TWIC Not Evidence of Resident Alien Status, 69292-69296 [2013-27569]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
69292
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, no
Federalism assessment is required.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 320
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 320 is
amended as follows:
PART 320—NATIONAL GEOSPATIALINTELLIGENCE AGENCY (NGA)
PRIVACY
1. The authority citation for part 320
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1986 (5
U.S.C. 552a).
2. Section 320.12 is amended by
adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 320.12
Exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) System identifier and name: NGA–
003, National Geospatial-Intelligence
Agency Enterprise Workforce System.
(1) Exemptions: Investigatory material
compiled for law enforcement purposes,
other than material within the scope of
subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), may be
exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
However, if an individual is denied any
right, privilege, or benefit for which he
would otherwise be entitled by Federal
law or for which he would otherwise be
eligible, as a result of the maintenance
of the information, the individual will
be provided access to the information
exempt to the extent that disclosure
would reveal the identity of a
confidential source.
Note to paragraph (d)(1): When claimed,
this exemption allows limited protection of
investigative reports maintained in a system
of records used in personnel or
administrative actions.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(2) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(2).
(3) Reasons: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a
(k)(2), the Director of NGA has
exempted this system from the
following provisions of the Privacy Act,
subject to the limitation set forth in 5
U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G),
(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). Exemptions
from these particular subsections are
justified, on a case-by-case basis to be
determined at the time a request is
made, for the following reasons:
(i) From subsection (c)(3) and (c)(4)
(Accounting for Disclosures) because
release of the accounting of disclosures
could alert the subject of an
investigation of an actual or potential
criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to
the existence of that investigation and
reveal investigative interest on the part
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Nov 18, 2013
Jkt 232001
of NGA as well as the recipient agency.
Disclosure of the accounting would
therefore present a serious impediment
to law enforcement efforts and/or efforts
to preserve national security. Disclosure
of the accounting would also permit the
individual who is the subject of a record
to impede the investigation, to tamper
with witnesses or evidence, and to
avoid detection or apprehension, which
would undermine the entire
investigative process.
(ii) From subsection (d) (Access to
Records) because access to the records
contained in this system of records
could inform the subject of an
investigation of an actual or potential
criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to
the existence of that investigation and
reveal investigative interest on the part
of NGA or another agency. Access to the
records could permit the individual
who is the subject of a record to impede
the investigation, to tamper with
witnesses or evidence, and to avoid
detection or apprehension. Amendment
of the records could interfere with
ongoing investigations and law
enforcement activities and would
impose an unreasonable administrative
burden by requiring investigations to be
continually reinvestigated. In addition,
permitting access and amendment to
such information could disclose
security-sensitive information that
could be detrimental to homeland
security.
(iii) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy
and Necessity of Information) because
in the course of investigations into
potential violations of Federal law, the
accuracy of information obtained or
introduced occasionally may be unclear,
or the information may not be strictly
relevant or necessary to a specific
investigation. In the interests of effective
law enforcement, it is appropriate to
retain all information that may aid in
establishing patterns of unlawful
activity.
(iv) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection
of Information from Individuals)
because requiring that information be
collected from the subject of an
investigation would alert the subject to
the nature or existence of the
investigation, thereby interfering with
that investigation and related law
enforcement activities.
(v) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to
Subjects) because providing such
detailed information could impede law
enforcement by compromising the
existence of a confidential investigation
or reveal the identity of witnesses or
confidential informants.
(vi) From subsections (e)(4)(G),
(e)(4)(H), and (e)(4)(I) (Agency
Requirements) and (f) (Agency Rules),
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
because portions of this system are
exempt from the individual access
provisions of subsection (d) for the
reasons noted above, and therefore NGA
is not required to establish
requirements, rules, or procedures with
respect to such access. Providing notice
to individuals with respect to existence
of records pertaining to them in the
system of records or otherwise setting
up procedures pursuant to which
individuals may access and view
records pertaining to themselves in the
system would undermine investigative
efforts and reveal the identities of
witnesses, and potential witnesses, and
confidential informants.
(vii) From subsection (e)(5)
(Collection of Information) because with
the collection of information for law
enforcement purposes, it is impossible
to determine in advance what
information is accurate, relevant, timely,
and complete. Compliance with
subsection (e)(5) would preclude NGA
personnel from using their investigative
training and exercise of good judgment
to both conduct and report on
investigations.
(viii) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice
on Individuals) because compliance
would interfere with NGA’s ability to
cooperate with law enforcement who
would obtain, serve, and issue
subpoenas, warrants, and other law
enforcement mechanisms that may be
filed under seal and could result in
disclosure of investigative techniques,
procedures, and evidence.
(ix) From subsection (g)(1) (Civil
Remedies) to the extent that the system
is exempt from other specific
subsections of the Privacy Act.
Dated: November 6, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013–27464 Filed 11–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 141
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0916]
RIN 1625–AC09
TWIC Not Evidence of Resident Alien
Status
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard issues this
final rule to remove from its regulations
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
on Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)
activities a reference to the
Transportation Worker Identification
Credential (TWIC) and a related TWIC
definition and recordkeeping reference
because they are inconsistent with a
requirement in the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act. These regulations deal
with the employment of personnel on
the OCS to U.S. citizens or resident
aliens. The TWIC reference incorrectly
provides that a TWIC alone may be
accepted by an employer as sufficient
evidence of the TWIC holder’s status as
a U.S. resident alien, as that term is
defined. This rule clarifies the
regulations.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 19, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in
this preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket USCG–2013–
0916 and are 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.
You may also find this docket on the
Internet by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–
2013–0916 in the ‘‘Search’’ box, and
then clicking ‘‘Search.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, email
or call Mr. Quentin Kent, Office of
Commercial Vessel Compliance, Foreign
and Offshore Vessel Division (CG–CVC–
2), Coast Guard; email Quentin.C.Kent@
uscg.mil, telephone 202–372–2292. If
you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Ms. Barbara Hairston,
Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Basis and Purpose
III. Regulatory History
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Abbreviations
APA
Administrative Procedure Act
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Nov 18, 2013
Jkt 232001
FR Federal Register
I–9 Form I–9, Employment Eligibility
Verification
INA Immigration and Nationality Act of
1952
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
OCSLA Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
TWIC Transportation Worker Identification
Credential
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Basis and Purpose
The Coast Guard is amending its
regulations in 33 CFR part 141, which
govern the restrictions on the
employment of personnel on units
engaged in Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) activities, by removing an
incorrect reference to the Transportation
Worker Identification Credential
(TWIC). The reference in 33 CFR
141.30(d) incorrectly provides that, for
purposes of 33 CFR part 141, a TWIC
alone may be accepted by an employer
as sufficient evidence of the TWIC
holder’s status a U.S. resident alien,1 as
that term is defined in 33 CFR 141.10.
The regulations in 33 CFR part 141
are authorized by the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) (43 U.S.C.
1301, et. al.), which mandates that the
Secretary of the Department in which
the Coast Guard operates shall issue
regulations which, in part, require the
employment of U.S. citizens or resident
aliens on any vessel, rig, platform, or
other vehicle or structure engaged in
OCS activities, unless certain exceptions
apply. 43 U.S.C. 1356.
Subsequent to the implementation of
the regulations in 33 CFR part 141, the
Coast Guard published a final rule
entitled, ‘‘Consolidation of Merchant
Mariner Qualification Credentials’’ on
March 16, 2009, that went into effect on
April 15, 2009. 74 FR 11196. In that
rulemaking several provisions of 33 CFR
part 141 were amended. In particular,
the Coast Guard added paragraph (d) to
33 CFR 141.30, authorizing an employer
to accept a TWIC alone as sufficient
evidence of the TWIC holder’s status as
a U.S. resident alien. However, the
preamble to this rulemaking did not
provide a reason for adding paragraph
(d) to 33 CFR 141.30. Paragraph (d) is
incorrect because a TWIC may be issued
to both U.S. resident aliens and nonresident aliens 2 and thus, it cannot
serve as sufficient evidence that the
person is a U.S. resident alien, as
1 U.S. resident alien is defined in 33 CFR 141.10
as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20). See
49 CFR 1570.3. The term in synonymous with
‘‘legal permanent resident’’ as it appears in TSA
regulations.
2 See Transportation Security Administration
regulations, 49 CFR 1572.105.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69293
required by law. Therefore, for purposes
of 33 CFR part 141, a TWIC alone
cannot be accepted by an employer as
sufficient evidence of the holder’s status
as a U.S. resident alien.
Since OCSLA mandates that
employers must employ only U.S.
citizens or resident aliens on units
engaged in OCS activities, any employer
who hires a non-resident alien who has
presented only a TWIC as proof of status
as a U.S. resident alien, would not be in
compliance with the OCSLA
requirement. Additionally, authorizing a
TWIC to be used in this manner is
contrary to, and inconsistent with the
definition for a U.S. ‘‘resident alien’’
found in § 141.10 where the term is
defined as ‘‘an alien lawfully admitted
to the United States for permanent
residence in accordance with section
101(a)(20) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA) of 1952, as
amended, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20).’’
To correct this inconsistency, the
Coast Guard is removing 33 CFR
141.30(d) from its regulations and
clarifies that only the provisions in 33
CFR 141.30(a) through (c) are acceptable
for showing evidence of a person’s
status as a U.S. resident alien.
The Coast Guard is also removing a
related TWIC definition in § 141.10 and
a related TWIC recordkeeping reference
in § 141.35(d).
III. Regulatory History
The Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) requires the Coast Guard to
provide public notice and seek public
comment on substantive regulations. 5
U.S.C. 553. The APA, however,
excludes certain types of regulations
and permits exceptions for other types
of regulations from this public notice
and comment requirement. Under the
APA ‘‘good cause’’ exception, an agency
may dispense with the requirement for
notice and comment if the agency finds
that following APA requirements would
be ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest.’’ 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B). The Coast Guard finds that
notice and comment for this rulemaking
is unnecessary because we are merely
removing a provision that we
mistakenly inserted into 33 CFR part
141 in a 2009 rulemaking and that is
inconsistent with the governing statute
(see discussion in section II. Basis and
Purpose). Public notice of this change is
unnecessary because such comments
cannot affect, influence, or inform any
Coast Guard action in implementing the
removal of this provision because the
Coast Guard cannot maintain a
regulation that is inconsistent with its
statutory authority.
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
69294
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Moreover, the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists to implement this rule
immediately upon publication in the
Federal Register. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
The Coast Guard finds it necessary to
implement this rule immediately
because the Coast Guard cannot keep a
regulation in place even if the public
showed support for it since it is
inconsistent with its statutory authority.
We also find it in the public interest to
implement this rule immediately to
ensure that employers know as soon as
possible that they must verify a
potential employees’ immigration status
by means other than a TWIC.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
Section 141.10 contains the
definitions that apply to part 141. A
TWIC is defined as ‘‘an identification
credential issued by the Transportation
Security Administration according to 49
CFR part 1572.’’ We are removing this
definition for the reasons explained in
Part III.
Section 141.30 contains the regulation
which lists the documents an employer
can accept as evidence of a person’s
status as a U.S. resident alien. We are
removing Section 141.30(d) for the
reasons explained in Part III.
Section 141.35 states which records
must be kept by employers as proof of
eligibility for employment on the OCS.
Section 141.35(a)(1) requires that an
employer maintain a copy of a TWIC if
that is the method of identification used
by the employee to assert eligibility to
work on the OCS. Since a TWIC is not
a valid form of identification for
purposes of part 141 as explained in
Part III, we are removing
‘‘Transportation Worker Identification
Credential’’ from § 141.35(a)(1). All
other recordkeeping requirements will
remain unchanged.
In addition, we will make a nonsubstantive change to § 141.30(c). The
word ‘‘the’’ preceding the word
‘‘Naturalization’’ is removed as it is
grammatically incorrect since only the
word ‘‘a’’ should precede the word
‘‘Naturalization.’’
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 14 of these statutes or
executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’) and 13563
(‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review’’) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Nov 18, 2013
Jkt 232001
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility.
This final 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
Regulation and Regulatory 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 (OMB) has
not reviewed it under that Order.
Nonetheless, we developed an analysis
of the costs and benefits of this final
rule to ascertain its probable impacts on
industry.
Currently, part 141 permits an
individual to present a valid TWIC as
evidence of U.S. resident alien status for
the purposes of employment on units
engaged in OCS activities. The TWIC is
unsuitable as evidence of U.S. resident
alien status because the TWIC may be
obtained by non-resident aliens.
Employers, therefore, cannot accept
the TWIC as sufficient evidence that the
potential employee is a U.S. resident
alien. This final rule will remove the
TWIC as proof of U.S. resident alien
status for employment on units engaged
in OCS activities, creating consistency
with other requirements in part 141 that
state that each employer engaged in
OCS activities must employ only U.S.
citizens or resident aliens, with limited
exceptions.
The Coast Guard does not expect this
final rule to burden industry with new
costs. In addition to having no evidence
that any employers have attempted to
accept the TWIC alone to determine the
immigration status of employees since
the TWIC was added to the list in 2009,
employers in the United States are
required by the INA to use the Form I–
9,3 Employment Eligibility Verification
(I–9) process. The I–9 process includes
an attestation from the new hire on
whether he or she is a U.S. citizen or
national, lawful permanent resident, or
alien authorized to work in the United
States. Employers must verify the
identity and employment authorization
of every individual hired for
employment in the United States. (8
3 Form I–9, Employment Eligibility Verification,
OMB No. 1615–0047, https://www.uscis.gov/files/
form/i-9.pdf
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
CFR 274a.2) The TWIC card alone
would be insufficient evidence to prove
one’s identity and employment
authorization under the I–9 process.
Because part 141 does not exempt
employers from completing the Form I–
9, the population directly affected by
the final rule (i.e., employers and
potential employees) will not incur any
additional costs as a result of the final
rule.
The benefits of this final rule include
harmonization with the INA and
clarification of the requirements to
demonstrate U.S. resident alien status
for the purpose of employment on units
engaged in activities on the OCS. The
inclusion of the TWIC to the list of
documents acceptable to prove U.S.
resident alien status in § 141.30
contradicts the intent of OCSLA.
Removal of the reference to TWIC from
the list will ensure employers and
employees understand which
documents can be accepted as proof of
U.S. resident alien status.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule will 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 revisions in this rule do not require
publication of an NPRM and, therefore,
is exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Although
this rule is exempt, we have reviewed
it for its potential economic impact on
small entities. There is no cost to
businesses, not-for-profit organizations,
or government jurisdictions as a result
of this rule, since other federal
requirements would preclude the use of
the TWIC as sole evidence of U.S.
resident alien status. Therefore, 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. If
you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule will have a significant
economic impact on it, please submit a
comment to the Docket Management
Facility at the address under ADDRESSES.
In your comment, explain why you
think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically
affect it.
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
69295
C. Assistance for Small Entities
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
L. Technical Standards
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 rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and
participate in the rulemaking. If the rule
will affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult Mr. Quentin
Kent, at Quentin.C.Kent@uscg.mil. 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.
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 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.
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.
D. 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).
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. 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.
It is well settled that States may not
regulate in categories reserved for
regulation by the Coast Guard. In 43
U.S.C. 1356, Congress specifically
granted to the Secretary of the
Department in which the Coast Guard is
operating, the authority to issue
regulations, which, in part, require the
employment of U.S. citizens or resident
aliens on any vessel, rig, platform, or
other vehicle or structure engaged in
OCS activities, unless certain exceptions
apply. As this rule updates existing OCS
personnel regulations, it falls within the
scope of authority Congress granted
exclusively to the Secretary of
Homeland Security and States may not
regulate within this category.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Nov 18, 2013
Jkt 232001
G. 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.
H. Civil Justice Reform
M. Environment
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.
I. 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.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
K. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 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 rule is categorically
excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2–
1, paragraph 34(a), (c) and (d) of the
Instruction. This rule involves
regulations that are editorial or
procedural, regulations concerning the
licensing of maritime personnel and
regulations concerning manning and
documentation of vessels. An
environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 141
Citizenship and naturalization,
Continental shelf, Employment,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 141 as follows:
PART 141—PERSONNEL
1. The authority citation for part 141
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1356; 46 U.S.C.
70105; 49 CFR 1.46(z).
Subpart A—Restrictions on Employment
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
69296
§ 141.10
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
[Amended]
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129. EPA requests you contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view
the hard copy of the docket. You may
view the hard copy of the docket
Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode
8P–AR, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129,
(303) 312–6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
2. In § 141.10, remove the definition
for ‘‘Transportation Worker
Identification Credential or TWIC’’.
■
§ 141.30
[Amended]
3. In § 141.30:
a. In paragraph (c), after the words
‘‘issued by’’, remove the word ‘‘the’’;
and
■ b. Remove paragraph (d).
■
■
§ 141.35
[Amended]
4. In § 141.35(a)(1), after the words
‘‘mariner’s document’’, remove the
punctuation and words ‘‘,
Transportation Worker Identification
Credential,’’.
■
Dated: November 8, 2013.
J.C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of
Inspections & Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013–27569 Filed 11–18–13; 8:45 am]
Table of Contents
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0846; FRL–9817–4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Montana; Revisions to the
Administrative Rules of Montana—Air
Quality, Subchapter 7, Subchapter 16
and Subchapter 17
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking final action to
approve new rules as submitted by the
State of Montana on September 23,
2011. Montana adopted these rules on
December 2, 2005 and March 23, 2006.
These new rules meet the requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s
minor new source review (NSR)
regulations. In this action, EPA is
approving these rules as they are
consistent with the CAA. This action is
being taken under section 110 of the
CAA.
SUMMARY:
This final rule is effective
December 19, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0846. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Nov 18, 2013
Jkt 232001
I. What action is EPA taking?
A. Summary of Final Action
II. What is the background?
A. Brief Discussion of Statutory and
Regulatory Requirements
B. Summary of the Submittal Addressed in
This Final Action
III. Response to Comments
IV. What are the grounds for this approval
action?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The words Minor NSR mean NSR
established under section 110 of the Act
and 40 CFR 51.160.
(iv) The initials NSR mean new
source review, a phrase intended to
encompass the stationary source
regulatory programs that regulate the
construction and modification of
stationary sources as provided under
CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), CAA Title I,
parts C and D, and 40 CFR 51.160
through 51.166.
(v) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
(iv) The words State or Montana
mean the State of Montana, unless the
context indicates otherwise.
I. What action is EPA taking?
A. Summary of Final Action
EPA is taking final action to approve
the Montana State Implementation Plan
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(SIP) and rules submitted to EPA on
September 23, 2011. This submission
contained revisions to ARM 17.8.744,
and new rules I–VI, codified as ARM
17.8.1601, 17.8.1602, 17.8.1603,
17.8.1604, 17.8.1605, and 17.8.1606,
pertaining to the regulation of oil and
gas well facilities. The Montana Board
of Environmental Review (Board)
adopted these revisions to existing SIP
revisions and new rules on December 2,
2005 and they became effective on
January 1, 2006. This submission also
contains new rules I–IX, codified as
ARM 17.8.1701, 17.8.1702, 17.8.1703,
17.8.1704, 17.8.1705, 17.8.1710,
17.8.1711, 17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713
pertaining to the regulation of oil and
gas well facilities. The Board adopted
these revisions to existing SIP revisions
and new rules on March 23, 2006 and
they became effective on April 7, 2006.
The new rules and revisions meet the
requirements of the Act and EPA’s
minor NSR regulations.
EPA proposed action for the above
SIP revision submittals on November
13, 2012 (77 FR 67596). We accepted
comments from the public on this
proposal from November 14, 2012, until
December 13, 2012. A summary of the
comments received and our evaluation
thereof is discussed in section III below.
In the proposed rule, we described our
basis for the actions identified above.
The reader should refer to the proposed
rule, and sections IV and V of this
preamble, for additional information
regarding this final action.
EPA reviews a SIP revision
submission for its compliance with the
Act and EPA regulations. CAA
110(k)(3). We evaluated the submitted
new and revised rules based upon the
regulations and associated record that
have been submitted and are currently
before EPA. In order for EPA to ensure
that Montana has a program that meets
the requirements of the CAA, the State
must demonstrate the program is as
stringent as the Act and the
implementing regulations discussed in
this notice. For example, EPA must have
sufficient information to make a finding
that the new program will ensure
protection of the NAAQS, and
noninterference with the Montana SIP
control strategies, as required by section
110(l) of the Act. The provisions in
these submittals were not submitted to
meet a mandatory requirement of the
Act.
II. What is the background?
A. Brief Discussion of Statutory and
Regulatory Requirements
The CAA (section 110(a)(2)(C)) and 40
CFR 51.160 require states to have legally
E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM
19NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69292-69296]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27569]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 141
[Docket No. USCG-2013-0916]
RIN 1625-AC09
TWIC Not Evidence of Resident Alien Status
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard issues this final rule to remove from its
regulations
[[Page 69293]]
on Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities a reference to the
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) and a related
TWIC definition and recordkeeping reference because they are
inconsistent with a requirement in the Outer Continental Shelf Lands
Act. These regulations deal with the employment of personnel on the OCS
to U.S. citizens or resident aliens. The TWIC reference incorrectly
provides that a TWIC alone may be accepted by an employer as sufficient
evidence of the TWIC holder's status as a U.S. resident alien, as that
term is defined. This rule clarifies the regulations.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 19, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2013-0916 and are 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. You may also find
this docket on the Internet by going to https://www.regulations.gov,
inserting USCG-2013-0916 in the ``Search'' box, and then clicking
``Search.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
email or call Mr. Quentin Kent, Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance,
Foreign and Offshore Vessel Division (CG-CVC-2), Coast Guard; email
Quentin.C.Kent@uscg.mil, telephone 202-372-2292. If you have questions
on viewing the docket, call Ms. Barbara Hairston, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Basis and Purpose
III. Regulatory History
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Abbreviations
APA Administrative Procedure Act
FR Federal Register
I-9 Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification
INA Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
OCSLA Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
TWIC Transportation Worker Identification Credential
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Basis and Purpose
The Coast Guard is amending its regulations in 33 CFR part 141,
which govern the restrictions on the employment of personnel on units
engaged in Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities, by removing an
incorrect reference to the Transportation Worker Identification
Credential (TWIC). The reference in 33 CFR 141.30(d) incorrectly
provides that, for purposes of 33 CFR part 141, a TWIC alone may be
accepted by an employer as sufficient evidence of the TWIC holder's
status a U.S. resident alien,\1\ as that term is defined in 33 CFR
141.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. resident alien is defined in 33 CFR 141.10 as an alien
lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined in 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(20). See 49 CFR 1570.3. The term in synonymous with ``legal
permanent resident'' as it appears in TSA regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulations in 33 CFR part 141 are authorized by the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) (43 U.S.C. 1301, et. al.), which
mandates that the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard
operates shall issue regulations which, in part, require the employment
of U.S. citizens or resident aliens on any vessel, rig, platform, or
other vehicle or structure engaged in OCS activities, unless certain
exceptions apply. 43 U.S.C. 1356.
Subsequent to the implementation of the regulations in 33 CFR part
141, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled, ``Consolidation
of Merchant Mariner Qualification Credentials'' on March 16, 2009, that
went into effect on April 15, 2009. 74 FR 11196. In that rulemaking
several provisions of 33 CFR part 141 were amended. In particular, the
Coast Guard added paragraph (d) to 33 CFR 141.30, authorizing an
employer to accept a TWIC alone as sufficient evidence of the TWIC
holder's status as a U.S. resident alien. However, the preamble to this
rulemaking did not provide a reason for adding paragraph (d) to 33 CFR
141.30. Paragraph (d) is incorrect because a TWIC may be issued to both
U.S. resident aliens and non-resident aliens \2\ and thus, it cannot
serve as sufficient evidence that the person is a U.S. resident alien,
as required by law. Therefore, for purposes of 33 CFR part 141, a TWIC
alone cannot be accepted by an employer as sufficient evidence of the
holder's status as a U.S. resident alien.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Transportation Security Administration regulations, 49
CFR 1572.105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since OCSLA mandates that employers must employ only U.S. citizens
or resident aliens on units engaged in OCS activities, any employer who
hires a non-resident alien who has presented only a TWIC as proof of
status as a U.S. resident alien, would not be in compliance with the
OCSLA requirement. Additionally, authorizing a TWIC to be used in this
manner is contrary to, and inconsistent with the definition for a U.S.
``resident alien'' found in Sec. 141.10 where the term is defined as
``an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent
residence in accordance with section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA) of 1952, as amended, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20).''
To correct this inconsistency, the Coast Guard is removing 33 CFR
141.30(d) from its regulations and clarifies that only the provisions
in 33 CFR 141.30(a) through (c) are acceptable for showing evidence of
a person's status as a U.S. resident alien.
The Coast Guard is also removing a related TWIC definition in Sec.
141.10 and a related TWIC recordkeeping reference in Sec. 141.35(d).
III. Regulatory History
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires the Coast Guard to
provide public notice and seek public comment on substantive
regulations. 5 U.S.C. 553. The APA, however, excludes certain types of
regulations and permits exceptions for other types of regulations from
this public notice and comment requirement. Under the APA ``good
cause'' exception, an agency may dispense with the requirement for
notice and comment if the agency finds that following APA requirements
would be ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The Coast Guard finds that notice and
comment for this rulemaking is unnecessary because we are merely
removing a provision that we mistakenly inserted into 33 CFR part 141
in a 2009 rulemaking and that is inconsistent with the governing
statute (see discussion in section II. Basis and Purpose). Public
notice of this change is unnecessary because such comments cannot
affect, influence, or inform any Coast Guard action in implementing the
removal of this provision because the Coast Guard cannot maintain a
regulation that is inconsistent with its statutory authority.
[[Page 69294]]
Moreover, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists to implement
this rule immediately upon publication in the Federal Register. See 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3). The Coast Guard finds it necessary to implement this
rule immediately because the Coast Guard cannot keep a regulation in
place even if the public showed support for it since it is inconsistent
with its statutory authority. We also find it in the public interest to
implement this rule immediately to ensure that employers know as soon
as possible that they must verify a potential employees' immigration
status by means other than a TWIC.
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
Section 141.10 contains the definitions that apply to part 141. A
TWIC is defined as ``an identification credential issued by the
Transportation Security Administration according to 49 CFR part 1572.''
We are removing this definition for the reasons explained in Part III.
Section 141.30 contains the regulation which lists the documents an
employer can accept as evidence of a person's status as a U.S. resident
alien. We are removing Section 141.30(d) for the reasons explained in
Part III.
Section 141.35 states which records must be kept by employers as
proof of eligibility for employment on the OCS. Section 141.35(a)(1)
requires that an employer maintain a copy of a TWIC if that is the
method of identification used by the employee to assert eligibility to
work on the OCS. Since a TWIC is not a valid form of identification for
purposes of part 141 as explained in Part III, we are removing
``Transportation Worker Identification Credential'' from Sec.
141.35(a)(1). All other recordkeeping requirements will remain
unchanged.
In addition, we will make a non-substantive change to Sec.
141.30(c). The word ``the'' preceding the word ``Naturalization'' is
removed as it is grammatically incorrect since only the word ``a''
should precede the word ``Naturalization.''
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 14 of these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies
to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives
and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both
costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of
promoting flexibility.
This final 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 Regulation and
Regulatory 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 (OMB) has not reviewed it under that Order.
Nonetheless, we developed an analysis of the costs and benefits of this
final rule to ascertain its probable impacts on industry.
Currently, part 141 permits an individual to present a valid TWIC
as evidence of U.S. resident alien status for the purposes of
employment on units engaged in OCS activities. The TWIC is unsuitable
as evidence of U.S. resident alien status because the TWIC may be
obtained by non-resident aliens.
Employers, therefore, cannot accept the TWIC as sufficient evidence
that the potential employee is a U.S. resident alien. This final rule
will remove the TWIC as proof of U.S. resident alien status for
employment on units engaged in OCS activities, creating consistency
with other requirements in part 141 that state that each employer
engaged in OCS activities must employ only U.S. citizens or resident
aliens, with limited exceptions.
The Coast Guard does not expect this final rule to burden industry
with new costs. In addition to having no evidence that any employers
have attempted to accept the TWIC alone to determine the immigration
status of employees since the TWIC was added to the list in 2009,
employers in the United States are required by the INA to use the Form
I-9,\3\ Employment Eligibility Verification (I-9) process. The I-9
process includes an attestation from the new hire on whether he or she
is a U.S. citizen or national, lawful permanent resident, or alien
authorized to work in the United States. Employers must verify the
identity and employment authorization of every individual hired for
employment in the United States. (8 CFR 274a.2) The TWIC card alone
would be insufficient evidence to prove one's identity and employment
authorization under the I-9 process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, OMB No. 1615-
0047, https://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because part 141 does not exempt employers from completing the Form
I-9, the population directly affected by the final rule (i.e.,
employers and potential employees) will not incur any additional costs
as a result of the final rule.
The benefits of this final rule include harmonization with the INA
and clarification of the requirements to demonstrate U.S. resident
alien status for the purpose of employment on units engaged in
activities on the OCS. The inclusion of the TWIC to the list of
documents acceptable to prove U.S. resident alien status in Sec.
141.30 contradicts the intent of OCSLA. Removal of the reference to
TWIC from the list will ensure employers and employees understand which
documents can be accepted as proof of U.S. resident alien status.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will 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 revisions in this rule do not require publication of an NPRM and,
therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Although this rule is exempt, we have reviewed it for
its potential economic impact on small entities. There is no cost to
businesses, not-for-profit organizations, or government jurisdictions
as a result of this rule, since other federal requirements would
preclude the use of the TWIC as sole evidence of U.S. resident alien
status. Therefore, 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. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule will have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically
affect it.
[[Page 69295]]
C. 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 rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule will
affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction
and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult Mr. Quentin Kent, at
Quentin.C.Kent@uscg.mil. 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.
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).
D. 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).
E. 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.
It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. In 43 U.S.C. 1356, Congress
specifically granted to the Secretary of the Department in which the
Coast Guard is operating, the authority to issue regulations, which, in
part, require the employment of U.S. citizens or resident aliens on any
vessel, rig, platform, or other vehicle or structure engaged in OCS
activities, unless certain exceptions apply. As this rule updates
existing OCS personnel regulations, it falls within the scope of
authority Congress granted exclusively to the Secretary of Homeland
Security and States may not regulate within this category.
F. 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.
G. 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.
H. 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.
I. 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.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. 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.
L. 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.
M. 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
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 rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2,
figure 2-1, paragraph 34(a), (c) and (d) of the Instruction. This rule
involves regulations that are editorial or procedural, regulations
concerning the licensing of maritime personnel and regulations
concerning manning and documentation of vessels. An environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 141
Citizenship and naturalization, Continental shelf, Employment,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 141 as follows:
PART 141--PERSONNEL
0
1. The authority citation for part 141 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1356; 46 U.S.C. 70105; 49 CFR 1.46(z).
Subpart A--Restrictions on Employment
[[Page 69296]]
Sec. 141.10 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 141.10, remove the definition for ``Transportation Worker
Identification Credential or TWIC''.
Sec. 141.30 [Amended]
0
3. In Sec. 141.30:
0
a. In paragraph (c), after the words ``issued by'', remove the word
``the''; and
0
b. Remove paragraph (d).
Sec. 141.35 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 141.35(a)(1), after the words ``mariner's document'',
remove the punctuation and words ``, Transportation Worker
Identification Credential,''.
Dated: November 8, 2013.
J.C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Inspections & Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-27569 Filed 11-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
