Security Zone; Vessels Carrying Hazardous Cargo, Sector Columbia River Captain of the Port Zone, 76328-76331 [2010-30738]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
76328
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01,
and 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 made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment because it
simply promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Revise § 117.661 to read as follow:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 117.661 Duluth Ship Canal (DuluthSuperior Harbor).
The draw of the Duluth Ship Canal
Aerial bridge, mile 0.25 at Duluth, shall
open on signal; except that, from the
Friday before Memorial Day through the
Tuesday after Labor Day each year,
between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m.,
seven days a week, the drawbridge shall
open on the hour and half-hour for
vessels under 300 gross tons, if needed;
and the bridge will open on signal for
all vessels from 9 p.m. to 7 a.m., seven
days a week, and at all times for
Federal, State, and local government
vessels, vessels in distress, commercial
vessels engaged in rescue or emergency
salvage operations, commercial-assist
towing vessels engaged in towing or
port operations, vessels engaged in pilot
duties, vessels seeking shelter from
severe weather, and all vessels 300 gross
tons or greater. From January 1 through
March 15, the draw shall open on signal
if at least 12 hours notice is given. The
opening signal is one prolonged blast,
one short blast, one prolonged blast, one
short blast. If the drawbridge is
disabled, the bridge authorities shall
give incoming and outgoing vessels
timely and dependable notice, by tug
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Dec 07, 2010
Jkt 223001
service if necessary, so that the vessels
do not attempt to enter the canal.
Dated: November 23, 2010.
M.N. Parks,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,
Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010–30739 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2009–1134]
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail MST1 Jaime Sayers,
Waterways Management Division, Coast
Guard Sector Columbia River; telephone
503–240–9319, e-mail
Jaime.A.Sayers@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone; Vessels Carrying
Hazardous Cargo, Sector Columbia
River Captain of the Port Zone
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes the
establishment of a 500 yard security
zone around vessels carrying hazardous
cargo, as determined by the Captain of
the Port (COTP) Columbia River, when
such vessels are located in the Sector
Columbia River COTP Zone as defined
in 33 CFR 3.65–15 and the COTP
Columbia River determines that a
security zone is necessary and
enforcement of that security zone is
practicable. The security zones will help
ensure the security of the vessels
themselves as well as the maritime
public due to the hazardous nature of
the cargo on board.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before March 8, 2011. Requests for
public meetings must be received by the
Coast Guard on or before January 24,
2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2009–1134 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: 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–
0001.
(4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these four methods. See the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2009–1134),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online(via https://
www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://
www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the
comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or
mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a phone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu
select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert
‘‘USCG–2009–1134’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the
balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column.
If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to
know that they reached the Facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
all comments and material received
during the comment period and we may
change the rule based on your
comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2009–
1134’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation to use
the Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of comments received into any of
our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review a Privacy
Act, system of records notice regarding
our public dockets in the January 17,
2008, issue of the Federal Register (73
FR 3316).
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one on or before January 24, 2011
using one of the four methods specified
under ADDRESSES. Please explain why
you believe a public meeting 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
Vessels carrying hazardous cargo
occasionally operate in the Sector
Columbia River COTP Zone. Examples
of hazardous cargoes include, but are
not limited to, liquefied petroleum gas,
ammonium nitrate and associated
mixtures, anhydrous ammonia, and
chlorine. The security zones that would
be created by this rule will help ensure
the security of the vessels themselves as
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Dec 07, 2010
Jkt 223001
well as the maritime public in general
by prohibiting all persons or vessels
from coming within 500 yards of such
vessels while located in Sector
Columbia River COTP Zone. In the past,
the COTP Columbia River has issued
temporary security zones to cover
certain vessels carrying hazardous
cargo.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes the
establishment of a 500 yard security
zone around any vessel carrying
hazardous cargo, as determined by the
COTP Columbia River, when such a
vessel is located in the Sector Columbia
River COTP Zone as defined in 33 CFR
3.65–15 and the COTP Columbia River
determines that a security zone is
necessary and enforcement of that
security zone is practicable.
All persons and vessels would be
prohibited from entering or remaining
in the security zone unless authorized
by the COTP Columbia River. The
maritime public will be notified when a
security zone is effective via the
presence of one or more Coast Guard
vessels to enforce the zone and a local
broadcast notice to mariners.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed 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 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. The Coast Guard has made this
determination based on the fact that the
security zones created by this rule will
only be in effect during the limited
periods of time when vessels carrying
hazardous cargo, as determined by the
COTP Columbia River, are located in the
Sector Columbia River COTP Zone. In
addition, maritime traffic will be able to
transit around the security zones or, if
necessary, may be allowed to transit
through the security zones with
permission from the COTP Columbia
River.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76329
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 proposed rule may affect the
following entities, some of which may
be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to operate
in an area covered by a security zone
created by this rule. The security zones
created by this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
however, because they will only be in
effect during the limited periods of time
when vessels carrying hazardous cargo,
as determined by the COTP Columbia
River, are located in the Sector
Columbia River COTP Zone. In
addition, maritime traffic will be able to
transit around the security zones or, if
necessary, may be allowed to transit
through the security zones with
permission from the COTP Columbia
River.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
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 proposed rule would affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact
MST1 Jaime Sayers, Waterways
Management Division, Coast Guard
Sector Columbia River at telephone
503–240–9319. The Coast Guard will
not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this
proposed 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
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
76330
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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 (adjusted for inflation) 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 cause 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.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Dec 07, 2010
Jkt 223001
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
We invite your comments on how this
proposed rule might impact Tribal
governments, even if that impact may
not constitute a ‘‘Tribal implication’’
under the Order.
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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01
and Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, 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 this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
involves the establishment of a security
zone. Therefore, this rule would be
categorically excluded under Figure 2–
1, paragraph (34) (g) of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, which
addresses regulations establishing,
disestablishing, or changing regulated
navigable areas and security or safety
zones. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
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:
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.
2. Add § 165.1335 to read as follows:
§ 165.1335 Security Zone; Vessels
Carrying Hazardous Cargo, Sector
Columbia River Captain of the Port Zone.
(a) Location. The following area is a
security zone: All waters within 500
yards, in all directions, of any vessel
carrying hazardous cargo, as determined
by the Captain of the Port (COTP)
Columbia River, while such a vessel is
located in the Sector Columbia River
COTP Zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.65–
15 and the COTP Columbia River
determines that a security zone is
necessary and enforcement of the
security zone is practicable.
(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance
with the general regulations in 33 CFR
part 165, subpart D, no person or vessel
may enter or remain in a security zone
created by this section without the
permission of the COTP Columbia River
or his/her designated representative.
Designated representatives are Coast
Guard personnel authorized by the
COTP Columbia River to grant persons
or vessels permission to enter or remain
in a security zone created by this
section. Subpart D of 33 CFR part 165
contains additional provisions
applicable to a security zone created by
this section.
(2) To request permission to enter a
security zone created by this section,
contact Coast Guard Sector Columbia
River at telephone number 503–861–
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules
6212 or via VHF channel 16 (156.8
MHz) or VHF channel 22 (157.1 MHz).
(c) Notification. When a security zone
is created by this section, one or more
Coast Guard vessels will be present to
enforce the security zone and the COTP
Columbia River will issue a local
broadcast notice to mariners.
Dated: November 5, 2010.
D.E. Kaup,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Sector Columbia River.
[FR Doc. 2010–30738 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 49
[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0683; FRL–9235–3]
Extension of Public Comment Period
and Postponement of Public Hearings
for Source Specific Federal
Implementation Plan for Implementing
Best Available Retrofit Technology for
Four Corners Power Plant: Navajo
Nation
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of extended public
comment period and postponed public
hearings.
AGENCY:
On October 19, 2010, EPA
published in the Federal Register our
proposed determination of the Best
Available Retrofit Technology (BART)
for the Four Corners Power Plant and
requested comment by December 20,
2010. EPA is extending the public
comment period until March 18, 2011,
for our proposed BART determination.
EPA is also postponing the open houses
and public hearings announced in the
Federal Register on November 12, 2010
and will provide additional notice and
details of the rescheduled hearings at a
later time.
DATES: Comments must be submitted no
later than March 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2010–0683, by one of the
following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
E-mail: r9air_fcppbart@epa.gov.
Mail or deliver: Anita Lee (Air-3), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Dec 07, 2010
Jkt 223001
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://www.regulations.gov is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. 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.
If
you have questions please contact Anita
Lee, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3958,
r9air_fcppbart@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
On
October 19, 2010, the Region 9 Office of
the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a
Source Specific Federal Implementation
Plan to implement the Best Available
Retrofit Technology for Four Corners
Power Plant, located on the Navajo
Nation (75 FR 64221). The Clean Air
Act’s Regional Haze Rule requires the
use of Best Available Retrofit
Technology (BART) at older coal-fired
power plants to reduce haze and
improve visibility.
On November 12, 2010, EPA
published in the Federal Register (75
FR 69373) a notice of three sets of open
houses and public hearings to be held
at three locations in the Four Corners
Area on December 6–9, 2010. EPA is
postponing the open houses and public
hearings and will provide additional
notice and details of the rescheduled
hearings at a later time.
EPA published notices of open houses
and public hearings, to be held
December 7–9, 2010 in Shiprock, NM,
Farmington, NM, and Durango, CO, in
the Farmington Daily Times and the
Durango Herald on November 3, 2010
and the Navajo Times on November 4,
2010. Notice of these hearings was
additionally published in the Federal
Register on November 12, 2010 (75 FR
69373). On Thursday, November 11,
2010, EPA published notice in the
Navajo Times of an additional open
house and public hearing to be held at
the Nenahnezad Chapter House in
Fruitland, NM. The public comment
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76331
period for the proposal was scheduled
to close on December 20, 2010.
EPA proposed requiring the Four
Corners Power Plant to meet a plantwide limit of 0.11 lb/MMBtu,
representing an 80% reduction in
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) to
achieve cleaner, healthier air while
improving the visibility at sixteen of our
most pristine national parks and
wilderness areas. EPA’s proposal can be
achieved by installing and operating
selective catalytic reduction (SCR) on all
five units. EPA is also proposing a
particulate matter (PM) emission limit
of 0.012 lb/MMBtu for the three smaller
units that will require additional
controls for fine particles, and is also
requesting comment on whether BART
can be met on the three smaller units by
requiring an emission limit of 0.03 lb/
MMBtu with a 20% opacity limit.
Reduction of fine particles may help
reduce the visible secondary plume that
is often emanating from these three
units. For the two larger units at Four
Corners Power Plant, EPA is proposing
an emission limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu,
achievable with proper operation of the
existing baghouses.
On November 9, 2010, EPA met with
representatives from Arizona Public
Service (APS), co-owner and operator of
FCPP. APS discussed an alternative
proposal that calls for shutting down
Units 1–3 at FCPP by 2014 and
installing SCR on Units 4 and 5 by 2018.
APS claims this plan will result in
larger emissions reductions than EPA’s
proposal without layoffs at the facility.
A record of this meeting has been
posted to the docket for this proposed
rulemaking. APS plans to submit their
alternative proposal and supporting
analysis to EPA shortly. EPA will make
this submittal from APS available from
our docket when it is received. The link
to the docket can be reached at the
following Web site: https://www.epa.gov/
region9/air/navajo/
index.html#proposed or from https://
www.regulations.gov, identified by EPA
Docket Number: EPA–R09–OAR–2010–
0683.
EPA is extending the public comment
period for our proposal to March 18,
2011 and postponing the scheduled
open houses and public hearings to
allow EPA and the public time to assess
the alternative proposal submitted by
APS. EPA may supplement our proposal
with additional information following
our analysis of APS’ submission. If EPA
supplements our original proposal, we
will publish the supplement in the
Federal Register and provide
supporting documentation in our
docket. The dates for the rescheduled
open houses and public hearings have
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76328-76331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30738]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2009-1134]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Vessels Carrying Hazardous Cargo, Sector Columbia
River Captain of the Port Zone
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes the establishment of a 500 yard
security zone around vessels carrying hazardous cargo, as determined by
the Captain of the Port (COTP) Columbia River, when such vessels are
located in the Sector Columbia River COTP Zone as defined in 33 CFR
3.65-15 and the COTP Columbia River determines that a security zone is
necessary and enforcement of that security zone is practicable. The
security zones will help ensure the security of the vessels themselves
as well as the maritime public due to the hazardous nature of the cargo
on board.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 8, 2011. Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before January 24, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2009-1134 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail MST1 Jaime Sayers, Waterways Management Division,
Coast Guard Sector Columbia River; telephone 503-240-9319, e-mail
Jaime.A.Sayers@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2009-1134), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online(via https://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2009-1134'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit
them in an
[[Page 76329]]
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and we may change the rule
based on your comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2009-1134'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act, system of
records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008,
issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one on or before January 24, 2011 using one of the four
methods specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a
public meeting 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
Vessels carrying hazardous cargo occasionally operate in the Sector
Columbia River COTP Zone. Examples of hazardous cargoes include, but
are not limited to, liquefied petroleum gas, ammonium nitrate and
associated mixtures, anhydrous ammonia, and chlorine. The security
zones that would be created by this rule will help ensure the security
of the vessels themselves as well as the maritime public in general by
prohibiting all persons or vessels from coming within 500 yards of such
vessels while located in Sector Columbia River COTP Zone. In the past,
the COTP Columbia River has issued temporary security zones to cover
certain vessels carrying hazardous cargo.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes the establishment of a 500 yard security
zone around any vessel carrying hazardous cargo, as determined by the
COTP Columbia River, when such a vessel is located in the Sector
Columbia River COTP Zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.65-15 and the COTP
Columbia River determines that a security zone is necessary and
enforcement of that security zone is practicable.
All persons and vessels would be prohibited from entering or
remaining in the security zone unless authorized by the COTP Columbia
River. The maritime public will be notified when a security zone is
effective via the presence of one or more Coast Guard vessels to
enforce the zone and a local broadcast notice to mariners.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed 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 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. The Coast Guard has made
this determination based on the fact that the security zones created by
this rule will only be in effect during the limited periods of time
when vessels carrying hazardous cargo, as determined by the COTP
Columbia River, are located in the Sector Columbia River COTP Zone. In
addition, maritime traffic will be able to transit around the security
zones or, if necessary, may be allowed to transit through the security
zones with permission from the COTP Columbia River.
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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to operate in an area covered by a security zone created by
this rule. The security zones created by this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
however, because they will only be in effect during the limited periods
of time when vessels carrying hazardous cargo, as determined by the
COTP Columbia River, are located in the Sector Columbia River COTP
Zone. In addition, maritime traffic will be able to transit around the
security zones or, if necessary, may be allowed to transit through the
security zones with permission from the COTP Columbia River.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
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
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact MST1 Jaime Sayers,
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Columbia River at
telephone 503-240-9319. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain about this proposed 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
[[Page 76330]]
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 (adjusted for
inflation) 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 cause 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. We
invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact Tribal
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``Tribal
implication'' under the Order.
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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, 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 this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed
rule involves the establishment of a security zone. Therefore, this
rule would be categorically excluded under Figure 2-1, paragraph (34)
(g) of Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which addresses regulations
establishing, disestablishing, or changing regulated navigable areas
and security or safety zones. We seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
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:
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.
2. Add Sec. 165.1335 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1335 Security Zone; Vessels Carrying Hazardous Cargo, Sector
Columbia River Captain of the Port Zone.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters
within 500 yards, in all directions, of any vessel carrying hazardous
cargo, as determined by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Columbia River,
while such a vessel is located in the Sector Columbia River COTP Zone
as defined in 33 CFR 3.65-15 and the COTP Columbia River determines
that a security zone is necessary and enforcement of the security zone
is practicable.
(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
33 CFR part 165, subpart D, no person or vessel may enter or remain in
a security zone created by this section without the permission of the
COTP Columbia River or his/her designated representative. Designated
representatives are Coast Guard personnel authorized by the COTP
Columbia River to grant persons or vessels permission to enter or
remain in a security zone created by this section. Subpart D of 33 CFR
part 165 contains additional provisions applicable to a security zone
created by this section.
(2) To request permission to enter a security zone created by this
section, contact Coast Guard Sector Columbia River at telephone number
503-861-
[[Page 76331]]
6212 or via VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or VHF channel 22 (157.1 MHz).
(c) Notification. When a security zone is created by this section,
one or more Coast Guard vessels will be present to enforce the security
zone and the COTP Columbia River will issue a local broadcast notice to
mariners.
Dated: November 5, 2010.
D.E. Kaup,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River.
[FR Doc. 2010-30738 Filed 12-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
