### 60962 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 194 / Friday, October 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules

**INFORMATION CONTACT** section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 8. Taking of Private Property

This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. 9. Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. 10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. 12. Energy Effects

This proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the establishment of a safety zone. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under **ADDRESSES** . We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 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. 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, 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Add § 165.1339 to read as follows:

**§ 165.1339 Safety Zone; Coast Guard Exercise Area, Hood Canal, Washington.** 

(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters encompassed within 500 yards of any vessel that is involved in a Coast Guard training exercise while such vessel is transiting Hood Canal, WA between Foul Weather Bluff and the entrance to Dabob Bay. Vessels involved will be various sizes and can be identified as those flying the Coast Guard Ensign.

(b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart C, no person may enter or remain in the safety zone created in this rule unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or a Designated Representative. See 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart C, for additional information and requirements. Vessel operators wishing to enter the zone during the enforcement period must request permission for entry by contacting the on-scene patrol commander on VHF channel 13 or 16, or the Sector Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center at (206) 217–6001.

(c) Enforcement Period. The safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section will be enforced by the Captain of the Port only upon notice. Notice of the enforcement by the Captain of the Port will be provided by all appropriate means, in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means will include publication in the Federal Register, and may also include Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, or both.

Dated: September 24, 2012. S.J. Ferguson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.

[FR Doc. 2012–24607 Filed 10–4–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 2**

**[FRL–9733–8]**

**Clean Water Act; Contractor Access to Confidential Business Information** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice of intended transfer of confidential business information to contractor, subcontractors, and consultants.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Office of Water’s (OW’s) Office of Science and Technology (OST) has authorized Eastern Research Group (ERG), its subcontractors, and its consultants to access confidential business information (CBI) collected from numerous industries. Transfer of this information is necessary for ERG to assist the Office of Water in the preparation of effluent guidelines and standards for certain industries.

We have determined that the contractors listed below require access


### 60963 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 194 / Friday, October 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules

to CBI submitted to us under Section 308 of the Clean Water Act and in connection with various programs and are providing notice and an opportunity to comment. The nature of the work and its necessity, and the type of access granted, is described below for each contractor. Information has been provided to this contractor under a previous agreement since September 26,

2002.

Transfer of the information to ERG will allow the contractor and subcontractors to support EPA in the planning, development, and review of effluent limitations guidelines and standards under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The information being transferred was or will be collected under the authority of section 308 of the CWA. Some information being transferred from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry was collected under the additional authorities of section 114 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and section 3007 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Interested persons may submit comments on this intended transfer of information to the address noted below.

**DATES :**  Comments on the transfer of data are due October 15, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments may be sent to Mr. M. Ahmar Siddiqui, Document Control Officer, Engineering and Analysis Division (4303T), Room 6231S EPA West, U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Mr. M. Ahmar Siddiqui, Document Control Officer, at (202) 566–1044, or via email

at siddiqui.ahmar@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In accordance with 40 CFR 2.302(h), EPA has transferred CBI to various contractors and subcontractors over the history of the effluent guidelines program. EPA determined that this transfer was necessary to enable the contractors and subcontractors to perform their work in supporting EPA in planning, developing, and reviewing effluent guidelines and standards for certain industries.

Today, EPA is giving notice that it has entered into a contract with ERG, contract number EP–C–12–021, located in Chantilly, Virginia. The purpose of this contract is to secure technical and engineering analysis support for EPA in its development, review,implementation, and defense of waterrelated initiatives for a variety of industries. To obtain assistance in responding to this contract, ERG has entered into contracts with the following subcontractors: Advanced Environmental Management Group, LLC (AEM, located in Plymouth, Michigan), Aqua Terra Consultants (located in Mountain View, California), Avanti Corporation (located in Alexandria, Virginia), Great Lakes Environmental Center (GLEC, located in Traverse City, Michigan), and Mabbett & Associates (located in Bedford, Massachusetts), PG Environmental, LLC (located in Herndon, Virginia), Bill Kennedy, Orion Engineering (located in Charlotte, NC), John H. Martin, Hall Associates (located in Georgetown, DE), and John P. Martin, JPMartin Energy Strategy, LLC (located in Saratoga Springs, New York).

All EPA contractor, subcontractor, and consultant personnel are bound by the requirements and sanctions contained in their contracts with EPA and in EPA’s confidentiality regulations found at 40 CFR part 2, Subpart B. ERG will adhere to EPA-approved security plans which describe procedures to protect CBI. ERG will apply the procedures in these plans to CBI previously gathered by EPA and to CBI that may be gathered in the future. The security plans specify that contractorpersonnel are required to sign nondisclosure agreements and are briefed on appropriate security procedures before they are permitted access to CBI. No person is automatically granted access to CBI: A need to know must exist.

The information that will be transferred to ERG consists of information previously collected by EPA to support the development and review of effluent limitations guidelines and standards under the CWA. In particular, information, including CBI, collected for the planning, development, and review of effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the following industries may be transferred: Airport deicing; aquaculture; centralized waste treatment; coal bed methane; concentrated animal feeding operations; coal mining; construction and development; drinking water treatment; industrial container and drum cleaning; industrial laundries; industrial waste combustors; iron and steel manufacturing; landfills; meat and poultry products; metal finishing; metal products and machinery; nonferrous metals manufacturing; oil and gas extraction (including coalbed methane); ore mining and dressing; organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers; pesticide chemicals; petroleum refining; pharmaceutical manufacturing; pulp, paper, and paperboard manufacturing; shale gas extraction; steam electric power generation; textile mills; timber products processing; tobacco; and transportation equipment cleaning. EPA also intends to transfer to ERG all information listed in this notice, of the type described above (including CBI) that may be collected in the future under the authority of section 308 of the CWA or voluntarily submitted (e.g., in comments in response to a Federal Register notice), as is necessary to enable ERG to carry out the work required by its contract to support EPA’s effluent guidelines planning process and the development of effluent limitations guidelines and standards.

Dated: September 18, 2012. Jeffrey L. Lape, Acting Director, Office of Science and Technology.

[FR Doc. 2012–23519 Filed 10–4–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 271**

**[EPA–R04–RCRA–2012–0124; FRL–9735–1]**

**Tennessee: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management**  **Program Revisions**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  Tennessee has applied to EPA for final authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA proposes to grant final authorization to Tennessee. In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this Federal Register, EPA is authorizing the changes by an immediate final rule. EPA did not issue a proposed rule prior to the immediate final rule because we believe this action is not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose it. EPA has explained the reasons for this authorization in the preamble to the immediate final rule. Unless EPA receives written comments which oppose this authorization during the comment period, the immediate final rule will become effective on the date it establishes, and we will not take further action on this proposal. If EPA receives comments that oppose this action, we will withdraw the immediate final rule and it will not take effect. EPA will then respond to public comments in a later final rule based on this proposal. You may not have another opportunity for comment. If you want to comment on this action, you must do so at this time.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before November 5, 2012.