This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

26675 

Vol. 87, No. 87 

Thursday, May 5, 2022 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2020–0458] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Apra Outer Harbor, Naval 

Base Guam 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a recurring safety zone for 

certain waters of Apra Outer Harbor. 

This action is necessary to provide for 

the safety of life on these navigable 

waters near Apra Harbor, Guam, during 

fireworks displays. This rulemaking 

prohibits persons and vessels from 

entering the safety zone unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

Guam (COTP) or a designated 

representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective June 6, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2020– 

0458 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 Chief Petty Officer Robert Davis, 

Sector Guam, U.S. Coast Guard; 

telephone 671–355–4866, email 

wwmguam@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

Navy Morale, Welfare, and Recreation 

conducts a recurring fireworks display 

between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. during the 

first week of July. The fireworks are 

launched from a barge positioned in 

Apra Outer Harbor. Hazards from 

firework display include accidental 

discharge of fireworks, dangerous 

projectiles, and falling hot embers or 

other debris. In response, on March 24, 

2021, the Coast Guard published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

titled Safety Zone; Apra Outer Harbor, 

Naval Base Guam (86 FR 15625). There 

we stated why we issued the NPRM, 

and invited comments on our proposed 

regulatory action related to this 

fireworks display. During the comment 

period that ended April 23, 2021 we 

received no comments. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule 

under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 

(previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP 

Guam has determined that potential 

hazards associated with the fireworks to 

be used during displays are a safety 

concern for anyone within a 190-yard 

radius of the barge. The purpose of this 

rule is to ensure safety of vessels and 

the navigable waters in the safety zone 

before, during, and after the scheduled 

event. 

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, 

and the Rule 

As noted above, we received no 

comments on our NPRM published 

March 24, 2021. There is one change in 

the regulatory text of this rule from the 

proposed rule in the NPRM. The text 

now refers to the event as Independence 

Day instead of 4th of July. 

This rule establishes a recurring safety 

zone from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. during the 

first week of July. The safety zone will 

cover all navigable waters within 190 

yards of the fireworks barge located in 

Apra Outer Harbor. The duration of the 

zone is intended to ensure the safety of 

vessels and these navigable waters 

before, during, and after the scheduled 

6 p.m. to 9 p.m. fireworks display. No 

vessel or person will be permitted to 

enter the safety zone without obtaining 

permission from the COTP or a 

designated representative. 

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 size, location, duration, 

and time-of-year of the safety zone. 

Vessel traffic will be able to safely 

transit around this safety zone, which 

will impact a small designated area of 

the Apra Outer Harbor for three hours. 

The safety zone will impact a small 

section of the main channel for Navy 

traffic, however Navy traffic will be able 

to transit around the area safely. This is 

also the main traffic area for the 

Marianas Yacht Club in Sasa Bay, 

however vessels will be able to transit 

around the area safely. Moreover, the 

Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast 

Notice to Mariners via VHF–FM marine 

channel 16 about the zone, and the rule 

allows vessels to seek permission to 

enter the zone. 

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 received 00 comments 

from the Small Business Administration 

on this rulemaking. 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. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
26676 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

While some owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the safety 

zone may be small entities, for the 

reasons stated in section V.A above, this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on any vessel owner 

or operator. 

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 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 approximately three hours 

that would prohibit entry within 190 

yards of a fireworks barge. 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; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1., Revision No. 01.2. 

■ 2. In numerical order under the 

undesignated center heading 

‘‘Fourteenth Coast Guard District,’’ add 

§ 165.1419 to read as follows: 

§ 165.1419 Safety Zone; Apra Outer 

Harbor, Naval Base Guam. 

(a) Location. The following areas, 

within the Captain of the Port Guam 

(COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–15), all 

navigable waters on the surface and 

below the surface within 190 yards of 

the fireworks barge for Independence 

Day celebrations at Polaris Point, Naval 

Base Guam. The barge will be anchored 

approximately 500 yards off the north 

tip of Polaris Point in Apra Outer 

Harbor. 

(b) Definition. As used in this section, 

‘‘designated on-scene 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 either 

designated by or assisting the COTP 

Sector Guam in the enforcement of the 

safety zone. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in section 

§ 165.23, entry into, transiting, or 

anchoring within this safety zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

COTP or a designated on-scene 

representative. 

(2) This safety zone is closed to all 

persons and vessel traffic, except as may 

be permitted by the COTP or a 

designated on-scene representative. 

(3) Persons and Vessel operators 

desiring to enter or operate within the 

safety zone must contact the COTP or a 

designated on-scene representative to 

obtain permission to do so. The COTP 

or a designated on-scene representative 

may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 

or at telephone number (671) 355–4821. 

Vessel operators given permission to 

enter or operate in the safety zone must 

comply with all directions given to 

them by the COTP or a designated onscene representative. 

(d) Enforcement period. This safety 

zone will be enforced on a specific date 

during the first week of July from 6 p.m. 

to 9 p.m. annually, unless the event is 

delayed or cancelled due to weather. 

The Coast Guard will provide advance 

notice of enforcement and a broadcast 

notice to mariners to inform public of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 26677 

specific date during the first week in 

July. 

Dated: May 1, 2022. 

Nicholas R. Simmons, 

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

Port, Guam. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09623 Filed 5–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0032; FRL–8688–02– 

R6] 

Air Plan Approval; Oklahoma; 

Interstate Visibility Transport 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is approving elements of a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submission 

from the State of Oklahoma for the 2015 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) and disapproving 

elements of two SIP submissions for the 

2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) and the 2012 

fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. 

These infrastructure SIP (i-SIP) 

submissions address how the existing 

SIP provides for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of these 

NAAQS. The i-SIP requirements are to 

ensure that the Oklahoma SIP is 

adequate to meet the State’s 

responsibilities under the CAA for these 

NAAQS. Specifically, this final rule 

addresses the interstate visibility 

transport requirements of the i-SIP for 

the 2015 Ozone NAAQS, 2010 SO2, and 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS under CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). We are also finalizing 

our determination that the deficiencies 

in the Oklahoma SIP that form the basis 

of our disapproval of the interstate 

visibility transport portions of the 

Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are 

remedied by the existing Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) in place for 

the Oklahoma Regional Haze program, 

and that no further Federal action is 

required to address the disapproval. 

DATES: This rule is effective on June 6, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0032. 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 whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet. Publicly available docket 

materials are available electronically 

through https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dayana Medina, EPA Region 6 Office, 

Regional Haze and SO2 Section, 214– 

665–7241, medina.dayana@epa.gov. 

Out of an abundance of caution for 

members of the public and our staff, the 

EPA Region 6 office may be closed to 

the public to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Please call or 

email the contact listed above if you 

need alternative access to material 

indexed but not provided in the docket. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. 

I. Background 

The background for this action is 

discussed in detail in our July 22, 2021 

proposal (86 FR 38630). In that 

document, we proposed to approve the 

interstate visibility transport element of 

the i-SIP submission from the State of 

Oklahoma for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. 

We also proposed to disapprove the 

interstate visibility transport elements of 

two i-SIP submissions from the State of 

Oklahoma: One for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS and the other for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. We simultaneously proposed, 

in exercising our authority under 

section 110(c) of the Act, to find that the 

deficiencies in the Oklahoma SIP that 

formed the basis of our proposed 

disapproval of the interstate visibility 

transport portions of the Oklahoma i-SIP 

submissions for the 2010 SO2 and 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS are already addressed by 

the existing FIP in place for the 

Oklahoma Regional Haze program, and 

that no further Federal action is 

required. The reader should refer to our 

notice of proposed rulemaking for our 

evaluation of the Oklahoma i-SIP 

submissions and a detailed explanation 

of our rationale for this action. 

The public comment period for the 

proposed action closed on August 23, 

2021. We received one public comment 

concerning our proposed action. The 

comment is included in the publicly 

posted docket associated with this 

action at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Below we provide a summary of the 

comment along with our response. After 

careful consideration of the comment 

received, we have decided to finalize 

our action with no changes from the 

proposed action. 

II. Response to Comments 

Comment: The commenter expressed 

appreciation for EPA’s close evaluation 

of Oklahoma’s SIP submittals and 

expressed support of EPA’s 

determinations and actions identified in 

the proposed rule. 

Response: We appreciate the 

commenter’s support of our proposed 

rule. 

Comment: The commenter stated that 

they do not object to EPA’s 

determination, among others, that the 

existing FIP in place for the Oklahoma 

Regional Haze program is sufficient to 

remedy the proposed disapproval of the 

interstate visibility transport portions of 

the Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS but 

asked EPA to revisit, as necessary and 

appropriate in the future, whether the 

existing FIP continues to remain 

sufficiently stringent to comply with the 

requirements of the CAA, including 

whether it is adequately ensuring 

reasonable progress towards achieving 

Oklahoma’s regional haze goals. 

Response: First, we note that 

comments regarding the stringency of 

the existing Oklahoma Regional Haze 

FIP and whether it is sufficient to 

comply with the regional haze 

requirements of the CAA are beyond the 

scope of this action, and as such, we 

will not be responding to them. We also 

note that we are not implementing a 

new or revised FIP in this action but are 

instead finding that the existing regional 

haze FIP also addresses the deficiencies 

in the Oklahoma SIP that form the basis 

of our disapproval of the interstate 

visibility transport portions of the 

Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

will review and take action on any 

future regional haze SIP revisions 

submitted by Oklahoma in separate 

future actions. 

III. Impact on Areas of Indian Country 

As stated in the proposed action, 

following the U.S. Supreme Court 

decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 

S.Ct. 2452 (2020), the Governor of the 

State of Oklahoma requested approval 

under Section 10211(a) of the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act of 2005: A 

Legacy for Users, Public Law 109–59, 

119 Stat. 1144, 1937 (August 10, 2005) 

(‘‘SAFETEA’’), to administer in certain 

areas of Indian country (as defined at 18 

U.S.C. 1151) the State’s environmental 

regulatory programs that were 

previously approved by the EPA outside 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1