Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and Washington; Amendment, 41987-41989 [2010-17665]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[Docket No. USCG–2009–0948]
RIN 1625–AB43
Inland Navigation Rules; Correction
ACTION:
Final rule; correction.
SUMMARY: In the Federal Register
published on April 15, 2010, the Coast
Guard placed the Inland Navigation
Rules into the Code of Federal
Regulations. That publication contained
an error in the ‘‘Discussion of the Rule’’
section. This error does not impact the
regulations, but has caused confusion
among some members of the public.
DATES: This correction is effective July
20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this correction,
contact Kevin d’Eustachio, Office of
Regulations and Administrative Law,
telephone (202) 372–3854, e-mail
kevin.m.deustachio@uscg.mil. For
information about the original
regulation, contact LT Scott Medeiros,
Office of Vessel Activities (CG–54133),
telephone (202) 372–1565
Scott.R.Medeiros@uscg.mil.
In FR doc
2010–8532 appearing on page 20294 in
the issue of Thursday, April 15, 2010,
the following corrections are made:
1. On page 19545, in the first column,
in the three places that ‘‘§ 83.185’’
appears, remove the numbers ‘‘§ 83.185’’
and replace with ‘‘§ 83.38’’.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: July 14, 2010.
Steve Venckus,
Office of Regulations and Administrative Law
(CG–0943), U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2010–17663 Filed 7–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–1017]
RIN 1625–AA11
Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars
Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington; Amendment
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is making a
change to the Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA) covering the Umpqua River Bar
in Oregon so that it does not include
those waters between ‘‘Navigation Aid
Number 8’’ and ‘‘Navigation Aid Number
6’’ on the Umpqua River. The change
has been requested by a number of
individuals and organizations that
believe they are able to safely use those
waters when the bar is restricted or
closed.
DATES: This rule is effective August 19,
2010.
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 docket USCG–2008–1017 and are
available online by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–
2008–1017 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and
then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
e-mail LT Kion Evans, Thirteenth Coast
Guard District Prevention Division;
telephone 206–220–7232, e-mail
Kion.J.Evans@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On April 12, 2010, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled ‘‘Regulated Navigation Areas;
Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington; Amendment’’ in the
Federal Register (75 FR 18449). We
received one comment on the proposed
rule. No public meeting was requested
and none was held.
Basis and Purpose
On November 17, 2009, the Coast
Guard published a Final Rule entitled
‘‘Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars
Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington’’ in the Federal Register (74
FR 59098), which established Regulated
Navigation Areas (RNA) covering each
of the coastal bars in Oregon and
Washington. Following implementation
of the rule, as codified at 33 CFR
165.1325, on December 17, 2009, the
Coast Guard began receiving feedback
from a number of individuals and
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
41987
organizations that use the waters near
the Umpqua River Bar in Oregon
indicating that the RNA covering that
bar, as defined in 33 CFR
165.1325(a)(12), is too large in that they
believe they are able to safely use the
area between ‘‘Navigation Aid Number
8’’ and ‘‘Navigation Aid Number 6’’ in
the Umpqua River when the bar is
restricted or closed.
In light of the public desires
expressed, the possible economic
impact on the local community, and the
Coast Guard’s assessment that mariners
are, in most circumstances, able to
safely operate between ‘‘Navigation Aid
Number 8’’ and ‘‘Navigation Aid Number
6’’ on the Umpqua River when the bar
is restricted or closed, the Coast Guard
is changing the Umpqua River Bar RNA
as defined in 33 CFR 165.1325(a)(12) to
allow such use without obtaining
permission of the Captain of the Port or
his/her designated representatives.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The one comment received on the
proposed rule expressed concern that
the location of the RNA as described in
the regulatory text did not align with the
description given in the preamble,
specifically with regards to ‘‘Navigation
Aid Number 6.’’ The rule was changed
to correct that inconsistency.
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 has made this
determination based on the fact that this
rule simply reduces the size of an
established Regulated Navigation Area.
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
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
41988
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will affect those small entities
that use the waters near the Umpqua
River Bar. The rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
however, because it simply reduces the
size of an established Regulated
Navigation Area.
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.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
in the NPRM we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so
that they could better evaluate its effects
on them and participate in the
rulemaking process.
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). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
Civil Justice Reform
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
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).
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
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.
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 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.
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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 the reduction in size of a
Regulated Navigation Area. 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
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Amend § 165.1325 by revising
paragraph (a)(12) to read as follows:
■
§ 165.1325 Regulated Navigation Areas;
Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington.
(a) * * *
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 138 / Tuesday, July 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(12) Umpqua River Bar, Oreg.: From a
point on the shoreline at 43°41′20″ N.,
124°11′58″ W. thence westward to
43°41′20″ N., 124°13′32″ W thence
southward to 43°38′35″ N., 124°14′25″
W. thence eastward to a point on the
shoreline at 43°38′35″ N., 124°12′35″ W.
thence northward along the shoreline to
the navigational light ‘‘6’’ located on the
jetty at 43°40′11″ N., 124°11′56″ W.
thence northward to a point on the
north bank of the entrance channel at
43°40′33″ N., 124°11′56″ W. thence
southwestward along the north bank of
the entrance channel thence northward
along the seaward shoreline to the
beginning.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 7, 2010.
G.T. Blore,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010–17665 Filed 7–19–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
Content of Periodicals Mail
Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Postal Service is revising
Mailing Standards of the United States
Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual
(DMM®) 707.3, to update present
‘‘content requirements’’ on materials
eligible for mailing at Periodicals prices
with authorized Periodicals
publications.
DATES: Effective September 7, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry
Lease, 202–268–7264.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: After
discussions with the Periodicals mailing
industry, the Postal Service agreed to
review the standards governing contents
of Periodicals mail, and decided to
update several standards. This rule
removes the current advertising
limitation on loose supplements, except
for unwrapped copies of loose
addressed supplements included in a
mailing for an authorized Periodicals
publication. The final rule also revises
the regulations on pages, specifically
multi-layer pages, giving publishers
more latitude in page design. The
provisions concerning the mailing of
products and product samples have
been updated and simplified. Finally,
the standards governing protective
covers and attachments have been
updated for consistency with past
rulings. This final rule contains only
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jul 19, 2010
Jkt 220001
those DMM revisions that are consistent
with the expressed wishes of numerous
publishers and Periodicals association
representatives.
Background
In the 1980s, and again in the 1990s,
the Postal Service undertook extensive
reviews of the standards governing what
could be mailed as part of a periodical
publication at Periodicals prices
(formerly second-class rates). Advances
in technology, and difficulty in applying
the standards, were key underlying
factors in those reviews. On March 27,
1995, the Postal Service published a
final rule in the Federal Register (60 FR
10021–10029) revising the standards.
Since that time, the standards
governing contents of a publication
eligible for Periodicals prices have not
changed, except for several minor
modifications. There has been no
discernable undesired movement of
printed advertising materials, or other
matter, from Standard Mail to
Periodicals mail.
The changes to the standards reflected
in this final rule concentrate on four
areas of ‘‘content’’ provisions and
mailpiece construction:
• DMM 707.3.3.1, Pages.
• DMM 707.3.3.5, Supplements.
• DMM 707.3.4.3, Products.
• DMM 707.3.5, Mailpiece
Construction.
Æ Specifically DMM 3.5.4, Without
Mailing Wrapper.
Æ and DMM 3.5.6, Cover page and
Protective Cover.
Pages
A basic requirement for all Periodicals
publications is that they be comprised
of ‘‘printed sheets.’’ In the March 27,
1995 rulemaking, however, the printed
sheet requirement was relaxed to allow
small amounts of ‘‘fastening’’ material,
such as grommets, string, and rubber
bands, used to assemble a page. The
Postal Service concluded at that time
allowing such materials was not a
significant deviation from the ‘‘printed
sheet’’ rule because the changes were
consistent with the existing practice of
allowing Periodicals publications to be
bound with staples, saddle stitching, or
spiral binding.
More recently, publishers have argued
that the 1995 changes, although
welcome, unduly limit creativity in
designing publications that appeal to
their readers and advertisers. These
publishers also point out advances in
technology that they are restricted from
using such as the inclusion of sound
devices and video as part of a printed
page. Finally, they point out that private
delivery companies do not impose
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
41989
similar restrictions on the delivery of
their publications, nor are they
prohibited from using such technologies
in the newsstand editions of their
publications.
Accordingly, DMM 707.3.3.1a is
revised to replace ‘‘fastening’’ with ‘‘nonpaper’’ in the first sentence to permit
non-paper materials other than fastening
materials in the construction of a
multilayer page. This change would
allow additional creativity in page
design. The sentence ‘‘Not all elements
that make up a multilayer page must be
printed’’ is added to 3.3.1a, for
additional transparency. That sentence
is currently incorporated in Customer
Support Ruling (CSR) PS–234, titled
‘‘Multilayer pages in Periodicals
Publications.’’ Finally, the sentence ‘‘In
addition, multilayer pages may contain
novel characteristics such as an LED
display, a sound device, or battery
operated movable parts’’ is added to
3.3.1a, to allow publishers to take
advantage of current technologies,
within the boundaries of mailable
versus nonmailable matter as described
in DMM 601.
In addition, it should be noted that
publishers continue to be required to
adhere to the mailing standards
governing the Periodicals price category
claimed.
Supplement
Many publishers have considered the
25 percent nonadvertising standard for
loose supplements to be burdensome,
and inappropriate as a means of limiting
advertising in Periodicals mail. It is
often viewed as an unnecessary
restriction on a publisher’s ability to
choose whether to place advertising
matter in the host publication or
accompanying loose supplement.
Moreover, the existing standards are
hard to apply. This problem exists for
customers and postal personnel, as
demonstrated by the numerous requests
for guidance directed to the Pricing and
Classification Service Center (PCSC) and
headquarters Mailing Standards
personnel concerning what is
advertising or nonadvertising matter.
Often, when supplements are produced
by third parties, it becomes particularly
difficult to make such judgments.
Contracts must be reviewed to evaluate
the relationship(s) between parties.
Payment arrangements by outside
parties for the advertising portion of
supplements must be examined in
determining whether the material
qualifies as nonadvertising matter.
The Postal Service agrees with many
publishers and their association
representatives that the 25 percent
nonadvertising requirement should be
E:\FR\FM\20JYR1.SGM
20JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 20, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41987-41989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17665]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2008-1017]
RIN 1625-AA11
Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington; Amendment
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is making a change to the Regulated Navigation
Area (RNA) covering the Umpqua River Bar in Oregon so that it does not
include those waters between ``Navigation Aid Number 8'' and
``Navigation Aid Number 6'' on the Umpqua River. The change has been
requested by a number of individuals and organizations that believe
they are able to safely use those waters when the bar is restricted or
closed.
DATES: This rule is effective August 19, 2010.
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 docket USCG-2008-1017 and are available online by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2008-1017 in the ``Keyword''
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail LT Kion Evans, Thirteenth Coast Guard District
Prevention Division; telephone 206-220-7232, e-mail
Kion.J.Evans@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On April 12, 2010, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of
Oregon and Washington; Amendment'' in the Federal Register (75 FR
18449). We received one comment on the proposed rule. No public meeting
was requested and none was held.
Basis and Purpose
On November 17, 2009, the Coast Guard published a Final Rule
entitled ``Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon
and Washington'' in the Federal Register (74 FR 59098), which
established Regulated Navigation Areas (RNA) covering each of the
coastal bars in Oregon and Washington. Following implementation of the
rule, as codified at 33 CFR 165.1325, on December 17, 2009, the Coast
Guard began receiving feedback from a number of individuals and
organizations that use the waters near the Umpqua River Bar in Oregon
indicating that the RNA covering that bar, as defined in 33 CFR
165.1325(a)(12), is too large in that they believe they are able to
safely use the area between ``Navigation Aid Number 8'' and
``Navigation Aid Number 6'' in the Umpqua River when the bar is
restricted or closed.
In light of the public desires expressed, the possible economic
impact on the local community, and the Coast Guard's assessment that
mariners are, in most circumstances, able to safely operate between
``Navigation Aid Number 8'' and ``Navigation Aid Number 6'' on the
Umpqua River when the bar is restricted or closed, the Coast Guard is
changing the Umpqua River Bar RNA as defined in 33 CFR 165.1325(a)(12)
to allow such use without obtaining permission of the Captain of the
Port or his/her designated representatives.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The one comment received on the proposed rule expressed concern
that the location of the RNA as described in the regulatory text did
not align with the description given in the preamble, specifically with
regards to ``Navigation Aid Number 6.'' The rule was changed to correct
that inconsistency.
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 has made this
determination based on the fact that this rule simply reduces the size
of an established Regulated Navigation Area.
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
[[Page 41988]]
governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect those small entities that use the
waters near the Umpqua River Bar. The rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, however,
because it simply reduces the size of an established Regulated
Navigation Area.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
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). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
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).
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 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.
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.
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 the reduction in size of a
Regulated Navigation Area. 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.
0
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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and
160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Amend Sec. 165.1325 by revising paragraph (a)(12) to read as
follows:
Sec. 165.1325 Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of
Oregon and Washington.
(a) * * *
[[Page 41989]]
(12) Umpqua River Bar, Oreg.: From a point on the shoreline at
43[deg]41'20'' N., 124[deg]11'58'' W. thence westward to 43[deg]41'20''
N., 124[deg]13'32'' W thence southward to 43[deg]38'35'' N.,
124[deg]14'25'' W. thence eastward to a point on the shoreline at
43[deg]38'35'' N., 124[deg]12'35'' W. thence northward along the
shoreline to the navigational light ``6'' located on the jetty at
43[deg]40'11'' N., 124[deg]11'56'' W. thence northward to a point on
the north bank of the entrance channel at 43[deg]40'33'' N.,
124[deg]11'56'' W. thence southwestward along the north bank of the
entrance channel thence northward along the seaward shoreline to the
beginning.
* * * * *
Dated: July 7, 2010.
G.T. Blore,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2010-17665 Filed 7-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
