Pacific Ocean at Naval Base Guam Telecommunication Site, Finegayan Small Arms Range, on the Northwestern Coast of Guam; Danger Zone, 43688-43692 [2020-14131]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
43688
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 139 / Monday, July 20, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
a.m. on August 17, 2020, through 5 p.m.
on August 21, 2020. Under the
provisions of 33 CFR 165.1339, no
person or vessel may enter or remain
within 500 yards of any vessel involved
in Coast Guard training exercises while
such vessel is transiting Hood Canal,
WA, between Foul Weather Bluff and
the entrance to Dabob Bay, unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or
her Designated Representative. In
addition, the regulation requires all
vessel operators seeking to enter any of
the zones during the enforcement period
to first obtain permission. You may seek
permission by contacting the on-scene
patrol commander on VHF channel 13
or 16, or the Sector Puget Sound Joint
Harbor Operations Center at 206–217–
6001.
You will be able to identify
participating vessels as those flying the
Coast Guard Ensign. The Captain of the
Port may also be assisted in the
enforcement of the zone by other
federal, state, or local agencies. The
Captain of the Port will issue a general
permission to enter the safety zones if
the training exercise is completed before
5 p.m. on August 21. In addition to this
notice of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to
provide notification of this enforcement
period via a Local Notice to Mariners.
Dated: July 15, 2020.
L.A. Sturgis,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2020–15671 Filed 7–17–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of
Engineers
33 CFR Part 334
[COE–2018–0005]
Pacific Ocean at Naval Base Guam
Telecommunication Site, Finegayan
Small Arms Range, on the
Northwestern Coast of Guam; Danger
Zone
AGENCY:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
DoD.
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Corps of Engineers
(Corps) is amending its danger zone
regulations to establish a danger zone in
the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the
existing Finegayan Small Arms Range at
Naval Base Guam telecommunication
site on the northwestern coast of Guam.
The danger zone is located entirely
within the Pacific Ocean, comprising
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Jul 17, 2020
Jkt 250001
892 acres and extending 2.36 miles into
the ocean from the high tide line.
Establishment of the danger zone will
intermittently prohibit vessels from
lingering in the danger zone when the
small arms range is in active use in
order to ensure public safety.
DATES: Effective August 19, 2020.
ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Attn: CECW-CO (David
Olson), 441 G Street NW, Washington,
DC 20314–1000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
David Olson, Headquarters, Operations
and Regulatory Division, at
David.B.Olson@usace.army.mil or 202–
761–4922.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
response to a request by the United
States Navy, and pursuant to its
authorities in Section 7 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1917 (40 Stat. 266;
33 U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of the
Army Appropriations Act of 1919 (40
Stat. 892; 33 U.S.C. 3), the Corps of
Engineers (Corps) is amending its
danger zone regulations to establish a
permanent danger zone in the Pacific
Ocean adjacent to the Finegayan Small
Arms Range (FSAR) on Guam. The
danger zone will be added at 33 CFR
334.1415. The danger zone is needed for
the Department of Defense to meet its
mission under 10 U.S.C. 5062, which is
to maintain, train, and equip combatready military forces, deterring
aggression, and maintaining freedom of
the seas. Due to the strategic location of
Guam and the Department of Defense’s
ongoing reassessment of the Western
Pacific military alignment, there has
been an increase in the importance of
the FSAR as a training and testing
venue. The danger zone is necessary to
protect the public from hazards
associated with small arms training.
The proposed rule was published in
the Federal Register on December 13,
2018 (83 FR 64053). The regulations.gov
docket number was COE–2018–0005.
Concurrently, a local public notice for
the proposed danger zone was sent out
from the Honolulu District. In response
to the proposed rule, 45 comments were
received. The comments are
summarized below, with the Corps’
responses to those comments.
Several commenters requested a time
extension for the public comment
period. Twenty-two commenters
requested either a public hearing with
the Corps or public meetings with
representatives of the Navy and/or
Corps. The commenters requested these
meetings to better understand the
impacts of the FSAR and the proposed
danger zone, and to have an open
dialogue and discussion.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Corps determined that 30 days
was sufficient to provide comments on
the proposed danger zone regulation.
The Corps’ regulations at 33 CFR part
327 allow district engineers to conduct
public hearings for the purpose of
acquiring information which will be
considered in evaluating a proposed
action that requires a decision by the
Corps. A public hearing gives the public
an opportunity to present their views,
opinions, and information on a
proposed action. The district engineer
has the discretion to not hold a public
hearing if he or she determines that
there would be no valid interest to be
served by a public hearing, or a public
hearing would not result in interested
parties presenting information that
could not be provided to the Corps via
comments submitted in response to a
proposed rule or a proposed permit
action. The Corps district carefully
reviewed all of the requests for a public
hearing or public meetings, as well as
the comments received in response to
the proposed rule, and concluded that a
public hearing would not identify issues
or concerns that were not already
identified and discussed in the
comments submitted in response to the
proposed rule and the district’s public
notice. Therefore, the district engineer
decided not to hold any public hearings
or public meetings for this proposed
rule.
A couple of commenters requested the
Corps prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) for the proposed rule.
Several commenters expressed concerns
with the 2010 Mariana Islands Range
Complex Environmental Impact
Statement/Overseas Environmental
Impact Statement and the 2015 Mariana
Islands Training and Testing
Environmental Impact Statement/
Overseas Environmental Impact
Statement and compliance with federal
laws, including the Coastal Zone
Management Act, the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the Endangered
Species Act, and the National Historic
Preservation Act. Some commenters
requested that additional studies be
conducted, as well as additional
assessments of the impacts, to better
understand the effects of the Mariana
Islands Range Complex and training
activities on natural resources, historical
and cultural resources, the economy,
and to the people of Guam. One
commenter said that specific sections of
these EIS documents should be
referenced and stated the public notice,
or the public notice should be
considered incomplete. Several
commenters requested a review of
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 139 / Monday, July 20, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
cumulative impacts. One commenter
asked how the proposed danger zone
relates to the future Marine Corps base.
One commenter wanted to know how
the Corps will mitigate any impacts to
the environment.
For the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
federal action being undertaken by the
Corps is the promulgation of the danger
zone regulation under its authorities at
33 U.S.C. 1 and 3 and the procedures in
33 CFR part 334. The Corps is
responsible for assessing the impacts of
the proposed danger zone on the human
environment, and for preparing
appropriate NEPA documentation for its
decision on whether to issue the final
rule for the danger zone. To comply
with NEPA requirements, the Corps
prepared an environmental assessment
for this rulemaking action and
concluded that the establishment of the
danger zone would not have a
significant impact on the quality of the
human environment and therefore does
not require the preparation of an EIS. A
copy of the environmental assessment is
available from the Corps district office.
The establishment of this danger zone
would not result in work, structures, or
construction within the Pacific Ocean,
or any modification to any vegetation,
habitat, or structures in the Pacific
Ocean, on the shore, or on the land.
Therefore, it will not have any impacts
on natural resources or historical and
cultural resources. With respect to
impacts to people on Guam, the danger
zone is intended to protect the public
from hazards that may result from the
use of the FSAR at the Naval Base Guam
telecommunication site. The boundaries
of the danger zone will be plotted by
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration on its nautical charts,
which will help alert users of those
navigable waters to the danger zone.
For the establishment and operation
of the FSAR itself, the Navy is the
Federal agency responsible for
compliance with applicable federal
laws, which may include Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act, the
Essential Fish Habitat provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act,
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, and the Coastal Zone
Management Act. The Navy’s
documents demonstrating compliance
with these laws and concurrences from
the agencies administering these laws
can be obtained from the Marianas
Islands Training and Testing website at
https://mitt-eis.com.
Cumulative impacts were evaluated in
the environmental assessment prepared
by the Corps district for this final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 17, 2020
Jkt 250001
The establishment of a future Marine
Corps base on Guam is a separate action
that is outside of the Corps’ rulemaking
action for the establishment of this
danger zone. Therefore, the Corps is not
required address that potential future
action in its NEPA documentation.
Since the danger zone will be in effect
only when the FSAR is in use and the
establishment of the danger zone will
promote public safety and will not have
any physical environmental effects,
impacts to the human environment have
been minimized. The Corps has
determined there is no need or
requirement for mitigation beyond
incorporating into the rule text
measures to minimize impacts to
maritime traffic and fishing activities.
Multiple commenters expressing
concern about potential impacts of the
danger zone on Guam’s fishing industry.
Multiple individuals provided
comments about impacts to commercial
tourism operations, subsistence fishing,
and recreational fishing. One
commenter stated that the danger zone
would create additional restrictions to
subsistence and artisanal fishers.
Several commenters wanted to better
understand how the establishment of a
danger zone would impact the
movement of the fishing community up
and down the coast, and whether
fishermen would be forced to move into
less safe waters outside the danger zone.
Many commenters wanted to know how
often access to the proposed danger
zone would be restricted.
The Corps’ regulations require that
danger zones and restricted areas
provide public access to the area to the
maximum extent practicable and not
cause unreasonable interference with or
restrict the food fishing industry (see 33
CFR 334.3(a) and (b), respectively). The
regulations require the Corps to consult
with the Regional Directors of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and National
Marine Fisheries Service regarding
impacts to the food fishing industry.
The Corps district sent each agency a
letter dated May 6, 2019, requesting
comments in relation to the food fishing
industry. Neither agency responded to
those letters.
The establishment of a danger zone
would intermittently restrict
commercial, public, and private vessels
from entering or lingering in the danger
zone to ensure public safety during
small arms training activities at the
FSAR. Although the danger zone would
restrict use of the waters within its
boundaries while the small arms range
is in use, it would not restrict access
through the danger zone to fishing
grounds to the north or south. While the
small arms range is in use, the Navy
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43689
would halt training activities to allow
vessels to expeditiously transit through
the danger zone. When the range is not
in use, the waters within the danger
zone boundaries would be open to
fishing.
Upon establishment of the danger
zone, nautical charts will be updated to
identify the boundaries of the danger
zone for mariner awareness and route
planning. A Notice to Mariners will also
be issued each time the range is active.
The Corps has determined that the Navy
has provided for public access to the
area to the maximum extent practicable.
Additionally, the Corps has determined,
based on the Navy allowing fishing
vessels to transit through the danger
zone, that there will not be
unreasonable interference or restrictions
to the food fishing industry.
The Corps received multiple
comments about the impacts of the
danger zone to recreation and access,
including impacts to the native
Chamorro population as well as tourism
operations. Several people wanted to
know if the restrictions associated with
the danger zone would result in
economic impacts. Some commenters
expressed concern about how the
danger zone may affect local property
owners.
The Corps’ regulations state that
danger zone regulations shall provide
for public access to the area to the
maximum extent practicable. This
danger zone will intermittently restrict
commercial, public, and private vessels
from entering or lingering in the danger
zone to ensure public safety during
small arms training activities. Although
the danger zone would restrict use of
the waters within its boundaries while
the small arms range is in use, it would
not restrict access through the danger
zone to areas north or south. While the
small arms range is in use, the Navy
would halt training activities to allow
vessels to expeditiously transit through
the danger zone. When the range is not
in use, the danger zone would be open
to normal maritime activities. Therefore,
it will only have intermittent impacts on
recreation and access for the public,
including the native Chamorro
population. Based on previous
operations of the FSAR, the Corps has
determined that the establishment of the
danger zone regulation would have no
economic impact on Guam’s tourism
industry or cruise vessel operations. The
danger zone is located completely in the
waters of the Pacific Ocean. The Corps
has determined that the establishment
of the danger zone would cause no
disruption in access to homes or
businesses.
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
43690
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 139 / Monday, July 20, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Multiple commenters expressed
concerns about potential effects to
cultural and historical resources.
Several commenters expressed their
belief that Chamorro cultural values and
practices would be jeopardized by the
proposed establishment of the danger
zone. Several commenters wanted to
know if the range would limit access to
ancient and sacred historical sites that
are regularly visited by the Chamorro
people. One commenter wanted to know
if the danger zone would have any
implications on the ‘‘2011 Programmatic
Agreement’’ and whether public access
to Haputo Reef, Double Reef, and
Tweed’s Cave would be affected by the
proposed danger zone. Others provided
information about the existing cultural
and historic sites near the FSAR.
Several others had specific questions
about how it would affect traditional
fishing grounds. A couple of individuals
asserted that Chamorro traditional
fishing grounds should not be
inaccessible to the Chamorro people.
One commenter wanted to know how
the danger zone would affect Chamorro
medicinal plant and coconut crab
collecting practices.
The danger zone restricts the use of
navigable waters to protect the public
during small arms training activities. It
does not involve any actions that have
the potential to cause effects to historic
properties, cultural resources, or sacred
cultural sites. There would be no
construction, structures, or in-water
work associated with the establishment
of the danger zone. The Corps
acknowledges that there may be
temporary disruptions to accessing
traditional fishing grounds when the
range is in use and has determined that
these disruptions would be minimal,
and are necessary for safety. When the
range is not in use, the danger zone will
be open and the waters available to
public water users.
The danger zone is not associated
with the 2011 Programmatic Agreement.
Public access to Haputo Beach, Double
Reef, and Tweed’s cave is available via
the Joint Region Marianas Public Access
Plan for Historic and Cultural Sites
when the range is not in use. In
addition, coconut crab collection is not
authorized on Department of Defense
property.
Multiple commenters voiced concerns
about potential effects to upland and inwater plants and animals in and
adjacent to the danger zone, including
the fruit bat, fish, corals, sea turtles, and
other aquatic species. Several
commenters expressed concerns about
potential impacts to threatened and
endangered species and Essential Fish
Habitat. One commenter wanted to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 17, 2020
Jkt 250001
know if the danger zone would
negatively impact the presence and
propagation of coconut trees or any
other endemic or native plants and
trees.
The establishment of the danger zone
will not result in a modification to any
vegetation, habitat, or structures in the
Pacific Ocean, on the shore, or on the
land. Establishment of the danger zone
will not have any effect on land-based
plants and animals. If humans are not
able to loiter in the danger zone while
the firing range is operational, then
there may be less human impact on
marine ecosystems within the
boundaries of the danger zone.
Therefore, the restrictions imposed by
the establishment of the danger zone are
likely to have negligible or mildly
beneficial impacts on marine life. The
establishment of the danger zone will
have no effect on marine species and
habitat, including coral species, listed
under the Endangered Species Act and
it will have no adverse effect on
Essential Fish Habitat. Although the
Corps has the authority to establish
danger zones to protect the public from
potential dangers imposed by target
practice, bombing, rocket firing or other
especially hazardous operations, the
Corps does not regulate boating
activities in general, and does not have
the authority to control environmental
effects that may be caused by boating
activities.
The Corps received comments
expressing concern about the safety
risks associated with the operation of
the danger zone. A couple of
commenters wanted more information
about how the limits of the firing range,
extending into the ocean up to 2.36
nautical miles from the shore, were
determined. A couple of commenters
inquired about the efficacy of the red
flag and strobe light. One commenter
asked if the red flag that would be used
to communicate with mariners during
the daytime and strobe light that would
be used to communicate with mariners
during the nighttime could be seen
under all weather conditions in the
entirety of the proposed danger zone. A
commenter wanted to know what other
methods of alerting the public that the
firing range was in use were considered.
One commenter asked if fishermen
could be notified in advance to help
better plan their trip. One individual
inquired about installing a warning
system at Gregorio D. Perez Marina
where most boaters launch.
The danger zone boundaries were
established to include all areas where a
potential hazard exists for a projectile
not being contained by the earthen
berms at the FSAR, although this type
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of event has a very low probability of
occurring. Danger zones are established
for this reason to ensure safe range
operations. The parameters of the
danger zone were determined by the
maximum distance a small arms round
can travel. The Navy has no plans to
expand the footprint of the existing
ranges, increase weapons caliber, or use
these ranges for bombing, rocket firing,
or other especially hazardous
operations. Targets would not be placed
within the danger zone. These ranges
would continue to be used in the same
capacity as they were used since the
1970s.
Similar to navigation lights/aids on
buoys and approach lighting for
airfields, the strobe light (nighttime),
would be visible under all weather
conditions that would be conducive to
small boat and small arms range
operations. The red flag (daytime)
method of identifying an active danger
zone is currently in use at the Naval
Base Guam Known Distance and MultiPurpose Ranges and has proven to be an
effective method of alerting the public
of small arms range operation. The red
flag and strobe light were the only
methods of alerting the public that were
considered by the Navy. The strobe light
was added for the FSAR as an
additional method of alerting the public
during nighttime operations of the
range. The red flag and strobe light have
been proven effective in alerting the
public and have been proven as feasible
methods of identifying the danger zones
as being active. It should also be noted
that an added measure of safety is taken
in that small arms range operating
procedures require a lookout to be
present during range operations as a
positive means to verify the danger zone
is clear. If a fisherman or other vessel
inadvertently enters the danger zone
area, range operations would cease until
the danger zone is clear. In addition,
small arms range operating procedures
require specially qualified range
supervisors and operators to oversee
small arms range operations. These
specially qualified personnel ensure all
small arms range safety procedures are
followed and provide an added layer of
safety to prevent errant bullets from
leaving the confines of the small arms
range berms.
A Notice to Mariners will be issued
each time the range is active. These
notices are issued to notify mariners
that an established danger zone is
active. In addition, after this final rule
is issued, nautical charts will be
updated by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration’s Office of
Coast Survey to identify the boundaries
of the danger zone for mariner
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 139 / Monday, July 20, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
awareness and route planning. Due to
the many safety layers and advanced
notification actions mentioned above,
which have been proven effective, the
Navy is not planning a warning system
located at Gregorio D. Perez Marina.
Multiple commenters expressed
concern with the potential for the firing
range and danger zone to contribute to
contamination of the air and water.
Specific concerns included the
introduction of lead, antimony, copper,
zinc, nickel, arsenic, and other
contaminants into the environment that
could pose an environmental or human
health threat. One commenter wanted to
know if contaminants from the danger
zone would impact the Haputo
Ecological Reserve.
The establishment of a danger zone in
the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the FSAR
is an administrative procedure that
restricts navigable access to a portion of
the ocean during small arms training
activities to protect public safety. There
will be no construction, structures or inwater work associated with the
establishment of the danger zone. The
establishment of the danger zone by the
Corps will not result in the release of
contaminants. The operation of the
FSAR itself, including the potential
environmental impacts caused by
rounds fired from the FSAR, falls
outside of the Corps’ regulatory
authorities. Activation of the danger
zone itself during small arms training
activities would not result in any
physical effects to air or water quality,
or any physical effects to Haputo
Ecological Reserve.
Several commenters expressed
concerns about erosion, accretion, and
noise associated with the danger zone.
One commenter asked whether the
danger zone would violate the
conditions to the 1983 Memorandum of
Understanding with the Government of
Guam that created the Haputo
Ecological Reserve.
The establishment of the danger zone
involves no construction, structures or
in-water work associated with the
establishment of the danger zone.
Therefore, the establishment of this
danger zone will not affect erosion,
accretion, or noise. In compliance with
the Coastal Zone Management Act, the
1983 Memorandum of Understanding
committed the Navy to the
establishment of two Ecological Reserve
Areas (ERAs) as mitigation for the
adverse environmental impacts
anticipated to accrue from the
construction of an ammunition wharf at
Adotgan Point in outer Apra Harbor,
what has since become known as Kilo
Wharf. The two ERAs to be established
were the Orate Peninsula Cliff ERA and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 17, 2020
Jkt 250001
the Haputo ERA. While there were
several conditions associated with the
establishment of the Orate Peninsula
ERA, none were established for the
Haputo ERA aside from the requirement
to take ‘‘all possible measures’’ to
‘‘preserve its quality for the people of
Guam, now and for the future.’’ It was
further stipulated that ‘‘it be protected
from development of any kind and from
the taking or destruction of its natural
and historic resources.’’ At the time the
ERA was designated, the FSAR had
been in existence for nearly a decade,
and it has operated since with little
change in frequency or manner of use.
There are no changes in the size,
location, operation of the range, the type
of small arms utilized, or the tempo of
operations being proposed. As a result,
the establishment of the danger zone
would not violate the conditions of the
1983 Memorandum of Understanding
with the Government of Guam that
created the Haputo ERA.
Multiple commenters asked whether
there are practicable alternatives to the
establishment of a danger zone and
what alternatives were evaluated. A
couple commenters asked if there were
upland alternatives or if private land or
private ranges could be used. One
commenter asked if a system could be
designed or constructed to prevent
ammunition from entering the area of
the proposed danger zone whereby a
danger zone would not be necessary.
The FSAR has been in existence since
1975, and the establishment of this
danger zone is necessary to protect the
public during small arms training
activities. It was not necessary to
evaluate alternative sites because the
danger zone is needed at this particular
site. As discussed above, the boundaries
of the danger zone were established to
address the potential area where a small
arms projectile could travel, to protect
the public during small arms training
exercises.
Procedural Requirements
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. For the reasons
stated below, this final rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly,
this final rule has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43691
it is exempt from the requirements of
Executive Order 13771.
The Corps determined this final rule
is not a significant regulatory action.
This regulatory action determination is
based on the rule text governing the
danger zone, which allows any vessel
that needs to transit the danger zone to
expeditiously transit through the danger
zone when the small arms range is in
use. When the range is not in use, the
danger zone will be open to normal
maritime traffic and to all activities,
include anchoring and loitering.
b. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. This rule has been
reviewed under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354). 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 (i.e., small
businesses and small governments). The
danger zone is necessary to protect
public safety during use of the small
arms range. To minimize impacts to
maritime traffic, the Navy will stop
firing when the range is in use to allow
vessels to transit through the danger
zone. When the range is not in use, the
danger zone will be open to normal
maritime traffic and all activities,
including anchoring and loitering. After
considering the economic impacts of
this danger zone regulation on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
c. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act. An
environmental assessment (EA) has
been prepared for the establishment of
this danger zone. The Corps has
concluded that the establishment of the
danger zone will not have a significant
impact to the quality of the human
environment and, therefore, preparation
of an EIS is not required. The final EA
and Finding of No Significant Impact
may be reviewed at the District Office
listed at the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section, above.
d. Unfunded Mandates Act. This rule
does not impose an enforceable duty
among the private sector and, therefore,
it is not a Federal private sector
mandate and it is not subject to the
requirements of either Section 202 or
Section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates
Act. We have also found under Section
203 of the Act, small governments will
not be significantly and uniquely
affected by this rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
43692
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 139 / Monday, July 20, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
e. Congressional Review Act. The
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
et seq., 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. The Corps will submit a
report containing the final 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. This final rule is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334
Danger zones, Marine safety,
Navigation (water), Restricted areas,
Waterways.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Corps amends 33 CFR
part 334 as follows:
normal maritime traffic and all activities
to include anchoring and loitering.
(2) When the range is in use, the
person(s) or officer(s) in charge shall
display a red flag from a conspicuous
and easily-seen location along the
nearby shore to signify that the range is
in use and will post lookouts to ensure
the safety of all vessels transiting
through the area. If the range is in use
at night, a strobe light shall be displayed
from the same conspicuous and easilyseen location in lieu of flags. The range
shall not be used when visibility is
equal to or less than the maximum range
of the weapons being used at the
facility.
(c) Enforcement. The restrictions on
public access in this section shall be
enforced by the Commander, Joint
Region Marianas, and such agencies as
the Commander may designate in
writing.
1. The authority citation for part 334
continues to read as follows:
[FR Doc. 2020–14131 Filed 7–17–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Kevin Gong, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA
94105. By phone: (415) 972–3073 or by
email at gong.kevin@epa.gov.
■
Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and
40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3).
■
2. Add § 334.1415 to read as follows:
§ 334.1415 Pacific Ocean, adjacent to the
Finegayan Small Arms Range at Naval Base
Guam Telecommunication Site, on the
northwestern coast of Guam; danger zone.
(a) The area. Coordinates are bounded
by the following four points: Point A
(13°34′57″ N; 144°49′53″ E) following
the high tide line to Point B (13°35′49″
N; 144°47′59″ E), Point C (13°34′57″ N;
144°47′45″ E), and Point D (13°34′48″ N;
144°49′50″ E). The datum for these
coordinates is NAD–83.
(b) The regulation. (1) Vessels or
persons shall expeditiously transit
through the danger zone when the small
arms range is in use. Vessels shall not
be permitted to anchor or loiter within
the danger zone while the range is in
use. Range activities shall be halted
until all vessels are cleared from the
danger zone. When the range is not in
use, the danger zone shall be open to
This rule is effective on August
19, 2020.
DATES:
The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0321. 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.
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.
Approved:
Thomas P. Smith,
Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division
Directorate of Civil Works.
PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND
RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS
plants. This action was proposed in the
Federal Register on December 30, 2019,
and concerns emissions of oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) from combustion
sources.
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0321; FRL–10009–
81–Region 9]
Air Plan Conditional Approval and
Disapproval; Arizona; Maricopa
County; Power Plants, Fuel Burning
Equipment, and Internal Combustion
Engines
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
AGENCY:
I. Proposed Action
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing conditional
approvals for two revisions to the
Maricopa County portion of the Arizona
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
concerning fuel burning equipment and
internal combustion engines. The EPA
is also finalizing a disapproval for one
revision to the Maricopa County portion
of the Arizona SIP concerning power
On December 30, 2019 (84 FR 71862),
the EPA proposed action on the
following rules that were submitted for
incorporation into the Arizona SIP.
Table 1 lists the rules on which the EPA
is finalizing action, with the dates they
were revised by the Maricopa County
Air Quality Department (MCAQD), the
dates they were submitted by the
Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality (ADEQ), and the type of action
that the EPA is finalizing for each rule.
SUMMARY:
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Rule No.
Rule title
Revised
Submitted
322 .........
323 .........
Power Plant Operations .........................................
Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources.
Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE).
November 2, 2016 .........
November 2, 2016 .........
June 22, 2017 ................
June 22, 2017 ................
November 2, 2016 .........
June 22, 2017 ................
324 .........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 17, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
Action
Disapproval.
Conditional
Approval.
Conditional
Approval.
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 139 (Monday, July 20, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43688-43692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14131]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
33 CFR Part 334
[COE-2018-0005]
Pacific Ocean at Naval Base Guam Telecommunication Site,
Finegayan Small Arms Range, on the Northwestern Coast of Guam; Danger
Zone
AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Corps of Engineers (Corps) is amending its danger zone
regulations to establish a danger zone in the Pacific Ocean adjacent to
the existing Finegayan Small Arms Range at Naval Base Guam
telecommunication site on the northwestern coast of Guam. The danger
zone is located entirely within the Pacific Ocean, comprising 892 acres
and extending 2.36 miles into the ocean from the high tide line.
Establishment of the danger zone will intermittently prohibit vessels
from lingering in the danger zone when the small arms range is in
active use in order to ensure public safety.
DATES: Effective August 19, 2020.
ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW-CO (David Olson),
441 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20314-1000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Olson, Headquarters,
Operations and Regulatory Division, at [email protected] or
202-761-4922.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In response to a request by the United
States Navy, and pursuant to its authorities in Section 7 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1917 (40 Stat. 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of
the Army Appropriations Act of 1919 (40 Stat. 892; 33 U.S.C. 3), the
Corps of Engineers (Corps) is amending its danger zone regulations to
establish a permanent danger zone in the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the
Finegayan Small Arms Range (FSAR) on Guam. The danger zone will be
added at 33 CFR 334.1415. The danger zone is needed for the Department
of Defense to meet its mission under 10 U.S.C. 5062, which is to
maintain, train, and equip combat-ready military forces, deterring
aggression, and maintaining freedom of the seas. Due to the strategic
location of Guam and the Department of Defense's ongoing reassessment
of the Western Pacific military alignment, there has been an increase
in the importance of the FSAR as a training and testing venue. The
danger zone is necessary to protect the public from hazards associated
with small arms training.
The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on December
13, 2018 (83 FR 64053). The regulations.gov docket number was COE-2018-
0005. Concurrently, a local public notice for the proposed danger zone
was sent out from the Honolulu District. In response to the proposed
rule, 45 comments were received. The comments are summarized below,
with the Corps' responses to those comments.
Several commenters requested a time extension for the public
comment period. Twenty-two commenters requested either a public hearing
with the Corps or public meetings with representatives of the Navy and/
or Corps. The commenters requested these meetings to better understand
the impacts of the FSAR and the proposed danger zone, and to have an
open dialogue and discussion.
The Corps determined that 30 days was sufficient to provide
comments on the proposed danger zone regulation. The Corps' regulations
at 33 CFR part 327 allow district engineers to conduct public hearings
for the purpose of acquiring information which will be considered in
evaluating a proposed action that requires a decision by the Corps. A
public hearing gives the public an opportunity to present their views,
opinions, and information on a proposed action. The district engineer
has the discretion to not hold a public hearing if he or she determines
that there would be no valid interest to be served by a public hearing,
or a public hearing would not result in interested parties presenting
information that could not be provided to the Corps via comments
submitted in response to a proposed rule or a proposed permit action.
The Corps district carefully reviewed all of the requests for a public
hearing or public meetings, as well as the comments received in
response to the proposed rule, and concluded that a public hearing
would not identify issues or concerns that were not already identified
and discussed in the comments submitted in response to the proposed
rule and the district's public notice. Therefore, the district engineer
decided not to hold any public hearings or public meetings for this
proposed rule.
A couple of commenters requested the Corps prepare an environmental
impact statement (EIS) for the proposed rule. Several commenters
expressed concerns with the 2010 Mariana Islands Range Complex
Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement
and the 2015 Mariana Islands Training and Testing Environmental Impact
Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement and compliance with
federal laws, including the Coastal Zone Management Act, the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Endangered Species
Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act. Some commenters
requested that additional studies be conducted, as well as additional
assessments of the impacts, to better understand the effects of the
Mariana Islands Range Complex and training activities on natural
resources, historical and cultural resources, the economy, and to the
people of Guam. One commenter said that specific sections of these EIS
documents should be referenced and stated the public notice, or the
public notice should be considered incomplete. Several commenters
requested a review of
[[Page 43689]]
cumulative impacts. One commenter asked how the proposed danger zone
relates to the future Marine Corps base. One commenter wanted to know
how the Corps will mitigate any impacts to the environment.
For the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
the federal action being undertaken by the Corps is the promulgation of
the danger zone regulation under its authorities at 33 U.S.C. 1 and 3
and the procedures in 33 CFR part 334. The Corps is responsible for
assessing the impacts of the proposed danger zone on the human
environment, and for preparing appropriate NEPA documentation for its
decision on whether to issue the final rule for the danger zone. To
comply with NEPA requirements, the Corps prepared an environmental
assessment for this rulemaking action and concluded that the
establishment of the danger zone would not have a significant impact on
the quality of the human environment and therefore does not require the
preparation of an EIS. A copy of the environmental assessment is
available from the Corps district office. The establishment of this
danger zone would not result in work, structures, or construction
within the Pacific Ocean, or any modification to any vegetation,
habitat, or structures in the Pacific Ocean, on the shore, or on the
land. Therefore, it will not have any impacts on natural resources or
historical and cultural resources. With respect to impacts to people on
Guam, the danger zone is intended to protect the public from hazards
that may result from the use of the FSAR at the Naval Base Guam
telecommunication site. The boundaries of the danger zone will be
plotted by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on its
nautical charts, which will help alert users of those navigable waters
to the danger zone.
For the establishment and operation of the FSAR itself, the Navy is
the Federal agency responsible for compliance with applicable federal
laws, which may include Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the
Essential Fish Habitat provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. The Navy's
documents demonstrating compliance with these laws and concurrences
from the agencies administering these laws can be obtained from the
Marianas Islands Training and Testing website at https://mitt-eis.com.
Cumulative impacts were evaluated in the environmental assessment
prepared by the Corps district for this final rule. The establishment
of a future Marine Corps base on Guam is a separate action that is
outside of the Corps' rulemaking action for the establishment of this
danger zone. Therefore, the Corps is not required address that
potential future action in its NEPA documentation. Since the danger
zone will be in effect only when the FSAR is in use and the
establishment of the danger zone will promote public safety and will
not have any physical environmental effects, impacts to the human
environment have been minimized. The Corps has determined there is no
need or requirement for mitigation beyond incorporating into the rule
text measures to minimize impacts to maritime traffic and fishing
activities.
Multiple commenters expressing concern about potential impacts of
the danger zone on Guam's fishing industry. Multiple individuals
provided comments about impacts to commercial tourism operations,
subsistence fishing, and recreational fishing. One commenter stated
that the danger zone would create additional restrictions to
subsistence and artisanal fishers. Several commenters wanted to better
understand how the establishment of a danger zone would impact the
movement of the fishing community up and down the coast, and whether
fishermen would be forced to move into less safe waters outside the
danger zone. Many commenters wanted to know how often access to the
proposed danger zone would be restricted.
The Corps' regulations require that danger zones and restricted
areas provide public access to the area to the maximum extent
practicable and not cause unreasonable interference with or restrict
the food fishing industry (see 33 CFR 334.3(a) and (b), respectively).
The regulations require the Corps to consult with the Regional
Directors of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service regarding impacts to the food fishing industry. The
Corps district sent each agency a letter dated May 6, 2019, requesting
comments in relation to the food fishing industry. Neither agency
responded to those letters.
The establishment of a danger zone would intermittently restrict
commercial, public, and private vessels from entering or lingering in
the danger zone to ensure public safety during small arms training
activities at the FSAR. Although the danger zone would restrict use of
the waters within its boundaries while the small arms range is in use,
it would not restrict access through the danger zone to fishing grounds
to the north or south. While the small arms range is in use, the Navy
would halt training activities to allow vessels to expeditiously
transit through the danger zone. When the range is not in use, the
waters within the danger zone boundaries would be open to fishing.
Upon establishment of the danger zone, nautical charts will be
updated to identify the boundaries of the danger zone for mariner
awareness and route planning. A Notice to Mariners will also be issued
each time the range is active. The Corps has determined that the Navy
has provided for public access to the area to the maximum extent
practicable. Additionally, the Corps has determined, based on the Navy
allowing fishing vessels to transit through the danger zone, that there
will not be unreasonable interference or restrictions to the food
fishing industry.
The Corps received multiple comments about the impacts of the
danger zone to recreation and access, including impacts to the native
Chamorro population as well as tourism operations. Several people
wanted to know if the restrictions associated with the danger zone
would result in economic impacts. Some commenters expressed concern
about how the danger zone may affect local property owners.
The Corps' regulations state that danger zone regulations shall
provide for public access to the area to the maximum extent
practicable. This danger zone will intermittently restrict commercial,
public, and private vessels from entering or lingering in the danger
zone to ensure public safety during small arms training activities.
Although the danger zone would restrict use of the waters within its
boundaries while the small arms range is in use, it would not restrict
access through the danger zone to areas north or south. While the small
arms range is in use, the Navy would halt training activities to allow
vessels to expeditiously transit through the danger zone. When the
range is not in use, the danger zone would be open to normal maritime
activities. Therefore, it will only have intermittent impacts on
recreation and access for the public, including the native Chamorro
population. Based on previous operations of the FSAR, the Corps has
determined that the establishment of the danger zone regulation would
have no economic impact on Guam's tourism industry or cruise vessel
operations. The danger zone is located completely in the waters of the
Pacific Ocean. The Corps has determined that the establishment of the
danger zone would cause no disruption in access to homes or businesses.
[[Page 43690]]
Multiple commenters expressed concerns about potential effects to
cultural and historical resources. Several commenters expressed their
belief that Chamorro cultural values and practices would be jeopardized
by the proposed establishment of the danger zone. Several commenters
wanted to know if the range would limit access to ancient and sacred
historical sites that are regularly visited by the Chamorro people. One
commenter wanted to know if the danger zone would have any implications
on the ``2011 Programmatic Agreement'' and whether public access to
Haputo Reef, Double Reef, and Tweed's Cave would be affected by the
proposed danger zone. Others provided information about the existing
cultural and historic sites near the FSAR. Several others had specific
questions about how it would affect traditional fishing grounds. A
couple of individuals asserted that Chamorro traditional fishing
grounds should not be inaccessible to the Chamorro people. One
commenter wanted to know how the danger zone would affect Chamorro
medicinal plant and coconut crab collecting practices.
The danger zone restricts the use of navigable waters to protect
the public during small arms training activities. It does not involve
any actions that have the potential to cause effects to historic
properties, cultural resources, or sacred cultural sites. There would
be no construction, structures, or in-water work associated with the
establishment of the danger zone. The Corps acknowledges that there may
be temporary disruptions to accessing traditional fishing grounds when
the range is in use and has determined that these disruptions would be
minimal, and are necessary for safety. When the range is not in use,
the danger zone will be open and the waters available to public water
users.
The danger zone is not associated with the 2011 Programmatic
Agreement. Public access to Haputo Beach, Double Reef, and Tweed's cave
is available via the Joint Region Marianas Public Access Plan for
Historic and Cultural Sites when the range is not in use. In addition,
coconut crab collection is not authorized on Department of Defense
property.
Multiple commenters voiced concerns about potential effects to
upland and in-water plants and animals in and adjacent to the danger
zone, including the fruit bat, fish, corals, sea turtles, and other
aquatic species. Several commenters expressed concerns about potential
impacts to threatened and endangered species and Essential Fish
Habitat. One commenter wanted to know if the danger zone would
negatively impact the presence and propagation of coconut trees or any
other endemic or native plants and trees.
The establishment of the danger zone will not result in a
modification to any vegetation, habitat, or structures in the Pacific
Ocean, on the shore, or on the land. Establishment of the danger zone
will not have any effect on land-based plants and animals. If humans
are not able to loiter in the danger zone while the firing range is
operational, then there may be less human impact on marine ecosystems
within the boundaries of the danger zone. Therefore, the restrictions
imposed by the establishment of the danger zone are likely to have
negligible or mildly beneficial impacts on marine life. The
establishment of the danger zone will have no effect on marine species
and habitat, including coral species, listed under the Endangered
Species Act and it will have no adverse effect on Essential Fish
Habitat. Although the Corps has the authority to establish danger zones
to protect the public from potential dangers imposed by target
practice, bombing, rocket firing or other especially hazardous
operations, the Corps does not regulate boating activities in general,
and does not have the authority to control environmental effects that
may be caused by boating activities.
The Corps received comments expressing concern about the safety
risks associated with the operation of the danger zone. A couple of
commenters wanted more information about how the limits of the firing
range, extending into the ocean up to 2.36 nautical miles from the
shore, were determined. A couple of commenters inquired about the
efficacy of the red flag and strobe light. One commenter asked if the
red flag that would be used to communicate with mariners during the
daytime and strobe light that would be used to communicate with
mariners during the nighttime could be seen under all weather
conditions in the entirety of the proposed danger zone. A commenter
wanted to know what other methods of alerting the public that the
firing range was in use were considered. One commenter asked if
fishermen could be notified in advance to help better plan their trip.
One individual inquired about installing a warning system at Gregorio
D. Perez Marina where most boaters launch.
The danger zone boundaries were established to include all areas
where a potential hazard exists for a projectile not being contained by
the earthen berms at the FSAR, although this type of event has a very
low probability of occurring. Danger zones are established for this
reason to ensure safe range operations. The parameters of the danger
zone were determined by the maximum distance a small arms round can
travel. The Navy has no plans to expand the footprint of the existing
ranges, increase weapons caliber, or use these ranges for bombing,
rocket firing, or other especially hazardous operations. Targets would
not be placed within the danger zone. These ranges would continue to be
used in the same capacity as they were used since the 1970s.
Similar to navigation lights/aids on buoys and approach lighting
for airfields, the strobe light (nighttime), would be visible under all
weather conditions that would be conducive to small boat and small arms
range operations. The red flag (daytime) method of identifying an
active danger zone is currently in use at the Naval Base Guam Known
Distance and Multi-Purpose Ranges and has proven to be an effective
method of alerting the public of small arms range operation. The red
flag and strobe light were the only methods of alerting the public that
were considered by the Navy. The strobe light was added for the FSAR as
an additional method of alerting the public during nighttime operations
of the range. The red flag and strobe light have been proven effective
in alerting the public and have been proven as feasible methods of
identifying the danger zones as being active. It should also be noted
that an added measure of safety is taken in that small arms range
operating procedures require a lookout to be present during range
operations as a positive means to verify the danger zone is clear. If a
fisherman or other vessel inadvertently enters the danger zone area,
range operations would cease until the danger zone is clear. In
addition, small arms range operating procedures require specially
qualified range supervisors and operators to oversee small arms range
operations. These specially qualified personnel ensure all small arms
range safety procedures are followed and provide an added layer of
safety to prevent errant bullets from leaving the confines of the small
arms range berms.
A Notice to Mariners will be issued each time the range is active.
These notices are issued to notify mariners that an established danger
zone is active. In addition, after this final rule is issued, nautical
charts will be updated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's Office of Coast Survey to identify the boundaries of
the danger zone for mariner
[[Page 43691]]
awareness and route planning. Due to the many safety layers and
advanced notification actions mentioned above, which have been proven
effective, the Navy is not planning a warning system located at
Gregorio D. Perez Marina.
Multiple commenters expressed concern with the potential for the
firing range and danger zone to contribute to contamination of the air
and water. Specific concerns included the introduction of lead,
antimony, copper, zinc, nickel, arsenic, and other contaminants into
the environment that could pose an environmental or human health
threat. One commenter wanted to know if contaminants from the danger
zone would impact the Haputo Ecological Reserve.
The establishment of a danger zone in the Pacific Ocean adjacent to
the FSAR is an administrative procedure that restricts navigable access
to a portion of the ocean during small arms training activities to
protect public safety. There will be no construction, structures or in-
water work associated with the establishment of the danger zone. The
establishment of the danger zone by the Corps will not result in the
release of contaminants. The operation of the FSAR itself, including
the potential environmental impacts caused by rounds fired from the
FSAR, falls outside of the Corps' regulatory authorities. Activation of
the danger zone itself during small arms training activities would not
result in any physical effects to air or water quality, or any physical
effects to Haputo Ecological Reserve.
Several commenters expressed concerns about erosion, accretion, and
noise associated with the danger zone. One commenter asked whether the
danger zone would violate the conditions to the 1983 Memorandum of
Understanding with the Government of Guam that created the Haputo
Ecological Reserve.
The establishment of the danger zone involves no construction,
structures or in-water work associated with the establishment of the
danger zone. Therefore, the establishment of this danger zone will not
affect erosion, accretion, or noise. In compliance with the Coastal
Zone Management Act, the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding committed the
Navy to the establishment of two Ecological Reserve Areas (ERAs) as
mitigation for the adverse environmental impacts anticipated to accrue
from the construction of an ammunition wharf at Adotgan Point in outer
Apra Harbor, what has since become known as Kilo Wharf. The two ERAs to
be established were the Orate Peninsula Cliff ERA and the Haputo ERA.
While there were several conditions associated with the establishment
of the Orate Peninsula ERA, none were established for the Haputo ERA
aside from the requirement to take ``all possible measures'' to
``preserve its quality for the people of Guam, now and for the
future.'' It was further stipulated that ``it be protected from
development of any kind and from the taking or destruction of its
natural and historic resources.'' At the time the ERA was designated,
the FSAR had been in existence for nearly a decade, and it has operated
since with little change in frequency or manner of use. There are no
changes in the size, location, operation of the range, the type of
small arms utilized, or the tempo of operations being proposed. As a
result, the establishment of the danger zone would not violate the
conditions of the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding with the Government
of Guam that created the Haputo ERA.
Multiple commenters asked whether there are practicable
alternatives to the establishment of a danger zone and what
alternatives were evaluated. A couple commenters asked if there were
upland alternatives or if private land or private ranges could be used.
One commenter asked if a system could be designed or constructed to
prevent ammunition from entering the area of the proposed danger zone
whereby a danger zone would not be necessary.
The FSAR has been in existence since 1975, and the establishment of
this danger zone is necessary to protect the public during small arms
training activities. It was not necessary to evaluate alternative sites
because the danger zone is needed at this particular site. As discussed
above, the boundaries of the danger zone were established to address
the potential area where a small arms projectile could travel, to
protect the public during small arms training exercises.
Procedural Requirements
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. For the reasons stated below, this final rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, this final 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.
The Corps determined this final rule is not a significant
regulatory action. This regulatory action determination is based on the
rule text governing the danger zone, which allows any vessel that needs
to transit the danger zone to expeditiously transit through the danger
zone when the small arms range is in use. When the range is not in use,
the danger zone will be open to normal maritime traffic and to all
activities, include anchoring and loitering.
b. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This rule has been
reviewed under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354). 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 (i.e., small businesses and small governments). The danger
zone is necessary to protect public safety during use of the small arms
range. To minimize impacts to maritime traffic, the Navy will stop
firing when the range is in use to allow vessels to transit through the
danger zone. When the range is not in use, the danger zone will be open
to normal maritime traffic and all activities, including anchoring and
loitering. After considering the economic impacts of this danger zone
regulation on small entities, I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
c. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act. An
environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared for the establishment
of this danger zone. The Corps has concluded that the establishment of
the danger zone will not have a significant impact to the quality of
the human environment and, therefore, preparation of an EIS is not
required. The final EA and Finding of No Significant Impact may be
reviewed at the District Office listed at the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section, above.
d. Unfunded Mandates Act. This rule does not impose an enforceable
duty among the private sector and, therefore, it is not a Federal
private sector mandate and it is not subject to the requirements of
either Section 202 or Section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act. We have
also found under Section 203 of the Act, small governments will not be
significantly and uniquely affected by this rulemaking.
[[Page 43692]]
e. Congressional Review Act. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C.
801 et seq., 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. The Corps will submit a
report containing the final 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. This final rule is
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334
Danger zones, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Restricted areas,
Waterways.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Corps amends 33 CFR
part 334 as follows:
PART 334--DANGER ZONE AND RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 334 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and 40 Stat. 892 (33
U.S.C. 3).
0
2. Add Sec. 334.1415 to read as follows:
Sec. 334.1415 Pacific Ocean, adjacent to the Finegayan Small Arms
Range at Naval Base Guam Telecommunication Site, on the northwestern
coast of Guam; danger zone.
(a) The area. Coordinates are bounded by the following four points:
Point A (13[deg]34'57'' N; 144[deg]49'53'' E) following the high tide
line to Point B (13[deg]35'49'' N; 144[deg]47'59'' E), Point C
(13[deg]34'57'' N; 144[deg]47'45'' E), and Point D (13[deg]34'48'' N;
144[deg]49'50'' E). The datum for these coordinates is NAD-83.
(b) The regulation. (1) Vessels or persons shall expeditiously
transit through the danger zone when the small arms range is in use.
Vessels shall not be permitted to anchor or loiter within the danger
zone while the range is in use. Range activities shall be halted until
all vessels are cleared from the danger zone. When the range is not in
use, the danger zone shall be open to normal maritime traffic and all
activities to include anchoring and loitering.
(2) When the range is in use, the person(s) or officer(s) in charge
shall display a red flag from a conspicuous and easily-seen location
along the nearby shore to signify that the range is in use and will
post lookouts to ensure the safety of all vessels transiting through
the area. If the range is in use at night, a strobe light shall be
displayed from the same conspicuous and easily-seen location in lieu of
flags. The range shall not be used when visibility is equal to or less
than the maximum range of the weapons being used at the facility.
(c) Enforcement. The restrictions on public access in this section
shall be enforced by the Commander, Joint Region Marianas, and such
agencies as the Commander may designate in writing.
Approved:
Thomas P. Smith,
Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division Directorate of Civil Works.
[FR Doc. 2020-14131 Filed 7-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
