15246 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

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. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This proposed 

rule involves implementation of 

regulations within 33 CFR part 100 

applicable to organized marine events 

on the navigable waters of the United 

States that could negatively impact the 

safety of waterway users and shore side 

activities in the event area. The category 

of water activities includes but is not 

limited to sail boat regattas, boat 

parades, power boat racing, swimming 

events, crew racing, canoe and sail 

board racing. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 

2. Add a temporary section, § 100.35– 

T05–0126 to read as follows: 

§ 100.35–T05–0126 Special Local 

Regulations for Marine Events; Chester 

River, Chestertown, MD. 

(a) Regulated area. The following 

locations are regulated areas: All waters 

of the Chester River, within a line 

connecting the following positions: 

latitude 39°12′27′′ N, longitude 

076°03′46′′ W; thence to latitude 

39°12′19′′ N, longitude 076°03′53′′ W; 

thence to latitude 39°12′25′′ N, 

longitude 076°03′41′′ W; thence to 

latitude 39°12′16′′ N, longitude 

076°03′48′′ W; thence to the point of 

origin at latitude 39°12′27′′ N, longitude 

076°03′46′′ W, located at Chestertown, 

Maryland. All coordinates reference 

Datum NAD 1983. 

(b) Definitions. 

(1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander 

means a commissioned, warrant, or 

petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard 

who has been designated by the 

Commander, Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore. 

(2) Official Patrol means any vessel 

assigned or approved by Commander, 

Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

on board and displaying a Coast Guard 

ensign. 

(c) Special local regulations. 

(1) Except for persons or vessels 

authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, no person or vessel may 

enter or remain in the regulated area. 

(2) The operator of any vessel in the 

regulated area must: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately when 

directed to do so by the Coast Guard 

Patrol Commander or any Official 

Patrol. 

(ii) Proceed as directed by the Coast 

Guard Patrol Commander or any Official 

Patrol. 

(d) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 10 a.m. until 5 

p.m. on May 28, 2011. 

(1) The Coast Guard will publish a 

notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District 

Local Notice to Mariners and issue 

marine information broadcast on VHF– 

FM marine band radio announcing 

specific event date and times. 

(2) [Reserved] 

Dated: March 4, 2011. 

Mark P. O’Malley, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Baltimore, Maryland. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6588 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 110 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–1131] 

RIN 1625–AA01 

Anchorage Regulations; Narragansett 

Bay and Rhode Island Sound, RI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

remove an obsolete Naval explosives 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 15247 

anchorage in Narragansett Bay, Rhode 

Island, and to add an offshore anchorage 

in Rhode Island Sound south of Brenton 

Point, Rhode Island, for use by vessels 

waiting to enter Narragansett Bay. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before April 20, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number USCG–2009–1131 using any 

one of the following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these methods. For instructions 

on submitting comments, see the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc at 

Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New 

England, 401–435–2351. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, please call Renee 

V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2009–1131), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online, or by fax, mail or hand 

delivery, but please use only one of 

these means. We recommend that you 

include your name and a mailing 

address, an e-mail address, or a phone 

number in the body of your document 

so that we can contact you if we have 

questions regarding your submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG– 

2009–1131’’ in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the balloon 

shape in the Actions column. If you 

submit your comments by mail or hand 

delivery, submit them in an unbound 

format, no larger than 8c by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying and electronic 

filing. If you submit them by mail and 

would like to know that they reached 

the Facility, please enclose a stamped, 

self-addressed postcard or envelope. We 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period 

and may change the rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert USCG– 

2009–1131 in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the item in the 

Docket ID column. You may also visit 

the Docket Management Facility in 

Room W12–140 on the ground floor of 

the Department of Transportation West 

Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. We have an 

agreement with the Department of 

Transportation to use the Docket 

Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of all comments received into any 

of our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting would be beneficial. If we 

determine that one would aid this 

rulemaking, we will hold one at a time 

and place announced by a later notice 

in the Federal Register. 

Basis and Purpose 

The Secretary of Homeland Security 

has delegated to the Coast Guard the 

authority to establish and regulate 

anchorage grounds in accordance with 

33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 

2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; and 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. This proposed 

rule would remove an obsolete and no 

longer used anchorage in Narragansett 

Bay from the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR), and formalize and 

codify an area of Rhode Island Sound 

that under current informal practice is 

routinely used by mariners as an 

anchorage while waiting to enter 

Narragansett Bay. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

This proposed rule would remove the 

Naval explosives anchorage described in 

33 CFR 110.145(a)(2)(ii). Naval Station 

Newport, Rhode Island, had indicated to 

the Coast Guard that this anchorage is 

obsolete and no longer necessary for 

naval purposes. Leaving this obsolete 

anchorage in the CFR, and on navigation 

charts, leaves mariners with the 

mistaken impression that the area is 

reserved for a special purpose (i.e., 

explosives vessel anchoring) when in 

fact, it is no longer used or needed for 

that purpose. 

The proposed rule also would add a 

new anchorage to formalize and codify 

the current practice of commercial 

vessels that anchor in an area south of 

Brenton Point, Newport, Rhode Island, 

while waiting to enter Narragansett Bay. 

Establishing this anchorage in the CFR, 

and placing it on navigation charts, will 

remove ambiguity and clarify for 

mariners the preferred and safest area in 

which to anchor offshore when waiting 

to enter Narragansett Bay. 

This proposed anchorage area would 

encroach on a Navy Restricted Area (33 

CFR 334.78) used as a naval practice 

minefield. We asked the Navy if this 

Restricted Area is still required and they 

have advised us that it is now 

considered obsolete and we can request 

that it be removed from the CFR and the 

charts. We have engaged the Army 

Corps of Engineers (ACOE) requesting 

that this Navy Restricted Area be 

removed from the CFR as well as the 

charts. 

Prior to anchoring in the proposed 

anchorage area all vessels would be 

required to notify the COTP and unless 

otherwise approved by the COTP, all 

vessels must depart the anchorage area 

within 96 hours. This is necessary to 

ensure that an adequate anchorage area 

remains available close to the entrance 

to Narragansett Bay for vessels waiting 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

15248 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

to enter Narragansett Bay. This 

anchorage is not intended to be a longer 

term anchorage, but rather it is intended 

to be a short term anchorage available 

for vessels intending to enter 

Narragansett Bay within 96 hours and to 

facilitate their easy and safe entrance 

into Narragansett Bay. All vessels 

anchored in the proposed anchorage 

must be within the anchorage area at all 

times to ensure that they do not swing 

out into the nearby Traffic Lanes 

creating a high risk of collision with 

commercial vessels that transit past this 

Anchorage Area especially at night and 

during times of inclement weather. 

Additionally, to ensure completely open 

entrance to Narragansett Bay when 

necessary, as deemed by the COTP, all 

vessels anchored in the proposed 

anchorage must be able to get underway 

within two hours. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. 

We expect minimal additional cost 

impacts to the industry because this rule 

is not imposing fees, permits, or 

specialized requirements for the 

maritime industry to utilize this 

anchorage area. The effect of this rule 

would not be significant as it removes 

one obsolete anchorage that is no longer 

used by the U.S. Navy, and documents 

and codifies another area that is 

currently used by commercial vessels. 

This would represent an improvement 

on the safety of vessels using the 

anchorage grounds and would facilitate 

the transit of deep draft vessels through 

the area. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

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 rule would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This proposed rule may affect the 

following entities, some of which might 

be small entities: the owners or 

operators of vessels that have a need to 

anchor in Narragansett Bay or Rhode 

Island Sound at the entrance to 

Narragansett Bay. 

This proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons: this rule would 

only codify current navigation practices 

that are already in use by small entities 

in this area. The anchorage would not 

affect vessels’ schedules or their ability 

to freely transit within these areas of 

Narragansett Bay or Rhode Island 

Sound. The anchorage would impose no 

monetary expenses on small entities 

because it does not require them to 

purchase any new equipment, hire 

additional crew, or make any other 

expenditures. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES above) explaining why you 

think it qualifies and how and to what 

degree this rule would economically 

affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

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 so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact Mr. Edward 

G. LeBlanc at Coast Guard Sector 

Southeastern New England, 401–435– 

2351. 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. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule calls for no new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

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. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and does not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that may disproportionately affect 

children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it does not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 15249 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)(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 rule 

removes one anchorage area and 

establishes one new anchorage area 

where commercial vessels already 

regularly anchor. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 

Anchorage grounds. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows: 

PART 110—ANCHORAGE 

REGULATIONS 

1. The authority citation for part 110 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 

1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

2. Remove and reserve 

§ 110.145(a)(2)(ii), consisting of 

introductory text and paragraphs (a) 

through (e). 

3. Add § 110.149 to subpart B to read 

as follows: 

§ 110.149 Narragansett Bay, RI 

(a) Brenton Point anchorage 

ground. An area bounded by the 

following coordinates: 41°22′37.1′′ N, 

71°14′40.3′′ W; thence to 41°20′42.8′′ N, 

71°14′40.3′′ W; thence to 41°18′24.1′′ N, 

71°20′32.5′′ W; thence to 41°20′22.6′′ N, 

71°20′32.5′′ W; thence back to point of 

origin. 

(b) The following regulations apply in 

the Brenton Point anchorage ground. 

(1) Prior to anchoring within the 

anchorage area, all vessels shall notify 

the Coast Guard Captain of the Port via 

VHF–FM Channel 16. 

(2) Except as otherwise provided, no 

vessel may occupy this anchorage 

ground for a period of time in excess of 

96 hours without prior approval of the 

Captain of the Port. 

(3) If a request is made for the longterm layup of a vessel, the Captain of 

the Port may establish special 

conditions with which the vessel must 

comply in order for such a request to be 

approved. 

(4) No vessel in such condition that it 

is likely to sink or otherwise become a 

menace or obstruction to navigation or 

anchorage of other vessels shall occupy 

an anchorage except in cases where 

unforeseen circumstances create 

conditions of imminent peril to 

personnel and then only for such period 

as may be authorized by the Captain of 

the Port. 

(5) Anchors shall be placed well 

within the anchorage areas so that no 

portion of the hull or rigging will at any 

time extend outside of the anchorage 

area. 

(6) The Coast Guard Captain of the 

Port may close the anchorage area and 

direct vessels to depart the anchorage 

during periods of adverse weather or at 

other times as deemed necessary in the 

interest of port safety and security. 

(7) Any vessel anchored in these 

grounds must be capable of getting 

underway if ordered by the Captain of 

the Port and must be able to do so 

within two hours of notification by the 

Captain of the Port. If a vessel will not 

be able to get underway within two 

hours of notification, permission must 

be requested from the Captain of the 

Port to remain in the anchorage. No 

vessel shall anchor in a ‘‘dead ship’’ 

status (propulsion or control 

unavailable for normal operations) 

without prior approval of the Captain of 

the Port. 

(8) Brenton Point anchorage ground is 

a general anchorage area reserved 

primarily for commercial vessels 

waiting to enter Narragansett Bay. 

(9) Temporary floats or buoys for 

marking anchors or moorings in place 

will be allowed in this area. Fixed 

mooring piles or stakes will not be 

allowed. 

(10) All coordinates referenced use 

datum: NAD 83. 

Dated: March 3, 2011. 

Daniel A. Neptun, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

First Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6498 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 51, 52, 70, and 71 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0083; FRL–9283–8] 

RIN 2060–AQ79 

Deferral for CO2 Emissions From 

Bioenergy and Other Biogenic Sources 

Under the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and Title V 

Programs: Proposed Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to defer 

for a period of three (3) years the 

application of the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title 

V permitting requirements to biogenic 

carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from 

bioenergy and other biogenic stationary 

sources. This action is being taken as 

part of the process of granting the 

Petition for Reconsideration filed by the 

National Alliance of Forest Owners 

(NAFO) on August 3, 2010, related to 

the PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas 

Tailoring Rule. 

DATES: Comments. Comments must be 

received on or before May 5, 2011. 

Public Hearing. EPA will hold one 

hearing on this action. The hearing will 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS