Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 137 / Monday, July 20, 2009 / Proposed Rules 35151 

intersection with the 3,400-foot 

elevation line, T5N, R13W; then 

(22) Proceed generally southeast along 

the 3,400-foot elevation line, crossing 

over Latteau, Willow Springs, and 

Hauser Canyons and continuing onto 

the Ritter Ridge map, to the line’s 

intersection with an unimproved dirt 

road at Summit, section 16, T5N, R13W; 

then 

(23) Proceed south along the unnamed 

dirt road less than 0.1 mile, crossing the 

Sierra Highway, to its intersection with 

the 3,400-foot elevation line, section 16, 

T5N, R13W; then 

(24) Proceed generally southwest 

along the 3,400-foot elevation line, 

meandering between the Sleepy Valley 

and Ritter Ridge maps and then 

returning to the Sleepy Valley map, to 

the line’s intersection with the section 

20 north boundary line, T5N, R13W; 

then 

(25) Proceed in a straight line west 

along the section 20 north boundary line 

0.2 mile to the line’s intersection with 

the 3,200-foot elevation line, section 20, 

T5N, R13W; then 

(26) Proceed generally southwest 

along the 3,200-foot elevation line to the 

line’s intersection with the section 19 

west boundary line, T5N, R13W; then 

(27) Proceed in a straight line north 

along the section 19 west boundary line 

0.15 mile to the line’s intersection with 

a pipeline, T5N, R13W; and then 

(28) Proceed southwest onto the Agua 

Dulce map 1.25 miles along the 

pipeline, returning to the beginning 

point. 

Signed: July 7, 2009. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–17179 Filed 7–17–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0529] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Cape Charles Tomato 

Festival Fireworks Event, Chesapeake 

Bay, Cape Charles, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes 

establishing a 280-foot radius safety 

zone on the Chesapeake Bay in the 

vicinity of the Cape Charles Town 

Harbor, Cape Charles, VA in support of 

the Cape Charles Tomato Festival 

Fireworks event. This action is intended 

to protect mariners from the hazards 

associated with fireworks displays by 

restricting vessel traffic movement in 

the vicinity of the event. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before August 19, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2009–0529 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: 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– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail LT Tiffany Duffy, 

United States Coast Guard Sector 

Hampton Roads Waterways 

Management Division; telephone 

757–668–5580, e-mail 

Tiffany.A.Duffy@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2009–0529), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online (via http:// 

www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

comment. If you fax, hand delivery, or 

mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a telephone number in the 

body of your document so that we can 

contact you if we have questions 

regarding your submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG– 

2009–0529’’ in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the balloon 

shape in the Actions column. If you 

submit your comments by mail or hand 

delivery, submit them in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying and electronic 

filing. If you submit comments by mail 

and would like to know that they 

reached the Facility, please enclose a 

stamped, self-addressed postcard or 

envelope. We will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period and may change 

the rule based on your comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert USCG– 

2009–0529 in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the item in the 

Docket ID column. You may also visit 

the Docket Management Facility in 

Room W12–140 on the ground floor of 

the Department of Transportation West 

Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. We have an 

agreement with the Department of 

Transportation to use the Docket 

Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
35152 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 137 / Monday, July 20, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting would be beneficial. If we 

determine that one would aid this 

rulemaking, we will hold one at a time 

and place announced by a later notice 

in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

On September 26, 2009, the Cape 

Charles Renewal Project will sponsor a 

fireworks display on the Chesapeake 

Bay shoreline centered on position 

37°15′46′′ N/076°01′30′′ W (NAD 1983). 

Due to the need to protect mariners and 

spectators from the hazards associated 

with the fireworks display, the United 

States Coast Guard proposes restricting 

access within 280 feet of the fireworks 

launch site. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes 

establishing a safety zone on the 

navigable waters of the Chesapeake Bay 

within 280 feet of position 37°15′46′′ N/ 

076°01′30′′ W (NAD 1983). This safety 

zone would be established in the 

vicinity of the Cape Charles Town 

Harbor, Cape Charles, VA on September 

26, 2009. In the interest of public safety, 

access to the safety zone would be 

restricted from 8 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on 

September 26, 2009. Except for 

participants and vessels authorized by 

the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or 

his representative, no person or vessel 

would be authorized to enter or remain 

in the regulated area. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed 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 proposed 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. Although this regulation restricts 

access to the safety zone, the effect of 

this rule would not be significant 

because: (i) The safety zone will be in 

effect for a limited duration; (ii) the 

zone would be of limited size; and (iii) 

the Coast Guard would make 

notifications via maritime advisories so 

mariners can adjust their plans 

accordingly. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

whether this proposed 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 proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This rule may affect the 

following entities, some of which may 

be small entities: The owners or 

operators of vessels intending to transit 

or anchor within the specified zone 

during the enforcement periods. 

The safety zone would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

because the zone would only be 

enforced for a limited time and is of 

limited size. Additionally, vessel traffic 

can pass safely around the zone. Before 

the effective period, maritime advisories 

would be issued and made widely 

available to waterway users. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

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 Tiffany 

Duffy. The Coast Guard will not retaliate 

against small entities that question or 

complain about this proposed rule or 

any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not 

result in such an expenditure, we do 

discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not effect 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 proposed 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 proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 137 / Monday, July 20, 2009 / Proposed Rules 35153 

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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule 

involves establishing a safety zone 

around a fireworks display. The 

fireworks will be launched from a land 

area, however some fallout may enter 

the water within a 280 foot radius of the 

launching site. This zone is designed to 

protect mariners from the hazards 

associated with fireworks displays. We 

seek any comments or information that 

may lead to the discovery of a 

significant environmental impact from 

this proposed 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, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

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

Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

2. Add temporary § 165.T05–0529, to 

read as follows: 

§ 165.T05–0529 Safety Zone: Cape Charles 

Tomato Festival Fireworks Event, 

Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VA. 

(a) Regulated area. The following area 

is a safety zone: All navigable waters 

within 280 feet of position 37°15′46′′ N/ 

076°01′30′′ W (NAD 1983), in the 

vicinity of the Cape Charles Town 

Harbor in Cape Charles, VA. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, Captain of the Port 

Representative means any U.S. Coast 

Guard commissioned, warrant or petty 

officer who has been authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, 

Virginia to act on his behalf. 

(c) 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, Hampton Roads or 

his designated representatives. 

(2) The operator of any vessel in the 

immediate vicinity of this safety zone 

shall: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon 

being directed to do so by any 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

on shore or on board a vessel that is 

displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. 

(ii) Proceed as directed by any 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

on shore or on board a vessel that is 

displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. 

(3) The Captain of the Port, Hampton 

Roads and the Sector Duty Officer at 

Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, 

Virginia can be contacted at telephone 

number (757) 668–5555. 

(4) The Captain of the Port 

Representative enforcing the safety zone 

can be contacted on VHF–FM marine 

band radio, channel 13 (156.65Mhz) and 

channel 16 (156.8Mhz). 

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast 

Guard may be assisted in the patrol and 

enforcement of the zone by Federal, 

State, and local agencies. 

(e) Enforcement period. This rule is 

effective on September 26, 2009 from 8 

p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 

Dated: June 30, 2009. 

M.S. Ogle, 

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

Port Hampton Roads. 

[FR Doc. E9–17101 Filed 7–17–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2009–0466; FRL–8932–6] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan; National 

Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the 

Central Wood Preserving Company 

Superfund Site from the National 

Priorities List. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 6 is issuing a 

notice of intent to delete Central Wood 

Preserving Company Superfund Site 

(Site) located in East Feliciana Parish, 

Louisiana, from the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Louisiana, through the 

Louisiana Department of Environmental 

Quality, have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation and 

maintenance and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

August 19, 2009. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1