Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 59617 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Parts 104, 105, and 160 

[Docket No. USCG–2004–19963] 

RIN 1625–AA93 

Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; 

Certain Dangerous Cargoes 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adopting, 

with changes, an interim rule published 

December 16, 2005, regarding certain 

dangerous cargo (CDC) and notice of 

arrival requirements. The interim rule 

defined certain dangerous cargo residue 

(CDC residue) as limited to certain dry 

cargo and made other changes to 

regulations in 33 CFR parts 104, 105, 

and 160. After reviewing comments on 

the interim rule, the Coast Guard issued 

a notice of proposed rulemaking in 2009 

that proposed to change the CDC 

residue definition to include certain 

bulk liquids and liquefied gases in 

residue quantities, revise the definition 

of CDC to reflect the proposed change in 

the CDC residue definition, and adopt 

other changes introduced by the 2005 

interim rule. This final rule will relieve 

an unnecessary burden on industry by 

including more lower-risk cargoes in the 

CDC residue category and thereby 

reducing the number of notice of arrival 

submissions required based on the cargo 

a vessel is carrying. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

October 28, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, are a 

part of docket USCG–2004–19963 and 

are 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. You may also 

find this docket on the Internet by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2004–19963 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

e-mail Lieutenant Sharmine Jones, 

Office of Vessel Activities, Coast Guard; 

telephone 202–372–1234, e-mail 

Sharmine.N.Jones@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble 

I. Abbreviations 

II. Regulatory History 

III. Basis and Purpose 

IV. Background 

V. Discussion of Comments and Changes 

VI. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

B. Small Entities 

C. Assistance for Small Entities 

D. Collection of Information 

E. Federalism 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

G. Taking of Private Property 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

I. Protection of Children 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

K. Energy Effects 

L. Technical Standards 

M. Environment 

I. Abbreviations 

CDC Certain dangerous cargo 

CDC residue Certain dangerous cargo 

residue 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CTAC Chemical Transportation Advisory 

Committee 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NOA Notice of arrival 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

TSAC Towing Safety Advisory Committee 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Regulatory History 

The Coast Guard published an interim 

rule on December 16, 2005, titled 

‘‘Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; 

Certain Dangerous Cargoes; Electronic 

Submission’’ (70 FR 74663). That 

interim rule adopted the definition of 

certain dangerous cargo (CDC), which a 

2004 temporary final rule (69 FR 51176, 

August 18, 2004) introduced. By 

revising § 104.105 in Title 33 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (33 CFR), 

the interim rule also made permanent 

the application of vessel security 

requirements in 33 CFR part 104 to 

barges carrying CDC. The interim rule, 

however, removed the remainder of the 

temporary changes made to 33 CFR 

parts 104 and 105 because they involved 

past submission and compliance 

deadlines and were no longer necessary. 

The interim rule also introduced 

changes that were not included in the 

2004 temporary final rule, including— 

• Adding another optional method, via 

Microsoft InfoPath, for electronic 

submission of notices of arrival (NOAs). 

• Clarifying that Coast Guard NOA 

regulations in 33 CFR part 160, subpart 

C, do not apply to U.S. recreational 

vessels. 

• Adding a definition of ‘‘CDC residue’’ 

that identified certain dry cargo in bulk 

that, at or below specified quantities, 

did not trigger NOA requirements. The 

2005 definition of CDC residue only 

included residue quantities of bulk 

ammonium nitrate or ammonium nitrate 

fertilizer that remained onboard after 

the vessel discharges all saleable cargo; 

no other cargo residues fell within the 

interim rule definition of CDC residue. 

In response to the 2005 interim rule, 

the Coast Guard received a comment 

from the Chemical Transportation 

Advisory Committee (CTAC) suggesting 

that the Coast Guard revise the 

definition of CDC residue to include 

some bulk liquids and liquefied gases. 

The Coast Guard requested CTAC’s 

Hazardous Cargoes Transportation 

Security Subcommittee to assist in our 

rulemaking. They reviewed the current 

requirement that a CDC vessel remain a 

CDC vessel until the removal of all bulk 

liquid and liquefied gas CDC cargoes, 

including residue quantities of such 

cargoes, from the vessel. The Committee 

completed its recommendation on 

August 24, 2006, and submitted it to the 

Coast Guard for review and 

consideration. (See the CTAC 

Recommendations Related to Residues 

of CDC Cargoes, August 24, 2006, which 

is available in the docket for this 

rulemaking.) The Coast Guard 

concurred with CTAC’s 

recommendations to— 

• Keep cargoes of Anhydrous 

Ammonia, Chlorine, Ethane, Ethylene 

Oxide, Methane (LNG), Methyl 

Bromide, Sulfur Dioxide, and Vinyl 

Chloride as CDC at all times, even when 

only residue quantities remain onboard. 

• Allow other cargoes that would be 

considered CDC in larger quantities to 

be defined as CDC residue if the amount 

that remains onboard in a cargo system 

after discharge is not accessible through 

normal transfer procedures. 

The Coast Guard took steps to 

implement these recommendations. On 

December 23, 2009, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

titled ‘‘Notification of Arrival in U.S. 

Ports; Certain Dangerous Cargoes’’ (74 

FR 68208). In it, the Coast Guard 

proposed to amend the definitions of 

CDC and CDC residue in accordance 

with CTAC’s recommendation. With the 

exception of the revision of these two 

definitions, the NPRM proposed to 

adopt the current regulations introduced 

by the interim rule in 2005 as final. 

We received two comments on the 

proposed rule. No public meeting was 

requested and none was held. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

59618 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

III. Basis and Purpose 

Under authority of the Ports and 

Waterways Safety Act (see, specifically, 

33 U.S.C. 1223 and 1231) and the 

Maritime Transportation Security Act 

(46 U.S.C. Chapter 701), as delegated by 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1, the Coast Guard 

is adopting, with changes, the interim 

rule published on December 16, 2005 

(70 FR 74663) regarding CDC and NOA 

requirements. This final rule reflects the 

adoptions and changes as proposed in 

the Coast Guard’s 2009 NPRM (74 FR 

68208). This rule will also relieve an 

unnecessary burden on industry by 

including more lower-risk cargoes in the 

CDC residue category and reducing the 

number of NOA submissions required 

based on the cargo a vessel is carrying. 

Additionally, it will complete this 

rulemaking, which has already 

introduced existing requirements into 

33 CFR parts 104, 105, and 160. 

IV. Background 

NOA regulations require the 

submission of information about certain 

vessels and their voyages, including 

cargoes, crews, and other persons 

onboard to the Coast Guard’s National 

Vessel Movement Center before those 

vessels arrive at a port or place in the 

United States. The Coast Guard uses the 

information contained in the NOA to 

implement appropriate safety and 

security measures, including security 

screening and escorts into port. 

In 2003, the Coast Guard became 

concerned about the potential security 

hazards of bulk ammonium nitrate and 

propylene oxide cargoes transported on 

U.S. waters. After consultation with 

CTAC and the Towing Safety Advisory 

Committee (TSAC), (see, e.g., TSAC 

Report on Task 03–03, Recommendation 

124, which is available in the docket for 

this rulemaking), the Coast Guard 

determined that these substances should 

be considered CDC (69 FR 51176, 51177, 

August 18, 2004) and, as noted, 

published a temporary final rule in 2004 

(69 FR 51176), followed by an interim 

rule in 2005 (70 FR 74663). The Coast 

Guard’s definition of CDC appears in 33 

CFR 160.204. CDC includes substances 

or materials that have been determined 

to pose an unreasonable risk to health, 

safety, and property if improperly 

handled. Existing regulations require 

most vessels carrying CDC to submit 

NOAs. 

V. Discussion of Comments and 

Changes 

The Coast Guard received one letter 

containing two comments on the 

proposal to change the definition of 

CDC so that residue quantities of some 

chemicals are not classified as CDC. 

This commenter commended the Coast 

Guard for working with CTAC to 

develop ‘‘this more sophisticated and 

nuanced approach to security 

requirements for CDCs in residue form.’’ 

First, the commenter concurred with 

the Coast Guard’s proposal that eight 

CDCs—anhydrous ammonia, chlorine, 

ethane, ethylene oxide, methane (LNG), 

methyl bromide, sulfur dioxide, and 

vinyl chloride—should maintain their 

CDC classification when in residue 

form. Regardless of how small the 

quantities of these eight substances that 

remain onboard in a cargo system after 

discharge are, they will still be defined 

as CDC. Second, as manifested in our 

revised definition of CDC residue, the 

commenter also believed that in the case 

of all other CDCs, industry practices are 

sufficiently effective in diluting CDC 

residues, that it is prudent for the Coast 

Guard to develop a different set of 

security requirements for vessels with 

these types of residues onboard. 

The Coast Guard agrees with the 

assessment to change the definition of 

CDC residue and to exclude certain 

CDCs from that definition. Because of 

this change, fewer vessels carrying only 

lower-risk cargoes will trigger NOA or 

other security requirements that apply 

to vessels carrying CDC. 

This commenter also noted that while 

standing by her recommendation, she 

does not want her ‘‘endorsement of the 

revised definition of CDC residue [to] be 

seen as an endorsement of the current 

process for submitting NOAs generally.’’ 

The commenter encourages the Coast 

Guard to use these two parallel 

rulemakings ‘‘to seriously evaluate the 

impractical process requiring operators 

to submit NOAs to * * * the National 

Vessel Movement Center and the Inland 

River Vessel Movement Center[], 

depending on a vessel’s position on the 

inland river system.’’ 

The NOA CDC NPRM focused on 

changing the definition of CDC residue. 

Revising where vessels should report 

based on requirements in both 33 CFR 

parts 160 and 165 is beyond the scope 

of this rulemaking. The Coast Guard 

will address this comment about the 

National Vessel Movement Center and 

the Inland River Vessel Movement 

Center in its broader, ‘‘Vessel 

Requirements for Notices of Arrival and 

Departure, and Automatic Identification 

System’’ (RIN 1625–AA99) rulemaking. 

The Coast Guard did not make any 

changes from the NOA CDC proposed 

rule based on these comments. This 

final rule remains the same as proposed 

in the NPRM. 

VI. 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. 

A. 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. Accordingly, OMB has not 

reviewed it under that Order. 

In the NPRM, published on December 

23, 2009 (74 FR 68208, 68212), we 

estimated that there are on average 

2,800 vessels currently carrying CDCs 

that make approximately 25,000 port 

arrivals a year. With this rule, some of 

these vessels will no longer be required 

to submit NOAs when transporting 

residue quantities of certain CDCs. As 

detailed in the NPRM, we estimate a 5 

percent annual reduction in the number 

of NOAs submitted as a result of this 

final rule, which is equivalent to a 

$22,000 decrease in cost burden for 

vessel operators that transport certain 

CDCs in residue status. 

We received no public comments or 

additional information that would alter 

our assessment of the impacts presented 

in the NPRM. 

B. 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. 

In the NPRM, we certified that under 

5 U.S.C. 605(b) the proposed rule would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. We received no public 

comments or additional information 

that would alter our certification of the 

rule. 

This rule will not increase the NOA 

reporting costs to vessel operators 

shipping CDC. We estimate that this 

rule will reduce the burden to vessel 

operators shipping residue quantities of 

certain CDCs. Therefore, the Coast 

Guard certifies that under 5 U.S.C. 

605(b) this final rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 59619 

C. 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 the rule so that they 

could better evaluate its effects on them 

and participate in the rulemaking. 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. 

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). 

D. 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). In our NPRM, however, we noted 

it would modify an existing collection 

under OMB Control Number 1625–0100, 

Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival, by 

reducing the number of responses. We 

received no public comments or 

additional information that would alter 

our estimates in the NPRM of the 

burden imposed by this rule through the 

ANOA collection of information. 

As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we 

submitted a copy of the proposed rule 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for its review of the collection of 

information. We received no comments 

from either OMB or the public on the 

collection of information portion of our 

NPRM, and we have made no changes 

to the final rule from what we proposed 

in the NPRM. 

On January 29, 2010, OMB approved 

collection 1625–0100 until January 31, 

2012, without change. You are not 

required to respond to a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

E. 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. 

F. 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. 

G. 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. 

H. 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. 

I. 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. 

J. 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. 

K. 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. 

L. Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (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. 

M. 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 that this action is one 

of a category of actions which does not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 

2–1, paragraph (34)(a) and (d) of the 

Instruction. An environmental analysis 

checklist and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects 

33 CFR Part 104 

Maritime security, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Security 

measures, Vessels. 

33 CFR Part 105 

Maritime security, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Security 

measures. 

33 CFR Part 160 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Harbors, Hazardous 

materials transportation, Marine safety, 

Navigation (water), Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard adopts the 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

59620 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

amendments to 33 CFR parts 104, 105, 

and 160 introduced by the interim rule 

published at 70 FR 74669 on December 

16, 2005, as final with the following 

changes: 

PART 160—PORTS AND WATERWAYS 

SAFETY—GENERAL 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 160 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701; Department of Homeland 

Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart C is 

also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 

1225 and 46 U.S.C. 3715. 

■ 2. In § 160.204, revise paragraphs (7) 

through (9) of the definition for ‘‘Certain 

dangerous cargo (CDC)’’ and the entire 

definition of ‘‘Certain dangerous cargo 

residue (CDC residue)’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 160.204 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Certain dangerous cargo (CDC) * * * 

* * * * * 

(7) All bulk liquefied gas cargo carried 

under 46 CFR 151.50–31 or listed in 46 

CFR 154.7 that is flammable and/or 

toxic and that is not carried as certain 

dangerous cargo residue (CDC residue). 

(8) The following bulk liquids except 

when carried as CDC residue: 

(i) Acetone cyanohydrin; 

(ii) Allyl alcohol; 

(iii) Chlorosulfonic acid; 

(iv) Crotonaldehyde; 

(v) Ethylene chlorohydrin; 

(vi) Ethylene dibromide; 

(vii) Methacrylonitrile; 

(viii) Oleum (fuming sulfuric acid); 

and 

(ix) Propylene oxide, alone or mixed 

with ethylene oxide. 

(9) The following bulk solids: 

(i) Ammonium nitrate listed as a 

Division 5.1 (oxidizing) material in 49 

CFR 172.101 except when carried as 

CDC residue; and 

(ii) Ammonium nitrate based fertilizer 

listed as a Division 5.1 (oxidizing) 

material in 49 CFR 172.101 except when 

carried as CDC residue. 

Certain dangerous cargo residue (CDC 

residue) includes any of the following: 

(1) Ammonium nitrate in bulk or 

ammonium nitrate based fertilizer in 

bulk remaining after all saleable cargo is 

discharged, not exceeding 1,000 pounds 

in total and not individually 

accumulated in quantities exceeding 

two cubic feet. 

(2) For bulk liquids and liquefied 

gases, the cargo that remains onboard in 

a cargo system after discharge that is not 

accessible through normal transfer 

procedures, with the exception of the 

following bulk liquefied gas cargoes 

carried under 46 CFR 151.50–31 or 

listed in 46 CFR 154.7: 

(i) Ammonia, anhydrous; 

(ii) Chlorine; 

(iii) Ethane; 

(iv) Ethylene oxide; 

(v) Methane (LNG); 

(vi) Methyl bromide; 

(vii) Sulfur dioxide; and 

(viii) Vinyl chloride. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 20, 2010. 

Kevin S. Cook, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of 

Prevention Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24221 Filed 9–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0872] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Natchez Fireworks Safety Zone; Lower 

Mississippi River, Mile Marker 365.5 to 

Mile Marker 363, Natchez, MS 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone for 

all waters of the Lower Mississippi 

River from mile marker 365.5 to 363 

extending the entire width of the river. 

This safety zone is needed to protect 

persons and vessels from the potential 

safety hazards associated with a 

fireworks display. Entry into this zone 

is prohibited to all vessels, mariners, 

and persons unless specifically 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

(COTP) Lower Mississippi River or a 

designated representative. The COTP 

Lower Mississippi River or a designated 

representative must authorize vessels 

that desire to operate in this zone. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 p.m. 

through 8:30 p.m. on September 28, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2010– 

0872 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2010–0872 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They 

are 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 temporary 

rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Junior 

Grade Jason Erickson, Coast Guard; 

telephone 901–521–4753, e-mail 

Jason.A.Erickson@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 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because 

immediate action is needed to protect 

the participants in the fireworks 

display, spectators, and mariners from 

the safety hazards associated with a 

fireworks display taking place on a 

confined waterway. 

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. This is because immediate 

action is needed to protect the 

participants in the fireworks display, 

spectators, and mariners from the safety 

hazards associated with a fireworks 

display taking place on a confined 

waterway. 

Basis and Purpose 

On September 13, 2010, the Coast 

Guard received an Application for 

Approval of Marine Event for a 

fireworks display on the Lower 

Mississippi River. This safety zone is 

needed to protect participants, 

spectators, and other mariners from the 

possible hazards associated with a 

fireworks show taking place on the 

Lower Mississippi River. The fallout 

zone extends into the navigable channel 

of the river. 

Discussion of Rule 

The Coast Guard is establishing a 

temporary safety zone for all waters of 

the Lower Mississippi from mile marker 

365.5 to 363 extending the entire width 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES