Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 53195 

(d) Regulations. (1) In accordance 

with the general regulations in § 165.23 

of this part, entry into this zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi 

River or a designated representative. 

(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry 

into or passage through the zone must 

request permission from the Captain of 

the Port Upper Mississippi River or a 

designated representative. The Captain 

of the Port Upper Mississippi River 

representative may be contacted at 

314–269–2332. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi 

River or their designated representative. 

Designated Captain of the Port 

representatives include United States 

Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, 

and petty officers of the U.S. Coast 

Guard. 

Dated: July 30, 2010. 

S.L. Hudson, 

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

Port Upper Mississippi River. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21616 Filed 8–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0021] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; U.S. Coast Guard BSU 

Seattle, Pier 36, Seattle, WA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a security zone at U.S. 

Coast Guard (USCG) Base Support Unit 

(BSU) Seattle, Pier 36, Elliot Bay, 

Seattle, WA. This permanent security 

zone is necessary to protect military and 

visiting foreign vessels, waterfront 

facilities, and the maritime public from 

destruction, loss, or injury from 

sabotage, subversive acts, or other 

malicious acts of a similar nature. Entry 

into or movement within this security 

zone is prohibited without the 

permission of the Captain of the Port 

Puget Sound or a Designated 

Representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective September 

30, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, are part 

of docket USCG–2010–0021 and are 

available online by going to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– 

2010–0021 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and 

then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is 

also available for inspection or copying 

at the Docket Management Facility (M– 

30), U.S. Department of Transportation, 

West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

e-mail LTJG Ashley M. Wanzer, Sector 

Puget Sound Waterways Management, 

Coast Guard; telephone 206–217–6175, 

e-mail SectorSeattleWWM@uscg.mil. If 

you have questions on viewing the 

docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 

Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 

202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

On May 3, 2010, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled Security Zone; U.S. Coast Guard 

BSU Seattle, Pier 36, Seattle, WA in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 23212). We 

received zero comments on the 

proposed rule. We did not receive any 

requests for a public meeting and a 

public meeting was not held regarding 

this regulation. 

Basis and Purpose 

Heightened awareness of potential 

terrorist acts requires enhanced security 

of our ports, harbors, and vessels. This 

rule establishes a security zone to 

protect waterfront facilities, persons, 

and vessels from subversive or terrorist 

acts on the waters surrounding USCG 

BSU Seattle, Pier 36, Elliot Bay, WA. 

The Coast Guard Captain of the Port 

Puget Sound finds sufficient cause to 

require this security zone to protect 

military vessels, facilities and the 

maritime public located at Pier 36, Elliot 

Bay, WA. This security zone will be 

continuously activated in order to 

maintain the security of both moored 

vessels and permanent facilities 

regardless of the physical presence of 

military vessels within the zone. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

We did not receive any comments on 

the NPRM. Accordingly, we have made 

no changes from the proposed rule. 

Discussion of Rule 

This rule establishes a permanent 

security zone necessary to protect 

military and visiting foreign vessels, 

waterfront facilities, and the maritime 

public from destruction, loss, or injury 

from sabotage, subversive acts, or other 

malicious acts of a similar nature. Entry 

into or movement within this security 

zone is prohibited without the 

permission of the Captain of the Port 

Puget Sound or a Designated 

Representative. 

Pier 36 is an inlet that provides vessel 

moorage to Coast Guard and visiting 

military vessels. The permanent security 

zone established by this rule extends 

from the north western tip of Pier 36 

across the inlet to the south western tip 

of Pier 36, effectively closing off the 

access point such that unauthorized 

vessels are prohibited from entering the 

pier. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

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. This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action because it does not 

adversely affect the transit of maritime 

vessels or the recreational boating 

public to major waterways. 

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. 

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. 

This security zone will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reason: Vessel traffic can 

pass safely around the security zone. 

This security zone will impact the 

following entities, some of which may 

be small entities; those vessels or vessel 

operators who intend to enter BSU 

Seattle at Pier 36, Seattle, WA. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
53196 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

in the NPRM we offered to assist small 

entities in understanding the rule so 

that they could better evaluate its effects 

on them and participate in the 

rulemaking process. 

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. 

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 (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. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will 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. 

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 may 

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 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. 

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 

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 concluded 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 is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g.), of the Instruction. This rule 

involves a security zone located on all 

waters east of a line from 47°35.450′ N 

122°20.585′ W to 47°35.409′ N 

122°20.585′ W at USCG BSU Seattle, 

Pier 36, Elliot Bay, Seattle, WA. Under 

figure 

2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the 

Instruction, an environmental analysis 

checklist 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 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: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 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 § 165.1334 to read as follows: 

§ 165.1334 Security Zone; U.S. Coast 

Guard BSU Seattle, Pier 36, Elliot Bay, 

Seattle, WA. 

(a) Location: The following area is a 

security zone: All waters in Elliot Bay 

east of a line from 47°35.450′ N 

122°20.585′ W to 47°35.409′ N 

122°20.585′ W at Pier 36, Elliot Bay, 

Seattle, WA. 

(b) Regulations: Under 33 CFR part 

165, subpart D, no vessel may enter, 

transit, moor, or anchor within this 

security zone located at Pier 36, Elliot 

Bay, WA, except for vessels authorized 

by the Captain of the Port Puget Sound 

or Designated Representative. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 53197 

(c) Authorization: To request 

authorization to operate within this 

security zone, contact United States 

Coast Guard Sector Puget Sound Joint 

Harbor Operations Center at 206–217– 

6001. 

Dated: August 18, 2010. 

S.W. Bornemann, 

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

Port, Puget Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21615 Filed 8–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army, Corps of 

Engineers 

33 CFR Part 334 

Restricted Area in Cape Fear River and 

Tributaries at Sunny Point Army 

Terminal, Brunswick County, NC 

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army requested that 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(Corps) revise the regulation for the 

restricted area in the Cape Fear River 

and its tributaries at Sunny Point Army 

Terminal, Brunswick County, North 

Carolina, by renaming the marker buoys 

and specifying the latitude and 

longitude for those buoys. There are no 

other changes proposed for this 

restricted area regulation. The purpose 

of the rule is to correct the buoys 

designating the boundary of the 

restricted area. The restricted area 

provides security for the facility, and 

prevents acts of terrorism, sabotage, or 

other criminal acts against the facility, 

including vessels loading and offloading 

at the Sunny Point Army Terminal. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

1, 2010 without further notice, unless 

the Corps receives adverse comment by 

September 30, 2010. If we receive such 

adverse comment, we will publish a 

timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register informing the public that this 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number COE– 

2010–0015, by any of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: david.b.olson@usace.army. 

mil. Include the docket number COE– 

2010–0015 in the subject line of the 

message. 

Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Attn: CECW–CO (David B. Olson), 441 

G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20314– 

1000. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to 

security requirements, we cannot 

receive comments by hand delivery or 

courier. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket number COE–2010–0015. All 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available on-line at 

http://regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the commenter indicates that the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected, through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an 

anonymous access system, which means 

we will not know your identity or 

contact information unless you provide 

it in the body of your comment. If you 

send an e-mail directly to the Corps 

without going through regulations.gov, 

your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, we recommend that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If we cannot read your 

comment because of technical 

difficulties and cannot contact you for 

clarification, we may not be able to 

consider your comment. Electronic 

comments should avoid the use of any 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. All documents in 

the docket are listed. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, such as CBI or other 

information whose disclosure 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

David Olson, Headquarters, Operations 

and Regulatory Community of Practice, 

Washington, DC at 202–761–4922 or 

Richard K. Spencer, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Wilmington District, at 910– 

251–4172. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter 

dated February 22, 2010, the Corps of 

Engineers was informed that the federal 

channel navigation buoys that mark the 

Cape Fear River main navigation 

channel and the boundaries of the 

restricted zone at the Sunny Point Army 

Terminal have been replaced with new 

buoys. The Army requests that the rule 

be revised because the current federal 

channel navigation buoys identification 

numbers no longer correspond to the 

regulation for the restricted area at the 

Sunny Point Army Terminal. In 

response to this request by the U.S. 

Army, and pursuant to its authorities 

under Section 7 of the Rivers and 

Harbors Act of 1917 (40 Stat 266; 33 

U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of the Army 

Appropriations Act of 1919 (40 Stat 892; 

33 U.S.C. 3), the Corps is amending the 

regulations in 33 CFR part 334 by 

revising the restricted area regulation. 

The Corps is publishing this rule 

without prior proposal because we view 

this as a non-controversial amendment 

and anticipate no adverse comment. 

In the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of 

today’s Federal Register, we are 

publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to revise this 

restricted area regulation if adverse 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective on November 1, 2010 without 

further notice unless we receive adverse 

comment by September 30, 2010 . If we 

receive adverse comment, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the direct final rule will not take 

effect. We will address all public 

comments in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. We will not 

institute a second comment period on 

this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting must do so at this time. 

Procedural Requirements 

a. Review Under Executive Order 

12866. This rule is issued with respect 

to a military function of the Defense 

Department and the provisions of 

Executive Order 12866 do not apply. 

b. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. This rule has been 

reviewed under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354) which 

requires the preparation of a regulatory 

flexibility analysis for any regulation 

that will have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities (i.e., small businesses and small 

governments). The Corps has 

determined that revising this restricted 

area regulation would have practically 

no economic impact on the public, or 

result in no anticipated navigational 

hazard or interference with existing 

waterway traffic. This will have no 

significant economic impact on small 

entities. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES