Safety Zone for Fireworks Display; Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC
| Published date | 08 June 2020 |
| Citation | 85 FR 34668 |
| Record Number | 2020-12310 |
| Section | Proposed rules |
| Court | Coast Guard,Homeland Security Department |
34668
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 110 / Monday, June 8, 2020 / Proposed Rules
previously contained within the Mount
Pleasant, TX, airspace legal description
but is being separated as the Winnsboro
Municipal Airport airspace and Mount
Pleasant Regional airspace no longer
adjoin.)
This action is the result of airspace
reviews caused by the decommissioning
of the Quitman VOR, which provided
navigation information for the
instrument procedures these airports, as
part of the VOR MON Program.
Class E airspace designations are
published in paragraph 6005 of FAA
Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019,
and effective September 15, 2019, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
71.1. The Class E airspace designations
listed in this document will be
published subsequently in the Order.
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on
September 15.
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, is non-controversial and
unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
‘‘significant rule’’ under 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 will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it
is certified that this rule, when
promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Environmental Review
This proposal will be subject to an
environmental analysis in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final
regulatory action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to
amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
■1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 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.
§ 71.1 [Amended]
■2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is
amended as follows:
Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas
Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More
Above the Surface of the Earth.
* * * * *
ASW TX E5 Big Sandy, TX [Removed]
* * * * *
ASW TX E5 Gilmer, TX [Establish]
Fox Stephens Field-Gilmer Municipal
Airport, TX
(Lat. 32°41′53″ N, long. 94°56′56″ W)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile
radius of Fox Stephens Field-Gilmer
Municipal Airport.
* * * * *
ASW TX E5 Gladewater, TX [Establish]
Gladewater Municipal Airport, TX
(Lat. 32°31′44″ N, long. 94°58′19″ W)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile
radius of Gladewater Municipal Airport.
* * * * *
ASW TX E5 Mineola, TX [Amended]
Mineola-Wisener Airport, TX
(Lat. 32°40′36″ N, long. 95°30′39″ W)
Wood County Airport-Collins Field, TX
(Lat. 32°44′32″ N, long. 95°29′47″ W)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile
radius of Mineola-Wisener Airport, and
within a 6.4-mile radius of Wood County
Airport-Collins Field, and within 3.8 miles
east and 5.7 miles west of the 182° bearing
from the Wood County Airport-Collins Field
extending from the 6.4-mile radius of Wood
County Airport-Collins Field to 21.3 miles
south of Wood County Airport-Collins Field.
* * * * *
ASW TX E5 Mount Pleasant, TX
[Amended]
Mount Pleasant Regional Airport, TX
(Lat. 33°06′49″ N, long. 94°57′42″ W)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile
radius of Mount Pleasant Regional Airport.
* * * * *
ASW TX E5 Winnsboro, TX [Establish]
Winnsboro Municipal Airport, TX
(Lat. 32°56′20″ N, long. 95°16′44″ W)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile
radius of Winnsboro Municipal Airport.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 1,
2020.
Steven T. Phillips,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020–12102 Filed 6–5–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2020–0251]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone for Fireworks Display;
Upper Potomac River, Washington, DC
AGENCY
: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION
: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY
: The Coast Guard is proposing
to establish a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the Upper Potomac
River. This action is necessary to
provide for the safety of life on these
navigable waters near the National Mall
and Memorial Parks at Washington, DC,
on July 4, 2020, (with alternate date of
July 5, 2020) during a fireworks display
to commemorate the July 4th holiday.
This proposed rulemaking would
prohibit persons and vessels from being
in the safety zone unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port Maryland-
National Capital Region or a designated
representative. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES
: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES
: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2020–0251 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
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, call or email Mr. Ron
Houck, Sector Maryland-National
Capital Region Waterways Management
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
410–576–2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@
uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Jun 05, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JNP1.SGM 08JNP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
34669
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 110 / Monday, June 8, 2020 / Proposed Rules
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On May 4, 2020, the National Park
Service notified the Coast Guard that, on
behalf of the United States, it will be
conducting a fireworks display on July
4, 2020, in Washington, DC, with a start
time between 9:09 p.m. and 9:20 p.m.
On May 27, 2020, the event sponsor
notified the Coast Guard that the
fireworks launch site was changed. The
20-minute public fireworks display will
be launched from multiple sites along
Ohio Drive SW, located adjacent to the
Upper Potomac River in Washington,
DC. Multiple fireworks fallout areas of
different sizes span an area adjacent to
the southern three-quarters of West
Potomac Park. A portion of the
fireworks fallout area includes certain
waters of the Tidal Basin. In the event
of inclement weather, the fireworks
display will be scheduled for July 5,
2020. Hazards from the fireworks
display includes accidental discharge of
fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and
falling hot embers or other debris. The
COTP Maryland-National Capital
Region has determined that potential
hazards associated with the fireworks to
be used in this display would be a safety
concern for anyone near these fireworks
discharge sites.
The Coast Guard is requesting that
interested parties provide comments
within a shortened comment period of
10 days instead of the more typical 30
days for this notice of proposed
rulemaking. The Coast Guard believes a
shortened comment period is necessary
and reasonable to ensure the Coast
Guard has time to review and respond
to any significant comments submitted
by the public in response to this NPRM
and has a final rule in effect in time for
the scheduled event.
The Coast Guard is proposing this
rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP proposes to establish a
temporary safety zone in the Upper
Potomac River from 8 p.m. on July 4,
2020, to 11 p.m. on July 5, 2020. The
safety zone would cover all navigable
waters of the Upper Potomac River, (i)
encompassed by a line connecting the
following points, beginning at the
Washington, DC shoreline at latitude
38°53′05.7″ N, longitude 077°02′54.7″
W, thence southwest to latitude
38°52′58.4″ N, longitude 077°03′04.0″
W, thence southeast to the northern
extent of the 14th Street Bridge Complex
(I–395/US–1), at mile 96, at latitude
38°52’34.9’’ N, longitude 077°02′30.9″
W, thence northeast to the Washington,
DC shoreline at latitude 38°52′43.9″ N,
longitude 077°02′22.1″ W, thence
northwest across the entrance to the
Tidal Basin and along the shoreline to
the point of origin; and (ii) within the
Tidal Basin, from shoreline to shoreline,
bounded on the east by a line drawn
from the northern shoreline at latitude
38°53′12.6″ N, longitude 077°02′27.1″
W, thence southeast to the Thomas
Jefferson Memorial shoreline, at latitude
38°52′55.2″ N, longitude 077°02′15.2″
W, located at Washington, DC. The area
of the safety zone on the Upper Potomac
River is approximately 1,200 yards in
length and 750 yards in width. The
duration of the zone is intended to
ensure the safety of vessels on these
navigable waters before, during, and
after the scheduled 9:09 p.m. to 9:40
p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or
person would be permitted to enter the
safety zone without obtaining
permission from the COTP or a
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 13771 directs agencies
to control regulatory costs through a
budgeting process. 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 (OMB), and
pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive
Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination
is based on location, duration, and time-
of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
would be able to safely transit around
this safety zone which would impact a
small designated area of the Upper
Potomac River for 3 hours during the
evening when vessel traffic is normally
low. Moreover, the Coast Guard would
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via
VHF–FM marine channel 16 about the
zone.
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
zone 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 call or email 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Jun 05, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JNP1.SGM 08JNP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
34670
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 110 / Monday, June 8, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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 call or email 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 Directive 023–01, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 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 involves a safety zone lasting 3
hours that would prohibit entry within
a portion of the Upper Potomac River,
including the Tidal Basin. Normally
such actions are categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01,
Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES
section of this preamble. 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 call or email 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 https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email 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 https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’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 in 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 is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
■1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
■2. Add § 165.T05–0251 to read as
follows:
§ 165.T05–0251 Safety Zone for Fireworks
Display; Upper Potomac River, Washington,
DC.
(a) Location. The following areas are
a safety zone: (1) All navigable waters of
the Upper Potomac River, encompassed
by a line connecting the following
points, beginning at the Washington, DC
shoreline at latitude 38°53′05.7″ N,
longitude 077°02′54.7″ W, thence
southwest to latitude 38°52′58.4″ N,
longitude 077°03′04.0″ W, thence
southeast to the northern extent of the
14th Street Bridge Complex (I–395/US–
1), at mile 96, at latitude 38°52′34.9″ N,
longitude 077°02′30.9″ W, thence
northeast to the Washington, DC
shoreline at latitude 38°52′43.9″ N,
longitude 077°02′22.1″ W, thence
northwest across the entrance to the
Tidal Basin and along the shoreline to
the point of origin.
(2) All navigable waters of the Upper
Potomac River, within the Tidal Basin,
from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on
the east by a line drawn from the
northern shoreline at latitude
38°53′12.6″ N, longitude 077°02′27.1″
W, thence southeast to the Thomas
Jefferson Memorial shoreline, at latitude
38°52′55.2″ N, longitude 077°02′15.2″
W, located at Washington, DC.
(3) These coordinates are based on
datum NAD 1983.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section—
Captain of the Port (COTP) means the
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Maryland-National Capital Region.
Designated representative means any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer who has been authorized
by the Captain of the Port Maryland-
National Capital Region to assist in
enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general
safety zone regulations in subpart C of
this part, you may not enter the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section unless authorized by the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter,
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Jun 05, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JNP1.SGM 08JNP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
34671
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 110 / Monday, June 8, 2020 / Proposed Rules
representative by telephone at 410–576–
2693 or on Marine Band Radio VHF–FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast
Guard vessels enforcing this section can
be contacted on Marine Band Radio
VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
(3) Those in the safety zone must
comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or
the COTP’s designated representative.
(d) Enforcement officials. The U.S.
Coast Guard may be assisted in the
patrol and enforcement of the safety
zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m.
on July 4, 2020, or if necessary due to
inclement weather on July 4, 2020, from
8 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 5, 2020.
Dated: June 2, 2020.
Joseph B. Loring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the
Port Maryland-National Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2020–12310 Filed 6–5–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2020–0277; FRL–10010–
45–Region 7]
Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Control of
Sulfur Emissions From Stationary
Boilers
AGENCY
: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION
: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Missouri on January 14, 2019. Missouri
requests that the EPA revise a state
regulation approved in the SIP related to
sulfur emissions from industrial,
commercial, or institutional boilers or
process heaters in the St. Louis
metropolitan area. The revisions to this
rule include adding incorporations by
reference to other state rules, including
definitions specific to the rule, and
wording changes that are administrative
in nature and do not change the
interpretation of the rule or the
applicability of the rule. The EPA’s
proposed approval of this rule revision
is in accordance with the requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES
: Comments must be received on
or before July 8, 2020.
ADDRESSES
: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2020–0277 to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
William Stone, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air
Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219;
telephone number (913) 551–7714;
email address stone.william@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2020–
0277 at https://www.regulations.gov.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
II. What is being addressed in this
document?
The EPA is proposing to approve the
revisions to 10 Code of State
Regulations (CSR) 10–5.570, Control of
Sulfur Emissions from Stationary
Boilers in the Missouri SIP. The
revisions include wording changes that
are administrative in nature, add
definitions to the rule rather than
referring to definitions in a separate
rule, and updates and consolidates
incorporation by reference to federal
regulations. These revisions are
described in detail in the technical
support document (TSD) included in
the docket for this action.
Missouri received sixteen comments
from the EPA during the state public
comment period. Missouri responded to
all comments as noted in the state
submission included in the docket for
this action, and made revisions to the
rule concerning incorporation by
reference of Federal regulations or other
testing methods, removal of definitions
that were inconsistent with Federal
definitions, and several non-substantive
changes to the text of the regulation.
III. Have the requirements for approval
of a SIP revision been met?
The State submission has met the
public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR
51.102. The submission also satisfied
the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part
51, appendix V. The State provided
public notice on this SIP revision from
June 25, 2018, to July 26, 2018. In
addition, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the
CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is proposing to approve
Missouri’s request to amend 10 CSR 10–
5.570. We are processing this as a
proposed action because we are
soliciting comments on the substantive
and administrative revisions detailed in
this proposal and the TSD. The EPA is
not soliciting comment on existing rule
text that has been previously approved
by EPA into the SIP. Final rulemaking
will occur after consideration of any
comments.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is
proposing to include regulatory text in
an EPA final rule that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference the Missouri
Regulations described in the proposed
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Jun 05, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JNP1.SGM 08JNP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
