Security Zone; Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, 15069-15071 [2020-05158]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations various levels of government. We have analyzed this 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES 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 rule under Department of Homeland Security Management 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 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321– 4370f). The Coast Guard has determined 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 rule promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges and is categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3–1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures. Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum for the Record are required for this rule. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:33 Mar 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows: PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. ■ 2. Revise § 117.593 to read as follows: § 117.593 Chelsea River. (a) All drawbridges across Chelsea River shall open on signal. The opening signal for each drawbridge is two prolonged blasts followed by two short blasts and one prolonged blast. The acknowledging signal is three prolonged blasts when the draw can be opened immediately and is two prolonged blasts when the draw cannot be open or is open and must be closed. (b) The draw of the Chelsea Street Bridge, mile 1.3, at Chelsea, shall open as follows: (1) The draw shall open on signal to 139 feet above mean high water for all vessel traffic unless a full bridge opening to 175 feet above mean high water is requested. (2) The 139 foot opening will be signified by a range light display with one solid green light and one flashing green light and the full 175 foot opening will be signified with two solid green range lights. Dated: Feburary 12, 2020. A.J. Tiongson, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2020–04965 Filed 3–16–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG–2020–0011] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zone; Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands AGENCY: PO 00000 Coast Guard, DHS. Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ACTION: 15069 Final rule. The Coast Guard is modifying the name and locating of an existing security zone in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. This rule adjusts the coordinates of the security zone and updates the facility name from HOVENSA Refinery to Limetree Bay Terminals. The rule continues to prohibit persons and vessels from entering the security zone, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative. This action is necessary to better meet the safety and security needs of Limetree Bay Terminals in St. Croix, USVI. DATES: This rule is effective April 16, 2020. ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https:// www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2020– 0011 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Commander Pedro Mendoza, Sector San Juan Prevention Department, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 787–729–2374, email Pedro.L.Mendoza@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Table of Abbreviations COTP Captain of the Port CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code USVI U.S. Virgin Islands II. Background Information and Regulatory History On November 21, 2019, the Coast Guard received a request to extend the regulated area of the security zone and update the facility name to Limetree Bay Terminals. The existing regulation in 33 CFR 165.770, contains a fixed security zone around the HOVENSA Refinery on the south coast of St. Croix, USVI. Limetree Bay Terminals recently installed a Single Point Mooring system to enable deep draft vessel traffic to transfer to and from the facility. The location of the Single Point Mooring systems falls outside of the existing security zone. In response, on January 27, 2020, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Security Zone; Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin E:\FR\FM\17MRR1.SGM 17MRR1 15070 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Islands’’ (85 FR 4619). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this the Limetree Bay Terminals security zone. During the comment period that ended February 26, 2020, we received no comments. III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters surrounding Limetree Bay Terminals. The Coast Guard is establishing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published January 27, 2020. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM. This rule amends the existing fixed security zone in 33 CFR 165.770 to expand the regulated area and to update the facility name. This rule increases the regulated area by approximately 880 yards (.5 mile) to encompass the new mooring system location installed by the facility. We updated the facility name to Limetree Bay Terminals to reflect its current ownership. Vessels may seek permission from the COTP to transit through the security zone. V. Regulatory Analyses We developed this 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. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES 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 rule has not been designated a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule 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 [provide factual reasons related to the waterway, duration of rule, etc.]. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:33 Mar 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 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 received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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. 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 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 call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 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). D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. 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 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 determined 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 rule involves expanding an existing security zone and updating the facility name. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the E:\FR\FM\17MRR1.SGM 17MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 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. Dated: March 9, 2020. E.P. King, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Juan. [FR Doc. 2020–05158 Filed 3–16–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: [EPA–R03–OAR–2019–0103; FRL–10006– 20–Region 3] 40 CFR Part 52 PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Revise § 165.770 to read as follows: khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES § 165.770 Security Zone; Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. (a) Regulated area. The Coast Guard is establishing a security zone in and around Limetree Bay Terminals on the south coast of St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. This security zone includes all waters from surface to bottom, encompassed by an imaginary line connecting the following points: Point 1 in position 17°41′48″ N, 064°44′26″ W; Point 2 in position 17°40′00″ N, 064°43′36″ W; Point 3 in position 17°39′36″ N, 064°44′48″ W; Point 4 in position 17°41′33″ N, 064°45′08″ W; then tracing the shoreline along the water’s edge to the point of origin. These coordinates are based upon North American Datum 1983 (NAD 1983). (b) Regulations. (1) Under § 165.33, entry into or remaining within the regulated area in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port San Juan or vessels have a scheduled arrival at Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C. (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may contact the COTP San Juan or designated representative at telephone number 787–289–2041 or on VHF–FM Channel 16. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:33 Mar 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ■ ■ Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2015 Ozone Standard The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of West Virginia. Whenever new or revised national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or standards) are promulgated, the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to make an initial SIP submission to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such NAAQS. This submission is required to address basic program elements, including, but not limited to, regulatory structure, monitoring, modeling, legal authority, and adequate resources necessary to assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. This type of SIP revision is commonly referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP and elements addressed in such a submission are referred to as infrastructure requirements. West Virginia made a submittal addressing most of the infrastructure requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and later supplemented the submittal to address the interstate transport elements; EPA is not acting on the interstate transport elements at this time. EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with the requirements of the CAA. DATES: This final rule is effective on April 16, 2020. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2019–0103. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 15071 Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Schulingkamp, Planning & Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814–2021. Mr. Schulingkamp can also be reached via electronic mail at schulingkamp.joseph@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On December 18, 2019 (84 FR 69349), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of West Virginia. In the NPRM, EPA proposed approval of most portions of West Virginia’s infrastructure SIP revision for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The State submitted the infrastructure SIP on September 14, 2018 through the Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP); this State later supplemented this submission on February 4, 2019 to address the interstate transport elements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Additional background on West Virginia’s submittal, infrastructure SIPs, and the ozone NAAQS can be found in the NPRM. II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis West Virginia’s September 14, 2018 infrastructure SIP submittal addressed the following infrastructure elements, or portions thereof, for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), D(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). The SIP submittal did not address the portion of element (C) which pertains to nonattainment new source review requirements, or element (I) which pertains to the nonattainment requirements of part D, title I of the CAA, because states are not required to address these elements by the 3-year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate process. EPA has analyzed the SIP submission and is making a determination that the submittal meets the requirements of the identified elements. A detailed summary of EPA’s review and rationale for approving West Virginia’s submittal may be found in the technical support E:\FR\FM\17MRR1.SGM 17MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 17, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15069-15071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05158]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0011]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zone; Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin 
Islands

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the name and locating of an 
existing security zone in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. This rule 
adjusts the coordinates of the security zone and updates the facility 
name from HOVENSA Refinery to Limetree Bay Terminals. The rule 
continues to prohibit persons and vessels from entering the security 
zone, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a 
designated representative. This action is necessary to better meet the 
safety and security needs of Limetree Bay Terminals in St. Croix, USVI.

DATES: This rule is effective April 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2020-0011 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Lieutenant Commander Pedro Mendoza, Sector San Juan 
Prevention Department, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; 
telephone 787-729-2374, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
USVI U.S. Virgin Islands

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On November 21, 2019, the Coast Guard received a request to extend 
the regulated area of the security zone and update the facility name to 
Limetree Bay Terminals. The existing regulation in 33 CFR 165.770, 
contains a fixed security zone around the HOVENSA Refinery on the south 
coast of St. Croix, USVI. Limetree Bay Terminals recently installed a 
Single Point Mooring system to enable deep draft vessel traffic to 
transfer to and from the facility. The location of the Single Point 
Mooring systems falls outside of the existing security zone. In 
response, on January 27, 2020, the Coast Guard published a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``Security Zone; Limetree Bay 
Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin

[[Page 15070]]

Islands'' (85 FR 4619). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and 
invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this the 
Limetree Bay Terminals security zone. During the comment period that 
ended February 26, 2020, we received no comments.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels 
and the navigable waters surrounding Limetree Bay Terminals. The Coast 
Guard is establishing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published 
January 27, 2020. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this 
rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
    This rule amends the existing fixed security zone in 33 CFR 165.770 
to expand the regulated area and to update the facility name. This rule 
increases the regulated area by approximately 880 yards (.5 mile) to 
encompass the new mooring system location installed by the facility. We 
updated the facility name to Limetree Bay Terminals to reflect its 
current ownership. Vessels may seek permission from the COTP to transit 
through the security zone.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this 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 rule has not been 
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 
12866. Accordingly, this rule 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 [provide factual 
reasons related to the waterway, duration of rule, etc.].

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 received no comments from the Small Business 
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    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.
    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 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 
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

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).

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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

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 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 determined 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 rule involves 
expanding an existing security zone and updating the facility name. 
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review 
under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 
023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration 
supporting this determination is available in the docket. For 
instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this 
preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to call or email the

[[Page 15071]]

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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Revise Sec.  165.770 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.770   Security Zone; Limetree Bay Terminals, St. Croix, U.S. 
Virgin Islands.

    (a) Regulated area. The Coast Guard is establishing a security zone 
in and around Limetree Bay Terminals on the south coast of St. Croix, 
U.S. Virgin Islands. This security zone includes all waters from 
surface to bottom, encompassed by an imaginary line connecting the 
following points: Point 1 in position 17[deg]41'48'' N, 064[deg]44'26'' 
W; Point 2 in position 17[deg]40'00'' N, 064[deg]43'36'' W; Point 3 in 
position 17[deg]39'36'' N, 064[deg]44'48'' W; Point 4 in position 
17[deg]41'33'' N, 064[deg]45'08'' W; then tracing the shoreline along 
the water's edge to the point of origin. These coordinates are based 
upon North American Datum 1983 (NAD 1983).
    (b) Regulations. (1) Under Sec.  165.33, entry into or remaining 
within the regulated area in paragraph (a) of this section is 
prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port San 
Juan or vessels have a scheduled arrival at Limetree Bay Terminals, St. 
Croix, in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR 
part 160, subpart C.
    (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may 
contact the COTP San Juan or designated representative at telephone 
number 787-289-2041 or on VHF-FM Channel 16. If permission is granted, 
all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the COTP 
or designated representative.

    Dated: March 9, 2020.
E.P. King,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Juan.
[FR Doc. 2020-05158 Filed 3-16-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P