Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Proposed Rules 10497

vessels. The Coast Guard would assign

a patrol and issue a Broadcast Notice to

Mariners to advise mariners of

established safety zone in advance of

the naval aircraft carrier’s arrival and

departure. This proposed safety zone

would be effective only during the time

indicated in the Broadcast Notice to

Mariners.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposal is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866 and does not

require an assessment of potential costs

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

order. It has been exempted from review

by the Office of Management and

Budget under that order. It is not

significant under the regulatory policies

and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;

February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard

expects the economic impact of this

proposal to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10e of the regulatory policies and

procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This

conclusion is based on the limited

duration of the moving safety zone, the

extensive advisories that would be made

to the affected maritime community and

the minimal restrictions the safety zone

regulations would place on vessel

traffic. These regulations would be

effective for a total of approximately 11⁄2

hours for each inbound or outbound

transit by a total of naval aircraft carrier.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this proposal

will have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. ‘‘Small entities’’ include

independently owned and operated

small businesses that are not dominant

in their field and that otherwise qualify

as ‘‘small business concerns’’ under

Section 3 of the Small Business Act (15

U.S.C. 632).

The Coast Guard certifies under 5

U.S.C. 605 (b) that this proposal, if

adopted, would not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. These

proposed regulations would have a

limited effect on small entities, because

of the limited duration of the proposed

regulations, the extensive advisories

that would be made to the affected

maritime community and the minimal

restrictions the safety zone regulations

would place on vessel traffic.

Collection of Information

These proposed regulations contain

no collection-of-information

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Federalism

This proposal has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and it has been determined that

the proposed rulemaking does not have

sufficient Federalism implication to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

Environmental Assessment

The Coast Guard has considered the

environmental impact of this proposal

and has concluded that under paragraph

2.B.2.e(34)(b) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1B (as revised by 59

FR 38654, July 29 1994), this proposal

is categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. Pursuant

to 2.B.2.e(34)(g) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1B, a Categorical

Exclusion Determination and

Environmental Analysis Checklist has

been created. Both the Categorical

Exclusion Determination and

Environmental Analysis Checklist are

available in the docket for inspection or

copying where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reports and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

Proposed Regulations

For the reasons stated in the

Preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 165

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;

33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;

49 CFR 1.46.

2. A new section § 165.711 is added

to read as follows:

§ 165.711 Safety Zone; Port Everglades,

Fort Lauderdale, Fl.

(a) Regulated Area. A moving safety

zone is established in the following

area:

(1) Around naval aircraft carriers

entering Port Everglades in an area 700

yards forward, 500 yards astern and 350

yards on either side of the vessel

beginning at the Port Everglades Sea

Buoy, in approximate position

26°¥05.5′N, 80°¥04.8′W, and

continuing until the vessel is safely

moored, in approximate position

26°¥04.9′N, 80°¥06.9′W. All

coordinates referenced use datum: NAD

83.

(2) Around naval aircraft carriers

departing Port Everglades in an area 700

yards forward, 500 yards astern and 350

yards on either side beginning at the

pier, in approximate position

26°¥04.9′N, 80°¥06.9′W, and

continuing until the stern passes the

Port Everglades Sea Buoy, in

approximate position 26°¥05.5′N,

80°¥04.8′W. All coordinates referenced

use datum: NAD 83.

(b) Regulations. (1) No person or

vessel may enter, transit, or remain in

the safety zone unless authorized by the

Captain of the Port, Miami, Florida, or

a Coast Guard commissioned, warrant,

or petty officer designated by him.

(2) Vessels encountering emergencies

which require transit through the

moving safety zone should contact the

Coast Guard patrol craft on VHF

Channel 16. In the event of an

emergency, the Coast Guard patrol craft

may authorize a vessel to transit through

the safety zone with a Coast Guard

designated escort.

(3) All persons and vessels shall

comply with the instructions of onscene patrol personnel. On-scene patrol

personnel include Coast Guard

commissioned, warrant, or petty

officers. Coast Guard Auxiliary and

local or state officials may be present to

inform vessel operators of this

regulation and other applicable laws.

Dated: December 6, 1996.

D.F. Miller,

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

Port , Miami, FL.

[FR Doc. 97–5718 Filed 3–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[PA 098–4032; FRL–5700–1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; 15 Percent Rate-ofProgress Plan and 1990 VOC Emission

Inventory for the Pittsburgh Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking,

correction.

SUMMARY: This action corrects and

clarifies the proposed action which was

published on Wednesday, January 22,

1997 (62 FR 3254–3260). This action

pertains to the State Implementation
10498 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Plan (SIP) revision submitted by

Pennsylvania on March 22, 1996

consisting of the 15% Rate-of-Progress

Plan and the 1990 Volatile Organic

Compound 1990 Emission Inventory

(the 15% Plan SIP) for the PittsburghBeaver Valley ozone nonattainment

area.

DATES: March 7, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marcia L. Spink, (215)566–2104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 22, 1997 (62 FR 3254–

3260), EPA published a notice of

proposed rulemaking proposing

conditional approval of the 15% Plan

SIP revision submitted by the

Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection (PADEP) on

March 22, 1996 consisting of the 15%

Plan and 1990 Volatile Organic

Compound (VOC) Emission Inventory

for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley ozone

nonattainment area (the Pittsburgh

area).

Need for Correction/Clarification

As published, the January 22, 1997

proposal notice states that EPA is

proposing conditional approval of the

15% Plan SIP revision for the Pittsburgh

area. In fact, the notice should read that

EPA is proposing conditional interim

approval of this SIP revision. The error

is typographical in nature; the notice

clearly indicates and fully explains that

this 15% Plan SIP relies upon

reductions from the enhanced

Inspection & Maintenance (I/M) SIP

submitted by Pennsylvania. Therefore,

as indicated in the January 22, 1997

proposal notice, approval of the 15%

Plan SIP for the Pittsburgh area approval

is dependent upon approval of

Pennsylvania’s enhanced I/M SIP. On

October 3, 1996 (61 FR 51638), EPA

proposed conditional interim approval

of Pennsylvania’s enhanced I/M SIP. On

January 28, 1997 (62 FR 4019), EPA

promulgated final conditional interim

approval of Pennsylvania’s enhanced I/

M SIP. Given that full final approval of

the 15% Plan SIP is dependent and

conditioned upon full final approval of

enhanced I/M SIP, EPA must keep its

actions on both SIP revisions consistent.

Correction/Clarification of Publication

Accordingly, the notice of proposed

rulemaking published on January 22,

1997 (62 FR 3254–3260, FR Doc. 97–

1493), is being corrected throughout its

text to read that EPA is proposing

conditional interim approval of the 15%

Plan SIP for the Pittsburgh area.

Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

and, is therefore not subject to review by

the Office of Management and Budget.

In addition, this action does not impose

any enforceable duty or contain any

unfunded mandate as described in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Pub. L. 104–4), or require prior

consultation with State officials as

specified by Executive Order 12875 (58

FR 58093, October 28, 1993), or involve

special consideration of environmental

justice related issues as required by

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,

February 16, 1994).

EPA does not believe that it is

necessary to subject this corrective

action pertaining to the 15% Plan SIP

for the Pittsburgh area to notice-andcomment requirements. Under the

Administrative Procedure Act or any

other statute, it is not subject to the

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: February 25, 1997.

Stanley L. Laskowski,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 97–5621 Filed 3–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[OR59–7274b, OR60–7275b; FRL–5696–7]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve

the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the State of

Oregon for the purpose of approving

two source-specific Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RACT)

volatile organic compound (VOC)

emissions standards: Cascade General,

Inc., a ship repair yard in Portland,

Oregon; and, White Consolidated, Inc.

(doing business as Schrock Cabinet Co.)

a wood cabinet manufacturing facility in

Hillsboro, Oregon. These SIP revisions

are required by the Clean Air Act (CAA)

and were submitted by the State. In the

Final Rules Section of this Federal

Register, the EPA is approving the

State’s SIP revisions as a direct final

rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

revision amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. A detailed rationale

for the approval is set forth in the direct

final rule. If no adverse comments are

received in response to this proposed

rule, no further activity is contemplated

in relation to this rule. If the 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. The EPA

will not institute a second comment

period on this action.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received in writing by April 7,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to Montel Livingston,

Environmental Protection Specialist

(OAQ–107), Office of Air Quality, at the

EPA Regional Office listed below.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

proposed rule are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 10, Office of Air Quality, 1200

6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.

Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue,

Portland, OR 97204–1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Denise Baker, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ–107), EPA, 1200 6th Avenue,

Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553–8087.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the

information provided in the Direct Final

action which is located in the Rules

Section of this Federal Register.

Dated: February 21, 1997.

Jane S. Moore,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–5643 Filed 3–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[OR65–7280; FRL–5700–8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

a revision to the State of Oregon