Je veux savoir à propos de…

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 193 / Friday, October 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations comment period. The Corps agrees that a mailing list should be available to people who wish to be alerted of public notices. The Honolulu District mailing list can be found at https
www.poh.usace.army.mil/Missions/
Regulatory/Public-Notices/.
Several commenters stated that the proposed danger zone should be evaluated through the preparation of an environmental impact statement EIS.
Some commenters stated that an EIS
should be prepared because of the lack of economic analysis or because they believe that the danger zone would have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. One commenter said that specific sections of the environmental assessment should be referenced and stated that the public notice was incomplete. Another commenter said that the Corps was placing the responsibility on the public to provide the analysis of impacts.
Several commenters said that the establishment of the danger zone is a significant regulatory action. Some commenters requested consultation documents for Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the essential fish habitat provisions of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act so that they could comment on the completeness of those consultations.
For the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act NEPA, the Federal action being undertaken by the Corps is the promulgation of the danger zone regulation under its authorities at 33 U.S.C. 1 and 3 and the procedures in 33 CFR part 334. The Corps is responsible for assessing the impacts of the proposed danger zone on the human environment, and for preparing appropriate NEPA documentation for its decision on whether to issue the final rule that would establish the danger zone. After evaluating the comments received in response to the proposed rule, to comply with NEPA
requirements the Corps prepared an environmental assessment for this rulemaking action and concluded that the establishment of the danger zone would not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment and therefore does not require the preparation of an EIS. A copy of the environmental assessment is available from the Corps Honolulu District office.
The establishment of this danger zone will not result in work, structures, or any construction within the Pacific Ocean, or any modification to any vegetation, habitat, or structures in the Pacific Ocean, on the shore, or on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:15 Oct 07, 2021

Jkt 256001

land. Therefore, the Corps Federal action, which is the establishment of this danger zone, will not have any impacts on natural resources or historical and cultural resources. With respect to impacts to people on Guam, the danger zone is intended to protect the public from hazards that may result from the use of the Mason LFTRC. The boundaries of the danger zone will be plotted by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA
on its nautical charts, which will help alert users of those navigable waters to the presence of the danger zone, and to the text of the regulations governing that danger zone.
The establishment of a future Marine Corps base on Guam is a separate action that is outside of the Corps rulemaking action for the establishment of this danger zone. Therefore, in its NEPA
documentation for the rulemaking to establish the danger zone, the Corps is not required to address the potential future establishment of a Marine Corps base on Guam. Because the danger zone will be in effect only when the range is in use, the establishment of the danger zone will promote public safety, and impacts to the human environment caused by the establishment of the danger zone have been minimized.
Vessel operators and fishers can use the navigable waters within the danger zone when the danger zone is not activated for live fire training exercises. The Corps has determined there is no need or requirement for mitigation beyond incorporating measures into the regulation governing the danger zone to minimize impacts to maritime traffic and fishing activities. The Corps determined that this rulemaking action is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 because it does not trigger any of the four significance thresholds identified in that Executive order.
At Marine Corps Base Camp Blaz, the Navy is the Federal agency responsible for compliance with applicable Federal laws, which may include Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the Essential Fish Habitat provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. The Navys documents demonstrating compliance with these laws and concurrences from the agencies administering these laws can be obtained from the Navys 2015
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement SEIS for the Guam and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Military Relocation.

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

56209

A couple of commenters said that the Corps does not have the authority to establish the danger zone. One of these comments was specific to Chamoru lands and the other comment pertained to the area shoreward of waters of the United States. Some commenters stated that specifics on land restrictions should be made clear and studied for how these restrictions would affect cultural and historic sites. One commenter said that the restrictions were arbitrarily decided upon.
The Corps authority for establishing danger zones is provided in Chapter 143, Subchapter XIX of the Army Appropriations Act of 1919 40 Stat 892;
33 U.S.C. 3. The Corps agrees that it does not have the authority to establish danger zones in uplands landward of the mean high water line. The danger zone does not extend into areas landward of the mean high water line.
Therefore, there will be no land restrictions caused by the establishment of this danger zone. With respect to the comment asserting that the restrictions were arbitrarily decided, the Corps disagrees that the decision was arbitrary. The Marines conducted extensive studies on the ballistics of weapons to be fired at the Mason LFTRC. The design of each range further limited the space in navigable waters needed for the danger zone. The Marines requested that the danger zone be comprised of two areas to close off the smallest amount of area necessary for specific training sessions, to minimize impacts to the publics use of navigable waters.
A couple of commenters asked about the consequences of entering the danger zone and requested information regarding how the public could inform the Marines if someone violated the danger zone. These commenters said there is a need for public outreach and education on the use of the danger zone.
Concerning potential consequences for entering the danger zone while it is being used for small arms training, the most immediate consequence would be the potential for being struck by bullets, which on rare occasions may ricochet beyond the ranges containment berms.
This safety hazard is the reason for the establishment of this danger zone, which is to help provide for public safety when the range is in use. If a person, vessel, watercraft, etc. enter the danger zone without authorization, MCBCB Range Control will notify the U.S. Coast Guard for action. Concerning how the public can notify the Marines if someone appears to violate the danger zone regulation, notification of alleged violations of the danger zone regulation can be provided to the MCBCB Range
E:FRFM08OCR1.SGM

08OCR1