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

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 Site Specific 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,


### 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


### 67625 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

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)