Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 209 / Monday, October 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 62261 

Signed: July 6, 2005. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

Approved: September 14, 2005. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, (Tax, Trade, and 

Tariff Policy). 

[FR Doc. 05–21562 Filed 10–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD17–05–002] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; High Capacity 

Passenger Vessels and Alaska Marine 

Highway System Vessels in Alaska 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising 

its proposed rule published March 9, 

2005, to establish permanent moving 

security zones around all escorted High 

Capacity Passenger Vessels (‘‘HCPV’’) 

and escorted Alaska Marine Highway 

System Vessels (‘‘AMHS vessels’’) 

during their transit in the navigable 

waters of the Seventeenth Coast Guard 

District. The 250-yard speed restriction 

zone, the 25-yard security zone around 

moored and anchored vessels, and the 

waiver request process in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) have been 

eliminated. The Coast Guard has revised 

the proposed security zones prohibiting 

any vessel from entering within 100 

yards of an escorted HCPV or escorted 

AMHS vessel while in transit. These 

security zones are necessary to mitigate 

potential terrorist acts and enhance 

public and maritime safety and security. 

Permission to enter these security zones 

may be granted by the designated onscene representative. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

December 30, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket CGD17–05–

002 and are available for inspection or 

copying at United States Coast Guard, 

District 17 (dpi), 709 West 9th Street, 

Juneau, AK 99801 between 8 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT 

Matthew York, District 17 (dpi), 709 

West 9th Street, Juneau, AK 99801, 

(907) 463–2821. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

We published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Regulated 

Navigation Area and Security Zones; 

High Capacity Passenger Vessels in 

Alaska’’ in the Federal Register (70 FR 

11595, March 9, 2005), docket number 

CGD17–05–002. That NPRM included 

provisions for a 250-yard speed 

restriction zone, a 25-yard security zone 

around moored and anchored vessels, 

and a waiver request process. We are 

removing those three provisions from 

the proposed rule in this supplemental 

NPRM. 

The revised proposed security zones 

are limited to High Capacity Passenger 

Vessels (HCPV) and Alaska Marine 

Highway System Vessels (AMHS) 

vessels during transit in the waters of 

the Seventeenth Coast Guard District. 

These security zones will only apply to 

HCPV and AMHS vessels transiting 

under an escort as defined in this 

SNPRM. These permanent security 

zones have been carefully designed to 

minimally impact the public while 

providing protections for HCPV and 

AMHS vessels. 

Requests for Comments 

The Coast Guard encourages 

interested persons to participate in this 

rulemaking by submitting written data, 

views, or arguments. Persons submitting 

comments should include their name 

and addresses, identifying this 

rulemaking (CGD17–05–002) and the 

specific section of this document to 

which each comment applies, and give 

the reason for each comment. Please 

submit all comments and attachments in 

an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2

by 11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. Persons wanting 

acknowledgment of receipt of comment 

should enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope. 

Comments on this supplemental 

NPRM must reach the Coast Guard on 

or before December 30, 2005. The Coast 

Guard will consider all comments 

received during the comment period 

and may change this proposed rule in 

view of the comments. 

The Coast Guard has not scheduled a 

public hearing at this time. You may 

request a public hearing by writing to 

the Seventeenth Coast Guard District at 

the address under ADDRESSES. The 

request should include the reasons why 

a hearing would be beneficial to the 

rulemaking. If it is determined that an 

opportunity for oral presentation will 

aid this rulemaking, the Coast Guard 

will schedule a public hearing at a time 

and place announced in a separate 

notice published in the Federal 

Register. 

Background and Purpose 

Due to increased awareness that 

future terrorist attacks are possible, the 

Coast Guard, as Lead Federal Agency for 

Maritime Homeland Security, has 

determined that the District Commander 

and the Captain of the Port must have 

the means to be aware of, detect, deter, 

intercept, and respond to threats, acts of 

aggression, and attacks by terrorists on 

the American homeland while 

maintaining our freedoms and 

sustaining the flow of commerce. 

Terrorists have demonstrated both 

desire and ability to utilize multiple 

means in different geographic areas to 

successfully carry out their terrorist 

missions, highlighted by the recent 

subway bombings in London. 

During the past 3 years, the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation has issued 

several advisories to the public 

concerning the potential for terrorist 

attacks within the United States. The 

October 2002 attack on a tank vessel, M/ 

V LIMBURG, off the coast of Yemen and 

the prior attack on the USS COLE 

demonstrate a continuing threat to U.S. 

maritime assets as described in the 

President’s finding in Executive Order 

13273 of August 21, 2002 (67 FR 56215, 

September 3, 2002) and Continuation of 

the National Emergency with Respect to 

Certain Terrorist Attacks, (67 FR 58317, 

September 13, 2002); and Continuation 

of the National Emergency With Respect 

To Persons Who Commit, Threaten To 

Commit, Or Support Terrorism, (67 FR 

59447, September 20, 2002). 

Furthermore, the ongoing hostilities in 

Afghanistan and Iraq have made it 

prudent for U.S. port and waterway 

users to be on a higher state of alert 

because the Al Qaeda organization and 

other similar organizations have 

declared an ongoing intention to 

conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests 

worldwide. 

In addition to escorting vessels, the 

Coast Guard has determined the need 

for additional security measures during 

their transit. A security zone is a tool 

available to the Coast Guard that may be 

used to control maritime traffic 

operating in the vicinity of these 

vessels. The District Commander has 

made a determination that it is 

necessary to establish a security zone 

around HCPV and AMHS vessels that 

are escorted to safeguard people, vessels 

and maritime traffic. 

62262 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 209 / Monday, October 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The Coast Guard received a total of 

147 documents containing comments to 

the proposed rule. The documents 

included letters from commercial 

fishermen, commercial fishing 

organizations, individual float plane 

operators, float plane organizations, 

harbor masters, cruise line agencies, 

charter vessels, pilot organizations, the 

Alaska Marine Highway System, 

government officials and other 

concerned mariners. Responses to these 

comments and changes made in the 

proposed rule are discussed in the 

following paragraphs. 

Numerous comments suggested that 

the security zones be in place only at 

heightened Maritime Security 

(MARSEC) levels. The Coast Guard 

disagrees. MARSEC Level 1 is the level 

at which minimum, appropriate 

protective security measures shall be 

maintained. At MARSEC Level 2, 

additional measures shall be maintained 

as a result of a heightened risk. At 

MARSEC Level 3, a transportation 

security incident is probable or 

imminent. The Coast Guard maintains 

that security zones around HCPV and 

AMHS vessels are a minimum 

appropriate security measure for 

MARSEC Level 1. 

The most frequent comments were 

focused on the unique geography of the 

tight, constricted waterways and ports 

in Alaska. One comment suggested that 

the zone be in effect only when a Coast 

Guard asset is on-scene. The NPRM 

indicated the zone would be in effect at 

all times in the waters of District 17. 

The Coast Guard recognizes that 

Alaska’s waterways are narrow and are 

shared with a myriad of maritime 

professionals as well as recreational 

boaters. The Coast Guard has revised the 

proposed rule by having these HCPV 

and AMHS security zones in effect only 

when there is a Coast Guard asset onscene. 

Several comments expressed concern 

for the time associated with gaining 

permission to enter the security zone. 

Other comments expressed concern on 

who would retain the master lists of 

‘‘waiver/exempt’’ vessels and the 

difficulty of maintaining an accurate 

Maritime Domain Awareness status of 

vessels on waivers. Based on these 

comments, the Coast Guard has 

reassessed its permission-to-enter 

proposal and has decided to revise the 

proposed rule and amends the rule by 

removing the waiver process and 

replacing it with the requirement that 

permission to enter the security zone be 

given by the designated on-scene 

representative on VHF channel 16 or 

VHF Channel 13 on a case-by-case basis. 

Numerous comments addressed the 

250-yard speed zone restriction and the 

minimum speed necessary to maintain a 

safe course. The Coast Guard recognizes 

that in order for float planes to safely 

take off and land, they will likely be at 

speeds between 40 and 60 knots. 

Numerous Southeast Alaskan ports 

would also see an increase in maritime 

traffic outside the 250 yard speed 

restriction zone, particularly Tongass 

Narrows and Gastineau Channel. This 

increase in traffic would likely have a 

detrimental effect on the safe navigation 

of maritime traffic. Accordingly, the 

Coast Guard has revised the proposed 

rule and eliminated the 250-yard speed 

zone restriction. 

Numerous comments addressed 

certain areas where a 100-yard security 

zone would create navigational 

situations that result in vessels coming 

into close proximity of HCPV and 

AMHS vessels in places like Snow Pass, 

Point Arden, Sunny Point, Tongass 

Narrows and Eastern Channel. While 

the Coast Guard recognizes that these 

areas are navigationally narrow, the 

Coast Guard will require vessels to 

remain 100 yards away from HCPV or 

AMHS vessels while those vessels are 

escorted by the designated on-scene 

representative. Speed and course 

adjustments must be made early enough 

to allow for sufficient sea room for the 

safe passage of the HCPV or AMHS 

vessels. Additionally, Rule 9 of the 

International Rules of the Road requires 

vessels less than 20 meters in length to 

not impede the passage of a vessel 

which can safely navigate only within a 

narrow channel or fairway. Vessels 

anchored in a designated area will be 

permitted to remain at anchor until the 

HCPV or AMHS Ferry has passed. As 

noted previously, the Coast Guard has 

revised the proposed rule so that 

security zones would be in effect only 

when there is a Coast Guard asset or 

designated representative on-scene. 

Numerous comments opposed the 25- 

yard security zone around moored and 

anchored vessels. Comments stated the 

rule would prevent access to fuel docks, 

processing facilities, and other marinerelated businesses along with access to 

various Southeast Alaskan small boat 

harbors such as the Hansen, Ryus, Daly 

floats, Casey Moran float, Thomas Basin, 

Juneau fish processing facilities, Marine 

Park lightering dock, Juneau 

Intermediate Vessel Float, Skagway 

Small Boat Harbor, and Whittier Small 

Boat Harbor. Another comment was 

received about the need for city officials 

to access municipal utilities, water, 

wastewater, telephone and electric 

utilities located under the pier and the 

only way to access those utilities was 

taking a skiff on the water and going 

under the pier. Based on these 

comments, the Coast Guard has revised 

the proposed rule to eliminate the 25- 

yard security zone for moored and 

anchored vessels. The security concerns 

for moored and anchored vessels will be 

addressed in a separate notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM). 

Several comments addressed the 

applicability of the rule to fishing 

vessels with gear in the water, fishing 

vessels in transit, and fish tenders. For 

the purposes of clarifying this particular 

section of the NPRM, the Coast Guard 

proposes revising the security zone by 

adding language to the proposed rule 

that ‘‘vessels defined as engaged in 

fishing as per COLREGS Rule 3(d), are 

exempt from this rule. Rule (3)(d) states 

that the term ‘Vessel engaged in fishing’

means any vessel fishing with nets, 

lines, trawls or other fishing apparatus 

which restrict maneuverability, but does 

not include a vessel fishing with trolling 

lines or other fishing apparatus which 

do not restrict maneuverability.’’

Therefore, fish tenders, processors, and 

trollers are not exempt from this rule. 

Some comments addressed the need 

to have the widest dissemination of the 

final rule as possible, including public 

service announcements, walking the 

docks, fliers, and Broadcasts Notice to 

Mariners (BNM). The Coast Guard 

proposes to broadcast the final rule 

published in the Federal Register via 

BNM, fliers, and announcements. 

Several comments requested a public 

hearing, and others requested that the 

comment period be extended. The Coast 

Guard re-opened the public comment 

period and published a second 30-day 

notice and comment period which 

expired on May 27, 2005 (70 FR 21702, 

April 27, 2005). The Coast Guard may 

hold a public hearing, if appropriate, 

prior to adoption of a final rule. Based 

on all the comments received to date, 

there has been an adequate forum and 

sufficient time for the public to express 

its concerns, and the comment period 

on the revised proposed rule has been 

re-opened until December 30, 2005. 

One comment was received 

expressing concern that the availability 

of Search and Rescue (SAR) assets 

would be jeopardized due to 

enforcement of the security zones. The 

Coast Guard disagrees. The SAR 

Coordinator for District 17 would retain 

the ability to direct Coast Guard assets 

to respond to SAR cases and would not 

decrease the Coast Guard’s abilities to 

respond in a safe and efficient manner. 

Some comments were received 

expressing concern about the potential 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 209 / Monday, October 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 62263 

punishment for violators of the security 

zone. If the proposed rule is made 

effective, the Coast Guard would be able 

to seek both criminal penalties, civil 

penalties, or both against violators of 

these HCPV and AMHS security zones. 

One comment expressed concern that 

if the Coast Guard is unwilling to back 

the rule up with deadly force, the rule 

cannot serve its stated purpose and will 

only serve to restrict the reasonable 

freedoms of law-abiding citizens. 

Another comment expressed concern 

that a 100-yard buffer will not stop a 

terrorist with explosives from blowingup a cruise ship. The Coast Guard 

appreciates these comments and 

concerns and disagrees based upon clear 

policy guidance designed to prepare 

Coast Guard members on how to react 

appropriately when confronted with a 

use of force situation. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

This proposed rule would establish 

permanent 100-yard security zones 

around HCPV and AMHS vessels that 

are being escorted by a Coast Guard 

surface, air, or by other state or federal 

law enforcement agency designated by 

the Captain of the Port (COTP) during 

their transit through the Seventeenth 

Coast Guard District. Persons desiring to 

transit within 100 yards of an escorted 

HCPV or AHMS vessel in the 

Seventeenth Coast Guard District must 

contact the designated on scene 

representative on VHF channel 16 

(156.800 MHz) or VHF channel 13 

(156.650 MHz) and obtain permission to 

transit within 100 yards of the escorted 

HCPV or AMHS vessels. The boundaries 

of the Seventeenth Coast Guard District 

are defined in 33 CFR 3.85–1(b). This 

includes territorial waters 12 nautical 

miles from the territorial sea baseline as 

defined in 33 CFR part 2 subpart B. 

Stationary vessels that are moored or 

anchored must remain moored or 

anchored when an escorted HCPV or 

AMHS vessel approaches within 100 

yards of the stationary vessel unless the 

designated on scene representative has 

granted approval for the stationary 

vessel to do otherwise. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

Although one public comment stated 

that this action constitutes a significant 

regulatory action, the Coast Guard 

disagrees based on the relatively small 

size of the limited access area around 

each ship and the minimal amount of 

time that vessels will be restricted when 

the zone is being enforced. In addition, 

vessels that may need to enter the zones 

may request permission on a case-bycase basis from the on scene designated 

representatives. This rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office 

of Management and Budget has not 

reviewed it under that Order. It is not 

‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory 

policies and procedures of the 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS). 

We expect the economic impact of 

this rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS is unnecessary. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

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. 

Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies 

under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule, if 

adopted, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This 

permanent security zone only applies to 

HCPV and AMHS vessels that are 

transiting with an escort. It does not 

apply when the vessels are moored or 

anchored. Furthermore, vessels desiring 

to enter the security zone may contact 

the designated on scene representative 

and request permission to enter the 

zone. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

we offered to assist small entities in 

understanding this rule so that they 

could better evaluate its effects on them 

and participate in the rulemaking 

process. If the rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance, please contact 

LT Matthew York, District 17 (dpi), 709 

West 9th St, Room 753, Juneau, Alaska 

99801. 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. 

Collection of Information 

This rule calls for no new collection 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–

3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this rule under that Order and have 

determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

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 or more in any one year. 

Though this rule would not result in 

such expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule does not affect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This 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. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that might 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

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. 

62264 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 209 / Monday, October 31, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guides the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded that there are no factors 

in this case that would limit the use of 

a categorical exclusion under section 

2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this 

rule is categorically excluded, under 

figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the 

Instruction, from further environmental 

documentation. Under figure 2–1, 

paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, an 

‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’

and a ‘‘Categorical Exclusion 

Determination’’ are not required for this 

rule. 

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 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C 

Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1(g), 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. Add § 165.1711 to read as follows: 

§ 165.1711 Security Zones; Waters of the 

Seventeenth Coast Guard District. 

(a) Definitions. As used in this 

section—

Alaska Marine Highway System vessel 

(‘‘AMHS vessel’’) means the M/V 

AURORA, M/V CHENEGA, M/V 

COLUMBIA, M/V FAIRWEATHER, M/V 

KENNICOTT, M/V LECONTE, M/V 

LITUYA, M/V MALASPINA, M/V 

MATANUSKA, M/V TAKU, and the 

M/V TUSTUMENA. 

Designated on Scene Representative 

means any U.S. Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

who has been authorized by the District 

Commander or local Captain of the Port 

(COTP), as defined in 33 CFR part 3, 

subpart 3.85, to act on his or her behalf, 

or other Federal, State or local law 

enforcement agency personnel 

designated by the COTP. 

Escorted HCPV or AMHS vessel 

means a HCPV or AMHS vessel that is 

accompanied by one or more Coast 

Guard assets or Federal, State or local 

law enforcement agency assets as listed 

below: 

(1) Coast Guard surface or air asset 

displaying the Coast Guard insignia. 

(2) State, Federal or local law 

enforcement assets displaying the 

applicable agency markings and or 

equipment associated with the agency. 

Federal Law Enforcement Officer 

means any federal government law 

enforcement officer who has authority 

to enforce federal criminal laws. 

High Capacity Passenger Vessel 

(‘‘HCPV’’) means a passenger vessel 

greater than 100 feet in length that is 

authorized to carry more than 500 

passengers for hire. 

State law enforcement Officer means 

any State or local government law 

enforcement officer who has authority 

to enforce State or local criminal laws. 

(b) Location. The following areas are 

security zones: All waters within 100 

yards around escorted High Capacity 

Passenger Vessels or escorted Alaska 

Marine Highway System vessels in the 

navigable waters of the Seventeenth 

Coast Guard District as defined in 33 

CFR 3.85–1, from surface to bottom. 

(c) Regulations. (1) No vessel may 

approach within 100 yards of an 

escorted HCPV or escorted AMHS vessel 

during their transits within the 

navigable waters of the Seventeenth 

Coast Guard District. 

(2) Moored or anchored vessels that 

are overtaken by this moving zone must 

remain stationary at their location until 

the escorted vessel maneuvers at least 

100 yards away. 

(3) The local Captain of the Port may 

notify the maritime and general public 

by marine information broadcast of the 

periods during which individual 

security zones have been activated by 

providing notice in accordance with 33 

CFR 165.7. 

(4) Persons desiring to transit within 

100 yards of a moving, escorted HCPV 

or AMHS vessel in the Seventeenth 

Coast Guard District must contact the 

designated on scene representative on 

VHF channel 16 (156.800 MHz), VHF 

channel 13 (156.650 MHz) to receive 

permission. 

(5) If permission is granted to transit 

within 100 yards of an escorted HCPV 

or AMHS vessel, all persons and vessels 

must comply with the instructions of 

the designated on scene representative. 

Dated: October 18, 2005. 

James C. Olson, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Seventeenth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 05–21576 Filed 10–28–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[OAR–2002–0056; FRL–7990–2] 

RIN 2060–AN32 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Industrial, 

Commercial, and Institutional Boilers 

and Process Heaters 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 

reconsideration of final rule; proposed 

amendments. 

SUMMARY: On September 13, 2004, EPA 

promulgated national emission 

standards for hazardous air pollutants 

(NESHAP) for industrial, commercial, 

and institutional boilers and process 

heaters. In this action, EPA is proposing 

a limited number of amendments to the 

NESHAP. In response to a petition for 

reconsideration, EPA is proposing and