Reservoirs at Headwaters of the Mississippi River; Use and Administration, 42030-42034 [2013-16877]
Download as PDF
42030
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves establishing a temporary
safety zone. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. 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:
(1) Entry into, transit through or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port of San Diego or his
designated representative.
(2) Mariners can request permission to
transit through the safety zone from the
Patrol Commander. The Patrol
Commander can be contacted on VHF–
FM channels 16 and 23.
(3) All persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his
designated representative.
(4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast
Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio,
flashing light, or other means, the
operator of a vessel shall proceed as
directed.
(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted
by other federal, state, or local agencies.
Dated: June 27, 2013.
S.M. Mahoney,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2013–16806 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
■
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, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T11–578 to read as
follows:
■
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(a) Location. The limits of the safety
zone will be the navigable waters of
Mission Bay bound by the following
coordinates; 32°47′32″ N, 117°13′25″ W
to 32°47′32″ N, 117°13′00″ W to
32°47′20″ N, 117°13′00″ W then west to
32°46′45″ N, 117°14′09″ W to 32°46′11″
N, 117°14′01″ W.
(b) Enforcement Period. This section
will be enforced from 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
on September 13, 14, and 15, 2013.
Before the effective period, the Coast
Guard will publish a Local Notice to
Mariners (LNM). If the event concludes
prior to the scheduled termination time,
the Captain of the Port will cease
enforcement of this safety zone and will
announce that fact via Broadcast Notice
to Mariners.
(c) Definitions. The following
definition applies to this section:
Designated representative, means any
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
of the Coast Guard on board Coast
Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and
local, state, and federal law enforcement
vessels who have been authorized to act
on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
(d) Regulations.
17:36 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
Department of the Army, Corps of
Engineers
33 CFR Part 207
Reservoirs at Headwaters of the
Mississippi River; Use and
Administration
§ 165.T11–578 Safety zone; San Diego
Bayfair; Mission Bay, San Diego, CA.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
AGENCY:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
DoD.
Notice of proposed rulemaking
and request for comments.
ACTION:
The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is proposing to amend the
rules regarding use and administration
of the reservoirs at the headwaters of the
Mississippi River by deleting from the
Code of Federal Regulations all
references to minimum discharges and
to operating limits for the reservoirs.
Following extensive public input and
environmental review, the St. Paul
District of the Corps of Engineers
recently adopted an updated operating
plan for the Mississippi River
Headwaters reservoirs containing
minimum flow values that differ from
those currently codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations. Deleting all
references to minimum flows in the
regulations will eliminate the current
discrepancy between the regulations
and the approved operating plan for the
reservoirs. The operating limits are also
contained in the operating plan for the
reservoirs, and eliminating both the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
minimum flow values and the operating
limits from the rule will make it
unnecessary to amend the regulations
each time the values are modified in the
operating plan in the future.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
September 13, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number COE–
2013–0008, by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: Jerry.W.Webb@usace.army.mil
and Chandra.S.Pathak@usace.army.mil.
Include the docket number, COE–2013–
0008 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Attn: CECW–CE (Chandra S. Pathak),
441 G Street NW., Washington, DC
20314–1000.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to
security requirements, we cannot
receive comments by hand delivery or
courier.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
docket number COE–2013–0008. All
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available on-line at
https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided,
unless the commenter indicates that the
comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do
not submit information that you
consider to be CBI, or otherwise
protected, through regulations.gov or
email. The regulations.gov Web site is
an anonymous access system, which
means we will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email directly to the
Corps without going through
regulations.gov, your email address will
be automatically captured and included
as part of the comment that is placed in
the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, we recommend that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If we cannot read your
comment because of technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, we may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic
comments should avoid the use of any
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
comments received, go to
regulations.gov. All documents in the
docket are listed. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly
available, such as CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form.
Mr.
Jerry W. Webb, Headquarters, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Engineering and
Construction Community of Practice,
Washington, DC at 202–761–0673; Mr.
Chandra S. Pathak, Headquarters, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering
and Construction Community of
Practice, Washington, DC at 202–761–
4668; or Mr. Kenton Spading, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District, at
651–290–5623.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Executive Summary
The purpose of this action is to amend
the current rule regarding minimum
discharges and minimum operating
limits of the reservoirs at the headwaters
of the Mississippi River to ensure that
the regulations do not conflict with the
current operating plan for those
reservoirs.
The Corps’ authority to amend the
minimum flow values and minimum
operating limits for the reservoirs of the
headwaters of the Mississippi River is
Section 7 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
of 1917 (40 Stat. 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and
Section 216 of the Flood Control Act of
1970 (84 Stat. 1830; 33 U.S.C. 549a).
Background
The Rivers and Harbors Acts of June
14, 1880, and August 2, 1882,
authorized the construction of dams at
each of the six Mississippi River
Headwaters lakes for the purpose of
augmenting Mississippi River flow for
navigation. The lakes affected by these
acts are Winnibigoshish, Leech,
Pokegama, Sandy, Cross (Pine River),
and Gull. Following authorization of the
reservoirs, the Secretary of War
prescribed regulations governing
operation of the reservoirs on February
11, 1931, which were codified at 33 CFR
207.340. The current regulations list
minimum discharges for each reservoir
at 33 CFR 207.340(d)(2). The current
regulations also list minimum operating
limits, or the lowest level at which the
Corps may operate each reservoir, at 33
CFR 207.340(d)(7).
The Corps’ procedure adopting and
publishing regulations related to
reservoirs has changed since the
aforementioned regulations were
originally codified in 1931. The presentday practice is to include minimum
flow values, operating limits and other
related information in Water Control
Manuals that are adopted following an
extensive public and environmental
review process, as outlined in Engineer
Regulation (ER) 1110–2–240. Moreover,
the operating limits in the Water Control
Manuals prescribe not only the
minimum level at which a reservoir may
operate but also the absolute upper limit
on reservoir operations, effectively
providing a band within which the
Corps may operate a reservoir.
As a precursor to updating the Water
Control Manuals for the Mississippi
42031
River Headwaters reservoirs in 2009, we
completed a study known as the
Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoir
Operating Plan Evaluation (ROPE). The
primary purpose of the ROPE was to
evaluate alternative operating plans for
the Headwaters reservoirs in an attempt
to improve the operation of the system
while balancing tribal trust obligations,
flood risk reduction, environmental
concerns, water quality, water supply,
recreation, navigation, hydropower, and
other public interests.
On January 19, 2010, after thoroughly
assessing potential environmental
impacts and involving the public in the
process, the District Engineer for the St.
Paul District signed a Record of
Decision approving the ROPE’s
recommended operating plan for the
Headwaters reservoirs. The ROPE’s
recommended plan adopts minimum
discharges that were scientifically
developed using a habitat in-stream
flow analysis (Tenant 1976), as
described in the ROPE. The minimum
discharges in the ROPE’s recommended
plan differ from the minimum
discharges listed in 33 CFR 207.340 as
it is currently written. We are in the
process of updating the Water Control
Manuals for the Headwaters reservoirs
to implement the recommendations
from the 2009 ROPE. Once the Water
Control Manuals are revised, the
minimum discharge values in the
revised Water Control Manuals will also
be in conflict with 33 CFR 207.340 if the
regulation is not amended.
Table No. 1 illustrates the differences
between the current regulations and the
2009 ROPE study minimum flows.
TABLE 1—MISSISSIPPI RIVER HEADWATER RESERVOIR SYSTEM OPERATING LIMITS AND CFR VERSUS ROPE MINIMUM
DISCHARGES
Winni-bigoshish
Total Operating Limit ....................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Minimum Flow: 33 CFR 207.340
Minimum Flow: 2009 ROPE .........
Leech
Pokegama
Sandy
Cross L.
Pine R.
1294.94–
1303.14.
150 cfs .............
≥1294.94 .........
100 cfs .............
<1294.94 .........
50 cfs ...............
1292.70–
1297.94.
70 cfs ...............
≥1292.70 .........
120 cfs .............
<1292.70 .........
60 cfs ...............
1270.42–
1278.42.
200 cfs .............
≥1273.17 .........
200 cfs .............
<1273.17 .........
Sum of Flow
From Winnibigoshish
plus Leech.
1214.31–
1221.31.
80 cfs ...............
≥1214.31 .........
20 cfs ...............
<1214.31 .........
10 cfs ...............
1225.32–
1235.30.
90 cfs ...............
≥1225.32 .........
30 cfs ...............
<1225.32 .........
15 cfs ...............
We are proposing to amend the
regulations to delete all references to
minimum flows to eliminate any
conflict between the regulations and the
Water Control Manuals that guide
operations at the Mississippi River
Headwaters reservoirs. We further
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:36 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
propose to remove the minimum
operating limits from the regulations.
Any future changes to the minimum
flows or the operating limits of the
Headwaters reservoirs will be handled
through revisions to the Water Control
Manuals, which will be accomplished
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Gull
1192.75–
1194.75
30 cfs
≥1192.75
20 cfs
<1192.75
10 cfs
in accordance with the guidance
provided in ER 1110–2–240 after public
input and any necessary environmental
reviews. The proposed change to the
rule will eliminate the necessity of
amending the Code of Federal
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
42032
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Regulations each time a Water Control
Manual is updated.
Administrative Requirements
Plain Language
In compliance with the principles in
the President’s Memorandum of June 1,
1998, (63 FR 31855) regarding plain
language, this preamble is written using
plain language. The use of ‘‘we’’ in this
notice refers to the Corps. We have also
used the active voice, short sentences,
and common everyday terms except for
necessary technical terms.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action will not impose
any new information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork
Production Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The proposed modification would
eliminate minimum flow values and
operating limits from the rule. Since the
proposed rule does not involve any
additional collection of information
from the public, this action is not
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), the Corps must
determine whether the regulatory action
is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to
review by OMB and the requirements of
the Executive Order. The Executive
Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as one that is likely to result in
a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, we have determined that
the proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ because it does not
meet any of these four criteria. The
proposed rule modifies the regulations
to be consistent with an approved,
updated operating plan for the
Mississippi River Headwaters
reservoirs.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires the Corps to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have Federalism
implications.’’ The phrase ‘‘policies that
have Federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’
The proposed rule does not have
Federalism implications. We do not
believe that amending the regulation to
eliminate references to minimum flow
values and operating limits for the
Mississippi River Headwaters reservoirs
will have substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between
the Federal government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. The proposed rule
does not impose new substantive
requirements. In addition, the proposed
changes will not impose any additional
substantive obligations on State or local
governments. Therefore, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this
proposed rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice-and-comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of this proposed rule on small entities,
a small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business based on Small Business
Administration size standards; (2) a
small governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; or (3) a
small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
After considering the economic
impacts of the proposed rule on small
entities, we believe that this action will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed rule is consistent
with current agency practice, does not
impose new substantive requirements,
and therefore would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and Tribal governments and the private
sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA,
the agencies generally must prepare a
written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Before promulgating a rule for which a
written statement is needed, Section 205
of the UMRA generally requires the
agencies to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section
205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law.
Moreover, section 205 allows an agency
to adopt an alternative other than the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome alternative if the agency
publishes with the final rule an
explanation why that alternative was
not adopted. Before an agency
establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, including Tribal
governments, it must have developed,
under Section 203 of the UMRA, a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of regulatory proposals
with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
We have determined that the
proposed rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and Tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or the private sector in
any one year. The proposed rule is
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
consistent with current agency practice,
does not impose new substantive
requirements and therefore does not
contain a Federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or
more for State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector in any one year.
Therefore, the proposed rule is not
subject to the requirements of Sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA. For the same
reasons, we have determined that the
proposed rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, the proposed rule is not
subject to the requirements of Section
203 of UMRA.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that:
(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
we must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the proposed
rule on children, and explain why the
regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives.
The proposed rule is not subject to
this Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866. In addition, it
does not concern an environmental or
safety risk that we have reason to
believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children.
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000), requires
agencies to develop an accountable
process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and
timely input by tribal officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have tribal implications.’’ The phrase
‘‘policies that have tribal implications’’
is defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities between
the Federal government and Indian
tribes.’’
The proposed rule does not have
tribal implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities between
the Federal government and Indian
tribes. It is generally consistent with
current agency practice and does not
impose new substantive requirements.
Therefore, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this proposed rule.
Environmental Documentation
The purpose of this proposed
rulemaking is to make the Code of
Federal Regulations consistent with the
current operating plan for the
Mississippi River Headwaters
Reservoirs. This action is solely
administrative in nature. There is no
intended change in the use or operation
of the reservoirs as a result of this
action. The substantive change in
reservoir operations has already
occurred as a consequence of the
adoption of an updated operating plan,
as approved in the Record of Decision
for Mississippi River Headwaters
Reservoir Operating Plan Evaluation
dated January 19, 2010. The potential
environmental impacts of the updated
operating plan were thoroughly assessed
in the Final Integrated Reservoir
Operating Plan Evaluation and
Environmental Impact Statement dated
September 2009. Because the present
action is merely administrative and an
environmental analysis was completed
at the time the substantive changes to
the operating plan were adopted, no
additional environmental
documentation will be required at this
time.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. We will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. The proposed rule is
not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 12898
Executive Order 12898 requires that,
to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, each Federal agency
must make achieving environmental
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42033
justice part of its mission. Executive
Order 12898 provides that each Federal
agency conduct its programs, policies,
and activities that substantially affect
human health or the environment in a
manner that ensures that such programs,
policies, and activities do not have the
effect of excluding persons (including
populations) from participation in,
denying persons (including
populations) the benefits of, or
subjecting persons (including
populations) to discrimination under
such programs, policies, and activities
because of their race, color, or national
origin.
The proposed rule is not expected to
negatively impact any community, and
therefore is not expected to cause any
disproportionately high and adverse
impacts to minority or low-income
communities.
Executive Order 13211
The proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) because it is not likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
The proposed rule is consistent with
current agency practice, does not
impose new substantive requirements
and therefore will not have a significant
adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 207
Navigation (water), Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
Dated: July 3, 2013.
Approved By:
James R. Hannon,
Chief of Operations.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Corps proposes to amend
33 CFR part 207 as follows:
PART 207—NAVIGATION
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 207
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1).
■
2. Revise § 207.340 to read as follows:
§ 207.340 Reservoirs at headwaters of the
Mississippi River; use and administration.
(a) Description. These reservoirs
include Winnibigoshish, Leech Lake,
Pokegama, Sandy Lake, Pine River and
Gull Lake.
(b) Penalties. The River and Harbor
Act approved August 11, 1888 (25 Stat.
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
42034
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules
419, 33 U.S.C. 601) includes the
following provisions as to the
administration of the headwater
reservoirs:
And it shall be the duty of the
Secretary of War to prescribe such rules
and regulations in respect to the use and
administration of said reservoirs as, in
his judgment, the public interest and
necessity may require; which rules and
regulations shall be posted in some
conspicuous place or places for the
information of the public. And any
person knowingly and willfully
violating such rules and regulations
shall be liable to a fine not exceeding
five hundred dollars, or imprisonment
not exceeding six months, the same to
be enforced by prosecution in any
district court of the United States within
whose territorial jurisdiction such
offense may have been committed.
(c) Previous regulations now revoked.
In accordance with the above act, the
Secretary of War prescribed regulations
for the use and administration of the
reservoirs at the headwaters of the
Mississippi River under date of
February 11, 1931, which together with
all subsequent amendments are hereby
revoked and the following substituted
therefor.
(d) Authority of officer in charge of
the reservoirs. The accumulation of
water in, and discharge of water from
the reservoirs, including that from one
reservoir to another, shall be under the
direction of the U.S. District Engineer,
St. Paul, Minnesota, and of his
authorized agents subject to the
following restrictions and
considerations:
(1) Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, the discharge
from any reservoir may be varied at any
time as required to permit inspection of,
or repairs to, the dams, dikes or their
appurtenances, or to prevent damage to
lands or structures above or below the
dams.
(2) During the season of navigation on
the upper Mississippi River, the volume
of water discharged from the reservoirs
shall be so regulated by the officer in
charge as to maintain as nearly as
practicable, until navigation closes, a
sufficient stage of water in the navigable
reaches of the upper Mississippi and in
those of any tributary thereto that may
be navigated and on which a reservoir
is located.
(e) Passage of logs and other floating
bodies. Logs and other floating bodies
may be sluiced or locked through the
dams, but prior authority for the
sluicing of logs must be obtained from
the District Engineer when this
operation necessitates a material change
in discharge.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
(f) Obstructions to flow of water. No
person shall place floating bodies in a
stream or pond above or below a
reservoir dam when, in the opinion of
the officer in charge, such act would
prevent the necessary flow of water to
or from such dam, or in any way injure
the dam and its appurtenances, its dikes
and embankments; and should floating
bodies lying above or below a dam
constitute at any time an obstruction or
menace as beforesaid, the owners of said
floating bodies will be required to
remove them immediately.
(g) Trespass. No one shall trespass on
any reservoir dam, dike, embankment or
upon any property pertaining thereto.
[FR Doc. 2013–16877 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[WC Docket No. 12–375; DA 13–1445]
More Data Sought on Extra Fees
Levied on Inmate Calling Services
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau)
seeks additional comment on certain
fees related to inmate calling services
(ICS). The record to date indicates that
ICS providers may charge ICS account
holders fees that appear ancillary to
making calls, such as account setup
fees, account replenishment fees,
account refund fees, and account
inactivity fees.
DATES: Comments due on or before July
17, 2013; reply comments due on or
before July 24, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by WC Docket No. 12–375, by
any of the following methods:
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web site: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Commercial overnight mail
(other than U.S. Postal Service Express
Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to
9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol
Heights, MD 20743.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Haledjian, Wireline
Competition Bureau, Pricing Policy
Division, (202) 418–1520 or
gregory.haledjian@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Public
Notice, WC Docket No. 12–375; DA 13–
1445, released June 26, 2013. The
complete text of this document is
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours in the
FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room
CY–A257, Washington DC 20554. The
document may also be purchased from
the Commission’s duplicating
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.,
445 12th Street SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800)
378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile
(202) 863–2898, or via Internet at
https://www.bcpiweb.com.
The Bureau requests that parties
provide data and information about
such fees. Specifically, we request that
parties identify any ancillary ICS fees
that ICS providers charge in connection
with the provision of interstate ICS, the
level of each fee, the total amount of
revenue received from each fee, and the
cost of providing the service for which
the fee recovers. We also request that
parties identify any portion of ancillary
service costs that are shared or common
to the provision of other services, and
explain how these costs, and recovery of
them, are apportioned among the
services to which they are shared or
common. To evaluate how costs
associated with providing ancillary
services relate to ICS providers’ overall
costs, we request that costs that are
shared or common to the provision of
ancillary ICS services be identified, and
that parties explain how such costs are
apportioned to and recovered by ICS
rates. Providers submitting joint and
common costs are requested to provide
both per-minute rates and fixed charges
associated with interstate ICS and
intrastate ICS and information on the
costs of providing ICS, including but not
limited to Customer Premise Equipment
or CPE, installation, specific security
enhancements (such as monitoring and
call blocking), labor, maintenance,
interconnection fees, and any other cost
recovered by ICS rates. In addition to
per-minute or incremental costs, we
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42030-42034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16877]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
33 CFR Part 207
Reservoirs at Headwaters of the Mississippi River; Use and
Administration
AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is proposing to amend the
rules regarding use and administration of the reservoirs at the
headwaters of the Mississippi River by deleting from the Code of
Federal Regulations all references to minimum discharges and to
operating limits for the reservoirs. Following extensive public input
and environmental review, the St. Paul District of the Corps of
Engineers recently adopted an updated operating plan for the
Mississippi River Headwaters reservoirs containing minimum flow values
that differ from those currently codified in the Code of Federal
Regulations. Deleting all references to minimum flows in the
regulations will eliminate the current discrepancy between the
regulations and the approved operating plan for the reservoirs. The
operating limits are also contained in the operating plan for the
reservoirs, and eliminating both the minimum flow values and the
operating limits from the rule will make it unnecessary to amend the
regulations each time the values are modified in the operating plan in
the future.
DATES: Submit comments on or before September 13, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number COE-
2013-0008, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: Jerry.W.Webb@usace.army.mil and
Chandra.S.Pathak@usace.army.mil. Include the docket number, COE-2013-
0008 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW-CE (Chandra S.
Pathak), 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314-1000.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to security requirements, we cannot
receive comments by hand delivery or courier.
Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number COE-2013-0008.
All comments received will be included in the public docket without
change and may be made available on-line at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the commenter
indicates that the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through regulations.gov or
email. The regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system,
which means we will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
directly to the Corps without going through regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, we recommend that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If we cannot read your
comment because of technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
comments should avoid the use of any special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
[[Page 42031]]
comments received, go to regulations.gov. All documents in the docket
are listed. Although listed in the index, some information is not
publicly available, such as CBI or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jerry W. Webb, Headquarters, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering and Construction Community of
Practice, Washington, DC at 202-761-0673; Mr. Chandra S. Pathak,
Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering and
Construction Community of Practice, Washington, DC at 202-761-4668; or
Mr. Kenton Spading, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District, at
651-290-5623.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
The purpose of this action is to amend the current rule regarding
minimum discharges and minimum operating limits of the reservoirs at
the headwaters of the Mississippi River to ensure that the regulations
do not conflict with the current operating plan for those reservoirs.
The Corps' authority to amend the minimum flow values and minimum
operating limits for the reservoirs of the headwaters of the
Mississippi River is Section 7 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917
(40 Stat. 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and Section 216 of the Flood Control Act of
1970 (84 Stat. 1830; 33 U.S.C. 549a).
Background
The Rivers and Harbors Acts of June 14, 1880, and August 2, 1882,
authorized the construction of dams at each of the six Mississippi
River Headwaters lakes for the purpose of augmenting Mississippi River
flow for navigation. The lakes affected by these acts are
Winnibigoshish, Leech, Pokegama, Sandy, Cross (Pine River), and Gull.
Following authorization of the reservoirs, the Secretary of War
prescribed regulations governing operation of the reservoirs on
February 11, 1931, which were codified at 33 CFR 207.340. The current
regulations list minimum discharges for each reservoir at 33 CFR
207.340(d)(2). The current regulations also list minimum operating
limits, or the lowest level at which the Corps may operate each
reservoir, at 33 CFR 207.340(d)(7).
The Corps' procedure adopting and publishing regulations related to
reservoirs has changed since the aforementioned regulations were
originally codified in 1931. The present-day practice is to include
minimum flow values, operating limits and other related information in
Water Control Manuals that are adopted following an extensive public
and environmental review process, as outlined in Engineer Regulation
(ER) 1110-2-240. Moreover, the operating limits in the Water Control
Manuals prescribe not only the minimum level at which a reservoir may
operate but also the absolute upper limit on reservoir operations,
effectively providing a band within which the Corps may operate a
reservoir.
As a precursor to updating the Water Control Manuals for the
Mississippi River Headwaters reservoirs in 2009, we completed a study
known as the Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoir Operating Plan
Evaluation (ROPE). The primary purpose of the ROPE was to evaluate
alternative operating plans for the Headwaters reservoirs in an attempt
to improve the operation of the system while balancing tribal trust
obligations, flood risk reduction, environmental concerns, water
quality, water supply, recreation, navigation, hydropower, and other
public interests.
On January 19, 2010, after thoroughly assessing potential
environmental impacts and involving the public in the process, the
District Engineer for the St. Paul District signed a Record of Decision
approving the ROPE's recommended operating plan for the Headwaters
reservoirs. The ROPE's recommended plan adopts minimum discharges that
were scientifically developed using a habitat in-stream flow analysis
(Tenant 1976), as described in the ROPE. The minimum discharges in the
ROPE's recommended plan differ from the minimum discharges listed in 33
CFR 207.340 as it is currently written. We are in the process of
updating the Water Control Manuals for the Headwaters reservoirs to
implement the recommendations from the 2009 ROPE. Once the Water
Control Manuals are revised, the minimum discharge values in the
revised Water Control Manuals will also be in conflict with 33 CFR
207.340 if the regulation is not amended.
Table No. 1 illustrates the differences between the current
regulations and the 2009 ROPE study minimum flows.
Table 1--Mississippi River Headwater Reservoir System Operating Limits and CFR Versus ROPE Minimum Discharges
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winni-bigoshish Leech Pokegama Sandy Cross L. Pine R. Gull
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Operating Limit........... 1294.94-1303.14... 1292.70-1297.94... 1270.42-1278.42... 1214.31-1221.31... 1225.32-1235.30... 1192.75-1194.75
Minimum Flow: 33 CFR 207.340.... 150 cfs........... 70 cfs............ 200 cfs........... 80 cfs............ 90 cfs............ 30 cfs
Minimum Flow: 2009 ROPE......... >=1294.94......... >=1292.70......... >=1273.17......... >=1214.31......... >=1225.32......... >=1192.75
100 cfs........... 120 cfs........... 200 cfs........... 20 cfs............ 30 cfs............ 20 cfs
<1294.94.......... <1292.70.......... <1273.17.......... <1214.31.......... <1225.32.......... <1192.75
50 cfs............ 60 cfs............ Sum of Flow From 10 cfs............ 15 cfs............ 10 cfs
Winni-bigoshish
plus Leech.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are proposing to amend the regulations to delete all references
to minimum flows to eliminate any conflict between the regulations and
the Water Control Manuals that guide operations at the Mississippi
River Headwaters reservoirs. We further propose to remove the minimum
operating limits from the regulations. Any future changes to the
minimum flows or the operating limits of the Headwaters reservoirs will
be handled through revisions to the Water Control Manuals, which will
be accomplished in accordance with the guidance provided in ER 1110-2-
240 after public input and any necessary environmental reviews. The
proposed change to the rule will eliminate the necessity of amending
the Code of Federal
[[Page 42032]]
Regulations each time a Water Control Manual is updated.
Administrative Requirements
Plain Language
In compliance with the principles in the President's Memorandum of
June 1, 1998, (63 FR 31855) regarding plain language, this preamble is
written using plain language. The use of ``we'' in this notice refers
to the Corps. We have also used the active voice, short sentences, and
common everyday terms except for necessary technical terms.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action will not impose any new information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Production Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.). The proposed modification would eliminate minimum flow
values and operating limits from the rule. Since the proposed rule does
not involve any additional collection of information from the public,
this action is not subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Corps must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to review by OMB and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory
action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, we have determined
that the proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
because it does not meet any of these four criteria. The proposed rule
modifies the regulations to be consistent with an approved, updated
operating plan for the Mississippi River Headwaters reservoirs.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires the Corps to develop an accountable process to
ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have Federalism
implications.'' The phrase ``policies that have Federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.''
The proposed rule does not have Federalism implications. We do not
believe that amending the regulation to eliminate references to minimum
flow values and operating limits for the Mississippi River Headwaters
reservoirs will have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. The proposed rule does not impose new substantive
requirements. In addition, the proposed changes will not impose any
additional substantive obligations on State or local governments.
Therefore, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this proposed rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act, as Amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small business
based on Small Business Administration size standards; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a population of less than
50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of the proposed rule on
small entities, we believe that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed
rule is consistent with current agency practice, does not impose new
substantive requirements, and therefore would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA, the
agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year. Before promulgating a rule for which a
written statement is needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires
the agencies to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The
provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows an agency to adopt an
alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an
explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before an agency
establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, including Tribal governments, it
must have developed, under Section 203 of the UMRA, a small government
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected
small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to
have meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
We have determined that the proposed rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector in any one year. The proposed rule is
[[Page 42033]]
consistent with current agency practice, does not impose new
substantive requirements and therefore does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Therefore, the proposed rule is not subject to
the requirements of Sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. For the same
reasons, we have determined that the proposed rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. Therefore, the proposed rule is not subject to the
requirements of Section 203 of UMRA.
Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the proposed rule on children, and explain why the
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives.
The proposed rule is not subject to this Executive Order because it
is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866. In
addition, it does not concern an environmental or safety risk that we
have reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires agencies to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' The phrase
``policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive
Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.''
The proposed rule does not have tribal implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes. It is generally consistent with current
agency practice and does not impose new substantive requirements.
Therefore, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.
Environmental Documentation
The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to make the Code of
Federal Regulations consistent with the current operating plan for the
Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoirs. This action is solely
administrative in nature. There is no intended change in the use or
operation of the reservoirs as a result of this action. The substantive
change in reservoir operations has already occurred as a consequence of
the adoption of an updated operating plan, as approved in the Record of
Decision for Mississippi River Headwaters Reservoir Operating Plan
Evaluation dated January 19, 2010. The potential environmental impacts
of the updated operating plan were thoroughly assessed in the Final
Integrated Reservoir Operating Plan Evaluation and Environmental Impact
Statement dated September 2009. Because the present action is merely
administrative and an environmental analysis was completed at the time
the substantive changes to the operating plan were adopted, no
additional environmental documentation will be required at this time.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. We will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. The proposed rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 12898
Executive Order 12898 requires that, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, each Federal agency must make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission. Executive Order
12898 provides that each Federal agency conduct its programs, policies,
and activities that substantially affect human health or the
environment in a manner that ensures that such programs, policies, and
activities do not have the effect of excluding persons (including
populations) from participation in, denying persons (including
populations) the benefits of, or subjecting persons (including
populations) to discrimination under such programs, policies, and
activities because of their race, color, or national origin.
The proposed rule is not expected to negatively impact any
community, and therefore is not expected to cause any
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income
communities.
Executive Order 13211
The proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined
in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The
proposed rule is consistent with current agency practice, does not
impose new substantive requirements and therefore will not have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 207
Navigation (water), Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
Dated: July 3, 2013.
Approved By:
James R. Hannon,
Chief of Operations.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Corps proposes to amend
33 CFR part 207 as follows:
PART 207--NAVIGATION REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 207 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1).
0
2. Revise Sec. 207.340 to read as follows:
Sec. 207.340 Reservoirs at headwaters of the Mississippi River; use
and administration.
(a) Description. These reservoirs include Winnibigoshish, Leech
Lake, Pokegama, Sandy Lake, Pine River and Gull Lake.
(b) Penalties. The River and Harbor Act approved August 11, 1888
(25 Stat.
[[Page 42034]]
419, 33 U.S.C. 601) includes the following provisions as to the
administration of the headwater reservoirs:
And it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War to prescribe such
rules and regulations in respect to the use and administration of said
reservoirs as, in his judgment, the public interest and necessity may
require; which rules and regulations shall be posted in some
conspicuous place or places for the information of the public. And any
person knowingly and willfully violating such rules and regulations
shall be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, or
imprisonment not exceeding six months, the same to be enforced by
prosecution in any district court of the United States within whose
territorial jurisdiction such offense may have been committed.
(c) Previous regulations now revoked. In accordance with the above
act, the Secretary of War prescribed regulations for the use and
administration of the reservoirs at the headwaters of the Mississippi
River under date of February 11, 1931, which together with all
subsequent amendments are hereby revoked and the following substituted
therefor.
(d) Authority of officer in charge of the reservoirs. The
accumulation of water in, and discharge of water from the reservoirs,
including that from one reservoir to another, shall be under the
direction of the U.S. District Engineer, St. Paul, Minnesota, and of
his authorized agents subject to the following restrictions and
considerations:
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the
discharge from any reservoir may be varied at any time as required to
permit inspection of, or repairs to, the dams, dikes or their
appurtenances, or to prevent damage to lands or structures above or
below the dams.
(2) During the season of navigation on the upper Mississippi River,
the volume of water discharged from the reservoirs shall be so
regulated by the officer in charge as to maintain as nearly as
practicable, until navigation closes, a sufficient stage of water in
the navigable reaches of the upper Mississippi and in those of any
tributary thereto that may be navigated and on which a reservoir is
located.
(e) Passage of logs and other floating bodies. Logs and other
floating bodies may be sluiced or locked through the dams, but prior
authority for the sluicing of logs must be obtained from the District
Engineer when this operation necessitates a material change in
discharge.
(f) Obstructions to flow of water. No person shall place floating
bodies in a stream or pond above or below a reservoir dam when, in the
opinion of the officer in charge, such act would prevent the necessary
flow of water to or from such dam, or in any way injure the dam and its
appurtenances, its dikes and embankments; and should floating bodies
lying above or below a dam constitute at any time an obstruction or
menace as beforesaid, the owners of said floating bodies will be
required to remove them immediately.
(g) Trespass. No one shall trespass on any reservoir dam, dike,
embankment or upon any property pertaining thereto.
[FR Doc. 2013-16877 Filed 7-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P