[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 68 (Wednesday, April 9, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19569-19572]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07838]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 147

[Docket Number USCG-2013-0874]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zones, Facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf in the
Gulf of Mexico

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish safety zones around four
Chevron North America (Chevron) facilities located on the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) in the Gulf of Mexico. The facilities are as
follows: The Jack & St Malo Semi-Sub Facility located in Walker Ridge
Block 718; The Petronius Compliant Tower Facility located in Viosca
Knoll Block 786; The Blind Faith Semi-Sub Facility located in
Mississippi Canyon Block 650; and The Tahiti SPAR Facility located in
Green Canyon Block 641.
    The purpose of these safety zones is to protect each facility from
vessels operating outside the normal shipping channels and fairways.
Placing a safety zone around each facility will significantly reduce
the threat of allisions, oil spills, and releases of natural gas, and
thereby protect the safety of life, property, and the environment.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 9, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-0874 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Mr. Rusty Wright, U.S. Coast Guard, District Eight
Waterways Management Branch; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
USCG United States Coast Guard
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OCS Outer Continental Shelf

A. 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.

1. Submitting Comments

    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. You may submit your comments and material online at
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, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, 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 email 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,
type the docket number [USCG-2013-0874] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ 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.

2. 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,
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0874) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. 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.

3. 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 Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the 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.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Under the authority provided in 14 U.S.C. 85, 43 U.S.C. 1333, and
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, Title 33, CFR
Part 147 permits the establishment of

safety zones for facilities located on the OCS for the purpose of
protecting life, property and the marine environment. Chevron requested
that the Coast Guard establish safety zones around four of its
facilities located in the deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico on the
OCS. Placing a safety zone around each of these four facilities will
significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil spills, and releases
of natural gas, and thereby protect the safety of life, property, and
the environment.
    For the purpose of safety zones established under 33 CFR Part 147,
the deepwater area is considered to be waters of 304.8 meters (1,000
feet) or greater depth extending to the limits of the Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ) contiguous to the territorial sea of the United
States and extending to a distance up to 200 nautical miles from the
baseline from which the breadth of the sea is measured. Navigation in
the vicinity of each safety zone consists of large commercial shipping
vessels, fishing vessels, cruise ships, tugs with tows and the
occasional recreational vessel. The deepwater area also includes an
extensive system of fairways.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Each of the proposed safety zones will extend 500 meters from each
point on the facility structure's outermost edge. The location of each
facility is as follows:
    (1) The Jack & St Malo Semi-Sub Facility is located in Walker Ridge
Block 718 with a center point at 26[deg]14'5.94'' N 91[deg]15'39.99''
W;
    (2) The Petronius Compliant Tower Facility is located in Viosca
Knoll Block 786 with a center point at 28[deg]13'44'' N/-87[deg]47'51''
W;
    (3) The Blind Faith Semi-Sub Facility is located in Mississippi
Canyon Block 650 with a center point at 28[deg]20'29.5279'' N/-
88[deg]15'56.4728'' W; and
    (4) The Tahiti SPAR Facility is located in Green Canyon Block 641
with a center point at 27[deg]19'33.3'' N/-90[deg]42'50.9'' W.
    The requests for these safety zones were made due to safety
concerns for both the personnel aboard the facilities and the
environment. Chevron indicated that it is highly likely that any
allision with one of these facilities would result in a catastrophic
event. In evaluating these requests, the Coast Guard explored relevant
safety factors and considered several criteria, including but not
limited to, (1) the level of shipping activity around each facility,
(2) safety concerns for personnel aboard each facility, (3) concerns
for the environment, (4) the likeliness that an allision would result
in a catastrophic event based on each facility's proximity to shipping
fairways, offloading operations, and production levels, (5) the volume
of traffic in the vicinity of each facility and proposed zone, (6) the
types of vessels navigating in the vicinity of each facility and
proposed zone, and (7) the structural configuration of each facility.
    Results from a thorough and comprehensive examination of these
criteria, International Maritime Organization guidelines, and existing
regulations warrant the establishment of a safety zone around each
facility. The proposed safety zones will reduce significantly the
threat of allisions, oil spills, and releases of natural gas and
increase the safety of life, property, and the environment in the Gulf
of Mexico by prohibiting entry into each zone unless specifically
authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District or a
designated representative.

D. 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 or executive orders.

1. 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,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This rule is not a
significant regulatory action due to the location of each facility on
the OCS and the distance between each facility and both land and
fairways. Vessel traffic can pass safely around each safety zone using
alternate routes. Exceptions to this proposed rule include vessels
measuring less than 100 feet in length overall and not engaged in
towing. Deviation to transit through each safety zone may be requested.
Such requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis and may be
authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District or a
designated representative.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 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.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in; Walker Ridge Block 718; Viosca Knoll
Block 786; Mississippi Canyon Block 650; and Green Canyon Block 641.
    These safety zones will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Vessel
traffic can pass safely around each safety zone using alternate routes.
Use of alternate routes may cause minimal delay in reaching a final
destination, depending on other traffic in the area and vessel speed.
Additionally, exceptions to this proposed rule include vessels
measuring less than 100 feet in length overall and not engaged in
towing. And, vessels may request deviation from this proposed rule to
transit through each safety zone. Such requests will be considered on a
case-by-case basis and may be authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast
Guard District or a designated representative. Therefore, the Coast
Guard expects any impact of this proposed rulemaking establishing
safety zones around OCS facilities to be minimal, with no significant
economic impact on small entities.
    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.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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, above. 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.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520.).

5. Federalism

    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
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed 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.

9. 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.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    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 will not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. 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 between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. 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 that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the establishment of safety zones around OCS Facilities to
protect life, property and the marine environment. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. Preliminary environmental
analysis checklists supporting this determination and Categorical
Exclusion Determinations 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147

    Continental shelf, Marine safety, Navigation (water).

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 147 as follows:

PART 147--SAFETY ZONES

0
1. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec. Sec.  147.851, 147.853, 147.855, and 147.857 to read as
follows:

Sec.  147.851  Jack & St Malo Semi-Sub Facility Safety Zone.

    (a) Description. The Jack & St Malo Semi-Sub facility is in the
deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at Walker Ridge block 718. The
facility is located at 26[deg]14'5.94'' N, 91[deg]15'39.99'' W and the
area within 500 meters (1640.4 feet) from each point on the facility
structure's outer edge is a safety zone.
    (b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
except the following:
    (1) An attending vessel;
    (2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in
towing; or
    (3) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
District or a designated representative.

Sec.  147.853  Petronius Compliant Tower Facility Safety Zone.

    (a) Description. The Petronius Compliant Tower facility is in the
deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at Viosca Knoll Block 786. The
facility is located at 28[deg]13'44'' N/-87[deg]47'51'' W and the area
within 500 meters (1640.4 feet) from each point on the facility
structure's outer edge is a safety zone.
    (b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
except the following:
    (1) An attending vessel;
    (2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in
towing; or
    (3) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
District or a designated representative.

Sec.  147.855  Blind Faith Semi-Sub Facility Safety Zone.

    (a) Description. The Blind Faith Semi-Sub facility is in the
deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at Mississippi Canyon Block 650.
The facility is located at 28[deg]20'29.5279'' N/-88[deg]15'56.4728'' W
and the area within 500 meters (1640.4 feet) from each point on the
facility structure's outer edge is a safety zone.

    (b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
except the following:
    (1) An attending vessel;
    (2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in
towing; or
    (3) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
District or a designated representative.

Sec.  147.857  Tahiti SPAR Facility Safety Zone.

    (a) Description. The Tahiti SPAR facility is in the deepwater area
of the Gulf of Mexico at Tahiti SPAR. The facility is located at
27[deg]19'33.3''; N/-90[deg]42'50.9'' W and the area within 500 meters
(1640.4 feet) from each point on the facility structure's outer edge is
a safety zone.
    (b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
except the following:
    (1) An attending vessel;
    (2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in
towing; or
    (3) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
District or a designated representative.

    Dated: March 10, 2014.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014-07838 Filed 4-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I wish to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and concerns on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life and I hope they will exist in the future for others to quit smoking.  I ask not so much for myself but for the millions of people who still smoke cigarettes.  I wish to provide you with my personal story or giving up cigarettes for 9 months now after many failed attempts with traditional products, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:As being a smoker very many years I was noticing health decline and after consulting with my physician he recommended switching to e-cigarettes. Within months I began to require my taste and my breathing had improved as well. I do not feel that the FDA should regulate e-juice rather they assist companies who produce e-juice with product testing and insuring there is no health risks or added chemicals in our smoke free alternative.

A 75 day comment period is insufficient time for the vaping industry and the wider vaping community to comment on the proposed deeming regulations. I would respectfully request that the period for comment be extended to 180 days.


[Federal Register: September 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 189)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56473]
[DOCID:fr29se08-12]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0339; Airspace Docket No. 08-ASW-5]

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Altus AFB, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; change of effective date; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action changes the effective date and makes a correction
to the direct final rule that amends Class D and Class E airspace at
Altus AFB, OK, published in the Federal Register August 6, 2008 (73 FR
45605) Docket No. FAA-2008-0339. The effective date is changed to
November 20, 2008, to allow additional time for charting. This action
also makes a correction to the geographic coordinates of Altus AFB.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, November 20, 2008. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Mallett, Central Service Center,
System Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76193-0530; telephone (817)
222-4949.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    The FAA published a direct final rule with request for comments in
the Federal Register August 6, 2008, (73 FR 45605), Docket No. FAA-
2008-0339. Subsequent to publication, the FAA found that additional
time was needed for charting. The effective date is changed to November
20, 2008, to allow additional time for charting. Also, there is a minor
correction to the coordinates for the latitude/longitude of Altus AFB,
OK.

Correction

0
In the Federal Register dated August 6, 2008, in Federal Register
Docket No. FAA-2008-0339, the geographical coordinates of Altus AFB, OK
are corrected to read:

Altus AFB, OK
    (Lat. 34[deg]39[min]59[sec] N., long. 99[deg]16[min]05[sec] W)

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on September 9, 2008.
Donald R. Smith,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E8-21518 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


MEMORANDUM Subject: Meeting with Representatives of Global Fluids International ( GFI)

From: Jeff Herzog, Mechanical Engineer Office of Transportation and Air Quality To: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA), Air Docket A 2001 28 Date: March 30, 2004 On March 30, 2004, Jeff Herzog and Paul Machiele of EPA met with Eli Zahavi and Oren Zahavi of GFI at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. We discussed EPA's proposed heating oil marker requirements under the nonroad diesel fuel Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and characteristics of GFI's fuel marker technology.