Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, HI, 12-15 [2010-33120]

Download as PDF 12 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations beginning of the preamble. You can find out more about SBREFA on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/regulations _policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 65 Air traffic controllers, Aircraft, Aviation safety. The Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 65—CERTIFICATION: AIRMEN OTHER THAN FLIGHT CREWMEMBERS 1. The authority citation for part 65 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g). 40113, 44701– 44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, 45301–45302. SFAR 103 [Amended] 2. Amend SFAR 103 by removing and reserving paragraph 5.b.vii. ■ Issued in Washington, DC, on December 22, 2010. J. Randolph Babbitt, Administrator. [FR Doc. 2010–33076 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2010–1096] Drawbridge Operation Regulations; New Haven Harbor, Quinnipiac and Mill Rivers, New Haven, CT Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of temporary deviation from regulations. AGENCY: ACTION: srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the Ferry Street Bridge across the Quinnipiac River, mile 0.7, at New Haven, Connecticut. The deviation allows the bridge to keep one lift span closed to facilitate scheduled bridge maintenance. http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–2010–1096 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ and then clicking ‘‘Search’’. They are 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 Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District, judy.k.leung-yee@uscg.mil, or telephone (212) 668–7165. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. The Ferry Street Bridge, across the Quinnipiac River at mile 0.7, at New Haven, Connecticut, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 25 feet at mean high water and 31 feet at mean low water. The drawbridge operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.213. The owner of the bridge, the City of New Haven, requested a temporary deviation from the regulations to facilitate scheduled bridge maintenance, replacing pinion couplings and brakes at the bridge. Under this temporary deviation the Ferry Street Bridge may keep one lift span in the closed position from 8 a.m. on January 3, 2011 through 5 p.m. on January 6, 2011, and from 8 a.m. on January 10, 2011 through 5 p.m. on January 13, 2011. One lift span shall remain operational at all times. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: December 17, 2010. Gary Kassof, Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2010–33118 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Jkt 223001 PO 00000 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2010–1111] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, HI Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone on the waters south of Kapoho Point and a nearby channel in Kailua Bay within the Honolulu Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone. This security zone is necessary to ensure the safety of the President of the United States, members of his official party, and other senior government officials. DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. (HST) on December 21, 2010 through 8 p.m. (HST) on January 5, 2011. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket USCG–2010–1111 are available online by going to http:// www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– 2010–1111 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search’’. They are 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 temporary rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Commander Marcella Granquist, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu; telephone 808–842–2600, e-mail Marcella.A.Granquist@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. on January 3, 2011 through 5 p.m. on January 13, 2011. ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG–2010– 1096 and are available online at 17:12 Dec 30, 2010 Coast Guard Regulatory Information DATES: VerDate Mar<15>2010 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03JAR1.SGM 03JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) because the Captain of the Port Honolulu (COTP) did not become aware of the need for this temporary security zone in a timely manner to publish and seek comments on a proposed rule and consider those comments before issuing a rule that would be enforceable by December 21, 2010. Publishing an NPRM and delaying the effective date would be contrary to the public interest since the occasion would occur before a notice-and-comment rulemaking could be completed, thereby jeopardizing the safety of the President of the United States, members of his official party, and other senior government officials. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The COTP finds that this temporary security zone needs to be effective by December 21, 2010, to ensure the safety of the President of the United States, members of his official party, and senior government officials visiting the Kailua Bay area on the eastern coast of Oahu, Hawaii. srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES Background and Purpose From December 21, 2010 through January 5, 2011, the President of the United States, members of his official party, and senior government officials will be residing near the Kailua Bay shoreline on Oahu, Hawaii. This position is located adjacent to U.S. navigable waters in the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone. The Coast Guard is establishing this security zone to ensure the safety of the President of the United States, members of his official party, and senior government officials. Discussion of Rule This temporary security zone is effective from 10 a.m. HST on December 21, 2010 through 8 p.m. HST on January 5, 2011. It is located within the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–10) and covers all U.S. navigable waters in the Kailua Bay on the west side of a line connecting Kapoho Point and continuing at a bearing of 222° True to Namala Place Road; as well as the nearby channel from its entrance at Kapoho Point to a point 150 yards along the channel to the southwest of the N. Kalaheo Avenue Road Bridge. This zone extends from the surface of the water to the ocean floor. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:12 Dec 30, 2010 Jkt 223001 This zone will include the navigable waters of the channel beginning at point 21°25.6′ N, 157°45′ W, then extending the channel way to 21°25.6′ N, 157°44.6′ W, then all the waters extending to 21°25.5′ N, 157°44.4′ W (Kapoho Point) with all the waters to the west of a straight line to 21°25′ N, 157°44.6′ W (Namala Place), and then extending back to the original point 21°25′ N, 157°45′ W. Additionally, three (3) yellow buoys will be placed in proximity of the security zone along the east coastline and one (1) yellow buoy will be placed as visual aids for mariners and the public to approximate the zone. In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR part 165, subpart D, no person or vessel will be permitted to transit into or remain in the zone except for authorized support vessels, aircraft and support personnel, or other vessels authorized by the Captain of the Port or the District Commander. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative permitted by law, may enforce the zone. Vessels, aircraft, or persons in violation of this rule would be subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192. 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. The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This expectation is based on the limited duration of the zone, the limited geographic area affected by it, and that the general public will be permitted to transit the security zone as necessary but will not be permitted to loiter. 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. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 13 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. We expect that there will be little to no impact to small entities due to the narrow scope, nature of this security zone, and that the general public will be permitted to transit the security zone as necessary but will not be permitted to loiter. Additionally, before and during the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue verbal maritime advisories, and distribute a written notice to waterway users and online at http:// homeport.uscg.mil/honolulu. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we offer to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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. E:\FR\FM\03JAR1.SGM 03JAR1 14 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 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. srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:12 Dec 30, 2010 Jkt 223001 require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 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 5100.1 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 concluded under the Instruction that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation because implementation of this security zone will not result in any: (1) Significant cumulative impacts on the human environment, (2) substantial controversy or substantial change to existing environmental conditions, (3) impacts which are more than minimal on properties under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, or (4) inconsistencies with any Federal, State, local laws or administrative determinations relating to the environment. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine security, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 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.T14–215 to read as follows: ■ § 165.T14–215 Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, HI. (a) Location. The following area, within the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–10), from the surface of the water to the ocean floor is a temporary security zone: All waters in Kailua Bay to the west of a line connecting the following points beginning at Kapoho Point and thence westward at a bearing of 222° True to the shoreline at Namala Place Road; in addition the adjacent channel beginning at Kapoho Point, and continuing thence to a point 150 yards down the channel way and ending southwest of the N. Kalaheo Avenue Road Bridge. This zone will include the navigable waters of the channel beginning at point 21°25′ N, 157°45′ W, then extending the channel way to 21°25.6′ N, 157°44.6′ W, then all the waters extending to 21°25.5′ N, 157°44.4′ W (Kapoho Point) with all the waters to the west of a straight line to 21°25′ N, 157°44.6′ W (Namala Place), and then extending back to the original point 21°25′ N, 157°45′ W. (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 10 a.m. HST on December 21, 2010, through 8 p.m. HST on January 5, 2011. (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing security zones contained in 33 CFR 165.33 apply. (2) Entry, transit, or anchoring within the security zone described in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Honolulu or the District Commander. (d) Notice of enforcement. The Captain of the Port Honolulu will cause notice of the enforcement of the security zone described in this section to be made by verbal broadcasts and written notice to mariners and the general public. (e) Authority to enforce. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative permitted by law, may enforce the security zone described in this section. (f) Waiver. The Captain of the Port may waive any of the requirements of this rule for any person, vessel, or class of vessel upon finding that application E:\FR\FM\03JAR1.SGM 03JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations of the security zone is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of maritime security. (g) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192. Dated: December 16, 2010. J.M. Nunan, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Honolulu. [FR Doc. 2010–33120 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0012; FRL–9246–3] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Emissions Banking and Trading of Allowances Program srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is approving portions of four revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) that create and amend the Emissions Banking and Trading of Allowances (EBTA) Program. The EBTA Program establishes a cap and trade program to reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from participating electric generating facilities. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) originally submitted the EBTA program to EPA as a SIP revision on January 3, 2000. Since that time, the TCEQ has submitted SIP revisions for the EBTA Program on September 11, 2000; July 15, 2002; and October 24, 2006. EPA has determined that these changes to the Texas SIP comply with the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act or CAA) and EPA regulations, are consistent with EPA policies, and will improve air quality. This action is being taken under section 110 and parts C and D of the Act. DATES: This final rule will be effective February 2, 2011. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0012. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:12 Dec 30, 2010 Jkt 223001 copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. The file will be made available by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 214–665–7253 to make an appointment. If possible, please make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your visit. There will be a 15 cent per page fee for making photocopies of documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. The State submittal related to this SIP revision, and which is part of the EPA docket, is also available for public inspection at the State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by appointment: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Office of Air Quality, 12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning today’s final rule, please contact Ms. Adina Wiley (6PD–R), Air Permits Section, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue (6PD–R), Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202–2733. The telephone number is (214) 665–2115. Ms. Wiley can also be reached via electronic mail at wiley.adina@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA. Table of Contents I. What final action is EPA taking? II. What is the background for this action? III. What are EPA’s responses to comments received on the proposed action? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What final action is EPA taking? We are fully approving severable portions of four revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) that create and amend the Emissions Banking and Trading of Allowances (EBTA) Program. The EBTA Program establishes a cap and trade program to reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from participating electric generating facilities. The TCEQ originally submitted the EBTA program to EPA as PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 15 a SIP revision on January 3, 2000. Since that time, the TCEQ has submitted SIP revisions for the EBTA Program on September 11, 2000; July 15, 2002; and October 24, 2006. EPA acted on the above SIP revisions through a direct final rulemaking and accompanying proposed rule action on November 16, 2010, at 75 FR 69884 and 75 FR 69909, respectively. In our direct final action we stated that we would withdraw our direct final approval if we received relevant adverse comments before December 16, 2010. Because EPA received one adverse comment, we withdrew our direct final action on December 15, 2010. As we discussed in our direct final and proposed rulemaking actions, we are proceeding with a final action and responding to the comments received in this notice. Today, we are approving the EBTA program and subsequent revisions as we proposed and find that they comply with the CAA and EPA regulations, are consistent with EPA policies, and will improve air quality. This final approval is being taken under parts C and D of the CAA. II. What is the background for this action? The TCEQ created the EBTA Program to implement the requirements of Texas Senate Bill 7 (SB 7), from the 76th Legislature, 1999, which deregulated the electric utility industry. Under Texas SB 7, TCEQ was required to develop a permitting system and a mass cap and trade system to distribute allowances for use by electric generating facilities. The EBTA program is designed to achieve a 50 percent reduction in NOX emissions and a 25 percent reduction in SO2 emissions, both based on 1997 heat input data, from participating sources. EPA has taken separate action on the permitting system required under Texas SB 7 and established at 30 TAC Chapter 116, Subchapter I (See docket EPA– R06–OAR–2005–TX–0031). In our November 16, 2010, direct final action, we presented our evaluation of the EBTA program. Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable and must not relax existing requirements. See Clean Air Act sections 110(a), 110(l), and 193. EPA’s review of the January 3, 2000; September 11, 2000; July 15, 2002; and October 24, 2006 SIP revisions finds that all 4 SIP submittals are consistent with the requirements at 40 CFR Part 51 and are considered complete SIP submittals in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. This detailed analysis is available in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this rulemaking. Additionally, we reviewed the EBTA program with respect to EPA’s E:\FR\FM\03JAR1.SGM 03JAR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12-15]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33120]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-1111]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, HI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone on 
the waters south of Kapoho Point and a nearby channel in Kailua Bay 
within the Honolulu Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone. This security zone 
is necessary to ensure the safety of the President of the United 
States, members of his official party, and other senior government 
officials.

DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. (HST) on December 21, 2010 
through 8 p.m. (HST) on January 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket USCG-2010-1111 are available online by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-1111 in the ``Keyword'' box, 
and then clicking ``Search''. They are 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 
temporary rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Commander Marcella Granquist, 
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu; 
telephone 808-842-2600, e-mail Marcella.A.Granquist@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

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior 
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This 
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to

[[Page 13]]

comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are 
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' 
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists 
for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) because the 
Captain of the Port Honolulu (COTP) did not become aware of the need 
for this temporary security zone in a timely manner to publish and seek 
comments on a proposed rule and consider those comments before issuing 
a rule that would be enforceable by December 21, 2010. Publishing an 
NPRM and delaying the effective date would be contrary to the public 
interest since the occasion would occur before a notice-and-comment 
rulemaking could be completed, thereby jeopardizing the safety of the 
President of the United States, members of his official party, and 
other senior government officials. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 
Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less 
than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The COTP finds 
that this temporary security zone needs to be effective by December 21, 
2010, to ensure the safety of the President of the United States, 
members of his official party, and senior government officials visiting 
the Kailua Bay area on the eastern coast of Oahu, Hawaii.

Background and Purpose

    From December 21, 2010 through January 5, 2011, the President of 
the United States, members of his official party, and senior government 
officials will be residing near the Kailua Bay shoreline on Oahu, 
Hawaii. This position is located adjacent to U.S. navigable waters in 
the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone. The Coast Guard is establishing 
this security zone to ensure the safety of the President of the United 
States, members of his official party, and senior government officials.

Discussion of Rule

    This temporary security zone is effective from 10 a.m. HST on 
December 21, 2010 through 8 p.m. HST on January 5, 2011. It is located 
within the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-10) and 
covers all U.S. navigable waters in the Kailua Bay on the west side of 
a line connecting Kapoho Point and continuing at a bearing of 222[deg] 
True to Namala Place Road; as well as the nearby channel from its 
entrance at Kapoho Point to a point 150 yards along the channel to the 
southwest of the N. Kalaheo Avenue Road Bridge. This zone extends from 
the surface of the water to the ocean floor. This zone will include the 
navigable waters of the channel beginning at point 21[deg]25.6' N, 
157[deg]45' W, then extending the channel way to 21[deg]25.6' N, 
157[deg]44.6' W, then all the waters extending to 21[deg]25.5' N, 
157[deg]44.4' W (Kapoho Point) with all the waters to the west of a 
straight line to 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]44.6' W (Namala Place), and then 
extending back to the original point 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]45' W. 
Additionally, three (3) yellow buoys will be placed in proximity of the 
security zone along the east coastline and one (1) yellow buoy will be 
placed as visual aids for mariners and the public to approximate the 
zone.
    In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR part 165, 
subpart D, no person or vessel will be permitted to transit into or 
remain in the zone except for authorized support vessels, aircraft and 
support personnel, or other vessels authorized by the Captain of the 
Port or the District Commander. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, 
or petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative 
permitted by law, may enforce the zone. Vessels, aircraft, or persons 
in violation of this rule would be subject to the penalties set forth 
in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.

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. The Coast Guard expects the economic 
impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. 
This expectation is based on the limited duration of the zone, the 
limited geographic area affected by it, and that the general public 
will be permitted to transit the security zone as necessary but will 
not be permitted to loiter.

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. We expect that there will be little to no impact to small 
entities due to the narrow scope, nature of this security zone, and 
that the general public will be permitted to transit the security zone 
as necessary but will not be permitted to loiter. Additionally, before 
and during the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue verbal 
maritime advisories, and distribute a written notice to waterway users 
and online at http://homeport.uscg.mil/honolulu.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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.

[[Page 14]]

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 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 M16475.1D, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 
under the Instruction that there are no factors in this case that would 
limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the 
Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded 
from further environmental documentation because implementation of this 
security zone will not result in any: (1) Significant cumulative 
impacts on the human environment, (2) substantial controversy or 
substantial change to existing environmental conditions, (3) impacts 
which are more than minimal on properties under Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act, or (4) inconsistencies with any 
Federal, State, local laws or administrative determinations relating to 
the environment.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine security, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and 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

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; 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.


0
2. Add Sec.  165.T14-215 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T14-215  Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, 
HI.

    (a) Location. The following area, within the Honolulu Captain of 
the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-10), from the surface of the water to 
the ocean floor is a temporary security zone: All waters in Kailua Bay 
to the west of a line connecting the following points beginning at 
Kapoho Point and thence westward at a bearing of 222[deg] True to the 
shoreline at Namala Place Road; in addition the adjacent channel 
beginning at Kapoho Point, and continuing thence to a point 150 yards 
down the channel way and ending southwest of the N. Kalaheo Avenue Road 
Bridge. This zone will include the navigable waters of the channel 
beginning at point 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]45' W, then extending the 
channel way to 21[deg]25.6' N, 157[deg]44.6' W, then all the waters 
extending to 21[deg]25.5' N, 157[deg]44.4' W (Kapoho Point) with all 
the waters to the west of a straight line to 21[deg]25' N, 
157[deg]44.6' W (Namala Place), and then extending back to the original 
point 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]45' W.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 10 a.m. HST on 
December 21, 2010, through 8 p.m. HST on January 5, 2011.
    (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing security 
zones contained in 33 CFR 165.33 apply.
    (2) Entry, transit, or anchoring within the security zone described 
in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the 
Captain of the Port Honolulu or the District Commander.
    (d) Notice of enforcement. The Captain of the Port Honolulu will 
cause notice of the enforcement of the security zone described in this 
section to be made by verbal broadcasts and written notice to mariners 
and the general public.
    (e) Authority to enforce. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or 
petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative 
permitted by law, may enforce the security zone described in this 
section.
    (f) Waiver. The Captain of the Port may waive any of the 
requirements of this rule for any person, vessel, or class of vessel 
upon finding that application

[[Page 15]]

of the security zone is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of 
maritime security.
    (g) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject 
to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.

    Dated: December 16, 2010.
J.M. Nunan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Honolulu.
[FR Doc. 2010-33120 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P