DOCSLIB.ORG

MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING Coastal Education and Visitors Center at Fort Macon State Park, Atlantic Beach, N.C

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING Coastal Education and Visitors Center at Fort Macon State Park, Atlantic Beach, N.C MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING Coastal Education and Visitors Center at Fort Macon State Park, Atlantic Beach, N.C. Nov. 2-4, 2011 N.C.G.S. 138A-15(e) mandates at the beginning of any meeting of a board, the chair shall remind all members of their duty to avoid conflicts of interest under Chapter 138. The chair also shall inquire as to whether there is any known conflict of interest with respect to any matters coming before the board at that time. N.C.G.S. 143B-289.54.(g)(2) states a member of the Marine Fisheries Commission shall not vote on any issue before the Commission that would have a "significant and predictable effect" on the member's financial interest. For purposes of this subdivision, "significant and predictable effect" means there is or may be a close causal link between the decision of the Commission and an expected disproportionate financial benefit to the member that is shared only by a minority of persons within the same industry sector or gear group. A member of the Commission shall also abstain from voting on any petition submitted by an advocacy group of which the member is an officer or sits as a member of the advocacy group's board of directors. A member of the Commission shall not use the member's official position as a member of the Commission to secure any special privilege or exemption of substantial value for any person. No member of the Commission shall, by the member's conduct, create an appearance that any person could improperly influence the member in the performance of the member's official duties. Commissioners having questions about a conflict of interest or appearance of conflict should consult with counsel to the Marine Fisheries Commission or the secretary’s ethics liaison. Upon discovering a conflict, the commissioner should inform the chair of the commission in accordance with N.C.G.S. 138A-15(e). Nov. 2 6 p.m. Public Meeting Receive public comment relative to fisheries management issues. Nov. 3 9 a.m. Call to Order* Pledge of Allegiance and Invocation Conflict of Interest Reminder Roll Call Approval of Agenda** and Approval of Meeting Minutes** 9:15 a.m. Public Comment Receive public comment relative to fisheries management issues. 9:45 a.m. Issues from Commissioners 10 a.m. Chairman’s Report Review administrative actions and issues from the chair. Letters 10:15 a.m. Committee Reports Nominating Vote on nominees for the South Atlantic and Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Councils. Vote on Slate of Nominees** Sea Turtle Review and discuss committee recommendations on the Division of Marine Fisheries’ Incidental Take Permit application submitted to the National Marine Fisheries Service for possible commission comment. Habitat and Water Quality Strategic Habitat Area Review and approve strategic habitat areas selected for Coastal Region 2 for inclusion in the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan. Vote on Region 2 Strategic Habitat Areas** 11 a.m. Finalize Limited Entry Provisions for Commercial Atlantic Ocean Striped Bass Fisheries Vote on Provisions** 12:30 p.m. Lunch Recess 2 p.m. Spotted Seatrout Fishery Management Plan Review advisory committee/public input on options to end overfishing within two years of final adoption of the plan, select preferred management options and approve sending out for departmental and legislative review. Review Advisory Committee and Public Input Select Preferred Management Option** Vote to send to Department of Environment and Natural Resources and Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations** 3 p.m. Estuarine Striped Bass Fishery Management Plan Amendment 1 Review advisory committee/public input on draft FMP, select preferred management options and approve sending out for departmental and legislative review. Review Advisory Committee and Public Input Select Preferred Management Options** Vote to send to Department of Environment and Natural Resources and Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations ** 3:30 p.m. Blue Crab Fishery Management Plan Amendment 2 Review plan amendment and vote to send out to advisory committees/public meetings. Vote to send out to public meetings/advisory committee review** 4:30 p.m. Rule Suspensions – David Taylor The commission must vote to continue suspension of any rules the Division of Marine Fisheries Director has suspended by proclamation. Vote on Rule Suspension for Spotted Seatrout** Vote on Rule Suspension for Gill Net Yardage Restrictions** Vote on Rule Suspension for Atlantic Ocean Striped Bass Gear Permit Date** 4:45 p.m. Rulemaking Update – Catherine Blum Review public comment and vote on final rules (earliest effective date April 1, 2012). Review of Hearing and Public Comment Vote on Approving Permanent Rules on the Following Subjects:** 1. 15A NCAC 03M .0504 - Repeal rule and continue management of the spotted seatrout fishery via existing proclamation authority 2. 15A NCAC 03M .0519 - Incorporate the current, long-standing proclamation closure of the American shad ocean fishery into rule 3. 15A NCAC 03O .0111 - Streamline the service of process for the surrender of fishing licenses by allowing service to licensees by certified mail 4. 15A NCAC 03O .0114 - Establish requirements for the suspension, revocation and reissuance of licenses 5:30 p.m. Recess Nov. 4 8:30 a.m. Director’s Report Reports and updates on recent Division of Marine Fisheries activities. Legislative Update Oyster Season – Mike Marshall Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Smooth Dogfish Atlantic Menhaden Highly Migratory Species – Randy Gregory For-Hire License Report – Don Hesselman Recreational Discard Mortality Workgroup Report – John Hadley Protected Resources – Red Munden Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council – Red Munden South Atlantic Fishery Management Council – Michelle Duval Recurring Updates Marine Patrol Report Coastal Recreational Fishing License Sales Report Coastal Angler Program Red Drum and Striped Bass Quota Southern Flounder Landings Big Book of Data and Semi-Annual Landings Bulletin 10 a.m. Issues from Commissioners 10:30 a.m. Adjourn 2012 Meeting Schedule: Feb. 22-24 Morehead City area Aug. 22-24 Raleigh area May 9-11 Morehead City area Nov. 7-9 Morehead City area * Times indicated are merely for guidance. The commission will proceed through the agenda until completed. **Action Items Minnuutes THE MFC ADVISER Marine Fisheries Commission Business Meeting The Holiday Inn Brownstone, Raleigh North Carolina Sept. 7-9, 2011 The Marine Fisheries Commission and the Division of Marine Fisheries continue to look for ways to keep committee advisers and the public informed about commission activities. It is our intent to publish the MFC Adviser after each business meeting, summarizing the meeting, and providing a list of motions and rulemaking proceedings. Hopefully this bulletin will keep you better informed about commission activities. Visit http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/marine- fisheries-commission-and-related-links to view this and past issues of the Adviser. Your comments regarding this update are always appreciated – please contact Nancy Fish by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 252-808-8021 or 1-800-682-2632. The commission held a public meeting on the evening of Sept. 7, followed by a business meeting Sept. 8 and 9 at the Holiday Inn Brownstone in Raleigh, North Carolina. The following commission members were in attendance: Rob Bizzell-Chairman, Anna Beckwith, Mikey Daniels, Chris Elkins, Allyn Powell, Joe Shute, Bradley Styron and Darrell Taylor. Joseph Smith had an excused absence. The briefing book and presentations from this meeting can be found at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/september-2011-mfc-briefing-book. The audio of this meeting can be found at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/mfc-meetings-audio. PUBLIC MEETING – SEPT. 7 The public meeting began at 6 p.m. Chairman Rob Bizzell advised that anyone who wishes to speak to the commission on a fisheries-related matter may do so during this public comment period or at 9:15 a.m. the following day. Bizzell explained that given time constraints individuals may speak only once, either on Sept. 7 or on Sept. 8, but not during both public comment periods. The following individuals spoke: Chris McCafferty, a commercial fisherman from Morehead City, expressed concerned about regulatory discards. He recommended the commission remove all size limits because size limits result in dead discards. McCafferty said the commission should set annual quotas on all targeted species and have a bycatch allowance on non-targeted species, with 10 percent of quota set aside for trip limit overages. He said all overages should be donated to the poor. He said a cooperative fish house should be established at the N.C. Port in Morehead City instead of toxic sulfur plant that had been considered. McCafferty said portable windmill-powered aerators should be used to mix coastal waters that have low dissolved oxygen to avoid fish kills, that artificial reefs could be the perfect union of aquaculture and commercially wild-caught fish, that the state should develop markets for rays and skates that are eating bay scallops and management should have the goal of a balanced harvest of as many different species as possible. 1 Greg Hurt, the vice chair of the Coastal Conservation Association-NC, asked the commission to consider our state’s sensitive and valuable fisheries resources when making management decisions. Bill Mandulak, with the Coastal Conservation Association-NC, said that for the commercial ocean striped bass fishery the CCA does not think hook-and-line is an appropriate term to be used as it implies the possibility of long lines, and feels that rod-and-reel is a better term to use. He said the purpose of his organization’s comments is to eliminate waste and not to exceed the quota, while allowing fishermen to fish safely, while catching their quota. Mandulak said the CCA feels: Trawling should be eliminated immediately as a gear type in the commercial ocean striped bass fishery and replaced with a rod-and-reel gear category.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Appendices...................................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................vii List of Figures............................................................................................................................................vii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER 1.0 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Background..................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1.1 Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) .......................................................1-1 1.1.2 Purpose of Using a Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) to Analyze This Proposed Action..........................................................................................................1-2 1.2 Purpose and Need........................................................................................................................1-3 1.2.1 Purpose of the Proposed Action...........................................................................................1-3 1.2.2 Need for the Proposed Action..............................................................................................1-4
    [Show full text]
  • The President of the United States Transmitting
    93d Congress, 2d Session House Document No. 93- 403 PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM COMMUNICATION FHOVI THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRANSMITTING PROPOSALS FOR THIRTY-SEVEN ADDITIONS TO THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM AND DEFERRAL OF ACTION ON FIVE AREAS SUITABLE FOR INCLUSION IN THE SYSTEM, AND RECOMMENDATIONS AGAINST THE INCLUSION OF FOUR OTHER AREAS STUDIED, PURSUANT TO SECTION 3 OF THE WILDER- NESS ACT OF 1964 [16 USC 1132] PART 31 UL BEND WILDERNESS MONTANA DECEMBER 4, 197 4. - Referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs and ordered to be printed with illustrations. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1974 THE WHITE HOUSE • WASHINGTON D e cembe r 4, 1974 Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the Wilderness Act of September 3, 1964, I am pleased to transmit herewith proposals for thirty-seven additions to the National Wilderness Preservation System. As described in the Wilderness Message that I am con­ currently sending to the Congress today, the proposed new wilderness areas cover a total of over nine million primeval acres. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior has recommended that Congressional action on five other areas which include surface lands suitable for wilderness be deferred for the reasons set forth below: A. Three areas which are open to mining might be needed in the future to provide vital minerals fer the Nation, but these areas have not been adequately surveyed for mineral deposits. The areas are the • Kofa Game Range, Arizona; Charles Sheldon Antelope Range, Nevada and Oregon; and, Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Range, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L
    Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 10, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) Sec. 1132. Extent of System. § 1110. Liability 1133. Use of wilderness areas. 1134. State and private lands within wilderness (a) United States areas. The United States Government shall not be 1135. Gifts, bequests, and contributions. liable for any act or omission of the Commission 1136. Annual reports to Congress. or of any person employed by, or assigned or de- § 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System tailed to, the Commission. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of (b) Payment; exemption of property from attach- policy; wilderness areas; administration for ment, execution, etc. public use and enjoyment, protection, preser- Any liability of the Commission shall be met vation, and gathering and dissemination of from funds of the Commission to the extent that information; provisions for designation as it is not covered by insurance, or otherwise. wilderness areas Property belonging to the Commission shall be In order to assure that an increasing popu- exempt from attachment, execution, or other lation, accompanied by expanding settlement process for satisfaction of claims, debts, or judg- and growing mechanization, does not occupy ments. and modify all areas within the United States (c) Individual members of Commission and its possessions, leaving no lands designated No liability of the Commission shall be im- for preservation and protection in their natural puted to any member of the Commission solely condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy on the basis that he occupies the position of of the Congress to secure for the American peo- member of the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 156/Tuesday, August 15, 2017
    38654 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules substantial number of small entities ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 AGENCY commenting-epa-dockets. U.S.C. 601 et seq.); FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 40 CFR Part 52 • Does not contain any unfunded Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory mandate or significantly or uniquely [EPA–R04–OAR–2016–0634; FRL–9966–32– Management Section, Air Planning and affect small governments, as described Region 4] Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Regional Environmental Protection Agency, of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Haze Progress Report Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., • Does not have Federalism Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. AGENCY: implications as specified in Executive Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Notarianni can be reached by phone at Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, (404) 562–9031 and via electronic mail ACTION: 1999); Proposed rule. at [email protected]. • Is not an economically significant SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: regulatory action based on health or Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a I. Background safety risks subject to Executive Order State Implementation Plan (SIP) States are required to submit a 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); revision submitted by the State of progress report in the form of a SIP • Georgia, Department of Natural Is not a significant regulatory action Resources, through the Georgia revision during the first implementation subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Environmental Protection Division (GA period that evaluates progress towards 28355, May 22, 2001); EPD) on January 8, 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeastern Regional Haze Project Update
    Environmental Show of the South Chattanooga, Tennessee May 15, 2019 Southeastern Regional Haze Project Update John Hornback Executive Director Metro 4/SESARM 1 Presentation Outline • Introduction to Metro 4/SESARM • Regional haze program expectations • Key VISTAS project tasks • VISTAS technical analysis status • What we’ve learned • Consultation and communications • Remaining work and projected schedule 2 Metro 4/SESARM WHO WE ARE • Nonprofit corporations • Multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJOs) • Organized in mid-1990s by locals/states • Metro 4 membership – 17 local agencies ➢in AL, FL, KY, NC, and TN • SESARM membership – 10 states ➢AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN, VA, WV • Funded by member agencies, mostly via grants 3 Metro 4/SESARM WHAT WE DO Mission: To enhance the effectiveness of member agencies in managing and improving air quality.” • Advocate positions of agencies on issues • Promote communications • Offer training courses • Manage regional meetings and workshops • Support technical analysis projects • “Other duties as assigned” 4 1999 Regional Haze Rule Objectives • Reduction of visibility impairment on the 20% haziest (worst) days in national park and wilderness (Class I) areas to natural conditions by 2064 • No worsening of visibility on the 20% cleanest (best) days. • Development of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) every 10 years to address emissions that contribute to regional haze. 5 Regional Haze Rule Requirements 40 CFR 51.308 • Establish baseline visibility conditions (2000 – 2004) • Evaluate most impaired and
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1480 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1113 (Pub
    § 1113 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1480 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 13, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation § 1113. Authorization of appropriations System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- There are hereby authorized to be appro- priations be available for additional personnel priated to the Department of the Interior with- stated as being required solely for the purpose of out fiscal year limitation such sums as may be managing or administering areas solely because necessary for the purposes of this chapter and they are included within the National Wilder- the agreement with the Government of Canada ness Preservation System. signed January 22, 1964, article 11 of which pro- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined vides that the Governments of the United States A wilderness, in contrast with those areas and Canada shall share equally the costs of de- where man and his own works dominate the veloping and the annual cost of operating and landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where maintaining the Roosevelt Campobello Inter- the earth and its community of life are un- national Park. trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- (Pub. L. 88–363, § 14, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this chapter an CHAPTER 23—NATIONAL WILDERNESS area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its PRESERVATION SYSTEM primeval character and influence, without per- manent improvements or human habitation, Sec. which is protected and managed so as to pre- 1131.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement Uwharrie National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan National Forests in North Carolina
    U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Final Environmental Impact Statement Uwharrie National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan National Forests in North Carolina R8-MB-140B May 2012 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Final Environmental Impact Statement Uwharrie National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan National Forests in North Carolina May 2012 Responsible Agency: USDA Forest Service Elizabeth Agpaoa Responsible Official: Regional Forester 1720 Peachtree Road NW Atlanta, GA 30309 404-347-4177 For more information contact: Forest Supervisor National Forests in North Carolina 160 Zillicoa Street Suite A Asheville, NC 28801 (828) 257- 4200 Abstract: Three alternatives for revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP or Forest Plan) for the Uwharrie National Forest are described, compared, and analyzed in detail in this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).
    [Show full text]
  • The Wilderness Act of 1964
    The Wilderness Act of 1964 Source: US House of Representatives Office of the Law This is the 1964 act that started it all Revision Counsel website at and created the first designated http://uscode.house.gov/download/ascii.shtml wilderness in the US and Nevada. This version, updated January 2, 2006, includes a list of all wilderness designated before that date. The list does not mention designations made by the December 2006 White Pine County bill. -CITE- 16 USC CHAPTER 23 - NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM 01/02/2006 -EXPCITE- TITLE 16 - CONSERVATION CHAPTER 23 - NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM -HEAD- CHAPTER 23 - NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM -MISC1- Sec. 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of policy; wilderness areas; administration for public use and enjoyment, protection, preservation, and gathering and dissemination of information; provisions for designation as wilderness areas. (b) Management of area included in System; appropriations. (c) "Wilderness" defined. 1132. Extent of System. (a) Designation of wilderness areas; filing of maps and descriptions with Congressional committees; correction of errors; public records; availability of records in regional offices. (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classifications as primitive areas; Presidential recommendations to Congress; approval of Congress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Eagles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado. (c) Review by Secretary of the Interior of roadless areas of national park system and national wildlife refuges and game ranges and suitability of areas for preservation as wilderness; authority of Secretary of the Interior to maintain roadless areas in national park system unaffected. (d) Conditions precedent to administrative recommendations of suitability of areas for preservation as wilderness; publication in Federal Register; public hearings; views of State, county, and Federal officials; submission of views to Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 39/Tuesday, February
    11858 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of practicable and permitted by law, to Resources, Division of Air Quality Children From Environmental Health make environmental justice part of their (NCDAQ), on December 17, 2007, that Risks and Safety Risks mission by identifying and addressing, addresses regional haze for the first The EPA interprets Executive Order as appropriate, disproportionately high implementation period. This revision 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as and adverse human health or addresses the requirements of the Clean applying only to those regulatory environmental effects of their programs, Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s rules that actions that concern health or safety policies, and activities on minority require states to prevent any future and risks, such that the analysis required populations and low-income remedy any existing anthropogenic under section 5–501 of the Executive populations in the United States. impairment of visibility in mandatory Order has the potential to influence the The EPA lacks the discretionary Class I areas (national parks and regulation. This proposed action is not authority to address environmental wilderness areas) caused by emissions subject to Executive Order 13045 justice in this proposed action. In of air pollutants from numerous sources because it is not an economically reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s located over a wide geographic area significant regulatory action based on role is to approve or disapprove state (also referred to as the ‘‘regional haze health or safety risks subject to choices, based on the criteria of the program’’).
    [Show full text]
  • FY12 Priority County and Area List (June 7, 2012)
    FY12 Priority County and Area List Office of Transportation and Air Quality Revised June 7, 2012 Please refer to the DERA Request for Proposals, Appendix D, for additional information The DERA program places a priority on projects that are located in areas that have the highest emissions from diesel engines. The term “project location,” as used in the FY 2012 National Clean Diesel Funding Assistance Program RFP, refers to the primary area where the affected vehicles/engines operate, or the primary area where the emissions benefits of the project will be realized. Please note that applicants may apply for projects that are not located in priority areas. These counties and areas were selected as priority areas for the DERA program based on data from a number of sources. The sources include counties and areas: Designated as PM2.5 or 8-Hr Ozone Nonattainment Areas or 8-Hr Ozone Maintenance Areas. Data is sourced from EPA’s Green Book of Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants. (www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk) Where all or part of the population is exposed to more than 2.0 ìg/m3 of diesel particulate matter emissions. Data is sourced from the 2005 National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment. (www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata2005) That are designated as Federal Class I Areas. (www.epa.gov/visibility/class1.html) That have been accepted to participate in EPA’s Ozone Advance Program by the close of this RFP, June 4, 2012. (www.epa.gov/ozoneadvance) Page 1 of 9 FY12 Priority County and Area List Office of Transportation and Air Quality Revised June 7, 2012 Please refer to the DERA Request for Proposals, Appendix D, for additional information STATE COUNTY or AREA STATE COUNTY or AREA STATE COUNTY or AREA AK Anchorage ME Waldo OH Licking AK Bering Sea Wilderness Area ME York OH Lorain AK Denali National Park (formerly Mt.
    [Show full text]