Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Louisiana; Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset Analysis, 67317-67318 [E6-19642]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 21, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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.
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
Technical Standards
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.
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
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 and Department of
Homeland Security Management
Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that 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, we believe that
this proposed rule should be
categorically excluded, under figure 2–
1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction,
from further environmental
documentation. This proposed rule fits
in paragraph (34)(g) because it is a
regulated navigation area. A preliminary
‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. Comments on this
section will be considered before we
make the final decision whether this
rule should be categorically excluded
from further environmental review.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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 proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Nov 20, 2006
Jkt 211001
2. Add new temporary § 165.T07–187
to read as follows:
§ 165.T07–187 Regulated Navigation Area,
San Carlos Bay, Florida.
(a) Regulated area. The following area
is a regulated navigation area (RNA):
The waters bounded by the following
points: NW Corner: 26°28′59″ N,
082°00′54″ W; NE Corner: 26°28′59″ N,
082°00′52″ W; SE Corner: 26°28′57″ N,
082°00′51″ W; SW Corner: 26°28′57″ N,
082°00′53″ W.
(b) Regulations. (1) A vessel in the
RNA established under paragraph (a) of
this section will operate at no-wake
speed. Nothing in this rule is to be
construed as to negate the requirement
to at all times operate at a safe speed as
provided in the Navigation Rules and
Regulations.
(2) A one-way traffic scheme is
established. Vessel traffic may proceed
in one direction at a time through the
RNA. Overtaking is prohibited.
(3) Tugs with barges must be arranged
in a push-ahead configuration, with the
barges made up in tandem, or as side
tows. Tugs must be of adequate
horsepower to maneuver the barges. Tug
and barge traffic may transit the RNA at
slack water only.
(4) Stern tows are prohibited except
for assistance towing vessels, subject to
certain conditions. Assistance towing
vessels may conduct stern tows of
disabled vessels that are less than or
equal to 30 feet in length. For vessels
that are greater than 30 feet in length,
assistance towing vessels may use a
towing arrangement in which one
assistance towing vessel is in the lead,
towing the disabled vessel, and another
assistance towing vessel is astern of the
disabled vessel. Side tows are also
permitted. All assistance towing vessels
operating within the regulated
navigation area must be of adequate
horsepower to maneuver the vessel
under tow and the transit must be at
slack water only.
(c) Definitions. The following
definitions apply to this section:
(1) Assistance towing means
assistance provided to disabled vessels.
(2) Assistance towing vessels means
commercially registered or documented
vessels that have been specially
equipped to provide commercial
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67317
services in the marine assistance
industry.
(3) Disabled vessel means a vessel,
which, while being operated, has been
rendered incapable of proceeding under
its own power and is in need of
assistance.
(4) Overtaking means a vessel shall be
deemed to be overtaking when coming
up with another vessel from a direction
more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam,
that is, in such a position with reference
to the vessel she is overtaking, that at
night she would be able to see only the
stern light of the vessel but neither of
her sidelights.
(5) Slack water means the state of a
tidal current when its speed is near
zero, especially the moment when a
reversing current changes direction and
its speed is zero. The term also is
applied to the entire period of low
speed near the time of turning of the
current when it is too weak to be of any
practical importance in navigation.
(6) Vessel means every description of
watercraft, including non-displacement
craft and seaplanes, used or capable of
being used as a means of transportation
on the water.
(d) Violations. Persons in violation of
these regulations will be subject to civil
penalty under 33 U.S.C. 1232 of this
part, to include a maximum civil
penalty of $32,500 per violation.
(e) Effective period. This section is
effective from 8 a.m. on January 7, 2007,
until 8 a.m. on January 6, 2008.
Dated: October 31, 2006.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–19680 Filed 11–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2006–0390; FRL–8244–7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana; Baton Rouge Ozone
Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles
Traveled Offset Analysis
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
the Louisiana State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for the Baton Rouge Ozone
Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) Offset Analysis
submitted to EPA on March 22, 2005.
E:\FR\FM\21NOP1.SGM
21NOP1
67318
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 21, 2006 / Proposed Rules
The Baton Rouge area became subject to
this requirement upon its
reclassification from serious to severe 1hour ozone nonattainment. This action
is being taken under sections 110 and
182 of the Federal Clean Air Act, as
amended (the Act).
Written comments must be
received on or before December 21,
2006.
DATES:
Comments may be mailed to
Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning
Section (6PD–L), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
Comments may also be submitted
electronically or through hand delivery/
courier by following the detailed
instructions in the ADDRESSES section of
the direct final rule located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.
ADDRESSES:
Mrs.
Sandra Rennie at (214) 665–7367, Air
Planning Section (6PD–L),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, fax number
214–665–7263; e-mail address
rennie.sandra@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
In the
final rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
SIP submittal as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this action, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA
receives adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
For additional information, see the
direct final rule, which is located in the
rules section of this Federal Register.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: November 9, 2006.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E6–19642 Filed 11–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Nov 20, 2006
Jkt 211001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Columbian SharpTailed Grouse as Threatened or
Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
Columbian sharp-tailed grouse
(Tympanuchus phasianellus
columbianus) as threatened or
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. We
find that the petition does not provide
substantial information indicating that
listing the Columbian sharp-tailed
grouse may be warranted. Therefore, we
are not initiating a further status review
in response to this petition. We ask the
public to submit to us any new
information that becomes available
concerning the status of the Columbian
sharp-tailed grouse or threats to it.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made on November 21,
2006. Comments and information
concerning this finding may be
submitted until further notice.
ADDRESSES: Data, information,
comments, and material concerning this
finding may be submitted to the
Supervisor, Upper Columbia Fish and
Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 11103 East Montgomery Drive,
Spokane, WA 99206. The complete file
for this finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the above
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Martin, Field Supervisor, Upper
Columbia Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES section above), by telephone
at (509) 891–6839, or by facsimile to
(509) 891–6748.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), requires that
we make a finding on whether a petition
to list, delist, or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information to indicate that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base the finding on
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
information provided in the petition
and supporting information available in
our files at the time of the petition
review. To the maximum extent
practicable, we are to make the finding
within 90 days of our receipt of the
petition, and publish a notice of the
finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
Our standard for substantial
information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we
find that substantial information was
presented, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species.
In making this finding, we evaluated
information provided by the petitioners
and contained in our files in accordance
with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our process of
coming to a 90-day finding under
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 50 CFR
424.14(b) is limited to a determination
of whether the information in the
petition provides ‘‘substantial
information’’ that the petitioned action
may be warranted.
On October 18, 2004, we received a
petition, dated October 14, 2004, from
Forest Guardians, American Lands
Alliance, Biodiversity Conservation
Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity,
Center for Native Ecosystems, The Larch
Company, Northwest Ecosystem
Alliance, Oregon Natural Desert
Association, and Western Watersheds
Project (petitioners). The petitioners
requested that the Columbian sharptailed grouse be listed as threatened or
endangered throughout its historic range
in accordance with section 4 of the Act.
We were required to complete a
significant number of listing actions in
2005, pursuant to court orders and
judicially approved settlement
agreements, and were unable to address
the petition at that time. On January 18,
2005, we acknowledged receipt of the
petition, and indicated to the petitioners
that we would not be able to address the
petition at that time due to other
priorities relating to court orders and
settlement agreements. On November
25, 2005, we received a Notice of Intent
to Sue (NOI), dated November 22, 2005,
for our failure to make a 90-day finding
on the petition. On April 5, 2006, we
received a formal complaint, which had
been filed on March 20, 2006. On May
31, 2006, the U.S. District Court of Idaho
granted a Stipulated Settlement
Agreement between us and the
petitioners, wherein we agreed to
publish a 90-day finding on the petition
E:\FR\FM\21NOP1.SGM
21NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 21, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67317-67318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19642]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2006-0390; FRL-8244-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana; Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles Traveled
Offset Analysis
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the Louisiana State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for the Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) Offset Analysis submitted to EPA on March 22, 2005.
[[Page 67318]]
The Baton Rouge area became subject to this requirement upon its
reclassification from serious to severe 1-hour ozone nonattainment.
This action is being taken under sections 110 and 182 of the Federal
Clean Air Act, as amended (the Act).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 21,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Comments may also be
submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier by following
the detailed instructions in the Addresses section of the direct final
rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Sandra Rennie at (214) 665-7367,
Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region
6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, fax number
214-665-7263; e-mail address rennie.sandra@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action,
no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments,
the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments
received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
For additional information, see the direct final rule, which is
located in the rules section of this Federal Register.
Dated: November 9, 2006.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E6-19642 Filed 11-20-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
