignation. However, the contingency plan is
considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and the State should
ensure that the contingency measures are adopted as soon as possible
once they are triggered by a specific event. The contingency plan
should identify the measures to be adopted, and provide a schedule and
procedure for adoption and implementation of the measures if they are
required. Normally, the implementation of contingency measures is
triggered by a violation of the NAAQS but the State may wish to
establish other triggers to prevent a violation of the NAAQS, such as
an exceedance of the NAAQS.''
    The EPA has determined that the IDEQ's contingency plan meets the
requirements of Section 175A(d) and the EPA's guidance memos. Section
3.5 of the IDEQ's submittal confirms that all measures relied upon for
attainment, including woodstove changeouts, voluntary curtailment
program, home weatherization, and public awareness campaign continue to
be in place and will be strengthened if the PM10 standard is
exceeded. If the Pinehurst area exceeds the standard, Section 3.5.1
identifies the Annual Network Plan monitoring data as the triggering
mechanism for contingency provisions. A violation cited in the Annual
Network Plan would trigger a schedule and process for IDEQ to examine
the data, assess the source of the problem, and identify which
contingency provision to adopt and implement. The submitted plan lists
potential provisions focused on control of woodsmoke and road dust, the
two primary sources of PM10 in the nonattainment area. The
submitted contingency provisions meet the CAA section 175A requirement
to continue implementing measures relied upon for attainment. There is
an automatic process on a set schedule by which the Pinehurst area's
design value is evaluated annually (i.e., the Annual Network Plan
submittal-review-approval), and a violation would trigger the state to
be required to evaluate, identify, adopt, and implement contingency
provisions best suited towards bringing the area back into attainment.
Therefore, the EPA is finalizing approval of the IDEQ's plan as meeting
the requirements of section 175A.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving the Pinehurst PM10 NAA LMP
submitted by the IDEQ and concurrently redesignating the area to
attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. Related to this action, the
EPA is taking final agency action on the September 15, 2013, high wind
exceptional event at the Pinehurst monitoring station. Additionally,
the EPA is approving the West Silver Valley annual PM2.5
base year emissions inventory as meeting CAA section 172(c)(3)
requirements.

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications and it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a

``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

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

    Dated: August 30, 2018.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR parts 52 and 81
are amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart N--Idaho

0
2. In Sec.  52.670, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry at the end of the table for ``Pinehurst PM10 Limited
Maintenance Plan'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.670  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                    EPA-Approved Idaho Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable
      Name of SIP provision          geographic or          State       EPA approval date         Comments
                                   nonattainment area  submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Pinehurst PM10 Limited            Shoshone County;          9/29/2017  9/11/2018,........  .....................
 Maintenance Plan.                 Pinehurst                           [Insert Federal
                                   Expansion Area and                   Register
                                   City of Pinehurst.                   citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
4. In Sec.  81.313, the table entitled ``Idaho-PM-10'' is amended by
revising the entry for ``Eastern Washington-Northern Idaho Interstate
AQCR 62 (Idaho portion):'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.313  Idaho.

* * * * *

                                                                       Idaho PM-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Designation                                             Classification
           Designated area           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Date                         Type                         Date                         Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Eastern Washington-Northern Idaho
 Interstate AQCR 62 (Idaho portion):
    Shoshone County: Pinehurst        October 11, 2018...........  Attainment.................  ...........................  ...........................
     Expansion Area Northwest
     quarter of the Northwest
     quarter, Section 8, Township 48
     North, Range 2 East; Southwest
     quarter of the Northwest
     quarter, Section 8, Township
     48, North, Range 2 East;
     Northwest quarter of the
     Southwest quarter, Section 8,
     Township 48 North, Range 2
     East; Southwest quarter,
     Section 8, Township 48 North,
     Range 2 East; Southwest quarter
     of the Southwest quarter,
     Section 48 North, Range 2 East,
     Boise Base (known as
     ``Pinehurst expansion area'').
    City of Pinehurst...............  October 11, 2018...........  Attainment.................  ...........................  ...........................

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-19600 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55574-55575]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19794]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0202]

Pipeline Safety: Request for Special Permit; Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this notice to solicit public comments on
a request for special permit received from the Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC (TCO). The special permit request is seeking relief
from compliance with certain requirements in the Federal pipeline
safety regulations. At the conclusion of the 30-day comment period,
PHMSA will review the comments received from this notice as part of its
evaluation to grant or deny the special permit request.

DATES: Submit any comments regarding this special permit request by
October 8, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference the docket number for this
specific special permit request and may be submitted in the following
ways:
     E-Gov Website: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management System: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: You should identify the docket number for the special
permit request you are commenting on at the beginning of your comments.
If you submit your comments by mail, please submit two (2) copies. To
receive

confirmation that PHMSA has received your comments, please include a
self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may submit comments at
http://www.Regulations.gov.

    Note: There is a privacy statement published on http://www.Regulations.gov. Comments, including any personal information
provided, are posted without changes or edits to http://www.Regulations.gov.

    Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this notice contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this notice, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Pursuant to 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 190.343, you may ask PHMSA to give confidential
treatment to information you give to the agency by taking the following
steps: (1) Mark each page of the original document submission
containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along with the
original document, a second copy of the original document with the CBI
deleted; and (3) explain why the information you are submitting is CBI.
Unless you are notified otherwise, PHMSA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this notice. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to: Kay McIver, DOT, PHMSA-PHP-80, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Any commentary PHMSA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this matter.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General: Ms. Kay McIver by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Technical: Mr. Steve Nanney by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA received a special permit request from
TCO seeking a waiver from the requirements of 49 CFR 192.611: Change in
class location: Confirmation or revision of maximum allowable operating
pressure, and Sec.  192.619: Maximum allowable operating pressure:
Steel or plastic pipelines. This special permit is being requested in
lieu of pipe replacement or pressure reduction for four (4) special
permit segments totaling 2.046 miles of the 30-inch diameter TCO
Montgomery County (MC) Pipeline. The proposed special permit segments
are located in Montgomery County, Maryland. The pipeline class
locations in the special permit segments have changed from a Class 1 to
Class 3 location. The TCO MC Pipeline special permit segments are not
contiguous and are comprised of 30-inch diameter pipe with existing
maximum allowable operating pressures of 898 pounds per square inch
gauge (psig). The installation of the special permit segments occurred
in 1962.
    The special permit request, proposed special permit with
conditions, and Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the TCO MC
Pipeline are available for review and public comment in Docket No.
PHMSA-2019-0202. We invite interested persons to review and submit
comments on the special permit request, proposed special permit with
conditions, and DEA in the docket. Please include any comments on
potential safety and environmental impacts that may result if the
special permit is granted. Comments may include relevant data.
    Before issuing a decision on the special permit request, PHMSA will
evaluate all comments received on or before the comment closing date.
Comments received after the closing date will be evaluated, if it is
possible to do so without incurring additional expense or delay. PHMSA
will consider each relevant comment it receives in making its decision
to grant or deny this special permit request.

Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2020-19794 Filed 9-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 12, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2004-19206

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  Bahamasair Holdings Limited 				Date Filed:  September 23,
2004

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to conduct
scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between Providenciales, Turks and Caicos Islands and Fort Lauderdale,
Florida.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representatives:  George U. Carneal & Kathy M. Miljanic  (202)
637-6546

DOT Analyst:  Shelita A. Smith:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  Air Turks & Caicos (2003) Ltd. (Air Turks &
Caicos) filed an answer in response to Bahamasair’s request stating
that a foreign air carrier of the Bahamas is not entitled to exercise
Turks and Caicos-U.S. seventh-freedom traffic rights and Bahamasair’s
request should be dismissed.  Air Turks & Caicos further states that it
recently filed an application with the Department in Docket
OST-2004-19171, seeking exemption authority to conduct scheduled
combination services between the Turks & Caicos Islands and the United
States, and that it has been licensed and designated by the Government
of the United Kingdom under U.K. Route 9 to perform the proposed
services.  Bahamasair filed a reply recognizing that its proposed
services are extrabilateral but stating that its proposed services are
endorsed by the Bahamas and the Turks & Caicos Islands; the Department
has previously granted Bahamasair authority to serve the Turks &
Caicos-U.S. market; and grant of the requested authority is consistent
with the public interest and will provide the traveling public with new
travel options.  Bahamasair also states that the fifth-freedom beyond
service would be a continuation of the scheduled service the carrier
currently offers between Nassau and Fort Lauderdale.

DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved								Action date:  November 12, 2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  November 12, 2004 – November
12, 2005

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  Reciprocity with
the Bahamas and support of the Government of the Turks and Caicos
Islands.

As to the concerns raised by Air Turks & Caicos, we note that as part of
its application, Bahamasair provided a letter dated August 17, 2004,
from the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands notifying Bahamasair
of its support of Bahamasair’s efforts to secure Department authority
to provide the proposed services.  The letter noted that tourism in the
area was expanding and that approval of Bahamasair's services would
facilitate travel to the Turks and Caicos Islands from Fort Lauderdale.
Therefore, based on the record before us, we see no reason to withhold
the authority sought by Bahamasair

2

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

X  Standard exemption conditions (attached)   X  Foreign air carrier
permit conditions (Order 87-8-55)

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		   Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant is qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied

all requests in the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke
the authority granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our
discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

 In 1998, we granted Bahamasair exemption authority to conduct scheduled
combination services between Miami and Grand Turk, Turks and Caicos
Islands.  See Notice of Action Taken dated December 18, 1998, in Docket
OST-98-4714.

05/2004


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 129 (Friday, July 5, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32063-32064]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14394]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-1036]

Safety Zones, Recurring Marine Events in Captain of the Port Long
Island Sound Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce ten safety zones in the Sector
Long Island Sound area of responsibility on the date and time listed in
the table below. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of
life on navigable waterways during the events. During the enforcement
periods, no person or vessel may enter the safety zones without
permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP) Sector Long Island Sound
or designated representative.

DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 165.151 Table 1 will be enforced during
the dates and times listed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Petty Officer Melanie Hughes, Waterways Management
Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound; telephone 203-468-
4583, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety
zones listed in 33 CFR 165.151 Table 1 on the specified dates and times
as indicated in the following table:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.2 Town of Branford Fireworks.........   Date: June 22-23,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 10 p.m. to 11
                                          p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          Branford Harbor, Bridgeport,
                                          CT in approximate position,
                                          41[deg]9'04'' N,
                                          073[deg]12'49'' W (NAD 83).
6.3 Vietnam Veterans/Town of East Haven   Date: June 29, 2019.
 Fireworks.
                                          Rain Date: July 1,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 9 p.m. to 11
                                          p.m.
                                          Location: Waters off
                                          Cosey Beach, East Haven, CT in
                                          approximate position,
                                          41[deg]14'19'' N,
                                          072[deg]52'9.8'' W (NAD 83).
6.4 Salute to Veterans Fireworks.......   Date: June 29, 2019.
                                          Rain Date: June 30,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 9 p.m. to 10:30
                                          p.m.
                                          Location: Waters off
                                          Reynolds Channel off
                                          Hempstead, NY in approximate
                                          position, 40[deg]35'36.62'' N,
                                          073[deg]35'20.72'' W (NAD 83).
6.5 Cherry Grove Arts Project Fireworks   Date: June 22, 2019.
                                          Rain Date: June 23,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 9 p.m. to 11
                                          p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          the Great South Bay off Cherry
                                          Grove, NY in approximate
                                          positions, 40[deg]39'49.06''
                                          N, 073[deg]05'27.99'' W (NAD
                                          83).
7.1 Point O'Woods Fire Company Summer     Date: July 4, 2019.
 Fireworks.
                                          Rain Date: July 5,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 9 p.m. to 10:30
                                          p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          the Great South Bay, Point
                                          O'Woods, NY in approximate
                                          position 40[deg]39'18.57'' N,
                                          073[deg]08'5.73'' W (NAD 83).
7.4 Norwalk Fireworks..................   Date: July 3, 2019.

                                          Time: 8:30 p.m. to
                                          10:30 p.m.
                                          Location: Waters off
                                          Calf Pasture Beach, Norwalk,
                                          CT in approximate position,
                                          41[deg]04'50'' N,
                                          073[deg]23'22'' W (NAD 83).
7.6 Sag Harbor Fireworks...............   Date: July 6, 2019.
                                          Rain Date: July 7,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 8:30 p.m. to
                                          10:30 p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          Sag Harbor off Havens Beach,
                                          Sag Harbor, NY in approximate
                                          position 41[deg]00'26'' N,
                                          072[deg]17'9'' W (NAD 83).
7.29 Mashantucket Pequot Fireworks.....   Date: July 13, 2019.
                                          Time: 8:30 p.m. to
                                          10:30 p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          the Thames River, New London,
                                          CT in approximate position
                                          Barge 1, 41[deg]21'03.03'' N,
                                          072[deg]5'24.5'' W Barge 2,
                                          41[deg]20'51.75'' N,
                                          072[deg]5'18.90'' W (NAD 83).
7.42 Connetquot River Summer Fireworks.   Date: July 3, 2019.
                                          Rain Date: July 9,
                                          2019.
                                          Time: 8:45 p.m. to
                                          10:15 p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          the Connetquot River off
                                          Snapper Inn Resturant,
                                          Oakdale, NY in approximate
                                          position 40[deg]43'32.38'' N,
                                          073[deg]9'02.64'' W (NAD 83).
7.46 Irwin Family 4th of July..........   Date: July 4, 2019.
                                          Time: 8:30 p.m. to
                                          10:30 p.m.
                                          Location: Waters of
                                          the Great South Bay off The
                                          Helm Road, East Islip, NY in
                                          approximate position
                                          40[deg]42'12.28'' N,
                                          073[deg]12'00.08'' W (NAD 83).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.151, the events listed above are
established as safety zones. During the enforcement period, persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring,
or anchoring within these safety zones unless they receive permission
from the COTP or designated representative.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165 and 5 U.S.C.
552 (a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast
Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of
this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners or marine
information broadcasts. If the COTP determines that these safety zones
need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to
enter the regulated area.

    Dated: June 17, 2019.
K.B. Reed,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 2019-14394 Filed 7-3-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: June 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 106)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 31415-31416]
[DOCID:fr02jn08-19]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-1132; FRL-8573-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Minnesota; Interstate Transport of Pollution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a request submitted by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) on October 23, 2007, to
revise the Minnesota State Implementation Plan (SIP). The submission
would address the ``good neighbor'' provisions of the Clean Air Act
(CAA). These provisions require each state to submit a SIP that
prohibits emissions that adversely affect another state's air quality
through interstate transport. MPCA has adequately addressed the four
distinct elements related to the impact of interstate transport of air
pollutants. These include prohibiting significant contribution to
nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in
another state, interference with maintenance of the NAAQS in another
state, interference with plans in another state to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality, and interference with plans in another
state to protect visibility.
    In the final rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is
approving the SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior
proposal, because EPA

views this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the
direct final rule. If we do not receive any adverse comments in
response to these direct final and proposed rules, we do not
contemplate taking any further action in relation to this proposed
rule. If EPA receives adverse comments, we will withdraw the direct
final rule and will respond to all public comments in a subsequent
final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on
this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 2, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2007-1132 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Douglas Aburano, Acting Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
     Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Acting Chief, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding
Federal holidays.

    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule, and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located
in the Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: May 21, 2008.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
 [FR Doc. E8-12223 Filed 5-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P