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 https://
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 https://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: https://
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 https://
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 https://
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
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
https://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: https://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 https://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]]
https://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 https://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