Regulated Navigation Area; Pacific Sound Resources and Lockheed Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup Sites, Elliott Bay, Seattle, WA, 21433-21436 [2012-8545]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
limitations (AWLs) specified in this AD
because those limitations were applicable as
part of the airworthiness certification of those
airplanes.
(2) This AD requires revisions to certain
operator maintenance documents to include
new inspections. Compliance with these
inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c).
For airplanes that have been previously
modified, altered, or repaired in the areas
addressed by these inspections, the operator
may not be able to accomplish the
inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c),
the operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance according
to paragraph (j) of this AD. The request
should include a description of changes to
the required inspections that will ensure the
continued damage tolerance of the affected
structure.
(3) Reports specified in Section 9,
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements
(CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, Revision July 2011,
of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data
(MPD) Document may be submitted within
10 days after the airplane is returned to
service, instead of 10 days after each
individual finding as specified in this
document.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Codes 27, Flight Controls; 28, Fuel; 32,
Landing Gear; 52, Doors; 53, Fuselage; 54,
Nacelles/Pylons; 55, Stabilizers; and 57,
Wings.
(i) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden
Statement
A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, nor shall a person be subject to
a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this
information collection is 2120–0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per
response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to
this collection of information are mandatory.
Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the
burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800
Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC
20591, Attn: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, AES–200.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a new revision
to the airworthiness limitations of the
maintenance planning document. We are
issuing this AD to ensure that fatigue
cracking of various principal structural
elements (PSEs) is detected and corrected;
such fatigue cracking could adversely affect
the structural integrity of these airplanes.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Revision of Maintenance Program
(1) Within 12 months after the effective
date of this AD, revise the maintenance
program by incorporating the information in
Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations—
Structural Inspections, of Section 9,
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements
(CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, Revision July 2011,
of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data
(MPD) Document, except as provided by
paragraph (h) of this AD.
(2) The initial compliance time for the
inspections is within the applicable times
specified in Subsection B, Airworthiness
Limitations—Structural Inspections, of
Section 9, of ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations
(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance
Requirements (CMRs),’’ D622W001–9,
Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777
Maintenance Planning Data (MPD)
Document, or within 18 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later, or within the applicable time specified
in Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations—
Structural Inspections, of Section 9,
‘‘Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements
(CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, Revision July 2011,
of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data
(MPD) Document, from the time of
installation for new parts.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:37 Apr 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
(h) Alternative Inspections and Inspection
Intervals
After accomplishing the actions required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
inspections or inspection intervals may be
used unless the alternative inspection or
interval is approved as an alternative method
of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of
this AD.
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in
14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the ACO, send it
to the attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair in
the areas affected by this AD if it is approved
by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO to make those
findings. For a repair method to be approved,
the repair must meet the certification basis of
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21433
the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
(k) Related Information
For more information about this AD,
contact James Sutherland, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S,
FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057–3356; phone:
(425) 917–6533; fax: (425) 917–6590; email:
James.Sutherland@faa.gov.
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) You must use the following service
information to do the actions required by this
AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of the
following service information:
(i) Section 9, ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations
(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance
Requirements (CMRs),’’ D622W001–9,
Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777
Maintenance Planning Data (MPD)
Document.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65,
Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone
206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–
5680; email me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
(3) You may review copies of the service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
425–227–1221.
(4) You may also review copies of the
service information that is incorporated by
reference at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call 202–741–
6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March
23, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–8228 Filed 4–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2010–1145]
RIN 1625–AA11
Regulated Navigation Area; Pacific
Sound Resources and Lockheed
Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup
Sites, Elliott Bay, Seattle, WA
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\10APR1.SGM
Coast Guard, DHS.
10APR1
21434
ACTION:
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Final rule.
The Coast Guard is
establishing a permanent regulated
navigation area (RNA) on a portion of
Elliott Bay in Seattle, Washington. The
RNA will protect the seabed in portions
of the bay that are subject to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)’s Pacific Sound Resources (PSR)
and Lockheed Shipyard superfund
cleanup remediation efforts. This RNA
will prohibit activities that would
disturb the seabed, such as anchoring,
dragging, trawling, spudding or other
activities that involve disrupting the
integrity of the sediment caps that cover
the superfund sites. It will not affect
transit or navigation of the area.
DATES: This rule is effective May 10,
2012.
SUMMARY:
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–2010–1145 and are
available online by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–
2010–1145 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 proposed
rule, call or email LT Ian Hanna,
Waterways Management Division,
Sector Puget Sound, Coast Guard;
telephone 206–217–6045, email
SectorPugetSoundWWM@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:
ADDRESSES:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Information
On August 1, 2011, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled Regulated Navigation Area;
Pacific Sound Resources and Lockheed
Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup Sites,
Elliott Bay, WA in the Federal Register
(76 FR 45738). We received 2 comments
on the proposed rule. No one requested
a public meeting and a public meeting
was not held.
Basis and Purpose
Under the Ports and Waterways Safety
Act, the Coast Guard has the authority
to establish RNAs in defined water areas
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:37 Apr 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
that are determined to have hazardous
conditions and in which vessel traffic
can be regulated in the interest of safety.
See 33 U.S.C. 1231 and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.
This rule is necessary to prevent
disturbance of the PSR and Lockheed
Shipyard sediment caps. It does so by
restricting anchoring, dragging,
trawling, spudding or other activities
that involve disrupting the integrity of
the cap in an RNA around the sediment
caps. This RNA is similar to RNAs
which protect other caps in the area.
Enforcement of this RNA will be
managed by Coast Guard Sector Puget
Sound assets including Vessel Traffic
Service Puget Sound through radar and
closed circuit television sensors. The
Captain of the Port Puget Sound may
also be assisted by other government
agencies in the enforcement of this
zone.
Background
The PSR superfund site, which is
located on the north shore of West
Seattle within Elliott Bay, and
northwest of the mouth of the
Duwamish river, was created by the
EPA to cover the remains of the Wyckoff
West Seattle Wood Treating Facility.
The wood treating facility, which was in
operation between 1909 and 1994, was
mostly located on a pile-supported
facility extending into Elliott Bay. The
area was added to the federal Superfund
National Priorities List in May 1994.
Later that year the entire wood
treatment facility was demolished and
approximately 4000 cubic yards of
highly contaminated soil and process
sludge were removed from the site.
Construction of a subsurface physical
containment barrier was started in 1996
and completed in 1999. The final
sediment cap, completed in 2004, is
approximately 58-acres which includes
approximately 1500 linear feet of
shoreline, and intertidal and subtidal
areas to depth of about 300 feet.
The Lockheed Shipyard Sediment
Operable Unit consists of contaminated
near shore sediments within and
adjacent to the Lockheed Shipyard on
Harbor Island. Harbor Island is located
approximately one mile southwest of
the Central Business District of Seattle,
in King County, Washington, and lies at
the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway
on the southern edge of Elliott Bay. The
Lockheed Shipyard sediments are
located on the west side of Harbor
Island and face the West Waterway of
the Duwamish Waterway. The final site
does not protrude a significant distance
into the West Duwamish waterway.
Lockheed Shipyards acquired the
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
facility in 1959 and conducted
shipbuilding operations there until
1986. In April 1997, Lockheed sold the
upland property and its legal rights to
the submerged portions of the site to the
Port of Seattle. The remedy for the
contaminated sediments included
demolition of 3 piers, three shipways
and one finger pier. The piers and
shipways primarily consist of timber
superstructures supported by
approximately 6000 piles. Contaminants
found in sediments which were either
dredged or capped are arsenic, copper,
lead, mercury, zinc, PAHs and PCBs.
The metal contaminants were associated
with sand blast grit and paint clips.
Remedial actions for both of these
sites as established by the EPA include
preventing use of large anchors on the
cap. This rulemaking is necessary to
assist the EPA in that remedial action.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received two positive comments
in favor of the proposed rule. One
commenter simply expressed support
for the proposed rule. The second
discussed the environmental benefits of
creating an RNA that protects the
sediment cap as well as supported the
points made in our regulatory analysis.
There were no changes made to the rule
based on these comments.
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. This expectation is based on the
fact that the RNA established by the rule
would encompass a small area that
should not impact commercial or
recreational traffic, and prohibited
activities are not routine for the
designated areas. There have been no
changes to the proposed rule published
in Federal Register August 1, 2011 (76
FR 45738).
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.
E:\FR\FM\10APR1.SGM
10APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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 would affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: the owners or operators of
vessels intending to anchor, dredge,
spud, lay cable or disturb the seabed in
any fashion when this rule is in effect.
The RNA would not have a significant
economic impact on small entities due
to its minimal restrictive area and the
opportunity for a waiver to be granted
for any legitimate use of the seabed.
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.
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.
Indian Tribal Governments
In preparation for this rulemaking, on
October 8, 2010, Sector Puget Sound
conducted a tribal consultation with
representatives from the Suquamish and
Muckleshoot tribes in accordance with
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. The group noted that the
sediment caps were in the usual and
accustomed (U&A) fishing grounds of
both tribes. Their main concern was that
this RNA would prohibit them from
exercising their U&A fishing. The Coast
Guard and EPA clarified that nothing in
this rulemaking is intended to conflict
with these tribes’ treaty fishing rights
and they are not restricted from any
type of fishing in the described areas. As
a result of the consultation the Coast
Guard added paragraph b.(3) to the
regulation. There were no comments to
the NPRM concerning tribal
implications.
Environment
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
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 rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
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.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
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.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
21435
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:37 Apr 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 that 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 a regulated navigation area
which prevents activities which would
disturb the seabed within the areas
outlined in this regulation. An
environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
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. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
■
2. Add § 165.1336 to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\10APR1.SGM
10APR1
21436
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 165.1336 Regulated Navigation Area;
Pacific Sound Resources and Lockheed
Shipyard Superfund Sites, Elliott Bay,
Seattle, WA.
Dated: March 25, 2012.
K.A. Taylor,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
(a) Regulated Areas. The following
areas are regulated navigation areas:
(1) All waters inside an area
beginning at a point on the shore at
47°35′ 02.7″ N 122°22′23.00″ W; thence
north to 47°35′26.00″ N 122°22′23.00″
W; thence east to 47°35′26.00″ N
122°21′52.50″ W; thence south to
47°35′10.80″ N 122°21′52.50″ W; thence
southwest to a point on the shoreline at
47°35′05.9″ N 122°21′58.00″ W. [Datum:
NAD 1983].
(2) All waters inside an area
beginning at 47°34′ 52.16″ N
122°21′27.11″ W; thence to 47°34′
53.46″ N 122°21′30.42″ W; thence to
47°34′ 37.92″ N 122°21′30.51″ W; thence
to 47°34′ 37.92″ N 122°21′27.65″ W.
[Datum: NAD 1983].
(b) Regulations. (1) All vessels and
persons are prohibited from activities
that would disturb the seabed, such as
anchoring, dragging, trawling, spudding,
or other activities that involve
disrupting the integrity of the sediment
caps installed in the designated
regulated navigation area, pursuant to
the remediation efforts of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and others in the Pacific Sound
Resources and Lockheed Shipyard EPA
superfund sites. Vessels may otherwise
transit or navigate within this area
without reservation.
(2) The prohibition described in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not
apply to vessels or persons engaged in
activities associated with remediation
efforts in the superfund sites, provided
that the Captain of the Port, Puget
Sound (COTP), is given advance notice
of those activities by the EPA.
(3) Nothing in this section is intended
to conflict with treaty fishing rights of
the Muckleshoot and Suquamish tribes,
and they are not restricted from any
type of fishing in the described area.
(c) Waivers. Upon written request
stating the need and proposed
conditions of the waiver, and any
proposed precautionary measures, the
COTP may authorize a waiver from this
section if the COTP determines that the
activity for which the waiver is sought
can take place without undue risk to the
remediation efforts described in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The
COTP will consult with EPA in making
this determination when necessary and
practicable.
[FR Doc. 2012–8545 Filed 4–9–12; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:37 Apr 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2012–0263]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone, East River, Brooklyn
Bridge Scaffolding Repair, Brooklyn,
NY
Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone on
the navigable waters of the East River,
in the vicinity of the Brooklyn Bridge.
This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life and property on the
navigable waters during emergency
repairs to stabilize and remove the
damaged scaffolding under the eastern
span of the bridge. This rule is intended
to restrict all vessels from a portion of
the East River during the repair and
removal of the damaged scaffolding.
DATES: This rule is effective from March
27, 2012 until April 30, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket USCG–2012–
0263 and are available online by going
to https://www.regulations.gov, inserting
USCG–2012–0263 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 email Lieutenant William
George, Coast Guard; telephone (718)
354–4114, email
William.J.George@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
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)
with respect to this rule because
immediate action is necessary to ensure
the safety of mariners and vessels
intending to transit on the East River in
the vicinity of the Brooklyn Bridge
where damaged corrugated metal
scaffoldings and loosely hanging cables
pose a potential hazard to navigation.
Temporary repairs of the damaged
section of the scaffolding are currently
ongoing. The removal of the scaffolding
is expected to take approximately three
to four weeks. During this period falling
debris may pose an imminent danger to
the safety of the vessels and their
occupants transiting the East River in
the vicinity of the Brooklyn Bridge.
Therefore, a temporary safety zone to
protect transiting mariners and vessels
from this hazard is needed immediately.
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 Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication because to do otherwise
would be contrary to the public interest
since immediate action is required to
protect mariners and vessels transiting
under the bridge while workers conduct
emergency repairs and removal of the
damaged scaffolding.
Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for this rule is
33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701,
3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Public
Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
On March 14, 2012 the Coast Guard
received a report that a crane barge
struck the scaffolding under the eastern
span of the Brooklyn Bridge. As a result
of the allision the corrugated metal
panels that make up the scaffolding
structure were damaged and some of the
cables that supported the scaffolding
were broken and are loosely hanging
E:\FR\FM\10APR1.SGM
10APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21433-21436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8545]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2010-1145]
RIN 1625-AA11
Regulated Navigation Area; Pacific Sound Resources and Lockheed
Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup Sites, Elliott Bay, Seattle, WA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
[[Page 21434]]
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a permanent regulated
navigation area (RNA) on a portion of Elliott Bay in Seattle,
Washington. The RNA will protect the seabed in portions of the bay that
are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Pacific
Sound Resources (PSR) and Lockheed Shipyard superfund cleanup
remediation efforts. This RNA will prohibit activities that would
disturb the seabed, such as anchoring, dragging, trawling, spudding or
other activities that involve disrupting the integrity of the sediment
caps that cover the superfund sites. It will not affect transit or
navigation of the area.
DATES: This rule is effective May 10, 2012.
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-2010-1145 and are available online by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-1145 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 proposed
rule, call or email LT Ian Hanna, Waterways Management Division, Sector
Puget Sound, Coast Guard; telephone 206-217-6045, email
SectorPugetSoundWWM@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:
Regulatory Information
On August 1, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Regulated Navigation Area; Pacific Sound Resources and
Lockheed Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup Sites, Elliott Bay, WA in the
Federal Register (76 FR 45738). We received 2 comments on the proposed
rule. No one requested a public meeting and a public meeting was not
held.
Basis and Purpose
Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, the Coast Guard has the
authority to establish RNAs in defined water areas that are determined
to have hazardous conditions and in which vessel traffic can be
regulated in the interest of safety. See 33 U.S.C. 1231 and Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
This rule is necessary to prevent disturbance of the PSR and
Lockheed Shipyard sediment caps. It does so by restricting anchoring,
dragging, trawling, spudding or other activities that involve
disrupting the integrity of the cap in an RNA around the sediment caps.
This RNA is similar to RNAs which protect other caps in the area.
Enforcement of this RNA will be managed by Coast Guard Sector Puget
Sound assets including Vessel Traffic Service Puget Sound through radar
and closed circuit television sensors. The Captain of the Port Puget
Sound may also be assisted by other government agencies in the
enforcement of this zone.
Background
The PSR superfund site, which is located on the north shore of West
Seattle within Elliott Bay, and northwest of the mouth of the Duwamish
river, was created by the EPA to cover the remains of the Wyckoff West
Seattle Wood Treating Facility. The wood treating facility, which was
in operation between 1909 and 1994, was mostly located on a pile-
supported facility extending into Elliott Bay. The area was added to
the federal Superfund National Priorities List in May 1994. Later that
year the entire wood treatment facility was demolished and
approximately 4000 cubic yards of highly contaminated soil and process
sludge were removed from the site. Construction of a subsurface
physical containment barrier was started in 1996 and completed in 1999.
The final sediment cap, completed in 2004, is approximately 58-acres
which includes approximately 1500 linear feet of shoreline, and
intertidal and subtidal areas to depth of about 300 feet.
The Lockheed Shipyard Sediment Operable Unit consists of
contaminated near shore sediments within and adjacent to the Lockheed
Shipyard on Harbor Island. Harbor Island is located approximately one
mile southwest of the Central Business District of Seattle, in King
County, Washington, and lies at the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway on
the southern edge of Elliott Bay. The Lockheed Shipyard sediments are
located on the west side of Harbor Island and face the West Waterway of
the Duwamish Waterway. The final site does not protrude a significant
distance into the West Duwamish waterway. Lockheed Shipyards acquired
the facility in 1959 and conducted shipbuilding operations there until
1986. In April 1997, Lockheed sold the upland property and its legal
rights to the submerged portions of the site to the Port of Seattle.
The remedy for the contaminated sediments included demolition of 3
piers, three shipways and one finger pier. The piers and shipways
primarily consist of timber superstructures supported by approximately
6000 piles. Contaminants found in sediments which were either dredged
or capped are arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, zinc, PAHs and PCBs. The
metal contaminants were associated with sand blast grit and paint
clips.
Remedial actions for both of these sites as established by the EPA
include preventing use of large anchors on the cap. This rulemaking is
necessary to assist the EPA in that remedial action.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received two positive comments in favor of the proposed rule.
One commenter simply expressed support for the proposed rule. The
second discussed the environmental benefits of creating an RNA that
protects the sediment cap as well as supported the points made in our
regulatory analysis. There were no changes made to the rule based on
these comments.
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. This expectation is based on the fact
that the RNA established by the rule would encompass a small area that
should not impact commercial or recreational traffic, and prohibited
activities are not routine for the designated areas. There have been no
changes to the proposed rule published in Federal Register August 1,
2011 (76 FR 45738).
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.
[[Page 21435]]
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 would affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
anchor, dredge, spud, lay cable or disturb the seabed in any fashion
when this rule is in effect. The RNA would not have a significant
economic impact on small entities due to its minimal restrictive area
and the opportunity for a waiver to be granted for any legitimate use
of the seabed.
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 (adjusted for
inflation) 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 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 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
In preparation for this rulemaking, on October 8, 2010, Sector
Puget Sound conducted a tribal consultation with representatives from
the Suquamish and Muckleshoot tribes in accordance with Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.
The group noted that the sediment caps were in the usual and accustomed
(U&A) fishing grounds of both tribes. Their main concern was that this
RNA would prohibit them from exercising their U&A fishing. The Coast
Guard and EPA clarified that nothing in this rulemaking is intended to
conflict with these tribes' treaty fishing rights and they are not
restricted from any type of fishing in the described areas. As a result
of the consultation the Coast Guard added paragraph b.(3) to the
regulation. There were no comments to the NPRM concerning tribal
implications.
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 that 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 a regulated navigation area which
prevents activities which would disturb the seabed within the areas
outlined in this regulation. 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
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add Sec. 165.1336 to read as follows:
[[Page 21436]]
Sec. 165.1336 Regulated Navigation Area; Pacific Sound Resources and
Lockheed Shipyard Superfund Sites, Elliott Bay, Seattle, WA.
(a) Regulated Areas. The following areas are regulated navigation
areas:
(1) All waters inside an area beginning at a point on the shore at
47[deg]35' 02.7'' N 122[deg]22'23.00'' W; thence north to
47[deg]35'26.00'' N 122[deg]22'23.00'' W; thence east to
47[deg]35'26.00'' N 122[deg]21'52.50'' W; thence south to
47[deg]35'10.80'' N 122[deg]21'52.50'' W; thence southwest to a point
on the shoreline at 47[deg]35'05.9'' N 122[deg]21'58.00'' W. [Datum:
NAD 1983].
(2) All waters inside an area beginning at 47[deg]34' 52.16'' N
122[deg]21'27.11'' W; thence to 47[deg]34' 53.46'' N 122[deg]21'30.42''
W; thence to 47[deg]34' 37.92'' N 122[deg]21'30.51'' W; thence to
47[deg]34' 37.92'' N 122[deg]21'27.65'' W. [Datum: NAD 1983].
(b) Regulations. (1) All vessels and persons are prohibited from
activities that would disturb the seabed, such as anchoring, dragging,
trawling, spudding, or other activities that involve disrupting the
integrity of the sediment caps installed in the designated regulated
navigation area, pursuant to the remediation efforts of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and others in the Pacific Sound
Resources and Lockheed Shipyard EPA superfund sites. Vessels may
otherwise transit or navigate within this area without reservation.
(2) The prohibition described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section
does not apply to vessels or persons engaged in activities associated
with remediation efforts in the superfund sites, provided that the
Captain of the Port, Puget Sound (COTP), is given advance notice of
those activities by the EPA.
(3) Nothing in this section is intended to conflict with treaty
fishing rights of the Muckleshoot and Suquamish tribes, and they are
not restricted from any type of fishing in the described area.
(c) Waivers. Upon written request stating the need and proposed
conditions of the waiver, and any proposed precautionary measures, the
COTP may authorize a waiver from this section if the COTP determines
that the activity for which the waiver is sought can take place without
undue risk to the remediation efforts described in paragraph (b)(1) of
this section. The COTP will consult with EPA in making this
determination when necessary and practicable.
Dated: March 25, 2012.
K.A. Taylor,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2012-8545 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P