105454 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

small entities that question or complain 

about this rule or any policy or action 

of the Coast Guard. 

C. Collection of Information 

This rule will not call for a new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 

Governments 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the National Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. We have 

analyzed this rule under that Order and 

have determined that it is consistent 

with the fundamental federalism 

principles and preemption requirements 

described in Executive Order 13132. 

Also, this rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does 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. 

E. 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 rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated 

implementing instructions, and 

Environmental Planning COMDTINST 

5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

determined 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 rule involves a safety 

zone lasting only 1.5 hours that will 

prohibit entry within 125 feet of the 

Main Street Bridge, over the Erie Canal, 

in North Tonawanda, NY. It is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph L60(a) of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. A 

Record of Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket. For instructions 

on locating the docket, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

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. 

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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 

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

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T24–1075 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T24–1075 Safety Zone; Erie Canal, 

North Tonawanda, NY. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All waters of the Erie Canal, 

from surface to bottom, encompassed 

withing a circular zone in a 125-foot 

radius from a point at 43°01′17.96′′ N, 

78°52′41.04′′ W. All geographic 

coordinates are North American Datum 

of 1983 (NAD 1983). 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, designated representative 

means a Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, including a Coast Guard 

coxswain, petty officer, or other officer 

operating a Coast Guard vessel and a 

Federal, State, and local officer 

designated by or assisting the Captain of 

the Port, Sector Eastern Great Lakes 

(COTP) in the enforcement of the safety 

zone. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general 

safety zone regulations in subpart C of 

this part, you may not enter the safety 

zone described in paragraph (a) of this 

section unless authorized by the COTP 

or the COTP’s designated representative. 

(2) To seek permission to enter, 

contact the COTP or the COTP’s 

representative by phone at (716) 843– 

9560. Those in the safety zone must 

comply with all lawful orders or 

directions given to them by the COTP or 

the COTP’s designated representative. 

(d) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 11:45 p.m. on 

December 31, 2024 through 1:15 a.m. 

January 1 2025. 

Dated: December 18, 2024. 

M.I. Kuperman, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the 

Port Sector Eastern Great Lakes. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30753 Filed 12–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2022–0058] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone, Port of Miami, Florida 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the existing Port of Miami fixed security 

zone regulation that encompasses 

certain navigable waters of the Miami 

Main Channel in Miami, FL. The change 

is designed to extend the existing fixed 

security zone eastward along the Miami 

Main Channel. The extension was 

established to include the new cruise 

ship terminal at the Port of Miami 

added in December 2024. This action 

extends existing fixed security zone 

approximately 840 yards eastward along 

the Miami Main Channel. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

27, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2022– 

0058 in the search box and click 

‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type 

column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related 

Material.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Lieutenant Guerschom Etienne, 

Waterways Management Division Chief, 

U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (305) 535– 

4307, email Guerschom.Etienne@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 105455 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

ICW Intercoastal Waterway 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

The Port of Miami is undergoing an 

expansion project that will create new 

cruise ship terminals at the eastern end 

of the Port and outside the existing 

security zone. The Captain of the Port 

(COTP) Miami identified a need to 

amend the existing security zone to 

address the Port of Miami’s cruise ship 

terminal expansion. In response, on 

August 16, 2022, the Coast Guard 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Security 

Zone; Port of Miami’’ (87 FR 50278). 

There we stated why we issued the 

NPRM and invited comments on our 

proposed regulatory action related to 

this security zone. During the comment 

period that ended September 15, 2022, 

we received no comments. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Delaying the effective date of 

this rule would be impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest. This rule 

must be immediately effective to guard 

against potential security concerns 

associated with the new cruise ship 

terminal at the Port of Miami which was 

added in December 2024. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule 

under the authority in 46 U.S.C. 70051 

and 70124. The Captain of the Port 

Miami (COTP) has determined it is 

necessary to extend the existing Port of 

Miami fixed security zone eastward 

approximately 840 yards to cover all 

navigable waters in the Main Ship 

Channel from approximately Watson 

Island to just west of the Biscayne Bay 

Pilots Station. 

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, 

and the Rule 

As noted above, we received no 

comments on our NPRM published 

August 16, 2022. There are no changes 

in the regulatory text of this rule from 

the proposed rule in the NPRM. 

This rule amends an established fixed 

security zone that encompasses all 

waters in the Main Ship Channel from 

approximately Star Island to just west of 

the Biscayne Bay Pilots Station. The 

fixed security zone is in effect when two 

or more passenger vessels, vessels 

carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or 

vessels carrying LHG, enter or moor 

within this zone. 

When the security zone is in effect, 

persons and vessels shall not enter or 

transit the security zone along the 

Miami Main Channel unless authorized 

by Captain of the Port of Miami or a 

designated representative. Persons and 

vessels may transit the Miami Main 

Channel when only one passenger 

vessel, one vessel carrying cargoes of 

particular hazard or one vessel carrying 

LHG is berthed. The public will be able 

to reach law enforcement vessels via 

VHF–FM marine channel 16. 

V. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on a number of these statutes and 

Executive orders, and we discuss First 

Amendment rights of protestors. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess the costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

This rule has not been designated a 

‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

this rule has not been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the limited nature of the 

security zone, specifically: persons and 

vessels may transit the Miami Main 

Channel when less than two passenger 

vessel is berthed, less than two vessel 

carrying cargoes of hazard, or vessel 

carrying LHG is berthed in the channel. 

Additionally, persons and vessels may 

operate within the security zone when 

authorized by Captain of the Port of 

Miami or a designated representative. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 

requires Federal agencies to consider 

the potential impact of regulations on 

small entities during rulemaking. The 

term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

that are independently owned and 

operated and are not dominant in their 

fields, and governmental jurisdictions 

with populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 

605(b) that this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this rule. If the rule 

would affect your small business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The 

Coast Guard will not retaliate against 

small entities that question or complain 

about this rule or any policy or action 

of the Coast Guard. 

C. Collection of Information 

This rule would not call for a new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 

Governments 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the National Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. We have 

analyzed this rule under that Order and 

have determined that it is consistent 

with the fundamental federalism 

principles and preemption requirements 

described in Executive Order 13132. 

Also, this 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. 

E. 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
105456 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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 rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated 

implementing instructions, and 

Environmental Planning COMDTINST 

5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (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 rule involves 

increasing the size of an existing 

security zone along the Miami Main 

Channel. Such actions are categorically 

excluded from further review under 

paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 

1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– 

001–01, Rev. 1. A Record of 

Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket. For instructions 

on locating the docket, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

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. 

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 amending 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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. 

■ 2. In § 165.760, revise paragraph (b)(2) 

to read as follows: 

§ 165.760 Security Zones; Port of Palm 

Beach, Port Everglades, and Port of Miami, 

Florida. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Fixed security zone in Port of 

Miami, Florida. A fixed security zone 

encompassing all navigable waters 

within the Miami Main Channel 

between Star Island to just west of the 

Biscayne Bay Pilots Station. The 

security zone is formed by an imaginary 

line starting at the northwest corner in 

position 25°46.33′ N, 080°09.16′ W; 

thence in an easterly direction to the 

northeast corner in position 25°46.17′ N, 

080°08.77′ W; thence in a southerly 

direction to the southeast corner in 

position 25°46.04′ N, 080°08.75′ W; 

thence in a northwesterly direction to 

the southwest corner in position 

25°46.23′ N, 080°09.16′ W, thence in a 

northerly direction back to the 

northwest corner. 

(i) When the security zone is in effect, 

persons and vessels shall not enter or 

transit the security zone along the 

Miami Main Channel unless authorized 

by Captain of the Port of Miami or a 

designated representative. 

(ii) Persons and vessels may transit 

the Miami Main Channel when only one 

passenger vessel is berthed in the 

channel, one vessel carrying cargoes of 

hazard is berthed in the channel, or one 

vessel carrying LHG is berthed in the 

channel. 

(iii) Law enforcement vessels can be 

contacted on VHF Marine Band Radio, 

Channel 16 (156.8 MHz). 

* * * * * 

C.R. Cederholm, 

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

Port Miami. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30598 Filed 12–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2024–0372; FRL–12293– 

02–R10] 

Air Plan Approval; WA; Excess 

Emissions, Startup, Shutdown, and 

Malfunction Revisions, Energy Facility 

Site Evaluation Council 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving Washington 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions to the Energy Facility Site 

Evaluation Council (EFSEC) air quality 

regulations submitted by the State of 

Washington, through the Department of 

Ecology (Ecology) on June 15, 2023. The 

revisions were submitted in response to 

the EPA’s June 12, 2015 ‘‘SIP call’’ in 

which the EPA found substantially 

inadequate a Washington SIP provision 

providing affirmative defenses that 

operate to limit the jurisdiction of the 

Federal court in an enforcement action 

related to excess emissions during 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

(SSM) events. The EPA’s approval of the 

SIP revisions includes removal of the 

substantially inadequate provision 

which corrects the EFSEC deficiency 

identified in the 2015 SSM SIP call and 

the EPA’s January 2022 finding of 

failure to submit. Washington withdrew 

some portions of the revisions 

submitted that were not identified in the 

2015 SSM SIP call and therefore the 

EPA is not approving those withdrawn 

portions. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

January 27, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R10–OAR–2024–0372. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., Confidential Business 

Information or other information the 

disclosure of which 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 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 

the person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Randall Ruddick, EPA Region 10, 1200 

Sixth Avenue (Suite 155), Seattle, WA 

98101, (206) 553–1999; or email 

ruddick.randall@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ or ‘‘our,’’ is used, it refers to the 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Public Comment and the EPA’s Response 

III. Final Action 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 22, 2024 (89 FR 84322), 

the EPA proposed to approve State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions to 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES