Security Zones; Sabine Bank Channel, Sabine Pass Channel and Sabine-Neches Waterway, TX, 1519-1521 [2011-172]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(b) A furlough will only be approved
if an inmate agrees to the following
conditions and understands that, while
on furlough, he/she:
(1) Remains in the legal custody of the
U.S. Attorney General, in service of a
term of imprisonment;
(2) Is subject to prosecution for escape
if he/she fails to return to the institution
at the designated time;
(3) Is subject to institution
disciplinary action, arrest, and criminal
prosecution for violating any
condition(s) of the furlough;
(4) May be thoroughly searched and
given a urinalysis, breathalyzer, and
other comparable test, during the
furlough or upon return to the
institution, and must pre-authorize the
cost of such test(s) if the inmate or
family members are paying the other
costs of the furlough. The inmate must
pre-authorize all testing fee(s) to be
withdrawn directly from his/her inmate
deposit fund account;
(5) Must contact the institution (or
United States Probation Officer) in the
event of arrest, or any other serious
difficulty or illness; and
(6) Must comply with any other
special instructions given by the
institution.
(c) While on furlough, the inmate
must not:
(1) Violate the laws of any jurisdiction
(federal, state, or local);
(2) Leave the area of his/her furlough
without permission, except for traveling
to the furlough destination, and
returning to the institution;
(3) Purchase, sell, possess, use,
consume, or administer any narcotic
drugs, marijuana, alcohol, or intoxicants
in any form, or frequent any place
where such articles are unlawfully sold,
dispensed, used, or given away;
(4) Use medication that is not
prescribed and given to the inmate by
the institution medical department or a
licensed physician;
(5) Have any medical/dental/surgical/
psychiatric treatment without staff’s
written permission, unless there is an
emergency. Upon return to the
institution, the inmate must notify
institution staff if he/she received any
prescribed medication or treatment in
the community for an emergency;
(6) Possess any firearm or other
dangerous weapon;
(7) Get married, sign any legal papers,
contracts, loan applications, or conduct
any business without staff’s written
permission;
(8) Associate with persons having a
criminal record or with persons who the
inmate knows to be engaged in illegal
activities without staff’s written
permission;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
(9) Drive a motor vehicle without
staff’s written permission, which can
only be obtained if the inmate has proof
of a currently valid driver’s license and
proof of appropriate insurance; or
(10) Return from furlough with
anything the inmate did not take out
with him/her (for example, clothing,
jewelry, or books).
[FR Doc. 2011–281 Filed 1–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2009–0316]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zones; Sabine Bank Channel,
Sabine Pass Channel and SabineNeches Waterway, TX
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is
establishing moving security zones for
certain vessels for which the Captain of
the Port, Port Arthur deems enhanced
security measures necessary. In
addition, it is establishing security
zones encompassing the mooring basins
of LNG carriers while they are moored
at the Golden Pass LNG facility in
Sabine, TX and/or the Sabine Pass LNG
facility located in Cameron Parish, LA.
DATES: This rule is effective February
10, 2011.
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–2009–0316 are
available online by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–
2009–0316 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 Mr. Scott Whalen, Marine Safety
Unit Port Arthur, TX; telephone 409–
719–5086, e-mail
scott.k.whalen@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1519
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On May 27, 2010, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled Security Zones; Sabine Bank
Channel, Sabine Pass Channel and
Sabine-Neches Waterway, TX in the
Federal Register (75 FR 29695). We
received one comment on the proposed
rule. On October 22, 2010, we then
published an interim rule discussing
and incorporating the recommendation
from that one comment and requesting
further comments (75 FR 65232).
No public meeting was requested and
none was held. Additionally, no
comments concerning the interim rule
were received.
Basis and Purpose
The Coast Guard is establishing
moving security zones for certain
vessels, for which the Captain of the
Port deems enhanced security measures
are necessary. The purpose of these
security zones is to protect certain
vessels designated as requiring such
enhanced security measures. Mariners
will be notified of the activation of a
moving security zone around designated
vessels by Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
Vessels with active moving security
zones will also be identified by the
presence of escort vessels displaying
flashing blue law enforcement lights.
The moving security zones would be
activated for certain vessels within the
U.S. territorial waters through Sabine
Bank Channel, Sabine Pass Channel and
the Sabine-Neches Waterway, extending
from the surface to the bottom. These
moving security zones would extend
channel edge to channel edge on the
Sabine Bank and Sabine Pass Channel
and shoreline to shoreline on the
Sabine-Neches Waterway, 2 miles ahead
and 1 mile astern of the designated
vessels while in transit. Meeting,
crossing or overtaking situations are not
permitted within the security zone
unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port.
In addition, the Coast Guard is
establishing security zones for the
mooring basins at the Golden Pass LNG
facility in Sabine, TX and the Sabine
Pass LNG facility located in Cameron
Parish, LA while LNG carriers are
moored at these facilities.
These security zones are part of a
comprehensive port security regime
designed to safeguard human life,
vessels, and waterfront facilities against
sabotage or terrorist attacks.
All vessels not exempted under
paragraph (b) of § 165.819 would be
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
1520
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
prohibited from entering or remaining
in these security zones unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port,
Port Arthur or his designated
representative. For authorization to
enter the proposed security zones,
vessels can contact the Captain of the
Port’s on-scene representative or Vessel
Traffic Service Port Arthur on VHF
Channel 01A or 65A, by telephone at
(409) 719–5070, or by facsimile at (409)
719–5090.
Background
On May 27, 2010 we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
to establish this security zone
regulation. We received one comment
on the proposed rule. Based on that
comment, the security zone area
proposed in the NPRM was extended to
include the entire mooring basins for
LNG carriers. The Coast Guard concurs
with that recommendation and modified
the regulatory language accordingly for
the interim rule. Additionally, the same
commenter noted that the location of
the Sabine Pass facility should be
changed from Cheneire, LA to Cameron
Parish, LA. This change was also
incorporated into the interim rule
regulatory language.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received no
comments concerning the interim rule
requesting that the establishment of a
security zone extending 100-feet around
LNG carriers while moored at Sabine
Pass LNG and Golden Pass LNG
facilities be extended to include the
entire mooring basin. For clarity, the
Coast Guard has amended the final rule
regulatory text to include ‘‘mooring
basin’’ as a body of water description for
the fixed security zones. Mooring basin
as a descriptive term is in addition to
the latitude and longitude positions,
which are already part of the regulatory
text, and does not change the areas
included in the fixed security zone. This
final rule contains no substantive
changes from the interim rule as
published.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that
Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that
Order.
We expect the economic impact of
this rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
The basis of this finding is that the
proposed fixed security zones around
moored LNG carriers are of limited size
and duration and the affected area does
not hinder or delay regular vessel traffic.
The moving security zone is limited and
does not create undue delay to vessel
traffic because vessel traffic may request
permission to enter the zone from the
Captain of the Port.
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 will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will affect the following
entities, some of which might be small
entities: The owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit through the
fixed or moving security zones. The
fixed security zones are of limited size
and duration and the affected area will
not hinder or delay regular vessel traffic.
The moving security zone rule will not
create undue delay to vessel traffic
because vessel traffic may request
permission to enter the zone.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
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
disestablishing, or changing Regulated
Navigation Areas and security or safety
zones. An environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
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.
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard adopts the
interim rule amending 33 CFR part 165
that was published at 75 FR 65235 on
October 22, 2010, as a final rule with the
following changes:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
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 regulations establishing,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Jan 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
List of Subjects in 33 CFR 165
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation to 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, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
§ 165.819
[Amended]
2. In § 165.819—
a. Amend paragraph (a)(1)(i) by
inserting the words ‘‘mooring basin’’
immediately before the word ‘‘waters’’,
and
■ b. Amend paragraph (a)(1)(ii) by
inserting the words ‘‘mooring basin’’
immediately before the word ‘‘waters’’.
■
■
Dated: November 22, 2010.
J.J. Plunkett,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Port Arthur.
[FR Doc. 2011–172 Filed 1–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2010–0423]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone: Fleet Industrial Supply
Center Pier, San Diego, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is removing
a security zone on the navigable waters
of San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA. The
existing zone is around the former Fleet
Industrial Supply Center Pier. The pier
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1521
is no longer owned by the U.S. Navy
and the existing security zone is no
longer necessary to provide for the
security of the U.S. Naval vessels, their
crews, and the public from sabotage or
other subversive acts, accidents,
criminal actions, or other causes of a
similar nature.
DATES: This rule is effective February
10, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket USCG–2010–
0423 and are available online by going
to https://www.regulations.gov, inserting
USCG–2010–0423 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
e-mail Commander Mike Dolan,
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector San Diego; telephone 619–
278–7261, e-mail
Michael.b.dolan@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
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).
It is unnecessary to seek comments on
this rulemaking because the purpose of
this security zone—to provide for the
security of the U.S. Naval vessels, their
crews, and the public from sabotage or
other subversive acts, accidents,
criminal actions, or other causes of a
similar nature—no longer exists because
the Navy no longer owns this facility.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for
making this rule effective 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The
pier is no longer owned by the U.S.
E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM
11JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 11, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1519-1521]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-172]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2009-0316]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zones; Sabine Bank Channel, Sabine Pass Channel and
Sabine-Neches Waterway, TX
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing moving security zones for
certain vessels for which the Captain of the Port, Port Arthur deems
enhanced security measures necessary. In addition, it is establishing
security zones encompassing the mooring basins of LNG carriers while
they are moored at the Golden Pass LNG facility in Sabine, TX and/or
the Sabine Pass LNG facility located in Cameron Parish, LA.
DATES: This rule is effective February 10, 2011.
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-2009-0316 are available online by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0316 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 Mr. Scott Whalen, Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur, TX;
telephone 409-719-5086, e-mail scott.k.whalen@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 May 27, 2010, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Security Zones; Sabine Bank Channel, Sabine Pass
Channel and Sabine-Neches Waterway, TX in the Federal Register (75 FR
29695). We received one comment on the proposed rule. On October 22,
2010, we then published an interim rule discussing and incorporating
the recommendation from that one comment and requesting further
comments (75 FR 65232).
No public meeting was requested and none was held. Additionally, no
comments concerning the interim rule were received.
Basis and Purpose
The Coast Guard is establishing moving security zones for certain
vessels, for which the Captain of the Port deems enhanced security
measures are necessary. The purpose of these security zones is to
protect certain vessels designated as requiring such enhanced security
measures. Mariners will be notified of the activation of a moving
security zone around designated vessels by Broadcast Notice to
Mariners. Vessels with active moving security zones will also be
identified by the presence of escort vessels displaying flashing blue
law enforcement lights.
The moving security zones would be activated for certain vessels
within the U.S. territorial waters through Sabine Bank Channel, Sabine
Pass Channel and the Sabine-Neches Waterway, extending from the surface
to the bottom. These moving security zones would extend channel edge to
channel edge on the Sabine Bank and Sabine Pass Channel and shoreline
to shoreline on the Sabine-Neches Waterway, 2 miles ahead and 1 mile
astern of the designated vessels while in transit. Meeting, crossing or
overtaking situations are not permitted within the security zone unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port.
In addition, the Coast Guard is establishing security zones for the
mooring basins at the Golden Pass LNG facility in Sabine, TX and the
Sabine Pass LNG facility located in Cameron Parish, LA while LNG
carriers are moored at these facilities.
These security zones are part of a comprehensive port security
regime designed to safeguard human life, vessels, and waterfront
facilities against sabotage or terrorist attacks.
All vessels not exempted under paragraph (b) of Sec. 165.819 would
be
[[Page 1520]]
prohibited from entering or remaining in these security zones unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Port Arthur or his designated
representative. For authorization to enter the proposed security zones,
vessels can contact the Captain of the Port's on-scene representative
or Vessel Traffic Service Port Arthur on VHF Channel 01A or 65A, by
telephone at (409) 719-5070, or by facsimile at (409) 719-5090.
Background
On May 27, 2010 we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
to establish this security zone regulation. We received one comment on
the proposed rule. Based on that comment, the security zone area
proposed in the NPRM was extended to include the entire mooring basins
for LNG carriers. The Coast Guard concurs with that recommendation and
modified the regulatory language accordingly for the interim rule.
Additionally, the same commenter noted that the location of the Sabine
Pass facility should be changed from Cheneire, LA to Cameron Parish,
LA. This change was also incorporated into the interim rule regulatory
language.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received no comments concerning the interim rule
requesting that the establishment of a security zone extending 100-feet
around LNG carriers while moored at Sabine Pass LNG and Golden Pass LNG
facilities be extended to include the entire mooring basin. For
clarity, the Coast Guard has amended the final rule regulatory text to
include ``mooring basin'' as a body of water description for the fixed
security zones. Mooring basin as a descriptive term is in addition to
the latitude and longitude positions, which are already part of the
regulatory text, and does not change the areas included in the fixed
security zone. This final rule contains no substantive changes from the
interim rule as published.
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.
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The basis of this finding is
that the proposed fixed security zones around moored LNG carriers are
of limited size and duration and the affected area does not hinder or
delay regular vessel traffic. The moving security zone is limited and
does not create undue delay to vessel traffic because vessel traffic
may request permission to enter the zone from the Captain of the Port.
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 will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit through the fixed or moving security zones. The fixed security
zones are of limited size and duration and the affected area will not
hinder or delay regular vessel traffic. The moving security zone rule
will not create undue delay to vessel traffic because vessel traffic
may request permission to enter the zone.
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
[[Page 1521]]
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 regulations establishing,
disestablishing, or changing Regulated Navigation Areas and security or
safety zones. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard adopts
the interim rule amending 33 CFR part 165 that was published at 75 FR
65235 on October 22, 2010, as a final rule with the following changes:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation to 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, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
Sec. 165.819 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 165.819--
0
a. Amend paragraph (a)(1)(i) by inserting the words ``mooring basin''
immediately before the word ``waters'', and
0
b. Amend paragraph (a)(1)(ii) by inserting the words ``mooring basin''
immediately before the word ``waters''.
Dated: November 22, 2010.
J.J. Plunkett,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Port Arthur.
[FR Doc. 2011-172 Filed 1-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
