Security Zone; Cooper River; Charleston, SC, 271-274 [2019-28388]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Governing the ACH Network’’ and
supplements thereto, except:
(1) Sections 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5
and 1.2.6; Appendix Seven; Appendix
Eight; and Appendix Nine (governing
the enforcement of the ACH Rules and
claims for compensation);
(2) Section 2.10 and Section 3.6
(governing the reclamation of benefit
payments);
(3) The requirement in Appendix
Three that the Effective Entry Date of a
credit entry be no more than two
Banking Days following the date of
processing by the Originating ACH
Operator (see definition of ‘‘Effective
Entry Date’’ in Appendix Three);
(4) Section 2.2 (setting forth ODFI
obligations to enter into agreements
with, and perform risk management
relating to, Originators and Third-Party
Senders) and Section 1.6 (Security
Requirements);
(5) Section 2.17.2.2–2.17.2.6
(requiring reduction of high rates of
entries returned as unauthorized); and
(6) The requirements of Section 2.5.8
(International ACH Transactions) shall
not apply to entries representing the
payment of a Federal tax obligation by
a taxpayer; and
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 210.3, revise paragraph (b),
redesignate paragraph (c) as paragraph
(d), and add new paragraph (c) to read
as follows:
§ 210.3
Governing law.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Incorporation by reference. Certain
material is incorporated by reference
into this part with the approval of the
Director of the Federal Register under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To
enforce any edition other than that
specified in this section the Service
must publish a document in the Federal
Register and the material must be
available to the public. All approved
material is available for inspection at
the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, 401
14th Street SW, Room 400A,
Washington, DC 20227, 202–874–6680,
and is available from the sources listed
below. It is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, email fedreg.legal@
nara.gov or go to www.archives.gov/
federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
(1) NACHA—The Electronic
Payments Association, 2550 Wasser
Terrace, Suite 400, Herndon, Virginia
20171, tel. 703–561–1100, info@
nacha.org.
(i) ‘‘2019 NACHA Operating Rules &
Guidelines: A Complete Guide to Rules
Governing the ACH Network,’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jan 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
copyright 2019. IBR approved for
§ 210.6
ii [Reserved]
2 [Reserved]
(c) Any amendment to the applicable
ACH Rules approved by Nacha after
publication of the 2019 Nacha Operating
Rules & Guidelines shall not apply to
Government entries unless the Service
expressly accepts such amendment by
publishing notice of acceptance of the
amendment to this part in the Federal
Register. An amendment to the ACH
Rules that is accepted by the Service
shall apply to Government entries on
the effective date of the rulemaking
specified by the Service in the Federal
Register notice expressly accepting such
amendment.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 210.6, revise paragraph (g) to
read as follows:
§ 210.6
Agencies.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Point-of-purchase debit entries. An
agency may originate a Point-ofPurchase (POP) entry using a check
drawn on a consumer or business
account and presented at a point-ofpurchase. The requirements of the 2019
Nacha Operating Rules and Guidelines,
incorporated by reference, see
§ 210.3(b)(2), shall be met for such an
entry if the Receiver presents the check
at a location where the agency has
posted the notice required by the ACH
Rules and has provided the Receiver
with a copy of the notice.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 210.10, revise paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
§ 210.10
RDFI liability.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Actual or constructive knowledge,
when used in reference to an RDFI’s or
agency’s knowledge of the death or
incapacity of a recipient or death of a
beneficiary, means that the RDFI or
agency received information, by
whatever means, of the death or
incapacity and has had a reasonable
opportunity to act on such information
or that the RDFI or agency would have
learned of the death or incapacity if it
had followed commercially reasonable
business practices. For purposes of
Subpart B, an agency is presumed to
have constructive knowledge of death or
incapacity at the time it stops certifying
recurring payments to a recipient if the
agency (1) does not re-initiate payments
to the recipient and (2) subsequently
initiates a reclamation for one or more
payments made to the recipient.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
271
Dated: December 11, 2019.
David A. Lebryk,
Fiscal Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019–27261 Filed 1–2–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–AS–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2019–0933]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone; Cooper River;
Charleston, SC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
establish a temporary security zone on
certain navigable waters of the Cooper
River within a 500-yard radius of the
South Carolina State Port Authority
Cruise Ship Terminal in Charleston, SC
during a visit by the Commandant of the
United States Coast Guard. This action
is necessary to protect personnel from
potential hazards and security risk
associated with the Commandant’s
speaking engagement. This proposed
rulemaking would prohibit persons and
vessels from entering, transiting
through, anchoring in, or remaining
within the security zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Charleston (COTP) or a designated
representative. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before January 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
0219–0933 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant
Chad Ray, Sector Charleston Office of
Waterways Management, Coast Guard;
telephone (843) 740–3184, email
Chad.L.Ray@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
272
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On November 18, 2019, Sector
Charleston personnel were notified that
the Commandant of the U.S. Coast
Guard will give the State of the Coast
Guard Address at the South Carolina
State Port Authority Cruise Ship
Terminal on the Cooper River in
Charleston, SC. The security zone will
impact waters of the Cooper River in
Charleston, SC. The Captain of the Port
Charleston (COTP) has determined that
potential hazards associated with the
event would be a security concern for
participants, spectators, and others on
the navigable waters around the event.
Section 4(a) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b))
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 being able to
facilitate a full 30 day comment period
with respect to this proposed rule
because the Coast Guard did not receive
necessary information regarding the
Commandant of the United States Coast
Guard’s visit near the South Carolina
State Port Authority Cruise Ship
Terminal in Charleston, SC until
November 18, 2019. As a result, the
Coast Guard did not have sufficient time
to both publish an NPRM and to
maintain a 30 day comment period prior
to the events. There is sufficient time to
allow for some amount of comment
period which the Coast Guard is
facilitating. A full 30 day comment
period would result in a delay in the
effective date of this rule and such a
delay would be contrary to the public
interest because immediate action is
needed to necessary to protect
personnel from potential hazards and
security risk associated with the
Commandant’s speaking engagement.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
ensure the security of persons, vessels,
and the marine environment before,
during, and after the scheduled event.
The Coast Guard is proposing this
rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034.
III. Discussion of the Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a
temporary security on the waters of the
Cooper River in Charleston, South
Carolina during the State of the Coast
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jan 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
Guard Address from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00
p.m. on February 20, 2020. The security
zone would cover all navigable waters
within a 500-yard radius of the South
Carolina State Port Authority Cruise
Ship Terminal in Charleston, SC. The
duration of the zone is intended to
ensure the security of persons, vessels,
and these navigable waters before,
during, and after the scheduled address.
No vessels or person would be
permitted to enter the security zone
without obtaining permission from the
COTP or a designated representative.
Persons and vessels desiring to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain
within the regulated area may contact
the COTP by telephone at (843) 740–
7050, or a designated representative via
VHF radio on channel 16, to request
authorization. If authorization to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain
within the regulated area is granted, all
persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the
instructions of the COTP or a designated
representative. The COTP will provide
notice of the safety zone by Local Notice
to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives. The regulatory text we
are proposing appears at the end of this
document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and
Executive orders, and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13771 directs agencies
to control regulatory costs through a
budgeting process. This NPRM has not
been designated a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and
pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive
Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination
is based on: (1) Persons and vessels may
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated area during
the enforcement periods if authorized
by Sector Charleston COTP or a
designated representative; (2) vessels
not able to enter, transit through, anchor
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in, or remain within the regulated area
without authorization from Sector
Charleston COTP or a designated
representative may operate in the
surrounding areas during the
enforcement period; (3) the Coast Guard
will provide advance notification of the
safety zone to the local maritime
community by Local Notice to Mariners
and Broadcast Notice to Mariners; and
(4) the regulated area will be limited in
time, scope, and only impact small
designated areas of the Cooper River.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to consider
the potential impact of regulations on
small entities during rulemaking. 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 proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the security
zone may be small entities, for the
reasons stated in section IV.A above,
this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule. If the
rule would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will
not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of
the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Governments
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial
direct effect 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. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent
with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements
described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
If you believe this proposed rule has
implications for federalism or Indian
tribes, please call or email the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
E. 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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023–01, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves a two hour security zone
that will prohibit persons and vessels
from entering, transiting through,
anchoring in, or remaining within a
limited area on the Cooper River during
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jan 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
the State of the Coast Guard Address by
Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard. It
is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A
Record of Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
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.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645,
September 26, 2018).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
273
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; and
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add a temporary § 165.T07–0933 to
read as follows:
■
§ 165.T07–0933 Security Zone; Cooper
River, Charleston, SC.
(a) Location. All waters of the Cooper
River within a 500-yard radius the
South Carolina State Port Authority
Cruise Ship Terminal in Charleston, SC.
(b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated
representative’’ means Coast Guard
Patrol Commanders, including Coast
Guard coxswains, petty officers, and
other officers operating Coast Guard
vessels, and Federal, state, and local
officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port (COTP) Charleston
in the enforcement of the regulated
areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area
unless authorized by the COTP
Charleston or a designated
representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated area may
contact the COTP Charleston by
telephone at 843–740–7050, or a
designated representative via VHF radio
on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization is granted, all persons
and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of
the COTP Charleston or a designated
representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide
notice of the regulated area by Marine
Safety Information Bulletins, Local
Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives.
(d) Enforcement period. This rule will
be enforced from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
on February 20, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
274
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Dated: December 26, 2019.
J.W. Reed,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the
Port, Charleston.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
[FR Doc. 2019–28388 Filed 1–2–20; 8:45 am]
I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2019–0666; FRL–10003–
76—Region 7]
Air Plan Approval; Nebraska; LincolnLancaster County Health Department
(LLCHD)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of
Nebraska that addresses the authority of
the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health
Department (LLCHD). This proposed
action will amend the Nebraska SIP by
removing a portion of the SIP that
addresses the authority of LLCHD
regarding the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) Program;
specifically: Article 2. Section 19.
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
of Air Quality (PSD) Lincoln-Lancaster
County Health Department (LLCHD).
This SIP revision will have no impact to
air quality and eliminate confusion
regarding the authority to issue PSD
permits in Lancaster County.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2019–0666 to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Stone, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air
Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219;
telephone number (913) 551–7714;
email address stone.william@epa.gov.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Jan 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2019–
0666, at https://www.regulations.gov.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
II. What is being addressed in this
document?
The EPA is proposing to approve a
revision to Nebraska’s SIP received from
the State of Nebraska on July 23, 2019.
Specifically, the EPA is proposing to
amend the Nebraska SIP by removing a
portion of the SIP as follows: Article 2.
Section 19. Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality (PSD)
Lincoln-Lancaster County Health
Department (LLCHD).
On February 14, 1996, the EPA
approved SIP revisions submitted by the
State of Nebraska on behalf of the
LLCHD (61 FR 5699, February 14, 1996).
This submittal included a complete
copy of the state’s air regulations that
LLCHD had adopted as its own.
Although the LLCHD’s adoption of the
State’s rules included the PSD
regulation, the action by the EPA did
not create or acknowledge a PSD
program separate and apart from the
State of Nebraska’s EPA-approved PSD
program.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
This incorporation by reference of the
LLCHD Air Pollution Control Program,
specifically ARTICLE 2. SECTION 19.
PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT
DETERIORATION OF AIR QUALITY
has created confusion about the
authority to issue PSD permits in
Lancaster County, Nebraska.
PSD authority in Lancaster County,
Nebraska was addressed in three
documents around the time of this SIP
action by both EPA and the State of
Nebraska. Those documents are (1) the
preamble to the direct final rule, (2) the
Technical Support Document (TSD) that
accompanied the proposal, and (3) a
letter from the Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality (NDEQ), now the
Nebraska Department of Environment
and Energy (NDEE), to EPA Region 7
dated November 9, 1995. PSD authority
in Lancaster County, Nebraska was also
addressed in a delegation letter from
NDEQ to LLCHD. Each of these
documents is available as part of this
docket.
Per the preamble to the direct final
rule (61 FR 5700, February 14, 1996),
the EPA herein notes that only the State
program includes an approved part 51
program to issue PSD permits.
On Page 5 of the TSD EPA states:
[A]lthough the local agencies’ adoption of the
state’s rule include Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) regulations, the EPA
herein notes that only the state program
includes an approved part 51 program to
issue PSD permits. As part of the Class II
program, the local agencies will act as agents
of the state to administer and enforce
requirements applicable under PSD,
although only the state will actually issue
these permits. This is identified in letter from
NDEQ dated November 9, 1995. (TSD for
Nebraska SIP revisions, November 20, 1995).
In a letter from NDEQ to EPA Region
7, referred to in the TSD above, NDEQ
states:
[A]lthough the local agencies adoption of the
Title 129 includes PSD regulations which
were submitted as part of the request for
approval, only the state program includes an
approved part 51 program to issue PSD
permits. As part of the Class II program, the
local agencies will act as agents of the state
to administer and enforce requirements
applicable under PSD, although only the
state will actually issue these permits . . .
(Letter from Joe Francis, Assistant Director,
NDEQ, to Art Spratlin, EPA Region 7,
LLCHD, November 9, 1995).
In a letter from NDEQ to LLCHD dated
December 31, 1997, NDEQ responds to
LLCHD’s request to delegate authority to
implement and enforce the PSD
program. NDEQ delegates the authority
to LLCHD to implement and enforce all
provisions of NDEQ title 129 chapter 19
with conditions including:
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 2 (Friday, January 3, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 271-274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28388]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2019-0933]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Cooper River; Charleston, SC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security
zone on certain navigable waters of the Cooper River within a 500-yard
radius of the South Carolina State Port Authority Cruise Ship Terminal
in Charleston, SC during a visit by the Commandant of the United States
Coast Guard. This action is necessary to protect personnel from
potential hazards and security risk associated with the Commandant's
speaking engagement. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons
and vessels from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the security zone unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port Charleston (COTP) or a designated representative. We invite
your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before January 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
0219-0933 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Chad Ray, Sector
Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone (843)
740-3184, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
[[Page 272]]
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
On November 18, 2019, Sector Charleston personnel were notified
that the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard will give the State of the
Coast Guard Address at the South Carolina State Port Authority Cruise
Ship Terminal on the Cooper River in Charleston, SC. The security zone
will impact waters of the Cooper River in Charleston, SC. The Captain
of the Port Charleston (COTP) has determined that potential hazards
associated with the event would be a security concern for participants,
spectators, and others on the navigable waters around the event.
Section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
553(b)) 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 being able to facilitate a full 30 day comment
period with respect to this proposed rule because the Coast Guard did
not receive necessary information regarding the Commandant of the
United States Coast Guard's visit near the South Carolina State Port
Authority Cruise Ship Terminal in Charleston, SC until November 18,
2019. As a result, the Coast Guard did not have sufficient time to both
publish an NPRM and to maintain a 30 day comment period prior to the
events. There is sufficient time to allow for some amount of comment
period which the Coast Guard is facilitating. A full 30 day comment
period would result in a delay in the effective date of this rule and
such a delay would be contrary to the public interest because immediate
action is needed to necessary to protect personnel from potential
hazards and security risk associated with the Commandant's speaking
engagement.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the security of
persons, vessels, and the marine environment before, during, and after
the scheduled event. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.
III. Discussion of the Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a temporary security on the
waters of the Cooper River in Charleston, South Carolina during the
State of the Coast Guard Address from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. on
February 20, 2020. The security zone would cover all navigable waters
within a 500-yard radius of the South Carolina State Port Authority
Cruise Ship Terminal in Charleston, SC. The duration of the zone is
intended to ensure the security of persons, vessels, and these
navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled address. No
vessels or person would be permitted to enter the security zone without
obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.
Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated area may contact the COTP by telephone at
(843) 740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel
16, to request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area is granted, all
persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the
instructions of the COTP or a designated representative. The COTP will
provide notice of the safety zone by Local Notice to Mariners,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.
The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this
document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on: (1) Persons and
vessels may enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
regulated area during the enforcement periods if authorized by Sector
Charleston COTP or a designated representative; (2) vessels not able to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area
without authorization from Sector Charleston COTP or a designated
representative may operate in the surrounding areas during the
enforcement period; (3) the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community by
Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners; and (4) the
regulated area will be limited in time, scope, and only impact small
designated areas of the Cooper River.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
security zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
[[Page 273]]
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. 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.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a two hour
security zone that will prohibit persons and vessels from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within a limited area on
the Cooper River during the State of the Coast Guard Address by
Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard. It is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is 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.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
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
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, 160.5; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add a temporary Sec. 165.T07-0933 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T07-0933 Security Zone; Cooper River, Charleston, SC.
(a) Location. All waters of the Cooper River within a 500-yard
radius the South Carolina State Port Authority Cruise Ship Terminal in
Charleston, SC.
(b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port (COTP) Charleston in the enforcement of the
regulated areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the COTP Charleston or a designated
representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the COTP Charleston
by telephone at 843-740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF
radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization is
granted, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must
comply with the instructions of the COTP Charleston or a designated
representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Marine Safety Information Bulletins, Local Notice to Mariners,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.
(d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from 12:00 p.m.
to 2:00 p.m. on February 20, 2020.
[[Page 274]]
Dated: December 26, 2019.
J.W. Reed,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2019-28388 Filed 1-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
