[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 82 (Thursday, April 28, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23710-23712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10248]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2011-0250]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zones: Bellingham Bay, Bellingham, WA and Lake Union,
Seattle, WA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing two redundant sections from its
regulations: Bellingham Bay, Bellingham, WA, and Lake Union, Seattle,
WA. This action is necessary to eliminate duplicate safety zones from
the regulations. These safety zones are also codified under these
regulations: Safety Zones; annual firework displays within the Captain
of the Port, Puget Sound Area of Responsibility.
DATES: This rule is effective May 31, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0250 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0250 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also 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.
[[Page 23711]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy, USCG Sector Puget Sound
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone 206-217-6323, e-
mail [email protected]. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is unnecessary as this rule's sole
purpose is to remove redundant sections from Title 33 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. The safety zones that are being removed from the
Code of Federal Regulations are already codified under 33 CFR 165.1332.
Basis and Purpose
After reviewing 33 CFR part 165, the Coast Guard has determined
that Sec. Sec. 165.1304 and 165.1306 are no longer necessary because
the safety zones in these sections are already codified under 33 CFR
165.1332. The Coast Guard is removing these redundant sections to
eliminate possible confusion and to use the more recently established
rule governing these safety zones.
Background
On June 10, 2010, 33 CFR 165.1332 Safety Zones; annual firework
displays within the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound Area of
Responsibility was published in the Federal Register. This section
simplified the fireworks safety zones. This new section also
encompasses the fireworks safety zones contained in 33 CFR 165.1304 and
165.1306. Therefore, the safety zones in 33 CFR 165.1304 and 165.1306
are unnecessary.
Discussion of Rule
The Coast Guard is removing 33 CFR 165.1304 and 165.1306 from the
Code of Federal Regulations. 33 CFR 165.1332 establishes and lists a
number of safety zones, including those contained in the sections being
removed at 33 CFR 165.1304 and 165.1332.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. The Coast Guard bases this finding on the
fact that this rule does not include creating any new zones only the
removal of two sections that were more recently codified under 33 CFR
165.1332.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. 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 rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule would not affect any small entities since
this rule does not involve creating any new safety zones. Information
concerning fireworks safety zones in Puget Sound affecting small
entities can be found in docket number: USCG-2010-0063 at http://www.regulations.gov.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
Collection of Information
This rule would call for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.
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 rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This 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.
Civil Justice Reform
This 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.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This 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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
[[Page 23712]]
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ``significant energy action'' under that
order because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator
of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated
it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a
Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
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. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
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 is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves removing 33 CFR 165.1304 and
165.1306 as these safety zones are already codified under 33 CFR
165.1332. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
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; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-
295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1
0
2. Remove Sec. 165.1304.
0
3. Remove Sec. 165.1306.
Dated: April 7, 2011.
S.J. Ferguson,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2011-10248 Filed 4-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P