Regulated Navigation Area; Middle Waterway EPA Superfund Cleanup Site, Commencement Bay, Tacoma, WA, 12654-12656 [E6-3534]
Download as PDF
12654
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Dated: March 3, 2006.
Linda S. Kahan,
Deputy Director, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health.
[FR Doc. E6–3522 Filed 3–10–06; 8:45 am]
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (CGD13–06–001),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know they reached us, please enclose
a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change
this proposed rule in view of them.
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD13–06–001]
RIN 1625–AA11
Regulated Navigation Area; Middle
Waterway EPA Superfund Cleanup
Site, Commencement Bay, Tacoma,
WA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
create a permanent regulated navigation
area on a portion of Commencement
Bay, Tacoma, Washington. This
regulated navigation area would be used
to preserve the integrity of a clean
sediment cap placed over certain areas
of the Middle Waterway as part of the
remediation process at the
Commencement Bay, Nearshore/
Tideflats Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) superfund cleanup site.
This regulated navigation area would
prohibit activities that would disturb
the seabed, such as anchoring, dragging,
trawling, or other activities that involve
disrupting the integrity of the cap. It
would not affect transit or navigation of
the area.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
April 12, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Sector
Commander, Sector Seattle, 1519
Alaskan Way South, Seattle,
Washington 98134. Sector Seattle
maintains the public docket [CGD13–
06–001] for this rulemaking. Comments
and material received from the public,
as well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at Sector Seattle between 8 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
LTJG Jes Hagen, c/o Captain of the Port
Puget Sound, 1519 Alaskan Way South,
Seattle, WA 98134, (206) 217–6232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:18 Mar 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to Sector
Seattle at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one
would aid this rulemaking, we will hold
one at a time and place announced by
a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The Middle Waterway is part of the
Commencement Bay Nearshore/
Tideflats Superfund Cleanup Site and is
located between the Thea Foss
Waterway and the St. Paul Waterway in
Commencement Bay, Washington. The
site includes property owned by Foss
Maritime Company, Simpson Timber
Company, and the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
as well as property leased by Marine
Industries Northwest, Inc. (MINI).
Part of the remediation process for the
site consists of covering the
contaminated sediments with a thicklayer cap. The thick-layer caps consist
of approximately three feet of sand,
gravel, and light-loose riprap and were
placed in various locations within the
waterway to contain contaminated
sediments. The thick-layer cap areas
cover approximately two acres of
sediment in the waterway.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This is to be a permanent regulation
restricting activities such as anchoring,
dragging, trawling, or other activities
that involve disrupting the integrity of
the cap. Activities common in the
proposed regulated areas include
tugboat and log-rafting activities,
tugboat moorage, removal and
launching of boats for repair and other
boat repair and maintenance activities.
The thick-layer cap areas were designed
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to be compatible with the activities
described above that are associated with
a working waterfront. The material used
for the cap was chosen to be able to
contain underlying sediments without
altering the main activities of the
working waterway.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office
of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. This expectation is
based on the fact that the regulated areas
established by the rule would
encompass a small area that should not
impact commercial or recreational
traffic.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
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. This rule would affect the
following entities, some of which may
be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to anchor,
dredge, spud, lay cable or disturb the
seabed in any fashion when this rule is
in effect. The zone would not have a
significant economic impact due to its
small area.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or
complain about this rule or any policy
or action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
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 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.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:18 Mar 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
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.
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 Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12655
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the
Instruction, from further environmental
documentation.
A draft ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ and a draft ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ are available
in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the
final decision on whether the rule
should be categorically excluded from
further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
Proposed Regulation
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 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: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.1322 to read as follows:
§ 165.1322 Middle Waterway,
Commencement Bay, Tacoma, WA.
(a) Regulated Areas. The following
areas are regulated navigation areas:
(1) All waters of the Middle Waterway
bounded by a line connecting the
following points:
Point 1: 47°15′49.337″ N,
122°25′55.056″ W;
Point 2: 47°15′43.600″ N,
122°25′51.453″ W;
Point 3: 47°15′43.296″ N,
122°25′51.948″ W;
Point 4: 47°15′49.159″ N,
122°25′55.630″ W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(2) All waters of the Middle Waterway
bounded by a line connecting the
following points:
Point 1: 47°15′47.774″ N,
122°25′58.517″ W;
Point 2: 47°15′45.138″ N,
122°25′56.894″ W;
Point 3: 47°15′45.113″ N,
122°25′57.863″ W;
Point 4: 47°15′47.430″ N,
122°25′59.644″ W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(3) All waters of the Middle Waterway
bounded by a line connecting the
following points:
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
12656
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 48 / Monday, March 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Point 1: 47°15′43.548″ N,
122°25′54.498″ W;
Point 2: 47°15′42.288″ N,
122°25′53.354″ W;
Point 3: 47°15′43.245″ N,
122°25′55.476″ W;
Point 4: 47°15′42.040″ N,
122°25′54.653″ W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(4) All waters of the Middle Waterway
bounded by a line connecting the
following points:
Point 1: 47°15′42.288″ N,
122°25′55.130″ W;
Point 2: 47°15′39.162″ N,
122°25′53.835″ W;
Point 3: 47°15′39.035″ N,
122°25′54.458″ W;
Point 4: 47°15′41.738″ N,
122°25′55.599″ W;
Point 5: 47°15′41.259″ N,
122°25′57.162″ W;
Point 6: 47°15′41.559″ N,
122°25′57.362″ W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(5) All waters of the Middle Waterway
bounded by a line connecting the
following points:
Point 1: 47°15′32.879″ N,
122°25′49.223″ W;
Point 2: 47°15′28.149″ N,
122°25′46.088″ W;
Point 3: 47°15′28.067″ N,
122°25′46.351″ W;
Point 4: 47°15′32.129″ N,
122°25′49.155″ W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(b) Regulations. All vessels and
persons are prohibited from anchoring,
dredging, laying cable, dragging,
seining, bottom fishing, conducting
salvage operations, or any other activity
which could potentially disturb the
seabed in the designated regulated
navigation area. Vessels may otherwise
transit or navigate within this area
without reservation.
(c) Waiver. The Captain of the Port,
Puget Sound, upon advice from the U.S.
EPA Project Manager and the
Washington State Department of Natural
Resources, may, upon written request,
authorize a waiver from this section if
it is determined that the proposed
operation supports USEPA remedial
objectives, or can be performed in a
manner that ensures the integrity of the
sediment cap. A written request must
describe the intended operation, state
the need, and describe the proposed
precautionary measures. Requests
should be submitted in triplicate, to
facilitate review by U.S. EPA, Coast
Guard, and Washington State Agencies.
USEPA managed remedial design,
remedial action, habitat mitigation, or
monitoring activities associated with the
Middle Waterway Superfund Site are
excluded from the waiver requirement.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:18 Mar 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
USEPA is required, however, to alert the
Coast Guard in advance concerning any
of the above-mentioned activities that
may, or will, take place in the Regulated
Area.
Dated: February 28, 2006.
Richard R. Houck,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–3534 Filed 3–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 228
RIN 0596–AC20
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 3160
[W0–610–411H12–24 1A]
RIN 1004–AD59
Onshore Oil and Gas Operations;
Federal and Indian Oil and Gas Leases;
Onshore Oil and Gas Order Number 1,
Approval of Operations
AGENCIES: U.S. Forest Service,
Agriculture; Bureau of Land
Management, Interior.
ACTION: Further proposed rule;
Reopening of comment period.
SUMMARY: This further proposed rule
amends the proposed rule published in
the Federal Register on July 27, 2005
(70 FR 43349). The proposed rule would
revise existing Onshore Oil and Gas
Order Number 1 (see 48 FR 48916 as
amended at 48 FR 56226 (1983)). The
Order provides the requirements
necessary for the approval of all
proposed oil and gas exploratory,
development, or service wells on all
Federal and Indian (except Osage Tribe)
onshore oil and gas leases, including
leases where the surface is managed by
the U.S. Forest Service (FS). It also
covers approvals necessary for
subsequent well operations, including
abandonment. This further proposed
rule amends the proposed rule by
making the provisions on the
Application for Permits to Drill or
Deepen (APD) package processing
consistent with the Energy Policy Act of
2005. In addition, this further proposed
rule amends a provision in the proposed
rule having to do with proposed
operations on lands with Indian surface
and Federal minerals. This notice also
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
reopens the comment period for the
proposed rule for 30 days.
DATES: Send your comments on this
further proposed rule and the proposed
rule to the BLM on or before April 12,
2006. The BLM and the FS will not
necessarily consider any comments
received after the above date during its
decision on the rule.
ADDRESSES: Mail: Director (630), Bureau
of Land Management, Eastern States
Office, 7450 Boston Boulevard,
Springfield, Virginia 22153.
Hand Delivery: 1620 L Street, NW.,
Suite 401, Washington, DC 20036.
E-mail:
comments_washington@blm.gov.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Burd at (202) 452–5017 or Ian
Senio at (202) 452–5049 at the BLM or
Barry Burkhardt at (801) 625–5157 at
the FS. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may contact these persons
through the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339, 24
hours a day, 7 days a week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Comment Procedures
II. Background and Discussion of Further
Proposed Rule
III. Procedural Matters
I. Public Comment Procedures
You may submit your comments by
any one of several methods:
You may mail your comments to:
Director (630), Bureau of Land
Management, Eastern States Office, 7450
Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia
22153, Attention: RIN 1004–AD59.
You may deliver comments to: 1620 L
Street NW., Suite 401, Washington, DC
20036. You may e-mail your comment
to: comments_washington@blm.gov.
(Include ‘‘Attention: AD59’’ in the
subject line).
You may submit your comments via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov.
Please make your comments on the
rule as specific as possible, confine
them to issues pertinent to the proposed
rule or the further proposed rule, and
explain the reason for any changes you
recommend. Where possible, your
comments should reference the specific
section or paragraph of the proposal that
you are addressing.
The Department of the Interior and
the FS may not necessarily consider or
include in the Administrative Record
for the final rule comments that we
receive after the close of the comment
period (see DATES) or comments
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 48 (Monday, March 13, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12654-12656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-3534]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD13-06-001]
RIN 1625-AA11
Regulated Navigation Area; Middle Waterway EPA Superfund Cleanup
Site, Commencement Bay, Tacoma, WA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to create a permanent regulated
navigation area on a portion of Commencement Bay, Tacoma, Washington.
This regulated navigation area would be used to preserve the integrity
of a clean sediment cap placed over certain areas of the Middle
Waterway as part of the remediation process at the Commencement Bay,
Nearshore/Tideflats Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) superfund
cleanup site. This regulated navigation area would prohibit activities
that would disturb the seabed, such as anchoring, dragging, trawling,
or other activities that involve disrupting the integrity of the cap.
It would not affect transit or navigation of the area.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before April 12, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Sector
Commander, Sector Seattle, 1519 Alaskan Way South, Seattle, Washington
98134. Sector Seattle maintains the public docket [CGD13-06-001] for
this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for
inspection or copying at Sector Seattle between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTJG Jes Hagen, c/o Captain of the
Port Puget Sound, 1519 Alaskan Way South, Seattle, WA 98134, (206) 217-
6232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD13-06-
001), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Sector Seattle at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The Middle Waterway is part of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/
Tideflats Superfund Cleanup Site and is located between the Thea Foss
Waterway and the St. Paul Waterway in Commencement Bay, Washington. The
site includes property owned by Foss Maritime Company, Simpson Timber
Company, and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), as well as property leased by Marine Industries Northwest, Inc.
(MINI).
Part of the remediation process for the site consists of covering
the contaminated sediments with a thick-layer cap. The thick-layer caps
consist of approximately three feet of sand, gravel, and light-loose
riprap and were placed in various locations within the waterway to
contain contaminated sediments. The thick-layer cap areas cover
approximately two acres of sediment in the waterway.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This is to be a permanent regulation restricting activities such as
anchoring, dragging, trawling, or other activities that involve
disrupting the integrity of the cap. Activities common in the proposed
regulated areas include tugboat and log-rafting activities, tugboat
moorage, removal and launching of boats for repair and other boat
repair and maintenance activities. The thick-layer cap areas were
designed to be compatible with the activities described above that are
associated with a working waterfront. The material used for the cap was
chosen to be able to contain underlying sediments without altering the
main activities of the working waterway.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant''
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This expectation is based on the
fact that the regulated areas established by the rule would encompass a
small area that should not impact commercial or recreational traffic.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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. This rule would affect the following
entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators
of vessels intending to anchor, dredge, spud, lay cable or disturb the
seabed in any fashion when this rule is in effect. The zone would not
have a significant economic impact due to its small area.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small
[[Page 12655]]
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.
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 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.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
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.
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 Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation.
A draft ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a draft
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be
considered before we make the final decision on whether the rule should
be categorically excluded from further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
Proposed Regulation
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
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: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add Sec. 165.1322 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1322 Middle Waterway, Commencement Bay, Tacoma, WA.
(a) Regulated Areas. The following areas are regulated navigation
areas:
(1) All waters of the Middle Waterway bounded by a line connecting
the following points:
Point 1: 47[deg]15'49.337'' N, 122[deg]25'55.056'' W;
Point 2: 47[deg]15'43.600'' N, 122[deg]25'51.453'' W;
Point 3: 47[deg]15'43.296'' N, 122[deg]25'51.948'' W;
Point 4: 47[deg]15'49.159'' N, 122[deg]25'55.630'' W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(2) All waters of the Middle Waterway bounded by a line connecting
the following points:
Point 1: 47[deg]15'47.774'' N, 122[deg]25'58.517'' W;
Point 2: 47[deg]15'45.138'' N, 122[deg]25'56.894'' W;
Point 3: 47[deg]15'45.113'' N, 122[deg]25'57.863'' W;
Point 4: 47[deg]15'47.430'' N, 122[deg]25'59.644'' W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(3) All waters of the Middle Waterway bounded by a line connecting
the following points:
[[Page 12656]]
Point 1: 47[deg]15'43.548'' N, 122[deg]25'54.498'' W;
Point 2: 47[deg]15'42.288'' N, 122[deg]25'53.354'' W;
Point 3: 47[deg]15'43.245'' N, 122[deg]25'55.476'' W;
Point 4: 47[deg]15'42.040'' N, 122[deg]25'54.653'' W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(4) All waters of the Middle Waterway bounded by a line connecting
the following points:
Point 1: 47[deg]15'42.288'' N, 122[deg]25'55.130'' W;
Point 2: 47[deg]15'39.162'' N, 122[deg]25'53.835'' W;
Point 3: 47[deg]15'39.035'' N, 122[deg]25'54.458'' W;
Point 4: 47[deg]15'41.738'' N, 122[deg]25'55.599'' W;
Point 5: 47[deg]15'41.259'' N, 122[deg]25'57.162'' W;
Point 6: 47[deg]15'41.559'' N, 122[deg]25'57.362'' W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(5) All waters of the Middle Waterway bounded by a line connecting
the following points:
Point 1: 47[deg]15'32.879'' N, 122[deg]25'49.223'' W;
Point 2: 47[deg]15'28.149'' N, 122[deg]25'46.088'' W;
Point 3: 47[deg]15'28.067'' N, 122[deg]25'46.351'' W;
Point 4: 47[deg]15'32.129'' N, 122[deg]25'49.155'' W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(b) Regulations. All vessels and persons are prohibited from
anchoring, dredging, laying cable, dragging, seining, bottom fishing,
conducting salvage operations, or any other activity which could
potentially disturb the seabed in the designated regulated navigation
area. Vessels may otherwise transit or navigate within this area
without reservation.
(c) Waiver. The Captain of the Port, Puget Sound, upon advice from
the U.S. EPA Project Manager and the Washington State Department of
Natural Resources, may, upon written request, authorize a waiver from
this section if it is determined that the proposed operation supports
USEPA remedial objectives, or can be performed in a manner that ensures
the integrity of the sediment cap. A written request must describe the
intended operation, state the need, and describe the proposed
precautionary measures. Requests should be submitted in triplicate, to
facilitate review by U.S. EPA, Coast Guard, and Washington State
Agencies. USEPA managed remedial design, remedial action, habitat
mitigation, or monitoring activities associated with the Middle
Waterway Superfund Site are excluded from the waiver requirement. USEPA
is required, however, to alert the Coast Guard in advance concerning
any of the above-mentioned activities that may, or will, take place in
the Regulated Area.
Dated: February 28, 2006.
Richard R. Houck,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-3534 Filed 3-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P