Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License, 38486-38488 [07-3447]

Download as PDF 38486 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 134 / Friday, July 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), 1341, 1344, 1362. PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest Rates Used to Value Benefits 5. In appendix B to part 4044, a new entry for August 2007, as set forth below, is added to the table. I 4. The authority citation for part 4044 continues to read as follows: I The values of it are: For valuation dates occurring in the month— it * * * August 2007 ...................................................................... Issued in Washington, DC, on this 9th day of July 2007. Vincent K. Snowbarger, Deputy Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. [FR Doc. E7–13594 Filed 7–12–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 105 [Docket Nos. TSA–2006–24191; USCG– 2006–24196] RIN 1652–AA41 United States Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS). ACTION: Final rule; extension of compliance date. AGENCY: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through the United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard), issues this final rule to extend compliance dates for the redesignation of secure areas. The Coast Guard is delaying the date by which facilities wishing to redefine their secure areas must submit an amendment to their facility security plan. Amendments to facility security plans are now due by September 4, 2007. SUMMARY: This final rule is effective July 13, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of dockets TSA–2006–24191 and mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES DATES: 16:47 Jul 12, 2007 it * for t = * .0549 1–20 Jkt 211001 USCG–2006–24196, and are available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility, 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. You may also find this docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call LCDR Jonathan Maiorine, telephone 1– 877–687–2243. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–493–0402. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 22, 2006, The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through the United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) published a joint notice of proposed rulemaking entitled ‘‘Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver’s License’’ in the Federal Register (71 FR 29396). This was followed by a 45 day comment period and four public meetings. The Coast Guard and TSA issued a joint final rule, under the same title, on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3492) (hereinafter referred to as the original TWIC final rule). The preamble to that final rule contains a discussion of all the comments received on the NPRM, as well as a discussion of the provisions found in the original TWIC final rule, which became effective on March 26, 2007. II. Background and Purpose A complete discussion of the background and purpose of the original TWIC final rule may be found beginning at 72 FR 3494. This final rule is being PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 * >20 .0516 I. Regulatory History Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver’s License VerDate Aug<31>2005 for t = it for t = * N/A N/A issued in order to amend the original TWIC final rule to reflect delays in the issuance of guidance. III. Discussion of Change The Coast Guard is delaying the date by which facilities wishing to redefine their secure areas must submit an amendment to their facility security plan. The original final rule required these submissions to be made to the appropriate Captain of the Port (COTP) by July 25, 2007. The Coast Guard issued its Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) containing guidance on which facilities are eligible for this redefinition, and what would be an acceptable new definition of ‘‘secure area,’’ on July 6, 2007. In order to provide facility owners and operators time to take this guidance into account before submitting their revised plan, we are delaying the deadline for these submission until September 4, 2007. This amendment may be found at 33 CFR 105.115. IV. Regulatory Requirements A. Administrative Procedure Act We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this final rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM, because providing opportunity for public comment is unnecessary and would be contrary to the public interest. The provision being amended by this final rule without prior notice and comment eases a restriction on the public by providing the public (owners and operators of facilities regulated by 33 CFR part 105) with more time to comply with the regulatory requirements. For the same reason, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 134 / Friday, July 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations B. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) The original TWIC final rule was a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review and therefore it was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. E.O. 12866 requires an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Final Assessment for the original TWIC final rule is available in both the TSA and Coast Guard dockets where indicated under the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. A summary of that assessment was included in the original TWIC final rule at 72 FR 3570– 3572. This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be minimal and a full Regulatory Evaluation unnecessary. We anticipate that these changes will not substantially increase TWIC related compliance costs to the affected entities and in most cases will provide advantages through deadline extensions. C. 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. We do not expect this rule to substantially increase TWIC related compliance costs, as it extends a deadline. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES D. Assistance for Small Entities 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 the rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:47 Jul 12, 2007 Jkt 211001 and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 888-REG-FAIR (1–888–734–3247).] E. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 3520). F. 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. G. 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 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. H. Taking of Private Property This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. I. 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. J. 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. K. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 38487 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does 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. L. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 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. M. 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. N. Environment The provisions of this rule have been analyzed under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Management Directive (MD) 5100.1, Environmental Planning Program, which is the DHS policy and procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and related E.O.s and requirements. The changes being made by this final rule have no effect on the environmental analysis that accompanied the promulgation of the original TWIC final rule. That analysis can be found at 72 FR 3576–3577. E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1 38488 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 134 / Friday, July 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations Accordingly, there are no extraordinary circumstances presented by this rule that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion (CATEX) under MD 5100.1, Appendix A, paragraph 3.2. The implementation of this rule, like the implementation of the original TWIC final rule, is categorically excluded under the following CATEX listed in MD 5100.1, Appendix A, Table 1: CATEX A1 (personnel, fiscal, management and administrative activities); CATEX A3 (promulgation of rules, issuance of rulings or interpretations); and CATEX A4 (information gathering, data analysis and processing, information dissemination, review, interpretation and development of documents). CATEX B3 (proposed activities and operations to be conducted in an existing structure that would be compatible with and similar in scope to ongoing functional uses) and CATEX B 11 (routine monitoring and surveillance activities that support law enforcement or homeland security and defense operations) would also be applicable. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 105 Facilities, Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 105 as follows: I PART 105—MARITIME SECURITY: FACILITIES 1. The authority citation for part 105 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 70103; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04– 11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No, 0170.1. § 105.115 [Amended] 2. Amend § 105.115(c) by removing the date ‘‘July 25, 2007’’ and adding in its place the date ‘‘September 4, 2007’’. I Dated: July 10, 2007. F.J. Sturm, Acting Assistant Commandant for Prevention. [FR Doc. 07–3447 Filed 7–11–07; 12:11 pm] mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES BILLING CODE 4910–15–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:47 Jul 12, 2007 Jkt 211001 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD09–07–069] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of enforcement of regulation. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Milwaukee Harbor Safety Zone in Milwaukee Harbor during June through September 2007. This action is necessary to protect vessels and people from the hazards associated with fireworks displays. This safety zone will restrict vessel traffic from a portion of the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan Zone. DATES: Effective from 9 p.m. on June 28, 2007 to 11 p.m. on September 8, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747– 7154. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the Safety Zone, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI, 33 CFR 165.935 for the following events: (1) Summerfest fireworks display on June 28, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m.; (2) Festa Italiana fireworks displays on July 19, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m.; on July 20, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m.; on July 21, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m.; and on July 22, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m.; (3) German Fest fireworks display on July 27, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m.; on July 28, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m.; and on July 29, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m.; (4) Mexican Fiesta fireworks display on August 24, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m.; and (5) Indian Summer fireworks displays on September 8, 2007 from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m. All vessels must obtain permission from the Captain of the Port or his onscene representative to enter, move within or exit the safety zone. Vessels and persons granted permission to enter the safety zone shall obey all lawful orders or directions of the Captain of the Port or a designated representative. While within a safety zone, all vessels PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 shall operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course. This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.935 Safety Zone, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI (published on June 13, 2007 at 72 FR 32522) and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of these enforcement periods via broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public when enforcement of the safety zone established by this section is suspended. The Captain of the Port may be contacted via U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit on channel 16, VHF–FM. Dated: June 28, 2007. Bruce C. Jones, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. E7–13575 Filed 7–12–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 65 [Docket No. FEMA–B–7722] Changes in Flood Elevation Determinations Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Interim rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This interim rule lists communities where modification of the Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) is appropriate because of new scientific or technical data. New flood insurance premium rates will be calculated from the modified BFEs for new buildings and their contents. DATES: These modified BFEs are currently in effect on the dates listed in the table below and revise the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in effect prior to this determination for the listed communities. From the date of the second publication of these changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has ninety (90) days in which to request through the community that the Mitigation Assistant Administrator of FEMA reconsider the changes. The modified BFEs may be changed during the 90-day period. E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 134 (Friday, July 13, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38486-38488]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3447]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 105

[Docket Nos. TSA-2006-24191; USCG-2006-24196]
RIN 1652-AA41


Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) 
Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement 
for a Commercial Driver's License

AGENCY: United States Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS).

ACTION: Final rule; extension of compliance date.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through the United 
States Coast Guard (Coast Guard), issues this final rule to extend 
compliance dates for the redesignation of secure areas. The Coast Guard 
is delaying the date by which facilities wishing to redefine their 
secure areas must submit an amendment to their facility security plan. 
Amendments to facility security plans are now due by September 4, 2007.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 13, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of dockets TSA-2006-24191 and USCG-2006-24196, and are 
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility, 
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. You 
may also find this docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call LCDR Jonathan Maiorine, telephone 1-877-687-2243. If you have 
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 
Docket Operations, telephone 202-493-0402.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Regulatory History

    On May 22, 2006, The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through 
the United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) and the Transportation 
Security Administration (TSA) published a joint notice of proposed 
rulemaking entitled ``Transportation Worker Identification Credential 
(TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials 
Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License'' in the Federal Register 
(71 FR 29396). This was followed by a 45 day comment period and four 
public meetings. The Coast Guard and TSA issued a joint final rule, 
under the same title, on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3492) (hereinafter 
referred to as the original TWIC final rule). The preamble to that 
final rule contains a discussion of all the comments received on the 
NPRM, as well as a discussion of the provisions found in the original 
TWIC final rule, which became effective on March 26, 2007.

II. Background and Purpose

    A complete discussion of the background and purpose of the original 
TWIC final rule may be found beginning at 72 FR 3494. This final rule 
is being issued in order to amend the original TWIC final rule to 
reflect delays in the issuance of guidance.

III. Discussion of Change

    The Coast Guard is delaying the date by which facilities wishing to 
redefine their secure areas must submit an amendment to their facility 
security plan. The original final rule required these submissions to be 
made to the appropriate Captain of the Port (COTP) by July 25, 2007. 
The Coast Guard issued its Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular 
(NVIC) containing guidance on which facilities are eligible for this 
redefinition, and what would be an acceptable new definition of 
``secure area,'' on July 6, 2007. In order to provide facility owners 
and operators time to take this guidance into account before submitting 
their revised plan, we are delaying the deadline for these submission 
until September 4, 2007. This amendment may be found at 33 CFR 105.115.

IV. Regulatory Requirements

A. Administrative Procedure Act

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
final rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM, because providing opportunity 
for public comment is unnecessary and would be contrary to the public 
interest. The provision being amended by this final rule without prior 
notice and comment eases a restriction on the public by providing the 
public (owners and operators of facilities regulated by 33 CFR part 
105) with more time to comply with the regulatory requirements. For the 
same reason, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register.

[[Page 38487]]

B. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)

    The original TWIC final rule was a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 
Planning and Review and therefore it was reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget. E.O. 12866 requires an assessment of potential 
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Final 
Assessment for the original TWIC final rule is available in both the 
TSA and Coast Guard dockets where indicated under the ADDRESSES section 
of this preamble. A summary of that assessment was included in the 
original TWIC final rule at 72 FR 3570-3572.
    This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. The Office of Management and 
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic 
impact of this rule to be minimal and a full Regulatory Evaluation 
unnecessary.
    We anticipate that these changes will not substantially increase 
TWIC related compliance costs to the affected entities and in most 
cases will provide advantages through deadline extensions.

C. 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.
    We do not expect this rule to substantially increase TWIC related 
compliance costs, as it extends a deadline. The Coast Guard certifies 
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Assistance for Small Entities

    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 the rule so that they can better evaluate its 
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247).]

E. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

F. 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.

G. 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 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.

H. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

I. 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.

J. 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.

K. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does 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.

L. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That 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.

M. 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.

N. Environment

    The provisions of this rule have been analyzed under the Department 
of Homeland Security (DHS) Management Directive (MD) 5100.1, 
Environmental Planning Program, which is the DHS policy and procedures 
for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and 
related E.O.s and requirements. The changes being made by this final 
rule have no effect on the environmental analysis that accompanied the 
promulgation of the original TWIC final rule. That analysis can be 
found at 72 FR 3576-3577.

[[Page 38488]]

    Accordingly, there are no extraordinary circumstances presented by 
this rule that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion (CATEX) 
under MD 5100.1, Appendix A, paragraph 3.2. The implementation of this 
rule, like the implementation of the original TWIC final rule, is 
categorically excluded under the following CATEX listed in MD 5100.1, 
Appendix A, Table 1: CATEX A1 (personnel, fiscal, management and 
administrative activities); CATEX A3 (promulgation of rules, issuance 
of rulings or interpretations); and CATEX A4 (information gathering, 
data analysis and processing, information dissemination, review, 
interpretation and development of documents). CATEX B3 (proposed 
activities and operations to be conducted in an existing structure that 
would be compatible with and similar in scope to ongoing functional 
uses) and CATEX B 11 (routine monitoring and surveillance activities 
that support law enforcement or homeland security and defense 
operations) would also be applicable.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 105

    Facilities, Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Security measures.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 105 as follows:

PART 105--MARITIME SECURITY: FACILITIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 105 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 70103; 50 U.S.C. 191; 
33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No, 0170.1.

Sec.  105.115  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  105.115(c) by removing the date ``July 25, 2007'' and 
adding in its place the date ``September 4, 2007''.

    Dated: July 10, 2007.
F.J. Sturm,
Acting Assistant Commandant for Prevention.
[FR Doc. 07-3447 Filed 7-11-07; 12:11 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P