Safety Zone; RICHLAND, Apra Harbor/Philippine Sea, GU, 2749-2751 [2016-00863]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations User assistance is available for eLibrary and other aspects of FERC’s Web site during normal business hours. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502–8659. Annual Update of Filing Fees (Issued January 12, 2016) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is issuing this document to update filing fees that the Commission assesses for specific services and benefits provided to identifiable beneficiaries. Pursuant to 18 CFR 381.104, the Commission is establishing updated fees on the basis of the Commission’s Fiscal Year 2015 costs. The adjusted fees announced in this document are effective February 18, 2016. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget, that this final rule is not a major rule within the meaning of section 251 of Subtitle E of Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission is submitting this final rule to both houses of the United States Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The new fee schedule is as follows: Fees Applicable to the Natural Gas Policy Act 1. Petitions for rate approval pursuant to 18 CFR 284.123(b)(2). (18 CFR 381.403) ................................................................ 1. 2. 3. 4. Fees Applicable to General Activities Petition for issuance of a declaratory order (except under Part I of the Federal Power Act). (18 CFR 381.302(a)) .......... Review of a Department of Energy remedial order: Amount in controversy $0–9,999. (18 CFR 381.303(b)) ............................................................................................................................................. $10,000–29,999. (18 CFR 381.303(b)) .................................................................................................................................. $30,000 or more. (18 CFR 381.303(a)) ................................................................................................................................. Review of a Department of Energy denial of adjustment: Amount in controversy $0–9,999. (18 CFR 381.304(b)) ............................................................................................................................................. $10,000–29,999. (18 CFR 381.304(b)) .................................................................................................................................. $30,000 or more. (18 CFR 381.304(a)) ................................................................................................................................. Written legal interpretations by the Office of General Counsel. (18 CFR 381.305(a)) ......................................................... Fees Applicable to Natural Gas Pipelines 1. Pipeline certificate applications pursuant to 18 CFR 284.224. (18 CFR 381.207(b)) ........................................................... Fees Applicable to Cogenerators and Small Power Producers 1. Certification of qualifying status as a small power production facility. (18 CFR 381.505(a)) ............................................ 2. Certification of qualifying status as a cogeneration facility. (18 CFR 381.505(a)) ............................................................... * This fee has not been changed. List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 381 § 381.304 Electric power plants, Electric utilities, Natural gas, reporting and recordkeeping requirements. [Amended] ■ 4. In § 381.304, paragraph (a) is amended by removing ‘‘$18,920’’ and adding ‘‘$19,120’’ in its place. Issued: January 12, 2016. Anton C. Porter, Executive Director. § 381.305 5. In § 381.305, paragraph (a) is amended by removing ‘‘$7,090’’ and adding ‘‘$7,160’’ in its place. PART 381—FEES 1. The authority citation for part 381 continues to read as follows: § 381.403 [Amended] 6. Section 381.403 is amended by removing ‘‘$12,310’’ and adding ‘‘$12,430’’ in its place. ■ ■ § 381.505 Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717–717w; 16 U.S.C. 791–828c, 2601–2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App. U.S.C. 1–85. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES § 381.302 [Amended] 2. In § 381.302, paragraph (a) is amended by removing ‘‘$24,730’’ and adding ‘‘$24,980’’ in its place. ■ § 381.303 [Amended] 7. In § 381.505, paragraph (a) is amended by removing ‘‘$21,260’’ and adding ‘‘$21,480’’ in its place and by removing ‘‘$24,070’’ and adding ‘‘$24,310’’ in its place. ■ [FR Doc. 2016–00842 Filed 1–15–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P [Amended] 3. In § 381.303, paragraph (a) is amended by removing ‘‘$36,100’’ and adding ‘‘$36,460’’ in its place. ■ VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:57 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 $12,430 $24,980 $100 $600 $36,460 $100 $600 $19,120 $7,160 * $1,000 $21,480 $24,310 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Amended] ■ In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends part 381, chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below. 2749 Sfmt 4700 [Docket Number USCG–2015–1101] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; RICHLAND, Apra Harbor/ Philippine Sea, GU Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary moving safety zone for navigable waters within a 1000yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern of the drydock. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the movement of the drydock from Guam waters. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Guam. DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from January 19, 2016 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM 19JAR1 2750 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations through 6:00 p.m. January 31, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 8:00 a.m. December 30, 2015 through January 19, 2016. ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http:// www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2015– 1101 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Chief Kristina Gauthier, Waterways Management Office, Sector Guam, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 671–355–4866, email Kristina.M.Gauthier@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive order FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Pub. L. Public Law § Section U.S.C. United States Code asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES II. Background Information and Regulatory History The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The final details for this removal of this dry-dock were not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time remaining before the operation to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable because it would inhibit the Coast Guard’s ability to protect vessels and waterway users from the hazards associated with this operation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in the preceding paragraph, VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 waiting for a 30 day notice period to run would be impracticable. III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Guam (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the movement of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND starting 8:00 a.m. December 30, 2015 will be a safety concern for anyone within 1000-yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern while transiting Guam waters. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel are in transit in Guam waters. IV. Discussion of the Rule This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:00 a.m. December 30, 2015 through 6:00 p.m. January 31, 2016. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters within 1000 yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern while transiting Guam waters. The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters while the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel are in transit. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. V. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors. A. Regulatory Planning and Review E.O.s 12866 and 13563 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. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 around this safety zone during the majority of this evolution which will impact a small designated area of Apra Harbor, Guam and the Philippine Sea for less than 24 hours. The transit through the mouth of the entrance to Apra Harbor will be the most restricted portion due to the limited space for maneuvering. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF–FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone. B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. 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. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM 19JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations C. Collection of Information This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 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 rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132. Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES E. 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. F. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have determined 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 involves a safety zone to be enforced for less than 24 hours that will prohibit entry within VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jan 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 1000 yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. G. 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. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 2751 unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative thereof. (e) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other COTP representative permitted by law, may enforce these temporary safety zones. (f) Waiver. The COTP may waive any of the requirements of this section for any person, vessel, or class of vessel upon finding that application of the safety zone is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of maritime security. (g) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192. Dated: December 23, 2015. James B. Pruett, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Guam. [FR Doc. 2016–00863 Filed 1–15–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [MB Docket No. 13–249; FCC 15–142] PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Revitalization of the AM Radio Service Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. ■ AGENCY: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. SUMMARY: 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: 2. Add § 165.T14–1101 to read as follows: ■ § 165. T14–1101 Safety Zone; RICHLAND, Apra Harbor/Philippine Sea, GU. (a) Location. The following areas, within the Guam Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–15), from the surface of the water to the ocean floor, is a moving safety zone: All navigable waters within 1000 yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern from departure from Wharf ‘‘P’’ to 12 miles from Orote Point, Guam. (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 8 a.m. on December 30, 2015 through 6 p.m. on January 31, 2016. (c) Enforcement period. This section is enforced from the time the vessel departs Wharf ‘‘P’’ until it is 12 miles from Orote Point, Guam. (d) Regulations. The general regulations governing safety zones contained in § 165.23 apply. No vessels may enter or transit the safety zone PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 In this document, the Commission adopted a number of procedures and procedural changes designed to assist AM broadcasters to better serve the public, thereby advancing the Commission’s fundamental goals of localism, competition, and diversity in broadcast media. DATES: Effective February 18, 2016, except for the amendment to 47 CFR 73.1560, which contains new or modified information collection requirements that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), and which will become effective after the Commission publishes a document in the Federal Register announcing such approval and the relevant effective date. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Doyle, Chief, Media Bureau, Audio Division, (202) 418–2700 or Peter.Doyle@fcc.gov; Thomas Nessinger, Senior Counsel, Media Bureau, Audio Division, (202) 418–2700 or Thomas.Nessinger@fcc.gov. For additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM 19JAR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2749-2751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00863]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2015-1101]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; RICHLAND, Apra Harbor/Philippine Sea, GU

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary moving safety zone 
for navigable waters within a 1000-yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND 
and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern of the 
dry-dock. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and 
the marine environment from potential hazards created by the movement 
of the drydock from Guam waters. Entry of vessels or persons into this 
zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the 
Port Guam.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from January 19, 
2016

[[Page 2750]]

through 6:00 p.m. January 31, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, 
actual notice will be used from 8:00 a.m. December 30, 2015 through 
January 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2015-1101 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Chief Kristina Gauthier, Waterways Management Office, 
Sector Guam, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 671-355-4866, email 
Kristina.M.Gauthier@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive order
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice 
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of 
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This 
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those 
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public 
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The 
final details for this removal of this dry-dock were not known to the 
Coast Guard until there was insufficient time remaining before the 
operation to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this 
rule to wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable because 
it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect vessels and 
waterway users from the hazards associated with this operation.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in 
the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in the preceding 
paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice period to run would be 
impracticable.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 
1231. The Captain of the Port Guam (COTP) has determined that potential 
hazards associated with the movement of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND starting 
8:00 a.m. December 30, 2015 will be a safety concern for anyone within 
1000-yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 
yards abeam and 500 yards astern while transiting Guam waters. This 
rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine 
environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while the 
Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel are in transit in Guam waters.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:00 a.m. December 30, 
2015 through 6:00 p.m. January 31, 2016. The safety zone will cover all 
navigable waters within 1000 yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and 
its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern while 
transiting Guam waters. The duration of the zone is intended to protect 
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable 
waters while the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel are in 
transit. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone 
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated 
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss 
First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 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. 
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility. This rule has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been 
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, 
location, and duration of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able 
to safely transit around this safety zone during the majority of this 
evolution which will impact a small designated area of Apra Harbor, 
Guam and the Philippine Sea for less than 24 hours. The transit through 
the mouth of the entrance to Apra Harbor will be the most restricted 
portion due to the limited space for maneuvering. Moreover, the Coast 
Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 
16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to 
enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the 
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section 
V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on 
any vessel owner or operator.
    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. If the rule would affect your 
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have 
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

[[Page 2751]]

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 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 rule under that Order and have 
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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. If you believe this rule has 
implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. 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.

F. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined 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 involves a safety zone to be enforced for less than 24 hours that 
will prohibit entry within 1000 yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND 
and its towing vessel and 500 yards abeam and 500 yards astern. It is 
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of 
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis 
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion 
Determination are available in the docket where indicated under 
ADDRESSES.

G. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1.


0
2. Add Sec.  165.T14-1101 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.  T14-1101 Safety Zone; RICHLAND, Apra Harbor/Philippine Sea, 
GU.

    (a) Location. The following areas, within the Guam Captain of the 
Port (COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-15), from the surface of the water to 
the ocean floor, is a moving safety zone: All navigable waters within 
1000 yards ahead of the Dry-Dock RICHLAND and its towing vessel and 500 
yards abeam and 500 yards astern from departure from Wharf ``P'' to 12 
miles from Orote Point, Guam.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 8 a.m. on 
December 30, 2015 through 6 p.m. on January 31, 2016.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section is enforced from the time the 
vessel departs Wharf ``P'' until it is 12 miles from Orote Point, Guam.
    (d) Regulations. The general regulations governing safety zones 
contained in Sec.  165.23 apply. No vessels may enter or transit the 
safety zone unless authorized by the COTP or a designated 
representative thereof.
    (e) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty 
officer, and any other COTP representative permitted by law, may 
enforce these temporary safety zones.
    (f) Waiver. The COTP may waive any of the requirements of this 
section for any person, vessel, or class of vessel upon finding that 
application of the safety zone is unnecessary or impractical for the 
purpose of maritime security.
    (g) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject 
to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.

    Dated: December 23, 2015.
James B. Pruett,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Guam.
[FR Doc. 2016-00863 Filed 1-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P