Source: http://thefederalregister.com/2012/11/28/2012-28794.html
Timestamp: 2018-09-21 03:40:37
Document Index: 574993685

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', '§ 127', 'art 127', '§ 127', '§ 127', '§ 127', 'art 127', '§ 127', '§ 127', 'ART 127', 'art 127', '§ 127', '§ 127', '§ 127', '§ 127', '§ 127']

Federal Register | Reconsideration of Letters of Recommendation for Waterfront F
RIN 1625-AB67
SUMMARY: This final rule clarifies the role and purpose of the Letter of Recommendation (LOR) issued by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port regarding the suitability of a waterway for liquefied natural gas (LNG) or liquefied hazardous gas (LHG) marine traffic. It also establishes a separate process for reconsideration of LORs by the Coast Guard. The process applies only to LORs issued after the effective date of the rule.
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-2011-0227 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 tohttp://www.regulations.govand inserting "USCG-2011-0227" in the "Search" box.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. Ken Smith (CG-OES-2), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (202) 372-1413, emailKen.A.Smith@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 APAAdministrative Procedure Act CFRCode of Federal Regulations COTPCaptain of the Port DHSDepartment of Homeland Security FERCFederal Energy Regulatory Commission FRFederal Register LHGLiquefied hazardous gas LNGLiquefied natural gas LOILetter of Intent LORLetter of Recommendation NEPANational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NPRMNotice of proposed rulemaking Pub. L.Public Law PWSAPorts and Waterways Safety Act of 1972, as amended U.S.C.United States Code II. Regulatory History
On December 16, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled “Reconsideration of Letters of Recommendation for Waterfront Facilities Handling LNG and LHG” in theFederal Register(76 FR78188). We received two letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested and none was held.
The Coast Guard issues LORs pursuant to the authority of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act of 1972, as amended (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221et seq.). Section 813 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 also directs the Coast Guard to make a recommendation to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as to the suitability of marine traffic associated with a proposed waterside LNG facility (Pub. L. 111-281, 124 Stat. 2905, 2999) (Oct. 15, 2010), and the LOR meets that requirement. This rule clarifies the role and purpose of the LOR, and establishes a separate process for reconsideration of LORs issued by the Coast Guard. This clarification and establishment of a new process are necessary because of confusion caused in part by the past practice of reconsidering LORs using the appeals process set forth in 33 CFR 127.015. We issue this final rule under the authority of the statutes already described, as well as Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 and 33 CFR subpart 1.05.
Several issued LORs have invited the recipient to request reconsideration of the LOR pursuant to 33 CFR 127.015, which provides that “[a]ny person directly affected by an action taken under this part may request reconsideration by the Coast Guard officer responsible for that action.” The process set forth in § 127.015 is the same that an owner or operator would use to appeal agency actions described elsewhere in Part 127, such as a COTP's Order to suspend operations. The use of § 127.015 to request reconsideration of LORs, however, has led to confusion about the nature and proper role of the LOR. This is in part because use of the words “action” and “final agency action” in § 127.015 create confusion as to whether the LOR is an agency action for purposes of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551et seq.). While we believe LORs should be subject to internal Coast Guard review, we did not intend to suggest that an LOR is an agency action, or that the LOR conveys a right or obligation.
As discussed above, we believe that some of the past confusion regarding the nature of LORs stems from the Coast Guard's use of 33 CFR 127.015 for LOR reconsiderations. The process in § 127.015 is designed for appeals of agency actions taken under the authority of Part 127,1 and using that same process for internal reconsideration of LORs inadvertently caused confusion between the two. In particular, § 127.015 applies to “[a]ny person directly affected by an action taken under this part,” and using that language in reference to an unenforceable recommendation is inapt.
1The Coast Guard does take agency action with respect to LNG and LHG facilities when it enforces its rules addressing the operation, maintenance, personnel training, firefighting, and security of the marine transfer area of waterfront facilities that handle LNG or LHG cargos, and when the COTP issues an Order directing vessel operations. See the detailed discussion in the NPRM (76 FR 78189).
The Coast Guard seeks to resolve the resulting confusion and, further, believes the process in § 127.015 is inappropriately complicated and lengthy in light of the LOR's role as a recommendation to another agency in the context of that agency's permittingprocess. The LOR is intended to inform the jurisdictional agency's process, and therefore should be available to the jurisdictional agency early in that process. A reconsideration process that results in revisions to the LOR after the jurisdictional agency's decision does not serve the purpose of the LOR.
Pursuant to the Natural Gas Act, as amended, FERC possesses theexclusiveauthority to approve or deny an application for the siting, construction, expansion, and operation of a waterfront LNG facility (see 15 U.S.C. 717b(e)). Similarly, for proposals to site, construct, expand, or operate a waterfront LHG facility, the agency with jurisdiction (Federal, State, or local) over the project possesses approval authority. The agency with jurisdiction over the proposed action of siting, constructing, or operating the waterfront LNG or LHG facility serves as the lead agency responsible for complying with the applicable environmental review requirements.
Furthermore, issuing an LOR neither authorizes nor prohibits vessel transit to or from the LNG or LHG facility. If safety or security concerns prompted the Coast Guard to address vessel operations near the facility, the Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) would do so in a COTP order; that COTP order would be issued pursuant to specific authority granted by the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221et seq.) that is wholly independent of, and does not rely on or enforce, an LOR. To interpret the LOR as a Federal agency action under the APA would impermissibly detract from the jurisdictional agency's authority to license the siting, construction, and operation of LNG and LHG waterfront facilities.
Executive Orders 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This final rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the final rule has not beenreviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
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. 4321-4370h), and have concluded that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves creating a separate process for reconsideration of LORs and is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(a) of the Instruction, which includes regulations that are editorial or procedural, such as those updating addresses or establishing application procedures. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated under theADDRESSESsection of this preamble.
Fire prevention, Harbors, Hazardous substances, Natural gas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
PART 127—WATERFRONT FACILITIES HANDLING LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS AND LIQUEFIED HAZARDOUS GAS 1. The authority citation for part 127 continues to read as follows: Authority:
2. Revise § 127.009 to read as follows:
(b) An LOR issued under this section is a recommendation from the COTP to the agency having jurisdiction as described in paragraph (a), and does not constitute agency action for the purposes of § 127.015 or the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551et seq.).
3. Add § 127.010 to read as follows:
§ 127.010 Reconsideration of the Letter of Recommendation.
(d) The District Commander's written confirmation described in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section ends the reconsideration process with respect to that specific request for reconsideration. If the COTP issues an LOR pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) or (c)(3)(ii) of this section, persons described in§ 127.009(c) may request reconsideration of that revised LOR using the process beginning in paragraph (a) of this section.
Dated: November 14, 2012. J.G. Lantz, Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.