``McCormick & Baxter'' Regulated Navigation Area, Willamette River, Portland, OR, 5989-5991 [E9-2308]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
wake speed or at the minimum speed
necessary to maintain steerage.
Dated: December 2, 2008.
J.P. Currier,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9–2310 Filed 2–3–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Regulatory Information
On June 3, 2008, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled ‘‘McCormick and Baxter
Regulated Navigation Area, Willamette
River, Portland, OR’’ in the Federal
Register (73 FR 31652). We received no
letters commenting on the proposed
rule. No public meeting was requested,
and none was held.
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0121]
RIN 1625–AA11
‘‘McCormick & Baxter’’ Regulated
Navigation Area, Willamette River,
Portland, OR
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a Regulated Navigation
Area on the Willamette River, Portland,
Oregon. This action is necessary to
preserve the integrity of the engineered
pilot cap placed over contaminated
sediments as part of an Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund
cleanup action at the McCormick &
Baxter Creosoting Company Superfund
Site. This rule is needed to prohibit
activities that would cause disturbance
of pilot cap material, which was placed
to isolate and contain underlying
contaminated sediment.
DATES: This rule is effective March 6,
2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, are part
of docket USCG–2008–0121 and are
available online by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, selecting the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, inserting USCG–
2008–0121 in the Docket ID box,
pressing Enter, and then clicking on the
item in the Docket ID column. This
material is also available for inspection
or copying at two locations: The Docket
Management Facility (M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays and U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Portland, 6767 North
Basin Ave., Portland, OR 97217,
between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:03 Feb 03, 2009
Jkt 217001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call
MST1 Jaime Sayers, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Portland, Waterways
Management Branch, telephone 503–
240–9300. If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
The McCormick & Baxter Creosoting
Company operated between 1944 and
1991, treating wood products with
creosote, pentachlorophenol and
inorganic (arsenic, copper, chromium,
and zinc) preservative solutions.
Historically, process wastewaters were
discharged directly to the Willamette
River, and other process wastes were
dumped in several areas of the Site.
Significant concentrations of woodtreating chemicals have been found in
soil and groundwater at the site and in
river sediments adjacent to the Site. The
EPA listed the Site on the National
Priorities List (NPL) in June 1994 based
on information collected by DEQ
between September 1990 and September
1992. The EPA also designated the DEQ
as the lead agency for implementing the
selected remedy while funding for
remedial design and construction was
primarily provided by EPA. The DEQ
implemented a number of interim
removal measures between 1992 and
1994, including plant demolition,
sludge and soil removals, and extraction
of creosote from the groundwater
aquifers. The Record of Decision (ROD)
was issued by WPA and DEQ in April
1996 after considering public comments
on the Proposed Cleanup Plan. The
remedy addressed contaminated ground
water, soil and sediment. A component
of the groundwater remedy, initiated in
1994, consisted of an automated
creosote extraction and groundwater
treatment system. However, due to poor
product recovery and high operating
costs, the automated system was
discontinued in late 2000. Creosote is
currently being recovered by passive
and manual methods. Approximately
6,200 gallons have been recovered since
1991. A contingency groundwater
remedy was implemented in the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5989
summer of 2003, with the construction
of a combination steel sheet pile and
soil Bentonite slurry wall surrounding
18 acres. The purpose of the barrier wall
is to prevent migration of creosote to the
Willamette River. Implementation of the
soil remedy began in March 1999 with
the removal of 33,000 tons of highly
contaminated soil and debris. The soil
remedy was completed in September
2005 following installation of a
combination impermeable/earthen
cap—the impermeable portion covering
the area within the subsurface barrier
wall. The sediment remedy was
implemented in 2004 and primarily
consisted of an armored sand cap placed
over 23 acres of contaminated sediment.
Construction occurred during the
summers of 2004 and 2005. Sediment
cap construction performed in 2005
followed construction work performed
by the City of Portland to stabilize two
high pressure sewer lines located within
a one-acre portion of the sediment cap.
In addition to the sand layer, an oil
adsorptive material known as
organophyllic clay was used in two
creosote seep areas. To protect the cap
from erosion, the sand and
organophyllic clay were armored with a
combination of rock and articulated
concrete blocks. Erosion forces
evaluated in designing the cap armoring
layer included hydraulic-induced
stresses due to river currents associated
with a 500-year flood, vessel-induced
propeller velocities from a tractor tug
and various sized recreational boats,
wind waves associated with a 100-year
wind storm and vessel wakes associated
with various boats including a 100-ft
fireboat traveling at 14 knots. These
forces were evaluated for river level
variations due to tidal action and flood
currents. Additionally, numerical
modeling was used to analyze wave
transformation and capping of the
riverbank with two feet of topsoil, turf
reinforcement matting and herbaceous
vegetation. Revegitation of the capped
riverbank with native trees and shrubs
took place in February 2006 after the
soil had been stabilized with the native
grasses planted in November 2004. The
DEQ has requested the issuance of this
RNA in order to prohibit activities that
may damage the engineered sediment
cap at the Site. Although the sediment
cap is designed to withstand a variety of
anticipated erosional forces, the cap is
susceptible to damage, such as from
propeller wash, deployment of barge
spuds, deployment and dragging of
anchors, and grounding of large vessels.
If the engineered sediment cap were to
be damaged by marine activities, the
contaminated sediments which underlie
E:\FR\FM\04FER1.SGM
04FER1
5990
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
the cap could be released to the river
thereby posing an unacceptable threat to
public health and the environment.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
No comments were received on this
rule during the comment period such
that no changes have been made to the
rule.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
This 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.
We expect the economic impact of
this rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
The effect of this regulation will not be
significant based on the fact there will
be minimal if any effect on the
navigable waterway around the
regulated area due to the regulated
navigation area’s proximity to the shore.
The local maritime community will be
informed of the regulated navigation
area via marine informational Notice to
Mariners.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this 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 rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: The owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit or anchor in
a portion of the Willamette River. This
rule will not have a significant
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:03 Feb 03, 2009
Jkt 217001
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the
regulated navigation area is limited in
size leaving ample room for vessels to
navigate around the area. Vessels
engaged in commerce with the existing
refueling pipeline located within the
site should not be affected by this
regulation in those activities but are
advised to minimize potential impacts
such as anchoring, wake scouring, and
dragging in the vicinity of the pilot cap.
Though this rule will not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
in the NPRM we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so
that they could better evaluate its effects
on them and participate in the
rulemaking process.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 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.
Civil Justice Reform
Collection of Information
This rule calls 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 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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.
This 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 rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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 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
E:\FR\FM\04FER1.SGM
04FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
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 rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded under that this action is
one of a category of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, this rule is
categorically excluded, under section
2.B.2. Figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction and neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required. This rule involves the
establishing, disestablishing, or
changing Regulated Navigation Areas,
and security or safety zones. An
environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
§ 165.1323 Regulated Navigation Area:
Willamette River Portland, Oregon Captain
of the Port Zone.
(a) Location. The following is a
regulated navigation area (RNA): All
waters of the Willamette River
encompassed by a line commencing at
45°34′.33″ N, 122°44′17″ W to 45°34′32″
N, 122°44′18″ W thence to 45°34′35″ N,
122°44′24″ W thence to 45°34′35″ N,
122°44′27″ W thence to 45°34′35″ N,
122°44′36″ W thence to 45°34′35″ N,
122°44′37″ W thence to 45°34′38″ N,
122°44′42″ W to 45°34′39″ N, 122°44′43″
W thence to 45°34′44″ N, 122°44′51″ W
thence to 45°34′45″ N, 122°44′53″ W
thence to 45°34′47’’ N, 122°44′51″ W
thence to 45°34′45″ N, 122°44′46″ W to
45°34′45″ N, 122°44′45″ W thence to
45°34′47″ N, 122°44′43″ W thence to
45°34′46″ N, 122°44′42″ W thence to
45°34′48″ N, 122°44′40’’ W thence to
45°34′48″ N, 122°44′38″ W and along
the shoreline to 45°34′46″ N, 122°44′39″
W and back to the point of origin. All
coordinates reference 1983 North
American Datum (NAD 83).
(b) Regulations. (1) Anchoring,
spudding, dredging, laying cable,
dragging, trawling, conducting salvage
operations, operating commercial
vessels of any size, and operating
recreational vessels greater than 30 feet
in length are prohibited in the regulated
area.
(2) All vessels transiting or accessing
the regulated area shall do so at no wake
speed or at the minimum speed
necessary to maintain steerage.
Dated: December 2, 2008.
J.P. Currier,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9–2308 Filed 2–3–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, and
Waterways.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
[EPA–HQ–OECA–2009–0006; FRL–8766–2]
40 CFR Part 6
■
RIN 2020–AA48
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, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
■
2. Add § 165.1323 to read as follows:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:03 Feb 03, 2009
Jkt 217001
Procedures for Implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act and
Assessing the Environmental Effects
Abroad of EPA Actions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a direct final
rule to make corrections to its rule
entitled ‘‘Procedures for Implementing
the National Environmental Policy Act
and Assessing the Effects Abroad of EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5991
Actions,’’ which was published
September 19, 2007. Since the final rule
became effective on October 19, 2007,
EPA has received inquiries about some
minor inconsistencies and ambiguities
in the final rule. This action involves
four minor, technical corrections to the
rule to address those issues. The first
correction expands the definition of
‘‘applicants’’ to include those who
request EPA approvals. The second
change clarifies that a categorical
exclusion includes vacant land. The
third change corrects the text to indicate
that the number of extraordinary
circumstances is ten. The last change
expands Subpart C to apply to EPA
approvals as well as permits and
assistance grants.
DATES: This rule is effective on April 6,
2009 without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse comment by March 6,
2009. If EPA receives adverse comment,
we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OECA–2009–0006, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: Hargrove.robert@epa.gov.
• Fax: 202–564–0072, Attention:
Robert Hargrove.
• Mail: EPA–HQ–OECA–2009–0006,
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), Enforcement
and Compliance Docket and Information
Center, Mailcode: 2201T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery: Public Reading
Room, Room B102, Enforcement and
Compliance Docket and Information
Center, EPA West Building, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20004. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OECA–2009–
0006. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
E:\FR\FM\04FER1.SGM
04FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 22 (Wednesday, February 4, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5989-5991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2308]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0121]
RIN 1625-AA11
``McCormick & Baxter'' Regulated Navigation Area, Willamette
River, Portland, OR
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a Regulated Navigation Area on
the Willamette River, Portland, Oregon. This action is necessary to
preserve the integrity of the engineered pilot cap placed over
contaminated sediments as part of an Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Superfund cleanup action at the McCormick & Baxter Creosoting
Company Superfund Site. This rule is needed to prohibit activities that
would cause disturbance of pilot cap material, which was placed to
isolate and contain underlying contaminated sediment.
DATES: This rule is effective March 6, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2008-0121 and are available online by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket Search option
on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2008-0121 in the Docket
ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in the Docket ID
column. This material is also available for inspection or copying at
two locations: The Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department
of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays and U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Portland, 6767 North Basin Ave., Portland, OR 97217, between 8
a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call MST1 Jaime Sayers, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Portland, Waterways
Management Branch, telephone 503-240-9300. If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On June 3, 2008, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``McCormick and Baxter Regulated Navigation Area,
Willamette River, Portland, OR'' in the Federal Register (73 FR 31652).
We received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public
meeting was requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
The McCormick & Baxter Creosoting Company operated between 1944 and
1991, treating wood products with creosote, pentachlorophenol and
inorganic (arsenic, copper, chromium, and zinc) preservative solutions.
Historically, process wastewaters were discharged directly to the
Willamette River, and other process wastes were dumped in several areas
of the Site. Significant concentrations of wood-treating chemicals have
been found in soil and groundwater at the site and in river sediments
adjacent to the Site. The EPA listed the Site on the National
Priorities List (NPL) in June 1994 based on information collected by
DEQ between September 1990 and September 1992. The EPA also designated
the DEQ as the lead agency for implementing the selected remedy while
funding for remedial design and construction was primarily provided by
EPA. The DEQ implemented a number of interim removal measures between
1992 and 1994, including plant demolition, sludge and soil removals,
and extraction of creosote from the groundwater aquifers. The Record of
Decision (ROD) was issued by WPA and DEQ in April 1996 after
considering public comments on the Proposed Cleanup Plan. The remedy
addressed contaminated ground water, soil and sediment. A component of
the groundwater remedy, initiated in 1994, consisted of an automated
creosote extraction and groundwater treatment system. However, due to
poor product recovery and high operating costs, the automated system
was discontinued in late 2000. Creosote is currently being recovered by
passive and manual methods. Approximately 6,200 gallons have been
recovered since 1991. A contingency groundwater remedy was implemented
in the summer of 2003, with the construction of a combination steel
sheet pile and soil Bentonite slurry wall surrounding 18 acres. The
purpose of the barrier wall is to prevent migration of creosote to the
Willamette River. Implementation of the soil remedy began in March 1999
with the removal of 33,000 tons of highly contaminated soil and debris.
The soil remedy was completed in September 2005 following installation
of a combination impermeable/earthen cap--the impermeable portion
covering the area within the subsurface barrier wall. The sediment
remedy was implemented in 2004 and primarily consisted of an armored
sand cap placed over 23 acres of contaminated sediment. Construction
occurred during the summers of 2004 and 2005. Sediment cap construction
performed in 2005 followed construction work performed by the City of
Portland to stabilize two high pressure sewer lines located within a
one-acre portion of the sediment cap. In addition to the sand layer, an
oil adsorptive material known as organophyllic clay was used in two
creosote seep areas. To protect the cap from erosion, the sand and
organophyllic clay were armored with a combination of rock and
articulated concrete blocks. Erosion forces evaluated in designing the
cap armoring layer included hydraulic-induced stresses due to river
currents associated with a 500-year flood, vessel-induced propeller
velocities from a tractor tug and various sized recreational boats,
wind waves associated with a 100-year wind storm and vessel wakes
associated with various boats including a 100-ft fireboat traveling at
14 knots. These forces were evaluated for river level variations due to
tidal action and flood currents. Additionally, numerical modeling was
used to analyze wave transformation and capping of the riverbank with
two feet of topsoil, turf reinforcement matting and herbaceous
vegetation. Revegitation of the capped riverbank with native trees and
shrubs took place in February 2006 after the soil had been stabilized
with the native grasses planted in November 2004. The DEQ has requested
the issuance of this RNA in order to prohibit activities that may
damage the engineered sediment cap at the Site. Although the sediment
cap is designed to withstand a variety of anticipated erosional forces,
the cap is susceptible to damage, such as from propeller wash,
deployment of barge spuds, deployment and dragging of anchors, and
grounding of large vessels. If the engineered sediment cap were to be
damaged by marine activities, the contaminated sediments which underlie
[[Page 5990]]
the cap could be released to the river thereby posing an unacceptable
threat to public health and the environment.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
No comments were received on this rule during the comment period
such that no changes have been made to the rule.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
This 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.
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The effect of this
regulation will not be significant based on the fact there will be
minimal if any effect on the navigable waterway around the regulated
area due to the regulated navigation area's proximity to the shore. The
local maritime community will be informed of the regulated navigation
area via marine informational Notice to Mariners.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in a portion of the Willamette River. This rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities because the regulated navigation area is limited in size
leaving ample room for vessels to navigate around the area. Vessels
engaged in commerce with the existing refueling pipeline located within
the site should not be affected by this regulation in those activities
but are advised to minimize potential impacts such as anchoring, wake
scouring, and dragging in the vicinity of the pilot cap.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). 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 rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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 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
[[Page 5991]]
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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
under that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
section 2.B.2. Figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction and
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required. This rule involves the establishing,
disestablishing, or changing Regulated Navigation Areas, and security
or safety zones. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
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, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add Sec. 165.1323 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1323 Regulated Navigation Area: Willamette River Portland,
Oregon Captain of the Port Zone.
(a) Location. The following is a regulated navigation area (RNA):
All waters of the Willamette River encompassed by a line commencing at
45[deg]34'.33'' N, 122[deg]44'17'' W to 45[deg]34'32'' N,
122[deg]44'18'' W thence to 45[deg]34'35'' N, 122[deg]44'24'' W thence
to 45[deg]34'35'' N, 122[deg]44'27'' W thence to 45[deg]34'35'' N,
122[deg]44'36'' W thence to 45[deg]34'35'' N, 122[deg]44'37'' W thence
to 45[deg]34'38'' N, 122[deg]44'42'' W to 45[deg]34'39'' N,
122[deg]44'43'' W thence to 45[deg]34'44'' N, 122[deg]44'51'' W thence
to 45[deg]34'45'' N, 122[deg]44'53'' W thence to 45[deg]34'47'' N,
122[deg]44'51'' W thence to 45[deg]34'45'' N, 122[deg]44'46'' W to
45[deg]34'45'' N, 122[deg]44'45'' W thence to 45[deg]34'47'' N,
122[deg]44'43'' W thence to 45[deg]34'46'' N, 122[deg]44'42'' W thence
to 45[deg]34'48'' N, 122[deg]44'40'' W thence to 45[deg]34'48'' N,
122[deg]44'38'' W and along the shoreline to 45[deg]34'46'' N,
122[deg]44'39'' W and back to the point of origin. All coordinates
reference 1983 North American Datum (NAD 83).
(b) Regulations. (1) Anchoring, spudding, dredging, laying cable,
dragging, trawling, conducting salvage operations, operating commercial
vessels of any size, and operating recreational vessels greater than 30
feet in length are prohibited in the regulated area.
(2) All vessels transiting or accessing the regulated area shall do
so at no wake speed or at the minimum speed necessary to maintain
steerage.
Dated: December 2, 2008.
J.P. Currier,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E9-2308 Filed 2-3-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P