Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Massachusetts and New Hampshire; Determination of Attainment of the One-Hour Ozone Standard, 2495-2496 [C1-2011-32059]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Indian Tribal Governments
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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jan 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves implementation of
regulations within 33 CFR Part 100
applicable to organized marine events
on the navigable waters of the United
States that could negatively impact the
safety of waterway users and shore side
activities in the event area. The category
of water activities includes but is not
limited to sail boat regattas, boat
parades, power boat racing, swimming
events, crew racing, canoe and sail
board racing. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
1. The authority citation for part 100
continues to read as follows:
2495
by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector
Baltimore.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel
assigned or approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
on board and displaying a Coast Guard
ensign.
(c) Special local regulations: (1) The
Coast Guard Patrol Commander may
forbid and control the movement of all
vessels and persons in the regulated
area. When hailed or signaled by an
official patrol vessel, a vessel or person
in the regulated area shall immediately
comply with the directions given.
Failure to do so may result in expulsion
from the area, citation for failure to
comply, or both.
(2) All Coast Guard vessels enforcing
this regulated area can be contacted on
marine band radio VHF–FM channel 16
(156.8 MHz).
(3) The Coast Guard will publish a
notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District
Local Notice to Mariners and issue a
marine information broadcast on VHF–
FM marine band radio announcing
specific event date and times.
(d) Enforcement period: This section
will be enforced from 6 a.m. to 9:45 a.m.
on May 12, 2012.
Dated: December 19, 2011.
Mark P. O’Malley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Baltimore.
[FR Doc. 2012–784 Filed 1–17–12; 8:45 am]
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
2. Add a temporary section, § 100.35–
T05–1120 to read as follows:
§ 100.35–T05–1120 Special Local
Regulations for Marine Events; Spa Creek
and Annapolis Harbor, Annapolis, MD.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
(a) Regulated area. The following
location is a regulated area: All waters
of the Spa Creek and Annapolis Harbor,
within lines connecting the following
positions: from position latitude
38°58′34″ N, longitude 076°29′05″ W,
thence to position latitude 38°58′27″ N,
longitude 076°28′55″ W, and from
position latitude 38°58′40″ N, longitude
076°28′49″ W to position latitude
38°58′32″ N, longitude 076°28′45″ W.
All coordinates reference Datum NAD
1983.
(b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol
Commander means a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated
40 CFR Part 52
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0879; A–1–FRL–
9505–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Massachusetts and New Hampshire;
Determination of Attainment of the
One-Hour Ozone Standard
Correction
In proposed rule document 2011–
32059 beginning on page 77739 the
issue of Wednesday, December 14, 2011
make the following correction:
On page 77741, Table 1 should read
as follows:
E:\FR\FM\18JAP1.SGM
18JAP1
2496
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—AVERAGE EXPECTED EXCEEDANCE RATE FOR THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD IN THE BOSTON-LAWRENCEWORCESTER, MA-NH AREA FOR 2005–2007
Exceedances (days over 0.124 ppm)
EPA AQS ID
Site
Year
Adjusted for
missing data
Actual
Massachusetts:
250250041 .....................
Boston-Long Island ...............
250250042 .....................
Boston-Roxbury ....................
250170009 .....................
Chelmsford ...........................
250051002 .....................
Fairhaven ..............................
250095005 .....................
Haverhill ................................
250092006 .....................
Lynn ......................................
250213003 .....................
Milton ....................................
250094004 .....................
Newbury ................................
250070001 .....................
Oak Bluffs .............................
250171102 .....................
Stow ......................................
250010002 .....................
Truro .....................................
250270015 .....................
Worcester .............................
New Hampshire
330111011 .....................
Nashua .................................
[FR Doc. C1–2011–32059 Filed 1–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0987; FRL–9617–5]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District and
Imperial Valley Air Pollution Control
District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jan 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
2005
2006
2007
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2005
2006
2007
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Antelope Valley Air
Quality Management District
(AVAQMD) and Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District (ICAPCD)
portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) emissions from stationary gas
turbines. We are proposing to approve
local rules to regulate these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
SUMMARY:
Any comments on this proposal
must arrive by February 17, 2012.
DATES:
Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2011–0987, by one of the
following methods:
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3-Year average
expected exceedance rate
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email.
E:\FR\FM\18JAP1.SGM
18JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2495-2496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: C1-2011-32059]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2011-0879; A-1-FRL-9505-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Massachusetts and New Hampshire; Determination of Attainment of the
One-Hour Ozone Standard
Correction
In proposed rule document 2011-32059 beginning on page 77739 the
issue of Wednesday, December 14, 2011 make the following correction:
On page 77741, Table 1 should read as follows:
[[Page 2496]]
Table 1--Average Expected Exceedance Rate for the One-Hour Ozone Standard in the Boston-Lawrence-Worcester, MA-NH Area for 2005-2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exceedances (days over 0.124 ppm)
--------------------------------------------------------
EPA AQS ID Site Year 3-Year average
Actual Adjusted for expected
missing data exceedance rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Massachusetts:
250250041............................... Boston-Long Island............ 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250250042............................... Boston-Roxbury................ 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250170009............................... Chelmsford.................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250051002............................... Fairhaven..................... 2005 0 0.0 0.7
2006 2 2.0
2007 0 0.0
250095005............................... Haverhill..................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250092006............................... Lynn.......................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250213003............................... Milton........................ 2005 1 1.0 0.3
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250094004............................... Newbury....................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250070001............................... Oak Bluffs.................... 2005 0 0.0 0.7
2006 2 2.1
2007 0 0.0
250171102............................... Stow.......................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250010002............................... Truro......................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
250270015............................... Worcester..................... 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
New Hampshire
330111011............................... Nashua........................ 2005 0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0.0
2007 0 0.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. C1-2011-32059 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
