81 FR 36831 - Safety Zone; Ohio River Mile 42.5 to 43.0, Chester, West Virginia
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 110 (June 8, 2016)
Coast Guard
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 110 (June 8, 2016)
| Page Range | 36831-36833 | |
| FR Document | 2016-13586 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 36831-36833] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-13586] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0335] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Ohio River Mile 42.5 to 43.0, Chester, West Virginia AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for all water extending 300 feet from the left descending bank into the Ohio River from mile 42.5 to mile 43.0. This proposed rule would be needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by a land based fireworks display. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone would be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking. DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 20, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG- 2016-0335 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh, [[Page 36832]] U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Sec. Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis On April 6, 2016, the Chester Volunteer Fire Department notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 9:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on July 4, 2016. The fireworks will be launched from land in the vicinity of Ohio River mile 42.5 to mile 43.0 along the left descending bank. Hazards from fireworks displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 9:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on July 4, 2016. The safety zone would cover the waters extending 300 feet from the left descending bank into the Ohio River from mile 42.5 to mile 43.0. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document. IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors. A. Regulatory Planning and Review Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 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. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration, of the safety zone and the low traffic nature of this area. The safety zone would close a small portion of the Ohio River for less than two hours. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow other waterway users to seek permission to enter the zone. Requests to transit the safety zone area would be considered on a case-by-case basis. B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV. A. above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. 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. 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. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 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. C. Collection of Information This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501- 3520). D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. Also, 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 between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. E. 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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this [[Page 36833]] action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting less than two hours that would prohibit entry into the safety zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist and Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places, or vessels. V. Public Participation and Request for Comments We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086). Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 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 0 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04- 1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 0 2. Add Sec. 165.T08-0335 to read as follows: Sec. 165.T08-0335 Safety Zone; Ohio River Mile 42.5 to Mile 43.0, Chester, WV. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters extending 300 feet from the left descending bank into the Ohio River from mile 42.5 to mile 43.0. (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone. (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in Sec. 165.23 of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's representative at 412-221-0807. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on July 4, 2016. (e) Informational Broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement. Dated: May 12, 2016. P.C. Burkett, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Pittsburgh. [FR Doc. 2016-13586 Filed 6-7-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 36831
15. What are the advantages, associated with maintaining equipment F. Other Information
disadvantages, and relative costs of equipped with these engines? Please provide any other data or
using DPM filters capable of reducing 23. What percentage of underground information that may be useful to
DPM concentrations by at least 75 coal mines’ total diesel equipment MSHA in evaluating miners’ exposures
percent or by an average of 95 percent inventory is equipped with Tier 4i or to harmful diesel exhaust emissions,
or to a level that does not exceed an Tier 4 engines? including the effectiveness of existing
average concentration of 0.12 milligrams control mechanisms for reducing
per cubic meter (mg/m3) of air when D. Monitoring MNM Miners’ Exposures
to DPM harmful diesel emissions and limiting
diluted by 100 percent of the MSHA miners’ exposures to harmful diesel
Part 7 approved ventilation rate for that exhaust emissions.
Under the existing standards, MSHA
diesel engine? How often do the filters
uses total carbon (TC) measurements as Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811, 813(h).
need to be replaced?
a surrogate for DPM when determining
16. What sensors (e.g. ammonia, Joseph A. Main,
MNM miners’ DPM exposures.
nitrogen oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety
(NO2)) are built into the after-treatment 24. MSHA requests information on and Health.
devices used on the diesel-powered alternative surrogates, other than TC, to
[FR Doc. 2016–13219 Filed 6–7–16; 8:45 am]
equipment? estimate a miner’s DPM exposure. What
BILLING CODE 4520–43–P
17. Are integrated engine and exhaust is the surrogate’s limit of detection and
after-treatment systems used to control what are potential interferences in a
DPM and gaseous emissions in the mine environment?
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
mining industry? If so, please describe 25. What are the advantages, SECURITY
the costs associated with acquiring and disadvantages, and relative costs for
maintaining integrated systems, and the using the alternative surrogate to Coast Guard
reduction in DPM emissions produced. determine a MNM miner’s exposure to
18. What are the advantages, DPM? Please be specific and include the 33 CFR Part 165
disadvantages, and relative costs of rationale for your response.
requiring that all light-duty diesel- [Docket Number USCG–2016–0335]
26. MSHA requests information on
powered equipment be equipped with advances in sampling and analytical RIN 1625–AA00
high-efficiency DPM filters? technology and other methods for
As discussed above, on June 29, 2004, measuring a MNM miner’s DPM Safety Zone; Ohio River Mile 42.5 to
EPA adopted Tier 4 diesel engine exposure that may allow for a reduced 43.0, Chester, West Virginia
standards. These standards are exposure limit. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
performance-based and technology-
neutral in the sense that manufacturers E. MNM Miners’ Personal Exposure ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
are responsible for determining which Limit (PEL)
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
emissions control technologies will be establish a temporary safety zone for all
MSHA analyzed its sampling data
needed to meet the requirements. water extending 300 feet from the left
from 2006 (when the final PEL was
Engine manufacturers will produce new descending bank into the Ohio River
published) to 2015, and found that the
engines with advanced emissions from mile 42.5 to mile 43.0. This
average exposures of MNM miners
control technologies to comply with proposed rule would be needed to
decreased by 57 percent from 253TC to
Tier 4 emissions standards. Exhaust protect personnel, vessels, and the
109TC mg/m3 in MNM mines. Further
emissions from these engines are marine environment from potential
analysis of the data revealed that
expected to decrease by more than 90 hazards created by a land based
approximately 63 percent of the mines
percent. fireworks display. Entry of vessels or
sampled had average exposures below
19. In the mining industry, are persons into this zone would be
100TC mg/m3 in 2015 and 75 percent of
operators replacing the engines on prohibited unless specifically
the mines sampled have average
existing equipment with Tier 4i authorized by the Captain of the Port
exposures below 122TC mg/m3. Overall,
(interim) or Tier 4 engines? If so, please Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated
50 percent of the mines sampled have
specify the type of equipment (make representative. We invite your
average exposures between 48TC and
and model) and engine size and tier. comments on this proposed rulemaking.
122TC mg/m3. For operators who have
Please indicate how much it costs to
had success in reducing exposures DATES: Comments and related material
replace the engine (parts and labor).
below the existing standard, please must be received by the Coast Guard on
20. What types of diesel equipment describe the best practices that you have or before June 20, 2016.
purchased new for use in the mining used to reduce controls. MSHA intends
industry is powered by Tier 4i or Tier ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to share this information with the identified by docket number USCG–
4 engines? What types of diesel- underground metal and nonmetal
powered equipment, purchased used for 2016–0335 using the Federal
mining community. eRulemaking Portal at http://
use in the mining industry, are powered
by Tier 3, Tier 4i or Tier 4 engines? 27. What existing controls were most www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
21. Are Tier 4i or Tier 4 engines used effective in reducing exposures since Participation and Request for
in underground mines equipped with 2006? Are these controls available and Comments’’ portion of the
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
diesel particulate filter (DPF) systems applicable to all MNM mines? SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
(e.g., advanced diesel engines with 28. Based on MSHA’s data, MNM further instructions on submitting
integrated after-treatment systems)? miners’ average exposures are well comments.
Please provide specific examples. below the existing standard of 160TC FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
22. How long have Tier 4i or Tier 4 mg/m3. What are the technological you have questions about this proposed
engines been in use in the mining challenges and relative costs of reducing rulemaking, call or email MST1 Jennifer
industry and what additional cost is the DPM exposure limit? Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:36 Jun 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JNP1.SGM 08JNP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_36941/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 36833
action is one of a category of actions that and can be viewed by following that Dated: May 12, 2016.
do not individually or cumulatively Web site’s instructions. Additionally, if P.C. Burkett,
have a significant effect on the human you go to the online docket and sign up Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
environment. This proposed rule for email alerts, you will be notified Captain of the Port Pittsburgh.
involves a safety zone lasting less than when comments are posted or a final [FR Doc. 2016–13586 Filed 6–7–16; 8:45 am]
two hours that would prohibit entry into rule is published. BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
the safety zone. Normally such actions
are categorically excluded from further List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure Marine safety, Navigation (water),
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
2–1 of Commandant Instruction Reporting and recordkeeping
M16475.lD. A preliminary requirements, Security measures, 34 CFR Chapter I
environmental analysis checklist and Waterways.
Categorical Exclusion Determination are For the reasons discussed in the [Docket ID ED–2016–OS–0002]
available in the docket where indicated preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
under ADDRESSES. We seek any RIN 1875–AA11
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
comments or information that may lead Secretary’s Proposed Supplemental
to the discovery of a significant PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION Priority for Discretionary Grant
environmental impact from this AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Programs
proposed rule.
■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 AGENCY: Department of Education.
G. Protest Activities
continues to read as follows: ACTION: Proposed priority.
The Coast Guard respects the First
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;
Amendment rights of protesters. 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes an
Protesters are asked to contact the Department of Homeland Security Delegation additional priority for use in any
person listed in the FOR FURTHER No. 0170.1. appropriate grant program for fiscal year
INFORMATION CONTACT section to (FY) 2016 and future years. The
coordinate protest activities so that your ■ 2. Add § 165.T08–0335 to read as
Secretary proposes to add this priority
message can be received without follows:
to the existing supplemental priorities
jeopardizing the safety or security of § 165.T08–0335 Safety Zone; Ohio River and definitions for discretionary grant
people, places, or vessels. Mile 42.5 to Mile 43.0, Chester, WV. programs that were published in 2014.
V. Public Participation and Request for (a) Location. The following area is a This priority reflects our current policy
Comments safety zone: All waters extending 300 objectives and emerging needs in
feet from the left descending bank into education.
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and the Ohio River from mile 42.5 to mile DATES: We must receive your comments
will consider all comments and material 43.0. on or before July 8, 2016.
received during the comment period. (b) Definitions. As used in this ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
Your comment can help shape the section, designated representative through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
outcome of this rulemaking. If you means a Coast Guard Patrol or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
submit a comment, please include the Commander, including a Coast Guard or hand delivery. We will not accept
docket number for this rulemaking, coxswain, petty officer, or other officer comments by fax or by email, or those
indicate the specific section of this operating a Coast Guard vessel and a submitted after the comment period. To
document to which each comment Federal, State, and local officer ensure that we do not receive duplicate
applies, and provide a reason for each designated by or assisting the Captain of copies, please submit your comments
suggestion or recommendation. the Port Pittsburgh (COTP) in the only once. In addition, please include
We encourage you to submit enforcement of the safety zone. the Docket ID at the top of your
comments through the Federal (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general comments.
eRulemaking Portal at http:// safety zone regulations in § 165.23 of • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov. If your material this part, you may not enter the safety www.regulations.gov to submit your
cannot be submitted using http:// zone described in paragraph (a) of this comments electronically. Information
www.regulations.gov, contact the person section unless authorized by the COTP on using Regulations.gov, including
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION or the COTP’s designated representative. instructions for accessing agency
CONTACT section of this document for (2) To seek permission to enter, documents, submitting comments, and
alternate instructions. contact the COTP or the COTP’s viewing the docket, is available on the
We accept anonymous comments. All representative at 412–221–0807. Those site under ‘‘How to use
comments received will be posted in the safety zone must comply with all regulations.gov.’’
without change to http:// lawful orders or directions given to • Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
www.regulations.gov and will include them by the COTP or the COTP’s or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
any personal information you have designated representative. your comments about the proposed
provided. For more about privacy and (d) Enforcement period. This section priority, address them to Ramin Taheri,
the docket, you may review a Privacy will be enforced from 9:30 p.m. to 11:00 U.S. Department of Education, 400
p.m. on July 4, 2016.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5E343,
Management System in the March 24, (e) Informational Broadcasts. The Washington, DC 20202–5930.
2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 COTP or a designated representative
Privacy Note: The Department’s policy is
FR 15086). will inform the public through to make all comments received from
Documents mentioned in this NPRM broadcast notices to mariners of the members of the public available for public
as being available in the docket, and all enforcement period for the safety zone viewing in their entirety on the Federal
public comments, will be in our online as well as any changes in the dates and eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.
docket at http://www.regulations.gov times of enforcement. Therefore, commenters should be careful to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:36 Jun 07, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JNP1.SGM 08JNP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_36941/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-06-08 03:10:44
Document Modified: 2016-06-08 03:10:44
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 20, 2016. | |
| Contact | If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 36831 | |
| RIN Number | 1625-AA00 | |
| CFR Associated | Marine Safety; Navigation (water); Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Security Measures and Waterways |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR