Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 38753

provided vessels assigned to patrol the

event.

(1) No spectators shall anchor, block,

loiter in, or impede the through transit

of participants or official patrol vessels

in the regulated area during effective

dates and times, unless cleared for such

entry by or through an official patrol

vessel.

(2) When hailed and/or signaled by an

official patrol vessel, a spectator shall

come to an immediate stop. Vessels

shall comply with all directions given;

failure to do so may result in a citation.

(3) The Patrol Commander is

empowered to control the movement of

all vessels in the regulated area. The

Patrol Commander may terminate the

event at any time it is deemed necessary

for the protections of life and/or

property and can be reached on VHF–

FM Channel 16 by using the call sign

‘‘PATCOM’’

(c) Dates: This section is effective at

1:30 p.m. and terminates at 3:30 p.m. on

July 19, 1998.

Dated: July 7, 1998.

Fred J. Plute,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,

Eighth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 98–19180 Filed 7–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD11–98–005]

RIN 2115–AA97

Safety/Security Zone; San Francisco

Bay, San Pablo Bay, Carquinez Strait,

and Suisun Bay, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

establishing a moving safety/security

zone around vessels transporting foreign

research reactor spent nuclear materials

on the navigable waters of San

Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay,

Carquinez Strait, and Suisun Bay, CA.

The zone will extend 200 yards ahead

and astern, and 100 yards to each side

of each vessel carrying the nuclear

materials, during transit from San

Francisco Main Ship Channel buoys 7

and 8 to the Weapons Support Facility

Seal Beach Detachment Concord on

Suisun Bay. The zone will remain in

effect while the transport vessels are

moored at the Weapons Support Facility

Seal Beach Detachment Concord until

all nuclear materials cargo operations

have been completed.

The purposes of this safety/security

zone are three-fold: To ensure the safety

of the participant transport vessels and

crew, and of all other vessels and crew

in the vicinity of the participant

transport vessels; to protect the

environment against potential harm;

and to ensure the security of the

participant transport vessels, and of the

property of the United States

Government contained on those vessels,

against sabotage or other subversive

and/or disruptive acts. No persons or

vessels will be allowed to enter, operate,

or anchor within this zone, except as

may be authorized by Commander,

Eleventh Coast Guard District, or his

designated representative.

DATES: This rule becomes effective July

8, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Commander Mark Dix, U.S.

Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San

Francisco Bay, at (510) 437–3073.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On May 7, 1998, the Coast Guard

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking entitled Safety/Security

Zone: San Francisco Bay, San Pablo

Bay, Carquinez Strait, and Suisun Bay,

CA in the Federal Register (63 FR

25189–25191). The comment period

ended July 6, 1998. The Coast Guard

received no comments on the proposal.

No public hearing was requested, and

none was held.

Good cause exists for making this rule

effective prior to publication of this

Final Rule in the Federal Register

because the shipments of spent nuclear

materials necessitating promulgation of

this safety/security zone may begin

immediately. Consequently, shipments

of spent nuclear materials might occur

prior to the effective date of this

regulation if the regulation does not

become effective until 30 days after

publication of this Final Rule in the

Federal Register, creating hazardous,

unsafe navigation conditions and

serious national security concerns

during the shipments.

Background and Purpose

As part of a major national security

objective to further the objectives of the

1968 Treaty On Non-Proliferation of

Nuclear Weapons, the United States

Department of Energy (DOE) will be

receiving several shipments of foreign

research reactor spent nuclear fuel at the

Weapons Support Facility Seal Beach

Detachment Concord in Concord, CA

over a period of years. As such, DOE is

responsible for the shipments

necessitating promulgation of this

safety/security zone.

The Coast Guard is establishing a

temporary moving safety/security zone

around any/all vessels transporting

these foreign research reactor spent

nuclear materials on behalf of DOE and

the United States Government on the

navigable waters of San Francisco Bay,

San Pablo Bay, Carquinez Strait, and

Suisun Bay, CA, and at the Weapons

Support Facility Seal Beach

Detachment.

The Coast Guard does not anticipate

that maritime traffic will be significantly

impacted by the promulgation of this

safety/security zone because the transit

of the transport vessel(s) is expected to

be expeditious, and it has been

scheduled on a day and time of

historically light maritime traffic, so as

to maximize safety and minimize any

delay or inconvenience caused by the

shipment. The purposes of this safety/

security zone are three-fold: (1.)

Pursuant to 33 CFR 165.23, to ensure

the safety of the participant transport

vessel(s) and crew, and of all other

vessels and crew in the vicinity of the

participant transport vessel(s) (2.)

pursuant to 33 CFR 165.23, to protect

the environment against potential harm;

and, (3.) pursuant to 33 CFR 165.33, to

ensure the security of the participant

transport vessel(s), and of the property

of the United States Government

contained on those vessels, against

sabotage or other subversive and/or

disruptive acts. No persons or vessels

will be allowed to enter, operate, or

anchor within this moving zone during

transport vessel transit, including any

emergency mooring or anchoring,

except as may be authorized by

Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard

District, or his designated

representative.

Discussion

The safety/security zone will extend

200 yards ahead and astern, and 100

yards to each side of each vessel

carrying the nuclear materials, during

transit from San Francisco Main Ship

Channel buoys 7 and 8 to the Weapons

Support Facility Seal Beach Detachment

Concord on Suisun Bay. Once each

vessel carrying the nuclear materials is

safely moored, the zone will close to

encompass all waters within 100 yards

of each vessel and will remain so until

all nuclear materials cargo handling

operations have been completed. No

persons or vessels will be allowed to

enter, operate, or anchor within this

zone, except as may be authorized by

Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard

District, or his designated

representative.
38754 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

DOE anticipates that these shipments

will take place at irregular intervals for

an undetermined period of years. Thus,

the actual dates and times that this

safety/security zone will be activated

are not known by the Coast Guard at

this time. The Eleventh Coast Guard

District Commander will cause notice of

the activation of this safety/security

zone to be made by all appropriate

means to effect the widest publicity

among the affected segments of the

public, including publication in the

Federal Register as practicable, in

accordance with the provisions of 33

CFR 165.7(a); such means of

announcement may include, but are not

limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

The Coast Guard will also issue a

Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying

the public when nuclear materials cargo

handling has been completed.

Discussion of Comments

No comments were received.

Regulatory Evaluation

This regulation 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

regulation to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10e of the regulatory policies and

procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

Maritime traffic will not be significantly

impacted because of the expeditious

nature of the transit necessitating this

safety/security zone, and the limited

duration of the zone during transit and

cargo operations.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

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

must consider whether this regulation

will have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. ‘‘Small entities’’ may include

small businesses and not-for-profit

organizations that are not dominant in

their respective fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations less than 50,000. For the

same reasons set forth in the above

Regulatory Evaluation, the Coast Guard

certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this

regulation is not expected to have a

significant economic impact on any

substantial number of entities,

regardless of their size.

Assistance For Small Entities

In accordance with 213(a) of the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),

the Coast Guard wants to assist small

entities in understanding this regulation

so that they can better evaluate its

effects on them and participate in the

rulemaking process. If your small

business or organization is affected by

this rule and you have questions

concerning its provisions or options for

compliance, please contact LCDR Mark

Dix, Coast Guard Marine Safety Office

San Francisco Bay, at (510) 437–3073.

Collection of Information

This regulation contains no collection

of information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

regulation under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this

regulation does not have sufficient

Federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Environmental Assessment

The Coast Guard has considered the

environmental impact of this regulation

and concluded that under Chapter 2.B.2.

of Commandant Instruction M16475.1C,

Figure 2–1, paragraph (34), it will have

no significant environmental impact

and it is categorically excluded from

further environmental documentation.

A Categorical Exclusion Determination

and Environmental Analysis Checklist

is on file in the rulemaking docket, and

is available for inspection at the address

referenced in the paragraph entitled FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

A copy of DOE’s ‘‘Final

Environmental Impact Statement on a

Proposed Nuclear Weapons

Nonproliferation Policy Concerning

Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear

Fuel’’ has also been placed in the

rulemaking docket and is available for

inspection at the address shown above

in the paragraph entitled FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. To request your

own copy of this document, contact:

Charles Head, Program Manager, Office

of Spent Nuclear Fuel Management

(Em–67), U.S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20585.

Unfunded Mandates

Under the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), the

Coast Guard must consider whether this

rule will result in an annual

expenditure by state, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate of $100

million (adjusted annually for inflation).

If so, the Act requires that a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives be

considered, and that from those

alternatives, the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objective of

the rule be selected.

No state, local, or tribal government

entities will be effected by this rule, so

this rule will not result in annual or

aggregate costs of $100 million or more.

Therefore, the Coast Guard is exempt

from any further regulatory

requirements under the Unfunded

Mandates Act.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Safety measures,

Waterways.

Regulation

In consideration of the foregoing,

Subpart F of Part 165 of Title 33, Code

of Federal Regulations, is amended 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;

CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; 49

CFR 1.46.

2. A new § 165.1115 is added to read

as follows:

§ 165.1115 Safety/Security Zone: San

Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, Carquinez

Strait, and Suisun Bay, CA.

(a) Regulated area. The following area

is established as a moving safety/

security zone:

(1) All waters 200 yards ahead and

astern and 100 yards to each side of

every vessel transporting nuclear

materials on behalf of the United States

Department of Energy while such

vessels transit from a line drawn

between San Francisco Main Ship

Channel buoys 7 and 8 (LLNR 4190 &

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

37°46.5′N, 122°35.2′W, respectively)

until safely moored at the Weapons

Support Facility Seal Beach Detachment

Concord on Suisun Bay (position

38°03.3′N, 122°02.5′W). All coordinates

referenced use datum: NAD 1983.

(2) All waters within 100 yards of

such vessels described in paragraph

(a)(1) of this section while such vessels

are conducting cargo operations at the

Weapons Support Facility Seal Beach

Detachment Concord.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 38755

(b) Notification. Commander,

Eleventh Coast Guard District, will

cause notice of the activation of this

safety/security zone to be made by all

appropriate means to effect the widest

publicity among the affected segments

of the public, including publication in

the Federal Register as practicable, in

accordance with the provisions of 33

CFR 165.7(a); such means of

announcement may include, but are not

limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast

Notice to Mariners notifying the public

when nuclear materials cargo handling

has been completed.

(c) Effective Period. The safety/

security zone will be effective

commencing at the time any vessel

described in paragraph (a)(1) of this

section enters the zone described in

paragraph (a)(1) of this section and will

remain in effect until all spent nuclear

materials cargo handling operations

have been completed at Weapons

Support Facility Seal Beach Detachment

Concord.

(d) Regulations. The general

regulations governing safety and

security zones contained in both 33 CFR

165.23 in 33 CFR 165.33 apply. Entry

into, transit through, or anchoring

within this moving safety/security zone

is prohibited unless authorized by

Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard

District, or his designated

representative.

Dated: July 7, 1998.

R.D. Sirois,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

Eleventh Coast Guard District Acting.

[FR Doc. 98–19179 Filed 7–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MO 050–1050; FRL–6124–7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; State of

Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving new

Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–2.360,

‘‘Emission Restrictions for Bakeries,’’ as

a revision to the Missouri State

Implementation Plan (SIP). This rule

restricts volatile organic compound

(VOC) emissions from large commercial

bakery operations in the Kansas City

ozone maintenance area.

DATES: This rule is effective on August

19, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the: Environmental

Protection Agency, Air Planning and

Development Branch, 726 Minnesota

Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101; and

the EPA Air & Radiation Docket and

Information Center, 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joshua A. Tapp at (913) 551–7606.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean

Air Act (CAA) requires states to apply

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) to sources of VOCs in ozone

nonattainment areas to reduce such

emissions. For the Kansas City area, the

Act required RACT for sources not

covered by a control techniques

guideline emitting more than 100 tons

per year. RACT is defined as the lowest

emissions limit that a particular source

is capable of meeting by the application

of control technology that is both

reasonably available, as well as

technologically and economically

feasible.

Kansas City is currently an ozone

maintenance area. It was redesignated to

attainment on June 23, 1992, with the

assumption that all existing major

sources had RACT controls. Recently,

the Missouri Department of Natural

Resources discovered a major,

uncontrolled commercial bakery located

in Kansas City with a potential to emit

greater than 100 tons per year of VOCs.

This source sector should have been

addressed prior to redesignation.

However, this rule now addresses such

sources consistent with the EPA’s

Alternative Control Technology

Document on commercial bakery

emission controls. Specifically,

Missouri’s rule requires a minimum of

80 percent VOC destruction and

contains provisions addressing

compliance determinations and

recordkeeping. Rules such as this will

aid Kansas City in its efforts to maintain

air quality to meet the national ambient

air quality standards. For more

background information, the reader is

referred to the proposal for this

rulemaking published on August 5,

1996, at 61 FR 40591.

On September 3, 1996, the EPA

received one comment from the

American Bakers Association (ABA).

The ABA opposes the capture efficiency

language contained in subsection (4)(C)

of the rule. The ABA’s position is that

bakery ovens operate under negative

pressure and, therefore, should not be

subject to capture efficiency

requirements. The ABA further

comments that if the language

addressing capture efficiency in

subsection (4)(C) is not changed, at a

minimum the language referencing

section 20 of rule 10 CSR 10–6.030 as

a compliance method should be deleted

so that the rule is consistent with the St.

Louis bakery rule.

The EPA’s response to these

comments is that, as written, the rule is

consistent with the Clean Air Act in that

it addresses emissions from major

sources of VOCs in an ozone

maintenance area. The rule contains

enforceable limitations, the

requirements for compliance are clear,

and the methods for determining

compliance have been provided.

Therefore, because this rule meets the

minimum SIP approval criteria under

the ACT, the EPA is approving it as a

revision to the Missouri SIP.

In addition, the EPA does not have

authority to revise language contained

in a state rule. Such concerns are more

appropriately conveyed at the time that

the state holds a public hearing on such

rules. In any event, under the Missouri

rule the Director may approve an

alternative compliance method,

including a method which accounts for

operation of a source under negative

pressure, as long as such method has

been approved by the EPA. Therefore,

the rule provides the Director with the

flexibility to address the ABA’s

concerns on a case-by-case basis.

This response to comments is also

documented in an addendum to the

Technical Support Document for this

rulemaking.

I. Final Action

In this document, the EPA takes final

action to approve Missouri rule 10 CSR

10–2.360, submitted on March 13, 1996,

as a revision to the Missouri SIP.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors, and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13045

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

The final rule is not subject to

Executive Order 13045, entitled

‘‘Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks,’’ because it is not an