Regulated Navigation Area; Offshore, Cape Canaveral, Florida, 51845-51848 [2021-20105]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules with all cells, links, and formulas intact when a natural gas pipeline files for a change in rates or charges. Issued: September 8, 2021. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Deputy Secretary. Comments due 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on September 29, 2021. [FR Doc. 2021–19771 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] DATES: The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments in lieu of paper using the ‘‘eFile’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. I. Table of Abbreviations BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Sherman, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8633, Jeffrey.Sherman@ferc.gov. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on Petitioners. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through the Commission’s Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to Commission’s Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID–19), issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call toll-free, (886) 208–3676 or TYY, (202) 502–8659. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG–2021–0661] RIN 1625–AA11 Regulated Navigation Area; Offshore, Cape Canaveral, Florida Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is proposing to replace the existing safety zone in Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, Offshore Cape Canaveral, Florida with a regulated navigation area (RNA). The existing safety zone is composed of four large regulated areas and was established in 2009 with the intent of protecting vessels from risks posed from rockets launching from facilities on Cape Canaveral. Changes in the type and size of launch vehicles, rocket component recovery methods, and the increased frequency of launches pose variable risks to marine traffic and require a more flexible regulatory tool. The proposed RNA would encompass all waters within typical rocket flight trajectories originating from launch complexes on and around Cape Canaveral, FL and out to 12 nautical miles. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking. DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before October 18, 2021. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2021–0661 using the Federal Decision Making Portal at https:// www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments. SUMMARY: If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. A. Eugene Stratton, Seventh District, Waterways Management Branch (DPW), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 305–415–6750, email a.eugene.stratton@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 51845 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 II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis The Coast Guard is proposing to replace the existing safety zone in 33 CFR 165.775 titled ‘‘Safety Zone; Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville; Offshore Cape Canaveral, Florida’’ with a regulated navigation area (RNA). The existing safety zone is composed of four large regulated areas and was established in 2009 with the intent of protecting marine traffic from the hazards associated with the launching of space vehicles, to expedite notification to the public, and to reduce the administrative workload of the Coast Guard. Changes in the type and size of launch vehicles, rocket component recovery methods, and the increased frequency of launches pose variable risks to marine traffic and require a more flexible regulatory tool. The proposed RNA would encompass all waters within typical rocket flight trajectories originating from launch complexes on and around Cape Canaveral, FL and out to 12 nautical miles. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5, and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Seventh Coast Guard District Commander is proposing to replace the existing Offshore Cape Canaveral Safety Zone in 33 CFR 165.775, with a RNA. Prior to the safety zone that was established in 2009, the Captain of the Port (COTP) Jacksonville issued temporary federal regulations for each rocket launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, now called Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. At the time, 12–15 launches a year was typical. The four ‘‘zones’’ were based on historical and projected launch azimuth data and designed in collaboration with the U.S. Air Force, 45th Space Wing Range Operations and Safety Departments and U.S. Coast Guard Space Transportation Systems program office in Port Canaveral, FL. Contemporary flight analyses models and risk assessments are more advanced and require a far smaller hazard area for typical launches than the four ‘‘zones’’ E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP1 51846 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules established in the Offshore Cape Canaveral Safety Zone of 2009. For most launches originating from Cape Canaveral, the existing safety zones are far too large and enforcement of them may unnecessarily restrict vessel traffic. Rocket launch activity has doubled since 2009. In 2020 the 45th Space Wing (now designated as Space Launch Delta 45 under the U.S. Space Force) launched 39 missions which required 20 activations of the 2009 safety zone. The type, configuration, and mission profile of contemporary governmental and commercial rockets adds additional variability to risk assessments and requires a more adaptable regulatory tool. A Safety Zone, as defined in 33 CFR 165.20, is intended to limit access to a hazardous area to authorized persons, vehicles, or vessels. Given the rapidly changing nature of space launch operations in the area, an RNA, as defined in 33 CFR 165.11, which allows the control of vessel traffic with more flexibility and expediency, is the more appropriate regulatory tool. This RNA is not meant to replace, alter, or conflict with Coast Guard security zones as described in 33 CFR 165.701, Vicinity, Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, FL; or 33 CFR 165.705, Port Canaveral Harbor, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document. We propose the following area to be a RNA: All waters offshore Cape Canaveral from surface to bottom, encompassed by a line connecting the following points beginning with Point 1 at 28°48′54″ N, 80°28′40″ W; thence southwest to Point 2 at 28°43′20″ N, 80°41′ W; thence south along the shoreline to Point 3 at 28°26′40″ N, 80°32′49″ W; thence continuing south offshore to Point 4 at 28°10′ N, 80°23′20″ W; thence east Point 5 at 28°10′ N, 80°21′13″ W; thence north along the 12 nautical mile line back to Point 1. Coordinates are in WGS 1984. These coordinates are based on the furthest north and south trajectories of typical rocket launch vehicles originating from Cape Canaveral. In addition, there are five typical launch exclusion areas that cover the majority of rocket launches. We list the coordinates and locations of the five typical launch exclusion areas in the regulatory text. When the RNA is deemed activated, the COTP or a designated representive would be able to restrict vessel movement including but not limited to transiting, anchoring, or mooring within this RNA to protect vessels from hazards associated with rocket launches. These VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 restrictions are temporary in nature and would only be enacted and enforced prior to and just after a successful launch. The COTP would be able to activate any single area, a combination of areas, or establish ad hoc areas within the RNA boundary area as warranted by the specific risks posed by individual launches. The COTP would inform the public of the activation or status of the RNA by Broadcast Notice to Mariners on VHF– FM channel 16, Public Notice of Enforcement, on-scene presence, and by the display of a yellow ball from a 90foot pole near the shoreline. IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors. A. Regulatory Planning and Review Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The RNA will operate in a similar way to the existing safety zone, but will reduce the size of exclusionary areas for each typical rocket launch. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is unnecessary. The RNA will only be activated a reasonable time before a launch and deactivated once the area is no longer hazardous. B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The total time of the RNA activation and thus restriction to the public is expected to be approximately one hour PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 per launch. Vessels would be able to transit around the activated RNA locations during these launches. We do not anticipate any significant economic impact resulting from activation of the RNA. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. C. Collection of Information This proposed rule would 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 proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the activation of a regulated navigation area with exclusionary zones smaller than the existing safety zones. The activation of the RNA is expected to be an hour total. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60a of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– 001–01, Rev. 1. A preliminary 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. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2021–0661 in the search box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If you cannot submit your material by using https:// www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate instructions. Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous paragraph, and then select ‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https:// www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive. Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions to the docket in response to this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places, or vessels. Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: V. Public Participation and Request for Comments We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and ■ VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 51847 Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. ■ 2. Revise § 165.775 to read as follows: § 165.775 Regulated Navigation Area; Launch Area Offshore Cape Canaveral, FL. (a) Location. (1) The following area is a regulated navigation area (RNA): All waters offshore Cape Canaveral from surface to bottom, encompassed by a line connecting the following points beginning with Point 1 at 28°48′54″ N, 80°28′40″ W; thence southwest to Point 2 at 28°43′20″ N, 80°41′ W; thence south along the shoreline to Point 3 at 28°26′40″ N, 80°32′49″ W; thence continuing south offshore to Point 4 at 28°10′ N, 80°23′20″ W; thence east Point 5 at 28°10′ N, 80°21′13″ W; thence north along the 12 nautical mile line back to Point 1. Coordinates are in WGS 1984. These coordinates are based on the furthest north and south trajectories of typical rocket launch vehicles originating from Cape Canaveral. (2) While restrictions may be enforced anywhere within the boundaries of the RNA, there are five typical launch exclusion areas that cover the majority of rocket launches. Typical launch hazard areas include all navigable waters within the following coordinates, encompassed by a line starting at Point 1 connecting the following points: (i) Northeast Launch Hazard Area: Point Point Point Point Point Point 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... ... ... ... ... ... 28°47′47″ 28°42′18″ 28°39′13″ 28°32′29″ 28°34′00″ 28°39′43″ N N N N N N 080°27′48″ 080°34′55″ 080°37′49″ 080°33′53″ 080°29′00″ 080°21′57″ W W W W W W (ii) East Northeast Launch Hazard Area: Point Point Point Point Point 1 2 3 4 5 ... ... ... ... ... 28°43′53″ 28°36′10″ 28°31′46″ 28°34′42″ 28°40′45″ N N N N N 080°24′50″ 080°35′20″ 080°33′40″ 080°28′40″ 080°22′28″ W W W W W (iii) Large East Launch Hazard Area: Point Point Point Point 1 2 3 4 ... ... ... ... 28°40′32″ 28°39′14″ 28°27′00″ 28°27′35″ N N N N 080°22′21″ 080°37′48″ 080°31′55″ 080°17′48″ W W W W (iv) Small East Launch Hazard Area: Point Point Point Point Point 1 2 3 4 5 ... ... ... ... ... 28°38′28″ 28°39′00″ 28°38′00″ 28°32′00″ 28°31′32″ N N N N N 080°21′24″ 080°31′00″ 080°36′58″ 080°33′45″ 080°18′35″ W W W W W (v) Southeast Launch Hazard Area: Point 1 ... Point 2 ... E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 28°37′00″ N 28°35′48″ N 17SEP1 080°29′00″ W 080°34′59″ W 51848 Point Point Point Point 3 4 5 6 ... ... ... ... Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 28°26′40″ 28°10′00″ 28°10′00″ 28°23′10″ N N N N 080°32′49″ 080°23′20″ 080°21′13″ 080°18′41″ W W W W ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 (b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section: Designated representative means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP) Jacksonville in the enforcement of RNAs, safety zones, and security zones. (c) Regulations. (1) The COTP or a designated represented may restrict vessel movement including but not limited to transiting, anchoring, or mooring within this RNA to protect vessels from hazards associated with rocket launches. These restrictions are temporary in nature and will only be enacted and enforced prior to and just after a successful launch. (2) The COTP may activate any single area, a combination of areas, or establish ad hoc areas within the RNA boundary area as warranted by the specific risks posed by individual launches. (d) Notice of activation of RNA. The COTP will inform the public of the activation or status of the RNA by Broadcast Notice to Mariners on VHF– FM channel 16, Public Notice of Enforcement, on-scene presence, and by the display of a yellow ball from a 90foot pole near the shoreline at approximately 28°35′00″ N, 080°34′36″ W and from a 90-foot pole near the shoreline at approximately 28°55′18″ N, 080°35′00″ W. Coast Guard assets or other Federal, State, or local law enforcement assets will be clearly identified by lights, markings, or with agency insignia. (e) Contact information. The COTP Jacksonville may be reached by telephone at (904) 564–7513. Any onscene Coast Guard or designated representative assets may be reached on VHF–FM channel 16. Dated: September 13, 2021. Brendan C. McPherson, Rear Admiral, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2021–20105 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 [EPA–R04–OAR–2021–0354; FRL–8958–01– R4] Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Mecklenburg Air Quality Permit Rules Revisions Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to the Mecklenburg County portion of the North Carolina SIP, hereinafter referred to as the Mecklenburg Local Implementation Plan (LIP). The revision was submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ), on behalf of Mecklenburg County Air Quality (MCAQ) via a letter dated April 24, 2020, and was received by EPA on June 19, 2020. The revision updates several Mecklenburg County Air Pollution Control Ordinance (MCAPCO) rules incorporated into the LIP and adds several rules. EPA is proposing to approve these changes pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 18, 2021. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2021–0354 at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evan Adams, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone number is (404) 562– 9009. Mr. Adams can also be reached via electronic mail at adams.evan@ epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Overview The Mecklenburg County LIP was submitted to EPA on June 14, 1990, and EPA approved the plan on May 2, 1991. See 56 FR 20140. Mecklenburg County is now requesting that EPA approve updates and additions to the LIP for, among other things, general consistency with the North Carolina SIP.1 Mecklenburg County prepared three submittals in order to modify the LIP and reflect regulatory and administrative changes that NCDAQ has made to the North Carolina SIP.2 The three submittals were submitted to EPA as follows: NCDAQ transmitted the October 25, 2017, submittal to EPA but withdrew it from review through a letter dated February 15, 2019. On April 24, 2020, NCDAQ resubmitted the October 25, 2017, update to EPA and also submitted the January 21, 2016, and January 14, 2019, updates. Due to an inconsistency with public notice at the local level, these submittals were withdrawn from EPA through a letter dated February 15, 2019. Mecklenburg County corrected this error, and NCDAQ submitted the updates in a revision dated April 24, 2020.3 II. What action is EPA proposing to take? The April 24, 2020, revision includes updates to and additions of several MCAPCO rules. The January 21, 2016, changes from MCAQ include updates to MCAPCO Rule 1.5214—Commencement of Operation; and the January 14, 2019, changes from MCAQ include updates to MCAPCO Rules 1.5212—Applications; 1.5213—Action on Application; Issuance of Permit; 1.5215—Application Processing Schedule; 1.5219—Retention of Permit at Permitted Facility; 1.5221— 1 Hereinafter, the terms ‘‘North Carolina SIP’’ and ‘‘SIP’’ refer to the North Carolina regulatory portion of the North Carolina SIP (i.e., the portion that contains SIP-approved North Carolina regulations). 2 The Mecklenburg County, North Carolina revision that is dated April 24, 2020, and received by EPA on June 19, 2020, is comprised of three previous submittals—one dated January 21, 2016; one dated October 25, 2017; and one dated January 14, 2019. 3 EPA notes that the April 24, 2020, submittal was received by EPA on June 19, 2020. E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 178 (Friday, September 17, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51845-51848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20105]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0661]
RIN 1625-AA11


Regulated Navigation Area; Offshore, Cape Canaveral, Florida

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to replace the existing safety 
zone in Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, Offshore Cape Canaveral, 
Florida with a regulated navigation area (RNA). The existing safety 
zone is composed of four large regulated areas and was established in 
2009 with the intent of protecting vessels from risks posed from 
rockets launching from facilities on Cape Canaveral. Changes in the 
type and size of launch vehicles, rocket component recovery methods, 
and the increased frequency of launches pose variable risks to marine 
traffic and require a more flexible regulatory tool. The proposed RNA 
would encompass all waters within typical rocket flight trajectories 
originating from launch complexes on and around Cape Canaveral, FL and 
out to 12 nautical miles. We invite your comments on this proposed 
rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before October 18, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0661 using the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for 
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further 
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. A. Eugene Stratton, Seventh 
District, Waterways Management Branch (DPW), U.S. Coast Guard; 
telephone 305-415-6750, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Coast Guard is proposing to replace the existing safety zone in 
33 CFR 165.775 titled ``Safety Zone; Captain of the Port Zone 
Jacksonville; Offshore Cape Canaveral, Florida'' with a regulated 
navigation area (RNA). The existing safety zone is composed of four 
large regulated areas and was established in 2009 with the intent of 
protecting marine traffic from the hazards associated with the 
launching of space vehicles, to expedite notification to the public, 
and to reduce the administrative workload of the Coast Guard. Changes 
in the type and size of launch vehicles, rocket component recovery 
methods, and the increased frequency of launches pose variable risks to 
marine traffic and require a more flexible regulatory tool. The 
proposed RNA would encompass all waters within typical rocket flight 
trajectories originating from launch complexes on and around Cape 
Canaveral, FL and out to 12 nautical miles. We invite your comments on 
this proposed rulemaking.
    The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46 
U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5, and 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 
01.2.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Seventh Coast Guard District Commander is proposing to replace 
the existing Offshore Cape Canaveral Safety Zone in 33 CFR 165.775, 
with a RNA. Prior to the safety zone that was established in 2009, the 
Captain of the Port (COTP) Jacksonville issued temporary federal 
regulations for each rocket launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force 
Station, now called Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. At the time, 
12-15 launches a year was typical. The four ``zones'' were based on 
historical and projected launch azimuth data and designed in 
collaboration with the U.S. Air Force, 45th Space Wing Range Operations 
and Safety Departments and U.S. Coast Guard Space Transportation 
Systems program office in Port Canaveral, FL.
    Contemporary flight analyses models and risk assessments are more 
advanced and require a far smaller hazard area for typical launches 
than the four ``zones''

[[Page 51846]]

established in the Offshore Cape Canaveral Safety Zone of 2009. For 
most launches originating from Cape Canaveral, the existing safety 
zones are far too large and enforcement of them may unnecessarily 
restrict vessel traffic.
    Rocket launch activity has doubled since 2009. In 2020 the 45th 
Space Wing (now designated as Space Launch Delta 45 under the U.S. 
Space Force) launched 39 missions which required 20 activations of the 
2009 safety zone. The type, configuration, and mission profile of 
contemporary governmental and commercial rockets adds additional 
variability to risk assessments and requires a more adaptable 
regulatory tool.
    A Safety Zone, as defined in 33 CFR 165.20, is intended to limit 
access to a hazardous area to authorized persons, vehicles, or vessels. 
Given the rapidly changing nature of space launch operations in the 
area, an RNA, as defined in 33 CFR 165.11, which allows the control of 
vessel traffic with more flexibility and expediency, is the more 
appropriate regulatory tool.
    This RNA is not meant to replace, alter, or conflict with Coast 
Guard security zones as described in 33 CFR 165.701, Vicinity, Kennedy 
Space Center, Merritt Island, FL; or 33 CFR 165.705, Port Canaveral 
Harbor, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL. The regulatory text we 
are proposing appears at the end of this document.
    We propose the following area to be a RNA: All waters offshore Cape 
Canaveral from surface to bottom, encompassed by a line connecting the 
following points beginning with Point 1 at 28[deg]48'54'' N, 
80[deg]28'40'' W; thence southwest to Point 2 at 28[deg]43'20'' N, 
80[deg]41' W; thence south along the shoreline to Point 3 at 
28[deg]26'40'' N, 80[deg]32'49'' W; thence continuing south offshore to 
Point 4 at 28[deg]10' N, 80[deg]23'20'' W; thence east Point 5 at 
28[deg]10' N, 80[deg]21'13'' W; thence north along the 12 nautical mile 
line back to Point 1. Coordinates are in WGS 1984. These coordinates 
are based on the furthest north and south trajectories of typical 
rocket launch vehicles originating from Cape Canaveral. In addition, 
there are five typical launch exclusion areas that cover the majority 
of rocket launches. We list the coordinates and locations of the five 
typical launch exclusion areas in the regulatory text.
    When the RNA is deemed activated, the COTP or a designated 
representive would be able to restrict vessel movement including but 
not limited to transiting, anchoring, or mooring within this RNA to 
protect vessels from hazards associated with rocket launches. These 
restrictions are temporary in nature and would only be enacted and 
enforced prior to and just after a successful launch. The COTP would be 
able to activate any single area, a combination of areas, or establish 
ad hoc areas within the RNA boundary area as warranted by the specific 
risks posed by individual launches.
    The COTP would inform the public of the activation or status of the 
RNA by Broadcast Notice to Mariners on VHF-FM channel 16, Public Notice 
of Enforcement, on-scene presence, and by the display of a yellow ball 
from a 90-foot pole near the shoreline.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and 
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the 
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    The RNA will operate in a similar way to the existing safety zone, 
but will reduce the size of exclusionary areas for each typical rocket 
launch. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal 
that a full regulatory evaluation is unnecessary. The RNA will only be 
activated a reasonable time before a launch and deactivated once the 
area is no longer hazardous.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    The total time of the RNA activation and thus restriction to the 
public is expected to be approximately one hour per launch. Vessels 
would be able to transit around the activated RNA locations during 
these launches. We do not anticipate any significant economic impact 
resulting from activation of the RNA.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect 
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you 
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, 
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any 
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please call or email the person

[[Page 51847]]

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing 
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made 
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of 
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the 
activation of a regulated navigation area with exclusionary zones 
smaller than the existing safety zones. The activation of the RNA is 
expected to be an hour total. Normally such actions are categorically 
excluded from further review under paragraph L60a of Appendix A, Table 
1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary 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. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so 
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through 
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To 
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2021-0661 in the 
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the 
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment 
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate 
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this 
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as 
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & 
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will 
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following 
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only 
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may 
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that 
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we 
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal 
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions 
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking 
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Revise Sec.  165.775 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.775  Regulated Navigation Area; Launch Area Offshore Cape 
Canaveral, FL.

    (a) Location. (1) The following area is a regulated navigation area 
(RNA): All waters offshore Cape Canaveral from surface to bottom, 
encompassed by a line connecting the following points beginning with 
Point 1 at 28[deg]48'54'' N, 80[deg]28'40'' W; thence southwest to 
Point 2 at 28[deg]43'20'' N, 80[deg]41' W; thence south along the 
shoreline to Point 3 at 28[deg]26'40'' N, 80[deg]32'49'' W; thence 
continuing south offshore to Point 4 at 28[deg]10' N, 80[deg]23'20'' W; 
thence east Point 5 at 28[deg]10' N, 80[deg]21'13'' W; thence north 
along the 12 nautical mile line back to Point 1. Coordinates are in WGS 
1984. These coordinates are based on the furthest north and south 
trajectories of typical rocket launch vehicles originating from Cape 
Canaveral.
    (2) While restrictions may be enforced anywhere within the 
boundaries of the RNA, there are five typical launch exclusion areas 
that cover the majority of rocket launches. Typical launch hazard areas 
include all navigable waters within the following coordinates, 
encompassed by a line starting at Point 1 connecting the following 
points:
    (i) Northeast Launch Hazard Area:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point 1......................  28[deg]47'47'' N     080[deg]27'48'' W
Point 2......................  28[deg]42'18'' N     080[deg]34'55'' W
Point 3......................  28[deg]39'13'' N     080[deg]37'49'' W
Point 4......................  28[deg]32'29'' N     080[deg]33'53'' W
Point 5......................  28[deg]34'00'' N     080[deg]29'00'' W
Point 6......................  28[deg]39'43'' N     080[deg]21'57'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) East Northeast Launch Hazard Area:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point 1......................  28[deg]43'53'' N     080[deg]24'50'' W
Point 2......................  28[deg]36'10'' N     080[deg]35'20'' W
Point 3......................  28[deg]31'46'' N     080[deg]33'40'' W
Point 4......................  28[deg]34'42'' N     080[deg]28'40'' W
Point 5......................  28[deg]40'45'' N     080[deg]22'28'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (iii) Large East Launch Hazard Area:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point 1......................  28[deg]40'32'' N     080[deg]22'21'' W
Point 2......................  28[deg]39'14'' N     080[deg]37'48'' W
Point 3......................  28[deg]27'00'' N     080[deg]31'55'' W
Point 4......................  28[deg]27'35'' N     080[deg]17'48'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (iv) Small East Launch Hazard Area:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point 1......................  28[deg]38'28'' N     080[deg]21'24'' W
Point 2......................  28[deg]39'00'' N     080[deg]31'00'' W
Point 3......................  28[deg]38'00'' N     080[deg]36'58'' W
Point 4......................  28[deg]32'00'' N     080[deg]33'45'' W
Point 5......................  28[deg]31'32'' N     080[deg]18'35'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (v) Southeast Launch Hazard Area:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point 1......................  28[deg]37'00'' N     080[deg]29'00'' W
Point 2......................  28[deg]35'48'' N     080[deg]34'59'' W

[[Page 51848]]

 
Point 3......................  28[deg]26'40'' N     080[deg]32'49'' W
Point 4......................  28[deg]10'00'' N     080[deg]23'20'' W
Point 5......................  28[deg]10'00'' N     080[deg]21'13'' W
Point 6......................  28[deg]23'10'' N     080[deg]18'41'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    Designated representative means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders 
including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers 
operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers 
designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP) Jacksonville 
in the enforcement of RNAs, safety zones, and security zones.
    (c) Regulations. (1) The COTP or a designated represented may 
restrict vessel movement including but not limited to transiting, 
anchoring, or mooring within this RNA to protect vessels from hazards 
associated with rocket launches. These restrictions are temporary in 
nature and will only be enacted and enforced prior to and just after a 
successful launch.
    (2) The COTP may activate any single area, a combination of areas, 
or establish ad hoc areas within the RNA boundary area as warranted by 
the specific risks posed by individual launches.
    (d) Notice of activation of RNA. The COTP will inform the public of 
the activation or status of the RNA by Broadcast Notice to Mariners on 
VHF-FM channel 16, Public Notice of Enforcement, on-scene presence, and 
by the display of a yellow ball from a 90-foot pole near the shoreline 
at approximately 28[deg]35'00'' N, 080[deg]34'36'' W and from a 90-foot 
pole near the shoreline at approximately 28[deg]55'18'' N, 
080[deg]35'00'' W. Coast Guard assets or other Federal, State, or local 
law enforcement assets will be clearly identified by lights, markings, 
or with agency insignia.
    (e) Contact information. The COTP Jacksonville may be reached by 
telephone at (904) 564-7513. Any on-scene Coast Guard or designated 
representative assets may be reached on VHF-FM channel 16.

    Dated: September 13, 2021.
Brendan C. McPherson,
Rear Admiral, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2021-20105 Filed 9-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P