FR 2024-29803

The document from the Federal Register announces that the Coast Guard is eliminating the safety and security zones around the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant in Plymouth, Massachusetts. This decision follows the permanent cessation of its power operations, rendering existing security regulations unnecessary. The rule will become effective on January 16, 2025. As a result, the area will no longer appear on navigation charts and publications, and any markers delineating the zone will be removed. The decision received unanimous support from the few comments received during the proposal stage, and it's not expected to significantly burden small businesses or necessitate additional data collection.

Summary of the Rule

The Federal Register document outlines the closing of safety and security zones that were previously in place for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant. These zones were initially established for security purposes when the plant was operational. With power operations now permanently halted, the need for these zones has been deemed obsolete. Consequently, the Coast Guard will update navigation charts and remove any physical navigational markers associated with the zones.

Significant Issues and Concerns

One noticeable issue is the lack of specific details regarding the economic impact, if any, that might result from this change. While it states there will not be a significant impact on small entities, the document does not elaborate on any particular analysis performed to arrive at this conclusion. Also, while it assures compliance with several Executive Orders, the environmental implications of this action are briefly covered, leaving room for further explanation. There is also limited discussion on how removing the security zone might affect the general safety or logistical operations surrounding the waterfront facility. Additionally, the document contains various legal references that may not be easily accessible or understandable to those without specialized knowledge.

Broader Public Impact

The change might affect the local community and those using the surrounding waterways by removing previously established security measures. Generally, this decision will streamline navigation referencing, as outdated security zones will no longer complicate charts and guides. However, without detailed information on potential risks or new safety measures, some members of the public may have concerns about safety and security in the area.

Impact on Stakeholders

For specific stakeholders, such as nearby residents and marine operators, the removal of these zones could have both positive and negative consequences. On the positive side, simplifying navigational aids might enhance marine transit efficiency. On the downside, the withdrawal of dedicated safety zones could lead to concerns about emergency preparedness or the mitigation of potential risk from remaining nuclear materials, thereby requiring additional local measures to reassure stakeholders about ongoing safety and security. Small businesses in the vicinity appear unaffected by this regulatory change, but clearer communication could help them understand the implications better.

Overall, the document reflects a regulatory realignment to match the current operational status of the plant while ensuring compliance with relevant laws and policies. It underscores the importance of adjusting safety rules in response to changing conditions to better serve public needs and safety, although additional clarity on consequential aspects might be beneficial for stakeholders’ peace of mind.

In the document "Safety and Security Zones: Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant, Plymouth Massachusetts," the financial aspect is mentioned concerning the potential expenditure addressed by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. The act requires federal agencies to evaluate discretionary regulatory actions that might lead to significant expenses for state, local, tribal governments, or the private sector. Specifically, the rule notes actions that could result in expenditures of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more within a year. However, the rule reassures that disestablishing the safety and security zone at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant does not result in any such expenditure.

While the referenced expenditure threshold is significant, the document does not specify any actual spending, savings, or economic impacts that might result from the rule. This lack of specific economic analysis is aligned with the issues identified, which point out that the document lacks details on financial costs or savings. For a general audience, particularly those with vested interests such as local businesses or governments, understanding these financial implications could be crucial for evaluating any indirect economic impacts or potential benefits following the removal of the security zone.

The document asserts that the action will not have a significant economic impact on small entities but fails to delve into specific analyses regarding different categories of small entities. For those small businesses or organizations potentially affected, this could mean uncertainty about new costs or changes in regulatory compliance requirements associated with the removal of the zone.

Finally, while financial references are minimal, they imply a sense of assurance that this regulatory adjustment is not expected to lead to substantial financial burdens, aligning with broader regulatory goals to minimize unnecessary economic impact. However, additional clarity and details would enhance understanding, especially for those potentially affected by the financial implications of such federal regulatory changes.