Security Zones; Brazos River, Freeport, TX, 8491-8493 [2010-3814]

Download as PDF jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized as follows: (1) Moored vessels or vessels anchored in a designated anchorage area are permitted to remain moored or anchored if they come within a security zone described in paragraph (a) of this section. A moored or an anchored vessel in a security zone must remain moored or anchored unless it obtains permission from the Captain of the Port to do otherwise. (2) Commercial vessels operating at the waterfront facilities within these zones. (3) Commercial vessel transiting directly to or from waterfront facilities within these zones. (4) Vessels providing direct operational/logistic support to commercial vessels within these zones. (5) Vessels operated by the port authority or by facilities located within these zones. (6) Vessels operated by Federal, State, county, or municipal agencies. (7) All persons and vessels within the moving security zone must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston and designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard. (8) To request permission as required by these regulations, contact the Sector Houston-Galveston Command Center by telephone at (713) 671–5113. In Freeport, vessels should contact the Captain of the Port’s designated onscene representative for the moving security zone on VHF Channel 16, or by telephone at (979) 233–7551. (c) Certain vessel definition. For the purposes of this section, certain vessel means any vessel within the 12 nautical mile U.S. Territorial Waters and bound for the Port of Freeport that is deemed to be in need of a moving security zone by the Captain of the Port, HoustonGalveston for security reasons. In making this determination, the Captain of the Port considers all relevant security factors, including but not limited to the presence of unusually harmful or hazardous substances and the risk to population or infrastructure. (d) Informational broadcasts. The Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston will inform the public when moving security zones have been established around certain vessels via Broadcast Notice to Mariners on VHF channel 16 and 13. Vessels that have a moving security zone in place around them will display the international signal flag or pennant number five. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:14 Feb 24, 2010 Jkt 220001 (e) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231 and 50 U.S.C. 191, the authority for this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226. Dated: December 28, 2009. M.E. Woodring, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston. [FR Doc. 2010–3832 Filed 2–24–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2009–0501] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zones; Brazos River, Freeport, TX Coast Guard, DHS. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has established four permanent security zones in the Brazos River in Freeport, Texas. These security zones are being put in place to protect vessels, waterfront facilities, and surrounding areas from destruction, loss, or injury caused by terrorism, sabotage, subversive acts, accidents, or incidents of a similar nature. Entry into these zones is prohibited except by permission of the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston. DATES: This rule is effective March 29, 2010. 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–2009–0501 and are available online by going to http:// www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– 2009–0501 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is also available for inspection or copying at 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant junior grade Margaret Brown, Coast Guard Sector HoustonGalveston; telephone (713) 678–9001, email margaret.a.brown@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 9826. PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 8491 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On November 24, 2009 we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Security Zones; Brazos River, Freeport, TX in the Federal Register (74 FR 61305). We received no comments on the proposed rule. Background and Purpose Heightened awareness of potential terrorist acts requires enhanced security of our ports, harbors, and vessels. To enhance security, the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston has established four permanent security zones within the port of Freeport, TX. These zones protect waterfront facilities, persons, and vessels from subversive or terrorist acts. Vessels operating within the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston Zone are potential targets of terrorist attacks, or potential launch platforms for terrorist attacks on other vessels, waterfront facilities, and adjacent population centers. The zones are in areas with a high concentration of commercial facilities that are considered critical to national security. All vessels not exempted under 33 CFR 165.814(c) desiring to enter this zone are required to obtain express permission from the Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston or his designated representative prior to entry. This rule is not designed to restrict access to vessels engaged, or assisting in commerce with waterfront facilities within the security zones, vessels operated by port authorities, vessels operated by waterfront facilities within the security zones, and vessels operated by Federal, State, county or municipal agencies. By limiting access to this area the Coast Guard reduces potential methods of attack on vessels, waterfront facilities, and adjacent population centers located within the zones. Discussion of Comments and Changes We received no comments on the proposed rule, published November 24, 2009. No public meeting was requested and none was held. The Coast Guard is implementing the rule as proposed, without change. 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 E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM 25FER1 8492 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 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. The economic impact of this rule is so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation was unnecessary. The basis of this finding is that the security zones are not part of the Federal Channel. The zones do not impede commercial traffic to, from, or within the Port of Freeport. Recreational and commercial fishing vessels are to transit the Brazos River within the Federal Channel. 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. This rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reason: This rule does not interfere with any commercial vessel traffic within the Old Brazos River. 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. 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). jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES 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. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:14 Feb 24, 2010 Jkt 220001 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 does 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 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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 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 023–01 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 this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves establishing security 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, Waterways. ■ 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 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, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM 25FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 2. Revise § 165.814(a)(5) to read as follows: § 165.814 Security Zones; Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston Zone. (a) * * * (5) Freeport, Texas. (i) The Dow Barge Canal, containing all waters of the Dow Barge Canal north of a line drawn between 28°56.81′ N/095°18.33′ W and 28°56.63′ N/095°18.54′ W (NAD 1983). (ii) The Brazos Harbor, containing all waters west of a line drawn between 28°56.45′ N, 095°20.00′ W, and 28°56.15′ N, 095°20.00′ W (NAD 1983) at its junction with the Old Brazos River. (iii) The Dow Chemical plant, containing all waters of the Brazos Point Turning Basin within 100′ of the north shore and bounded on the east by the longitude line drawn through 28°56.58′ N/095°18.64′ W and on the west by the longitude line drawn through 28°56.64′ N/095°19.13′ W (NAD 1983). (iv) The Seaway Teppco Facility, containing all waters of the Brazos Port Turning Basin bounded on the south by the shore, the north by the Federal Channel, on the east by the longitude line running through 28°56.44′ N, 095°18.83′ W and 28°56.48′ N 095°18.83′ W and on the West by the longitude line running through 28°56.12′ N, 095°19.27′ W and 28°56.11′ N, 095°19.34′ W (NAD 1983). (v) The Conoco Phillips Facility docks, containing all waters within 100′ of a line drawn from a point on shore at Latitude 28°55.96′ N, Longitude 095°19.77′ W, extending west to a point on shore at Latitude 28°56.19′ N, Longitude 095°20.07′ W (NAD 1983). * * * * * ■ Dated: January 7, 2010. M.E. Woodring, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston. [FR Doc. 2010–3814 Filed 2–24–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0871; FRL–9116–1] jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Revisions to the Definition of Volatile Organic Compound and Other Terms Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:14 Feb 24, 2010 Jkt 220001 Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions amend the wording of 22 definitions, including the definition of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC). EPA is approving these revisions to Virginia’s definitions in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: This rule is effective on April 26, 2010 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by March 29, 2010. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2009–0871 by one of the following methods: A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. B. E-mail: frankford.harold@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0871, Harold A. Frankford, Air Protection Division, Mailcode 3AP00, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. 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–R03–OAR–2009– 0871. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at 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 www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 8493 you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harold A. Frankford, (215) 814–2108, or by e-mail at frankford.harold@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. On October 6, 2009, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a formal revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revision consists of amendments to 22 definitions listed in 9VAC5 Chapter 10 (General Definitions), Regulation 5–10– 20 (Terms defined). The amended terms are: Ambient air quality standard, Criteria pollutant, Dispersion technique, Emission limitation, Emission standard, Excessive concentration, Federal Clean Air Act, Federally enforceable, Good engineering practice, Initial emission test, Initial performance test, Public hearing, Reference method, Regulations for the Control and Abatement of Air Pollution, Reid vapor pressure, Run, Standard of performance, State enforceable, These regulations, True vapor pressure, Vapor pressure, and Volatile organic compound. II. Summary of SIP Revision Virginia amended the definition of ‘‘Volatile organic compound’’ to add the organic compound (1)1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5decafluoro-3-methoxy-4trifluoromethyl-pentane (HFE–7300) to E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM 25FER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8491-8493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3814]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0501]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zones; Brazos River, Freeport, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has established four permanent security zones 
in the Brazos River in Freeport, Texas. These security zones are being 
put in place to protect vessels, waterfront facilities, and surrounding 
areas from destruction, loss, or injury caused by terrorism, sabotage, 
subversive acts, accidents, or incidents of a similar nature. Entry 
into these zones is prohibited except by permission of the Captain of 
the Port Houston-Galveston.

DATES: This rule is effective March 29, 2010.

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-2009-0501 and are available online by going to 
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0501 in the ``Keyword'' 
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also available for 
inspection or copying at 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or e-mail Lieutenant junior grade Margaret Brown, Coast Guard 
Sector Houston-Galveston; telephone (713) 678-9001, e-mail 
margaret.a.brown@uscg.mil. 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 November 24, 2009 we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Security Zones; Brazos River, Freeport, TX in the 
Federal Register (74 FR 61305). We received no comments on the proposed 
rule.

Background and Purpose

    Heightened awareness of potential terrorist acts requires enhanced 
security of our ports, harbors, and vessels. To enhance security, the 
Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston has established four permanent 
security zones within the port of Freeport, TX.
    These zones protect waterfront facilities, persons, and vessels 
from subversive or terrorist acts. Vessels operating within the Captain 
of the Port Houston-Galveston Zone are potential targets of terrorist 
attacks, or potential launch platforms for terrorist attacks on other 
vessels, waterfront facilities, and adjacent population centers. The 
zones are in areas with a high concentration of commercial facilities 
that are considered critical to national security.
    All vessels not exempted under 33 CFR 165.814(c) desiring to enter 
this zone are required to obtain express permission from the Captain of 
the Port Houston-Galveston or his designated representative prior to 
entry. This rule is not designed to restrict access to vessels engaged, 
or assisting in commerce with waterfront facilities within the security 
zones, vessels operated by port authorities, vessels operated by 
waterfront facilities within the security zones, and vessels operated 
by Federal, State, county or municipal agencies. By limiting access to 
this area the Coast Guard reduces potential methods of attack on 
vessels, waterfront facilities, and adjacent population centers located 
within the zones.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    We received no comments on the proposed rule, published November 
24, 2009. No public meeting was requested and none was held. The Coast 
Guard is implementing the rule as proposed, without change.

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

[[Page 8492]]

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. The economic impact of this rule is so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation was unnecessary. The basis of 
this finding is that the security zones are not part of the Federal 
Channel. The zones do not impede commercial traffic to, from, or within 
the Port of Freeport. Recreational and commercial fishing vessels are 
to transit the Brazos River within the Federal Channel.

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. This rule does not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reason: This 
rule does not interfere with any commercial vessel traffic within the 
Old Brazos River.

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.

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 does 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 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 023-01 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 
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually 
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. 
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph 
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves establishing security 
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, 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, and 160.5; 
Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.


[[Page 8493]]



0
2. Revise Sec.  165.814(a)(5) to read as follows: Sec.  165.814 
Security Zones; Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston Zone.
    (a) * * *
    (5) Freeport, Texas. (i) The Dow Barge Canal, containing all waters 
of the Dow Barge Canal north of a line drawn between 28[deg]56.81' N/
095[deg]18.33' W and 28[deg]56.63' N/095[deg]18.54' W (NAD 1983).
    (ii) The Brazos Harbor, containing all waters west of a line drawn 
between 28[deg]56.45' N, 095[deg]20.00' W, and 28[deg]56.15' N, 
095[deg]20.00' W (NAD 1983) at its junction with the Old Brazos River.
    (iii) The Dow Chemical plant, containing all waters of the Brazos 
Point Turning Basin within 100' of the north shore and bounded on the 
east by the longitude line drawn through 28[deg]56.58' N/095[deg]18.64' 
W and on the west by the longitude line drawn through 28[deg]56.64' N/
095[deg]19.13' W (NAD 1983).
    (iv) The Seaway Teppco Facility, containing all waters of the 
Brazos Port Turning Basin bounded on the south by the shore, the north 
by the Federal Channel, on the east by the longitude line running 
through 28[deg]56.44' N, 095[deg]18.83' W and 28[deg]56.48' N 
095[deg]18.83' W and on the West by the longitude line running through 
28[deg]56.12' N, 095[deg]19.27' W and 28[deg]56.11' N, 095[deg]19.34' W 
(NAD 1983).
    (v) The Conoco Phillips Facility docks, containing all waters 
within 100' of a line drawn from a point on shore at Latitude 
28[deg]55.96' N, Longitude 095[deg]19.77' W, extending west to a point 
on shore at Latitude 28[deg]56.19' N, Longitude 095[deg]20.07' W (NAD 
1983).
* * * * *

    Dated: January 7, 2010.
M.E. Woodring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Houston-Galveston.
[FR Doc. 2010-3814 Filed 2-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P