Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 162 / Thursday, August 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules 44429

coast and is used in accordance with

Rule 10(d) of the 72 COLREGS.

A roundabout is a routing measure

comprising a separation point or

circular separation zone and a circular

traffic lane within defined limits. Traffic

within the roundabout is separated by

moving in a counterclockwise direction

around the separation point or zone.

A precautionary area is a defined area

where ships must navigate with

particular caution and within which the

direction of traffic flow may be

recommended.

A deep-water route is a route within

defined limits which has been

accurately surveyed for clearance of sea

bottom and submerged obstacles as

indicated on nautical charts.

The approaches to the Mississippi

River and the Mississippi River Gulf

Outlet were last studied in 1984. The

study concluded that there was a need

for the establishment of the existing

shipping safety fairways.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’

Waterborne Commerce of The United

States reports that, from 1984 to 1993,

volume of traffic increased from 397.1

million tons to 520.3 million tons.

Channel depths were increased to 45

feet in 1994.

The Associated Branch Pilots

Association and the Coast Guard’s

Marine Safety Office in New Orleans

have expressed concern about the safety

of navigation due to the frequency of

collisions that have the potential to

close one of the busiest ports in the

United States. In addition to safety

concerns, several collisions in the past

few years have demonstrated the

potential for far reaching economic

impact. The most recent collision

involving the M/V FORMOSA SIX and

the M/V FLORA partially closed the

waterway with an estimated cost of over

one million dollars per day.

Study Area

The study area is bounded by a line

connecting the following geographic

positions:

Latitude Longitude

29°02′20′′ N ....................... 89°40′15′′ W

29°33′00′′ N ....................... 89°02′39′′ W

29°32′45′′ N ....................... 88°42′40′′ W

29°03′30′′ N ....................... 88°45′12′′ W

28°36′30′′ N ....................... 89°18′09′′ W

28°26′15′′ N ....................... 89°41′15′′ W

The study area encompasses the

approaches to the Mississippi River, the

Mississippi River Gulf Outlet as well as

the area offshore of southeast Louisiana

used by commercial vessels transiting to

and between these ports.

Issues

The Coast Guard is trying to

determine the scope of any safety

problems associated with vessel transit

in the study area. It is expected that

information will be gathered during the

study that will identify the problems

and appropriate solutions.

In addition to information that you

wish to provide, the Coast Guard is

particularly interested in your responses

to the following questions:

1. What is the nature of your work

that causes you to navigate in the study

area?

2. How many trips do you make in the

study area in a 24-hour period?

3. What route do you take? Please

specify point of origin and destination?

4. Considering all the passes leading

to the Gulf of Mexico, which would be

the most direct to your destination?

5. Are there passes that you do not

use? Why not?

6. If the U.S. Corps of Engineers

maintained each pass to a

predetermined depth, would you use all

the passes?

7. What should be the maintained

depth of each pass?

8. Have you had an accident or near

miss when transiting the mouth of the

Mississippi River? If so, where? Please

describe the incident.

9. Would a traffic separation scheme

to separate opposing streams of traffic

help in preventing accidents or near

misses?

10. Would improved aids to

navigation help in preventing accidents

or near misses? What improvements

would you suggest?

11. Would mandatory vessel transit

restrictions or operating requirements in

the passes and near shore waters help?

12. Do you have other suggestions to

improve navigational safety in the study

area?

The study may recommend the

following:

1. No vessel routing measures are

needed.

2. Establish one or more of the

following vessel routing measures:

(a) TSS in the approach to Southwest

Pass of the Mississippi River;

(b) TSS in the approach to the

Mississippi River Gulf Outlet;

(c) Precautionary area(s) near either or

both approaches; or,

(d) Inshore traffic zone(s) near either

or both approaches; and,

3. Establish a regulated navigation

area with specific vessel operating

requirements to ensure safe navigation.

Procedural Requirements

In order to provide safe access routes

for movement of vessel traffic

proceeding to and from U.S. ports, the

PWSA directs that the Secretary

designate necessary fairways and TSS’s

in which the paramount right of

navigation over all other uses shall be

recognized. Before a designation can be

made, the Coast Guard is required to

undertake a study of potential traffic

density and the need for safe access

routes.

During the study, the Coast Guard is

directed to consult with federal and

state agencies and to consider the views

of representatives of the maritime

community, port and harbor authorities

or associations, environmental groups,

and other parties who may be affected

by the proposed action.

In accordance with 33 U.S.C. 1223(c),

the Coast Guard will, to the extent

practicable, reconcile the need for safe

access routes with the needs of all other

reasonable uses of the area involved.

The Coast Guard will also consider

previous studies and experience in the

areas of vessel traffic management,

navigation, shiphandling, the effects of

weather, and prior analysis of the traffic

density in certain regions.

Data needed to gain a clear

understanding of the waterway and its

uses will be gathered by a contractor.

The Coast Guard will focus on

interaction with waterway users and

stakeholders to scope out safety

concerns and determine an appropriate

solution.

The results of this study will be

published in the Federal Register. If the

Coast Guard determines that new

routing or other regulatory measures are

needed, a notice of proposed

rulemaking will be published. It is

anticipated that the study will be

concluded by 30 January 1998.

Dated: August 7, 1997.

R.C. North,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 97–22136 Filed 8–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[PA4051b; FRL–5865–7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; Approval of VOC and

NOX RACT Determinations for

Individual Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).
44430 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 162 / Thursday, August 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the

purpose of establishing volatile organic

compound (VOC) and nitrogen oxides

(NOX) reasonably available control

technology (RACT) for two major

sources located in Pennsylvania. In the

final rules section of this Federal

Register, EPA is approving the

Commonwealth’s SIP revision as a

direct final rule without prior proposal

because the Agency views this as a

noncontroversial SIP revision and

anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for the approval is set

forth in the direct final rule and the

accompanying technical support

document. If no adverse comments are

received in response to this proposed

rule, no further activity is contemplated

in relation to this rule. If EPA receives

adverse comments, the direct final rule

will be withdrawn and all public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

If adverse comments are received that

do not pertain to all documents subject

to this rulemaking action, those

documents not affected by the adverse

comments will be finalized in the

manner described here. Only those

documents that receive adverse

comments will be withdrawn in the

manner described here.

DATES: Comments must be received in

writing by September 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to David J.

Campbell, Air, Radiation, and Toxics

Division, Mailcode 3AT22, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air, Radiation, and Toxics

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107; and the Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality

Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose

Quinto, (215) 566–2182, at the EPA

Region III office or via e-mail at

quinto.rose@epamail.epa.gov. While

information may be requested via email, comments must be submitted in

writing to the above Region III address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the

information pertaining to this action,

VOC and NOX RACT determinations for

individual sources located in

Pennsylvania, provided in the direct

final action of the same title which is

located in the Rules and Regulations

Section of this Federal Register.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: July 22, 1997.

Thomas Voltaggio,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 97–22063 Filed 8–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5878–4]

National Priorities List for Uncontrolled

Hazardous Waste Sites, Proposed Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; Amendment of

Montrose Chemical Corporation Site

Listing.

SUMMARY: The Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

(‘‘CERCLA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’) requires that

the National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan

(‘‘NCP’’), found at 40 CFR part 300,

include a list of national priorities

among the known releases or threatened

releases of hazardous substances,

pollutants, or contaminants throughout

the United States. The National

Priorities List (‘‘NPL’’) constitutes this

list. The NPL is found in Appendix B of

40 CFR part 300.

The principal mechanism for placing

sites on the NPL is the Hazard Ranking

System (HRS). Under the HRS various

conditions at a site (for example,

volumes of waste present or relative

toxicity of pollutants) are assigned

numerical values to develop a total

score that measures the relative risk at

a site compared with other sites. The

HRS is found in Appendix A of 40 CFR

part 300. A site with a total score in

excess of 28.5 under the HRS is eligible

for listing on the NPL.

The NPL is intended primarily to

guide the Environmental Protection

Agency (‘‘EPA’’ or ‘‘the Agency’’) in

determining which sites warrant further

investigation to assess the nature and

extent of public health and

environmental risks associated with the

site and to determine what CERCLAfinanced remedial action(s), if any, may

be appropriate.

EPA is proposing today to add to the

Montrose Chemical Corporation

National Priorities Listing certain DDTand PCB-contaminated sediments found

on the seafloor off the coast of the Palos

Verdes Peninsula in Southern

California. EPA is also soliciting

comments from the public on this

proposal consistent with 40 CFR

300.425(d)(5)(i).

DATES: Comments on this proposal must

be submitted (postmarked) on or before

October 20, 1997.

ADDRESSES: By Mail: Mail original and

three copies of comments (no facsimiles

or tapes) to Docket Coordinator,

Headquarters; U.S. EPA; CERCLA

Docket Office (Mail Code 5201G); 401 M

Street, SW; Washington, DC 20460;

(703) 603–9232.

By Overnight Mail: Send original and

three copies of comments (no facsimiles

or tapes) to Docket Coordinator,

Headquarters; U.S. EPA; CERCLA

Docket Office; 1235 Jefferson Davis

Highway; Crystal Gateway #1, First

Floor; Arlington, VA 22202.

By E-Mail: Comments in ASCII format

only may be mailed directly to SUPERFUND.DOCKET@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV.

E-mailed comments must be followed

up by an original and three copies sent

by mail or Federal Express.

If you wish to view documents

themselves, requests for appointments

or copies of the background information

from the public docket should be

directed to:

Docket Coordinator, Headquarters,

U.S. EPA CERCLA Docket Office (Mail

Code 5201G); Crystal Gateway #1, 1st

Floor; 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway;

Arlington, VA 22202. Phone: (703) 603–

9232; Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Monday through Friday excluding

Federal holidays. (Please note this is the

viewing address only. Do not mail

documents to this address.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carolyn Douglas, NPL Coordinator, U.S.

EPA Region 9, (415) 744–2343.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

II. Contents of This Proposed Rule

III. Executive Order 12866

IV. Unfunded Mandates

V. Effect on Small Businesses

I. Introduction

The Palos Verdes Shelf area that is

subject to this rulemaking is an

extremely important commercial and

recreational fishing area and an area of

high marine productivity that has

become highly contaminated with