Inland Waterways Navigation Regulations, 24697-24700 [2013-09853]

Download as PDF erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 81 / Friday, April 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules (ii) Significant issues in responding to the allegations have arisen between the Military Services or DoD Components and other Federal agencies or civilian authorities; or (iii) The situation has potential for widespread public interest that could negatively impact performance of the DoD mission. (3) The DASD(MC&FP) shall configure the FACAT based on the information and recommendations of the requestor, the installation FAPM, and the FAPD of the DoD Component. (4) The DASD(MC&FP) shall: (i) Request the FAPDs to identify several individuals from the FACAT roster who are available for deployment. (ii) Request, through the appropriate channels of the DoD Component, that the individuals’ supervisors release them from normal duty positions to serve on temporary duty with the deploying FACAT. (5) The DASD(MC&FP) shall provide fund citations to the FACAT members for their travel orders and per diem and shall provide information regarding travel arrangements. The FACAT members shall be responsible for preparing travel orders and making travel arrangements. (6) FACAT members who are subject to DoD Instruction 6025.13, ‘‘Medical Quality Assurance (MQA) and Clinical Quality Management in the Military Health System (MHS)’’ (see http:// www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/ 602513p.pdf) shall be responsible for arranging temporary clinical privileges in accordance with DoD 6025.13–R, ‘‘Military Health System (MHS) Clinical Quality Assurance (CQA) Program Regulation’’ (see http://www.dtic.mil/ whs/directives/corres/pdf/602513r.pdf) at the installation to which they shall be deployed. (e) FACAT Tasks. The FACAT shall meet with the installation’s commanding officer, the MCIO, or designated response team to assess the current situation and assist in coordinating the installation’s response to the incidents. Depending on the composition of the team, such tasks may include: (1) Investigating the allegations. (2) Conducting medical and mental health assessment of the victims and their families. (3) Developing and implementing plans to provide appropriate treatment and support for the victims and their families and for the non-abusing staff of the DoD-sanctioned activity. (4) Coordinating with local officials to manage public affairs tasks. (f) Reports of FACAT Activities. The FACAT leader designated by the VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 Apr 25, 2013 Jkt 229001 DASD(MC&FP) or the installation commander depending on the composition of the team shall prepare three types of reports: (1) Daily briefs for the installation commander or designee. (2) Periodic updates to the FAPD of the DoD Component and to the DASD(MC&FP). (3) An after-action brief for the installation commander briefed at the completion of the deployment and transmitted to the DASD(MC&FP) and the FAPD of the DoD Component. Dated: April 19, 2013. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 2013–09672 Filed 4–25–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 162 [Docket No. USCG–2013–0027] RIN 1625–AB84 Inland Waterways Navigation Regulations Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to exempt vessels under 20 meters (65 feet) in length operating in the St. Marys River along Michigan’s eastern Upper Peninsula from certain speed rules. Exempting such vessels from these rules is necessary because enforcement is impractical and the rules impeded the operations of public response vessels. DATES: Comments and related materials must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 10, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2013–0027 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods: (1) Online: http:// www.regulations.gov. (2) Mail: 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– 0001. (3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on the Ground Floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 24697 Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202–366–9329. (4) Fax: 202–493–2251. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email CDR Nicholas Wong, Prevention Chief, Sector Sault Sainte Marie, Coast Guard; telephone (906) 635–3220, email Nicholas.l.wong@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management Facility. Please see DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’ paragraph below. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2013–0027), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8c by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1 24698 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 81 / Friday, April 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules Privacy Act Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of Transportation’s Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http:// DocketsInfo.dot.gov. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request 33 CFR 162.117 prescribes inland navigation rules for the St. Marys River along Michigan’s eastern Upper Peninsula. These rules include speed limits for stretches of the St. Marys River demarcated by lights. The table below from 162.117(g) depicts these speed rules. These speed rules apply to all vessels transiting the St. Marys River between the points in table 162.117(g). U.S. Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) St. Mary’s River monitors and directs vessel traffic movement within the VTS St. Marys River area through a Vessel Movement Reporting System (VMRS). This VTS area overlaps the length of the St. Marys River governed by the speed rules in § 162.117(g). The VMRS requires users, generally including commercial vessels of 20 meters or more, to report information, including their position, course, and speed. These users report their information through radio communications and Automatic Identification System (AIS). Because VTS St. Marys River tracks speed for VMRS users, it can and does enforce the speed rules in § 162.117(g) on these users. Many non-VMRS vessels transit the length of the St. Marys River governed by the speed rules in § 162.117(g). These vessels generally include private vessels under 20 meters. As non-VMRS users, these vessels are not required to report their speed to the VTS St. Marys River. Additionally, unlike commercial vessels of 20 meters or more, these vessels are not required to operate with AIS, the prevalent means of reporting location, course, and speed to VTS St. Marys River. Because the VTS St. Marys River cannot track these non-VMRS vessels, it cannot and does not enforce the speed rules in § 162.117(g) on them. The speed rules in § 162.117(g) also impact the operational effectiveness of public response vessels in the St. Marys River. These vessels include small boats, generally under 20 meters, operated by the U.S. Coast Guard and VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 Apr 25, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Basis and Purpose E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1 EP26AP13.004</GPH> erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2013–0027) in the ‘‘Search’’ box and click ‘‘Search.’’ You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the U.S. Coast Guard Sector Sault Sainte Marie, 337 E. Water Street, Sault Sainte Marie, MI 49783–2021, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 81 / Friday, April 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules federal, Canadian, state, and local partners. These small boats respond to pollution incidents, marine casualties, and perform search and rescue and law enforcement operations throughout the St. Marys River. These operations require public vessels to deploy and be on-scene rapidly. The speed rules impede response times and degrade operational effectiveness to the detriment of the boating public and industry. Because the speed rules in 162.117(g) are not enforceable on non-VMRS users and impact operational effectiveness of public response boats, this rule proposes to exempt vessels under 20 meters (65 feet) from these speed rules. This proposed exemption is not anticipated to impact the St. Marys River VTS, VMRS, or its users. Additionally, it is not intended to relieve vessels under 20 meters from the responsibility to boat safely and exercise good seamanship. Discussion of Proposed Rule Because the Ninth Coast Guard District Commander has determined that the speed rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g), as currently written, are too broad and unnecessarily restrict public vessel operations, this rule proposes to amend these rules. Specifically, this rule proposes to exempt vessels under 20 meters (65 feet) from the speed rules in § 162.117(g). erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 D. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders. 1. Regulatory Planning and Review This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under § 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or § 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We conclude that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will not adversely affect the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. Rather, permitting vessels under 20 meters to operate free of the speed rules in 33 CFR VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 Apr 25, 2013 Jkt 229001 162.117(g) will lessen restrictions on the public and enable public vessels to engage unimpeded in response operations. 2. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed 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. This proposed rule will affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to transit between the length of the St. Marys River governed by the speed rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g). The proposed exemption for vessels under 20 meters to the speed rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g) will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reason: This proposed amendment will lessen navigation restrictions on the public and private businesses. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. 3. 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 this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact CDR Nicholas Wong, Prevention Chief, Sector Sault Sainte Marie, Coast Guard; telephone (906) 635–3220, email Nicholas.L.Wong@uscg.mil. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or object to this PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 24699 proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 4. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). 5. Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. 6. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. 7. 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 proposed rule would not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble. 8. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would 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. 9. Civil Justice Reform This proposed 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. 10. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1 24700 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 81 / Friday, April 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. 11. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 12. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed 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. 13. 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Directive 023–01, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves amendments to navigation regulations and thus, is categorically excluded under paragraph 34(i) of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary Categorical Exclusion Determination (CED) and a preliminary environmental analysis checklist are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 162 Navigation (water), Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 162 as follows: PART 162—INLAND WATERWAYS NAVIGATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 162 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. § 162.117 [Amended] 2. In § 162.117, revise paragraph (g)(1) to read as follows: ■ § 162.117 St. Marys River, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. * * * * * (g) Speed Rules. (1) The following speed limits indicate speed over the ground. Vessels, other than those under 20 meters (65 feet) in length, must adhere to the following speed limits. * * * * * Dated: April 5, 2013. M.N. Parks, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2013–09853 Filed 4–25–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 14. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:46 Apr 25, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R08–OAR–2010–0406; FRL–9807–4] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Dakota; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan; Federal Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport of Pollution Affecting Visibility and Regional Haze; Reconsideration; Announcement of Public Hearings Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of public hearings; extension of comment period. AGENCY: On March 15, 2013, EPA initiated reconsideration of its approval of North Dakota’s best available retrofit technology (BART) emission limits for nitrogen oxides (NOX) for Milton R. Young Station Units 1 and 2 and Leland Olds Station Unit 2, which are coal-fired power plants in North Dakota. EPA is holding public hearings on May 15, 2013 to accept written and oral comments on this proposed action. The comment period for this action was scheduled to close on May 14, 2013. EPA is extending the comment period to June 17, 2013 to allow for a full 30-day public comment period for the submission of additional public comment following the public hearings. DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published March 15, 2013 at 78 FR 16452, is extended. Comments must be received on or before June 17, 2013. The public hearings will be held on May 15, 2013. ADDRESSES: The public hearings will be held at the North Dakota Department of Health, Environmental Training Center, 2639 East Main Avenue, Bismarck, ND 58506. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gail Fallon, EPA Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202–1129, (303) 312–6281, Fallon.Gail@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 15, 2013, we published a proposed rule initiating reconsideration of EPA’s approval of North Dakota’s BART emission limits for NOX for Milton R. Young Station Units 1 and 2 and Leland Olds Station Unit 2, which are coal-fired power plants in North Dakota. See 78 FR 16452. Public hearings will be held on Wednesday, May 15, 2013, from 3 p.m. until 5 p.m., and again from 6 p.m. until 8 p.m. The public hearings will provide interested parties the opportunity to SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 81 (Friday, April 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24697-24700]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09853]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 162

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0027]
RIN 1625-AB84


Inland Waterways Navigation Regulations

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to exempt vessels under 20 meters (65 
feet) in length operating in the St. Marys River along Michigan's 
eastern Upper Peninsula from certain speed rules. Exempting such 
vessels from these rules is necessary because enforcement is 
impractical and the rules impeded the operations of public response 
vessels.

DATES: Comments and related materials must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 10, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-0027 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. Department of 
Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the 
following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    (4) Fax: 202-493-2251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email CDR Nicholas Wong, Prevention Chief, Sector Sault 
Sainte Marie, Coast Guard; telephone (906) 635-3220, email 
Nicholas.l.wong@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or 
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management 
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2013-0027), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each 
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, 
an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so 
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. 
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, 
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one 
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an 
unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, 
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and 
material received during the comment period. We may change this 
proposed rule in view of them.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to

[[Page 24698]]

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Enter the docket number for 
this rulemaking (USCG-2013-0027) in the ``Search'' box and click 
``Search.'' You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in 
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the U.S. Coast Guard 
Sector Sault Sainte Marie, 337 E. Water Street, Sault Sainte Marie, MI 
49783-2021, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into 
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment 
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of 
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register 
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that 
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place 
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    33 CFR 162.117 prescribes inland navigation rules for the St. Marys 
River along Michigan's eastern Upper Peninsula. These rules include 
speed limits for stretches of the St. Marys River demarcated by lights. 
The table below from 162.117(g) depicts these speed rules.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP26AP13.004

These speed rules apply to all vessels transiting the St. Marys River 
between the points in table 162.117(g).
     U.S. Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) St. Mary's River 
monitors and directs vessel traffic movement within the VTS St. Marys 
River area through a Vessel Movement Reporting System (VMRS). This VTS 
area overlaps the length of the St. Marys River governed by the speed 
rules in Sec.  162.117(g). The VMRS requires users, generally including 
commercial vessels of 20 meters or more, to report information, 
including their position, course, and speed. These users report their 
information through radio communications and Automatic Identification 
System (AIS). Because VTS St. Marys River tracks speed for VMRS users, 
it can and does enforce the speed rules in Sec.  162.117(g) on these 
users.
    Many non-VMRS vessels transit the length of the St. Marys River 
governed by the speed rules in Sec.  162.117(g). These vessels 
generally include private vessels under 20 meters. As non-VMRS users, 
these vessels are not required to report their speed to the VTS St. 
Marys River. Additionally, unlike commercial vessels of 20 meters or 
more, these vessels are not required to operate with AIS, the prevalent 
means of reporting location, course, and speed to VTS St. Marys River. 
Because the VTS St. Marys River cannot track these non-VMRS vessels, it 
cannot and does not enforce the speed rules in Sec.  162.117(g) on 
them.
    The speed rules in Sec.  162.117(g) also impact the operational 
effectiveness of public response vessels in the St. Marys River. These 
vessels include small boats, generally under 20 meters, operated by the 
U.S. Coast Guard and

[[Page 24699]]

federal, Canadian, state, and local partners. These small boats respond 
to pollution incidents, marine casualties, and perform search and 
rescue and law enforcement operations throughout the St. Marys River. 
These operations require public vessels to deploy and be on-scene 
rapidly. The speed rules impede response times and degrade operational 
effectiveness to the detriment of the boating public and industry.
    Because the speed rules in 162.117(g) are not enforceable on non-
VMRS users and impact operational effectiveness of public response 
boats, this rule proposes to exempt vessels under 20 meters (65 feet) 
from these speed rules.
    This proposed exemption is not anticipated to impact the St. Marys 
River VTS, VMRS, or its users. Additionally, it is not intended to 
relieve vessels under 20 meters from the responsibility to boat safely 
and exercise good seamanship.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Because the Ninth Coast Guard District Commander has determined 
that the speed rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g), as currently written, are 
too broad and unnecessarily restrict public vessel operations, this 
rule proposes to amend these rules. Specifically, this rule proposes to 
exempt vessels under 20 meters (65 feet) from the speed rules in Sec.  
162.117(g).

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulations and 
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential 
costs and benefits under Sec.  6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or 
Sec.  1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget 
has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We conclude that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory 
action because we anticipate that it will not adversely affect the 
economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely 
alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise 
any novel legal or policy issues. Rather, permitting vessels under 20 
meters to operate free of the speed rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g) will 
lessen restrictions on the public and enable public vessels to engage 
unimpeded in response operations.

2. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed 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.
    This proposed rule will affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels 
intending to transit between the length of the St. Marys River governed 
by the speed rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g).
    The proposed exemption for vessels under 20 meters to the speed 
rules in 33 CFR 162.117(g) will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities for the following reason: 
This proposed amendment will lessen navigation restrictions on the 
public and private businesses.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business, 
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 
and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on 
it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically 
affect it.

3. 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 this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 
If this proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, 
or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please contact CDR Nicholas Wong, 
Prevention Chief, Sector Sault Sainte Marie, Coast Guard; telephone 
(906) 635-3220, email Nicholas.L.Wong@uscg.mil. The Coast Guard will 
not retaliate against small entities that question or object to this 
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places or vessels.

7. 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 proposed rule would not 
result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed 
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would 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.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,

[[Page 24700]]

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and 
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that 
might disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed 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.

13. 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-
01, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a 
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule 
involves amendments to navigation regulations and thus, is 
categorically excluded under paragraph 34(i) of the Commandant 
Instruction. A preliminary Categorical Exclusion Determination (CED) 
and a preliminary environmental analysis checklist are available in the 
docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
    We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery 
of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 162

    Navigation (water), Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 162 as follows:

PART 162--INLAND WATERWAYS NAVIGATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 162 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  162.117  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  162.117, revise paragraph (g)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  162.117  St. Marys River, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.

* * * * *
    (g) Speed Rules. (1) The following speed limits indicate speed over 
the ground. Vessels, other than those under 20 meters (65 feet) in 
length, must adhere to the following speed limits.
* * * * *

    Dated: April 5, 2013.
M.N. Parks,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013-09853 Filed 4-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P