Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 67623 

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 amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. From November 3, 2010, through 

April 5, 2011, temporarily suspend 

§ 165.1183 and temporarily add 

§ 165.T11–362 to read as follows: 

§ 165.T11–362 Temporary Security Zones; 

San Francisco Bay, Delta Ports, Monterey 

Bay and Humboldt Bay, CA. 

(a) Location. (1) San Francisco Bay. 

The limits of these security zones 

include all waters in San Francisco Bay, 

extending from the surface to the sea 

floor, within 500 yards ahead, astern 

and extending 500 yards along either 

side of any cruise ship, tanker or HIV 

that is underway, anchored, or moored 

within the San Francisco Bay and Delta 

port areas shoreward of the line drawn 

between San Francisco Main Ship 

Channel Buoys 7 and 8 (LLNR 4190 and 

4195, positions 37°46.9′ N, 122°35.4′ W 

and 37°46.5′ N, 122°35.2′ W, 

respectively). 

(2) Monterey Bay. In Monterey Bay, 

the limits of the security zones include 

all waters, extending from the surface to 

the sea floor, within 500 yards ahead, 

astern and extending 500 yards along 

either side of any cruise ship, tanker or 

HIV that is underway, anchored or 

moored within Monterey Bay area 

shoreward of a line drawn between 

Santa Cruz Light (LLNR 305) to the 

north in position 36°57.10′ N, 

122°01.60′ W and Cypress Point, 

Monterey to the south in position 

36°34.90′ N, 121°58.70′ W. 

(3) Humboldt Bay. In Humboldt Bay 

the limits of the security zones apply to 

all waters, extending from the surface to 

the sea floor, within 500 yards ahead, 

astern and extending 500 yards along 

either side of any cruise ship, tanker or 

HIV that is underway, anchored, or 

moored within Humboldt Bay area 

shoreward of a 4 nautical mile radius 

line drawn to the west of the Humboldt 

Bay Entrance Lighted Whistle Buoy HB 

(LLNR 8230), in position 40°46.25′ N, 

124°16.13′ W. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section— 

Cruise ship means any vessel over 100 

gross register tons, carrying more than 

12 passengers for hire which makes 

voyages lasting more than 24 hours, of 

which any part is on the high seas. 

Passengers from cruise ships are 

embarked or disembarked in the U.S. or 

its territories. Cruise ships do not 

include ferries that hold Coast Guard 

Certificates of Inspection endorsed for 

‘‘Lakes, Bays and Sounds’’ that transit 

international waters for only short 

periods of time on frequent schedules. 

Designated representative means any 

commissioned, warrant, and petty 

officers of the Coast Guard on board 

Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, 

and local, State and Federal law 

enforcement vessels who have been 

authorized to act on the behalf of the 

Captain of the Port. 

High Interest Vessel or HIV means any 

vessel deemed by the Captain of the 

Port, or higher authority, as a vessel 

requiring protection based upon risk 

assessment analysis of the vessel and is 

therefore escorted by a Coast Guard or 

other law enforcement vessel with an 

embarked Coast Guard commissioned, 

warrant, or petty officer. 

Tanker means any self-propelled tank 

vessel constructed or adapted primarily 

to carry oil or hazardous materials in 

bulk in the cargo spaces. 

(c) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from October 5, 2010, 

through April 5, 2011. If the need to 

enforce the security zones in paragraph 

(a) of this section terminates before this 

rule expires, the Captain of the Port will 

cease enforcement of the security zones 

and will announce that fact via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within the 

security zones described in paragraph 

(a) of this section is prohibited unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port of 

San Francisco or her designated 

representative. 

(2) Mariners requesting permission to 

transit through the security zone may 

request authorization to do so from the 

Patrol Commander (PATCOM), a 

designated representative. The 

PATCOM may be contacted on VHF–FM 

Channel 16. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the 

designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel shall proceed as 

directed. 

(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other Federal, State, or local 

agencies. 

Dated: October 4, 2010. 

C.L. Stowe, 

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

Port San Francisco. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27704 Filed 11–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0665; FRL–9212–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; 

Volatile Organic Compound SiteSpecific State Implementation Plan for 

Abbott Laboratories 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving into the 

Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

amendments to Illinois’ manufacturing 

rules. On July 17, 2009, the Illinois 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(Illinois EPA) submitted amendments to 

its pharmaceutical manufacturing rules 

for approval into its SIP. These 

amendments consist of a site-specific 

rulemaking for certain of Abbott 

Laboratories’ (Abbott) tunnel dryers and 

fluid bed dryers. This site-specific rule 

revision is approvable because it lowers 

the allowable emissions from these 

dryers and it is consistent with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA 

regulations. EPA proposed these rules 

for approval on July 14, 2010, and 

received no comments. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

December 3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Nos. EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0665. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
67624 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Steven Rosenthal, 

Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886– 

6052 before visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental 

Engineer, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6052. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What public comments were received on 

the proposed approval and what is EPA’s 

response? 

II. What action is EPA taking today and what 

is the purpose of this action? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

I. What public comments were received 

on the proposed approval and what is 

EPA’s response? 

EPA’s July 14, 2010, proposed action 

at 75 FR 40760 provided a 30-day public 

comment period. We did not receive 

any comments on the proposed action. 

II. What action is EPA taking today and 

what is the purpose of this action? 

EPA is approving revisions to Illinois’ 

pharmaceutical manufacturing rule for 

three of Abbott’s fluid bed dryers and 

four of its tunnel dryers. Specifically, 

EPA is approving amendments to 35 Ill. 

Adm. Code 218.480 adopted August 21, 

2008, and effective August 26, 2008. 

Each of the three fluid bed dryers 

previously had a five tons volatile 

organic compound (VOC) per year 

applicability cutoff and each of the four 

tunnel dryers had a 7.5 tons VOC per 

year applicability cutoff. This rule 

revision replaces these individual 

cutoffs with an overall combined cutoff 

for all seven dryers of 20.6 tons VOC per 

year. 

In EPA’s July 14, 2010, proposal (75 

FR 40760), we present a detailed legal 

and technical analysis of the State’s 

submission. The reader is referred to 

that notice for additional background on 

the submission and the bases for EPA’s 

approval. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by January 3, 2011. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: October 1, 2010. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart O—Illinois 

■ 2. Section 52.720 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(186), to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.720 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(186) On July 17, 2009, Illinois 

submitted amendments to its 

pharmaceutical manufacturing rules for 

approval into its state implementation 

plan. These amendments consist of a 

site-specific rulemaking for certain of 

Abbott Laboratories’ (Abbott) tunnel 

dryers and fluid bed dryers. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Illinois Administrative Code, Title 

35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle 

B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution 

Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 67625 

Standards and Limitations for 

Stationary Sources, Part 218: Organic 

Material Emission Standards and 

Limitations for the Chicago Area, 

Subpart T: Pharmaceutical 

Manufacturing, Section: 218.480 

Applicability, effective August 26, 2008. 

(ii) Additional material. 

(A) Letter from Laurel L. Kroack, 

Illinois Environmental Protection 

Agency, to Cheryl Newton, EPA, dated 

May 12, 2010, with attachments, that 

establishes how compliance with 

Abbott’s 20.6 tons VOC per year limit is 

determined as well as Abbott’s 

recordkeeping requirements. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27636 Filed 11–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0814; FRL–9219–5] 

Delegation of National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Source Categories; State of 

Nevada; Clark County Department of 

Air Quality and Environmental 

Management 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to delegate the authority to 

implement and enforce specific national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants (NESHAP) to Clark County, 

Nevada. The preamble outlines the 

process that Clark County will use to 

receive delegation of any future 

NESHAP, and identifies the NESHAP 

categories to be delegated by today’s 

action. EPA has reviewed Clark 

County’s request for delegation and has 

found that this request satisfies all of the 

requirements necessary to qualify for 

approval. Thus, EPA is hereby granting 

Clark County the authority to 

implement and enforce the unchanged 

NESHAP categories listed in this rule. 

DATES: This rule is effective on January 

3, 2011 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

December 3, 2010. If we receive such 

comments, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register to 

notify the public that this direct final 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2010–0814, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send 

e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae 

Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4124, 

wang.mae@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Delegation of NESHAP 

B. Clark County Delegation Request 

II. EPA Action 

A. Delegation to Clark County for Specific 

Standards 

B. Clark County’s Delegation Mechanism 

for Future Standards 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. Delegation of NESHAP 

Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act, as 

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), 

authorizes EPA to delegate to State or 

local air pollution control agencies the 

authority to implement and enforce the 

standards set out in 40 CFR part 63, 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source 

Categories. On November 26, 1993, EPA 

promulgated regulations, codified at 40 

CFR part 63, Subpart E (hereinafter 

referred to as ‘‘Subpart E’’), establishing 

procedures for EPA’s approval of state 

rules or programs under section 112(l) 

(see 58 FR 62262). Subpart E was later 

amended on September 14, 2000 (see 65 

FR 55810). 

Any request for approval under CAA 

section 112(l) must meet the approval 

criteria in 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR part 63, 

Subpart E. To streamline the approval 

process for future applications, a State 

or local agency may submit a one-time 

demonstration that it has adequate 

authorities and resources to implement 

and enforce any CAA section 112 

standards. If such demonstration is 

approved, then the State or local agency 

would no longer need to resubmit a 

demonstration of these same authorities 

and resources for every subsequent 

request for delegation of CAA section 

112 standards. However, EPA maintains 

the authority to withdraw its approval if 

the State does not adequately 

implement or enforce an approved rule 

or program. 

B. Clark County Delegation Request 

On July 13, 1995, EPA approved Clark 

County’s program for accepting 

delegation of CAA section 112 standards 

that are unchanged from the Federal 

standards as promulgated (see 60 FR 

36070). The approved program reflects 

an adequate demonstration by Clark 

County of general resources and 

authorities to implement and enforce 

CAA section 112 standards. However, 

formal delegation for an individual 

standard does not occur until Clark 

County obtains the necessary regulatory 

authority to implement and enforce that 

particular standard, and EPA approves 

Clark County’s formal delegation 

request for that standard. 

Clark County informed EPA that it 

intends to obtain the regulatory 

authority necessary to accept delegation 

of CAA section 112 standards by 

incorporating the standards into local 

codes of regulation. The details of this 

delegation mechanism are set forth in a 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES