Security Zones; Dignitary Arrival/Departure and United Nations Meetings, New York, NY, 23619-23621 [2018-10899]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2018 / Proposed Rules
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, visit https://
www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
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 proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
authorization. If authorization to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain
within the regulated area is granted by
the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative, all persons
and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of
the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide
notice of the regulated area by local
notice to mariners, broadcast notice to
mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives.
(d) Enforcement Period. This rule will
be enforced on July 4, 2018 from 8:45
p.m. until 10.15 p.m.
Dated: May 16, 2018.
J.W. Reed,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2018–10931 Filed 5–21–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Coast Guard
■
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.
2. Add a temporary § 165.T07–0203 to
read as follows:
■
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 165.T07–0203 Safety Zone; Marshwalk
Group Independence Day Fireworks,
Murrells Inlet, SC.
16:16 May 21, 2018
Jkt 244001
[Docket Number USCG–2017–1081]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zones; Dignitary Arrival/
Departure and United Nations
Meetings, New York, NY
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
(a) Location. The following is a safety
zone: Certain waters of the Atlantic
Ocean at Murrells Inlet, South Carolina
within a 500-yard radius of Veterans
Fishing Pier.
(b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated
representative’’ means Coast Guard
Patrol Commanders, including Coast
Guard coxswains, petty officers, and
other officers operating Coast Guard
vessels, and Federal, state, and local
officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the
enforcement of the regulated areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Charleston or a designated
representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated area may
contact the Captain of the Port
Charleston by telephone at 843–740–
7050, or a designated representative via
VHF radio on channel 16, to request
VerDate Sep<11>2014
33 CFR Part 165
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
modify the Marine Air Terminal,
LaGuardia Airport Security Zone. The
modification of the security zone would
expand the existing security zone
boundary north along the Rikers Island
Bridge to the intersecting point on the
southern tip of Rikers Island then east
to the western end of LaGuardia Airport.
This expanded security zone is
necessary to protect the port, waterfront
facilities, and waters of the United
States from terrorism, sabotage, or other
subversive acts and incidents of a
similar nature during visits to New York
City by various dignitaries. We invite
your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
SUMMARY:
Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before July 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2017–1081 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
23619
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email MST1 Kristina
Pundt, Sector New York Waterways
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
718–354–4352, email Kristina.H.Pundt@
uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On September 29, 2014, the Coast
Guard published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) with a request for
comments entitled, ‘‘Security Zones;
Dignitary Arrival/Departure and United
Nations Meetings, New York, NY’’ in
the Federal Register (79 FR 58298). This
NPRM proposed to disestablish three
regulated navigation areas (RNAs) and
replace each with a security zone. No
comments nor requests for a public
meeting were received. On December
30, 2014 the Coast Guard published a
Final Rule titled, ‘‘Security Zones;
Dignitary Arrival/Departure and United
Nations Meetings, New York, NY’’ in
the Federal Register (79 FR 78308). This
final rule disestablished the RNAs and
replaced each with a security zone. One
of the security zones established was the
Marine Air Terminal, LaGuardia Airport
security zone.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
modify the existing Marine Air
Terminal, LaGuardia Airport security
zone. Due to location adjustments of
security staging areas, the Coast Guard
has determined that modification of the
existing security zone is necessary to
safeguard the port, waterfront facilities,
and waters of the United States from
terrorism, sabotage, or other subversive
acts and incidents of a similar nature
during visits by various dignitaries to
New York City.
The Coast Guard proposes this
rulemaking under the authority in 33
U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; and
Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend
33 CFR 165.164 by modifying the
E:\FR\FM\22MYP1.SGM
22MYP1
23620
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2018 / Proposed Rules
existing Marine Air Terminal,
LaGuardia Airport security zone. The
modification of the security zone would
expand the existing security zone
boundary north along the Rikers Island
Bridge to the intersecting point on the
southern tip of Rikers Island then east
to the western end of LaGuardia Airport.
Due to location adjustments of security
staging areas, the Coast Guard has
determined that the existing security
zone does not provide an adequate level
of security. The proposed modification
will allow enforcement of a security
zone that will minimize threat exposure.
The regulatory text we are proposing
appears at the end of this document.
IV. 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 and
Executive orders and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 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.
Executive Order 13771 directs agencies
to control regulatory costs through a
budgeting process. This NPRM has not
been designated a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and
pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive
Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination
is based on the limited size and
enforcement of the proposed security
zone. Although expanding upon the
current security zone, the proposed
modification only encompasses a small
designated area of Bowery Bay.
Additionally, the proposed security
zone will only be enforced during the
infrequent visits of domestic and foreign
dignitaries for as limited duration as
necessary to safeguard against
destruction, loss, or injury from
sabotage or other subversive acts,
accidents, or other causes of a similar
nature. Moreover, the Coast Guard will
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via
VHF–FM marine channel 16 prior to
periods of enforcement. Lastly, the rule
would continue to allow vessels to seek
permission to transit the zone.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 May 21, 2018
Jkt 244001
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 proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the security
zone may be small entities, for the
reasons stated in section IV.A above,
this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this 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.
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. 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. The Coast Guard will
not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of
the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would 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 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 is
consistent with the fundamental
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
federalism principles and preemption
requirements described in Executive
Order 13132.
Also, 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.
If you believe this proposed rule has
implications for federalism or Indian
tribes, please contact the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
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
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023–01, which guides
the Coast Guard in complying with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (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 the modification of a security
zone that would prohibit entry into
Bowery Bay for a limited duration and
for a limited number of instances each
year. Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A
draft Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this
determination is 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.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
E:\FR\FM\22MYP1.SGM
22MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, visit https://
www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 May 21, 2018
Jkt 244001
2. In § 165.164, revise paragraph (a)(3)
to read as follows:
(a) * * *
(3) Marine Air Terminal, LaGuardia
Airport Security Zone: All waters of
Bowery Bay, Queens, New York, inside
of a line drawn from the start of the
Rikers Island Bridge in Queens at
approximate position 40°46′37″ N,
073°53′30″ W to the intersecting point
on the southern side of Rikers Island at
approximate position 40°47′12″ N,
073°53′06″ W, then a line drawn east to
the western end of LaGuardia Airport at
approximate position 40°47′00″ N,
073°52′44″ W, then a line drawn south
following the shoreline back to the point
of origin at 40°46′37″ N, 073°53′30″ W
(NAD 1983).
■
Dated: May 7, 2018.
M.H. Day,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2018–10899 Filed 5–21–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 13
[NPS–AKRO–25579; PPAKAKROZ5,
PPMPRLE1Y.L00000]
RIN 1024–AE38
Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in
National Preserves
National Park Service, Interior.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Park Service
proposes to amend its regulations for
sport hunting and trapping in national
preserves in Alaska. This proposed rule
would remove a regulatory provision
issued by the National Park Service in
2015 that prohibited certain sport
hunting practices that are otherwise
permitted by the State of Alaska. These
proposed changes are consistent with
Secretary of the Interior Orders 3347
and 3356.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
must be received by 11:59 p.m. EST on
July 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Regulation Identifier
Number (RIN) 1024–AE38, by either of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail or hand deliver to: National
Park Service, Regional Director, Alaska
Regional Office, 240 West 5th Ave.,
Anchorage, AK 99501.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
23621
• Instructions: Comments will not be
accepted by fax, email, or in any way
other than those specified above. All
submissions received must include the
words ‘‘National Park Service’’ or
‘‘NPS’’ and must include the docket
number or RIN (1024–AE38) for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
• Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Herbert C. Frost, Regional Director,
Alaska Regional Office, 240 West 5th
Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501. Phone
(907) 644–3510. Email: AKR_
Regulations@nps.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 23, 2015, the National
Park Service (NPS) published a final
rule (Final Rule) to amend its
regulations for sport hunting and
trapping in national preserves in Alaska
(80 FR 64325). The Final Rule codified
prohibitions on certain types of harvest
practices that are otherwise permitted
by the State of Alaska. The practices are:
Taking any black bear, including cubs
and sows with cubs, with artificial light
at den sites; harvesting brown bears over
bait; taking wolves and coyotes
(including pups) during the denning
season (between May 1 and August 9);
taking swimming caribou; taking
caribou from motorboats under power;
taking black bears over bait; and using
dogs to hunt black bears. This rule is
inconsistent with State of Alaska’s
hunting regulations found at 5 AAC Part
85.
Since the publication of the Final
Rule, the Secretary of the Interior issued
two Secretarial Orders regarding how
the Department of the Interior should
manage recreational hunting and
trapping in the lands and waters it
administers, and directing greater
collaboration with state, tribe, and
territorial partners in doing so.
On March 2, 2017, Secretary Zinke
signed Secretarial Order 3347,
Conservation Stewardship and Outdoor
Recreation. Part of the stated purpose of
Secretarial Order 3347 is to increase
outdoor recreation and improve the
management of game species and their
habitat. Secretarial Order 3347 directs
the Department of the Interior to
identify specific actions to (1) expand
access significantly for recreational
hunting and fishing on public lands;
and (2) improve recreational hunting
E:\FR\FM\22MYP1.SGM
22MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 22, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23619-23621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10899]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2017-1081]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zones; Dignitary Arrival/Departure and United Nations
Meetings, New York, NY
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the Marine Air Terminal,
LaGuardia Airport Security Zone. The modification of the security zone
would expand the existing security zone boundary north along the Rikers
Island Bridge to the intersecting point on the southern tip of Rikers
Island then east to the western end of LaGuardia Airport. This expanded
security zone is necessary to protect the port, waterfront facilities,
and waters of the United States from terrorism, sabotage, or other
subversive acts and incidents of a similar nature during visits to New
York City by various dignitaries. We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before July 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-1081 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email MST1 Kristina Pundt, Sector New York
Waterways Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 718-354-4352, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
On September 29, 2014, the Coast Guard published a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) with a request for comments entitled,
``Security Zones; Dignitary Arrival/Departure and United Nations
Meetings, New York, NY'' in the Federal Register (79 FR 58298). This
NPRM proposed to disestablish three regulated navigation areas (RNAs)
and replace each with a security zone. No comments nor requests for a
public meeting were received. On December 30, 2014 the Coast Guard
published a Final Rule titled, ``Security Zones; Dignitary Arrival/
Departure and United Nations Meetings, New York, NY'' in the Federal
Register (79 FR 78308). This final rule disestablished the RNAs and
replaced each with a security zone. One of the security zones
established was the Marine Air Terminal, LaGuardia Airport security
zone.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to modify the existing Marine Air
Terminal, LaGuardia Airport security zone. Due to location adjustments
of security staging areas, the Coast Guard has determined that
modification of the existing security zone is necessary to safeguard
the port, waterfront facilities, and waters of the United States from
terrorism, sabotage, or other subversive acts and incidents of a
similar nature during visits by various dignitaries to New York City.
The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under the authority in 33
U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; and
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 165.164 by modifying the
[[Page 23620]]
existing Marine Air Terminal, LaGuardia Airport security zone. The
modification of the security zone would expand the existing security
zone boundary north along the Rikers Island Bridge to the intersecting
point on the southern tip of Rikers Island then east to the western end
of LaGuardia Airport. Due to location adjustments of security staging
areas, the Coast Guard has determined that the existing security zone
does not provide an adequate level of security. The proposed
modification will allow enforcement of a security zone that will
minimize threat exposure. The regulatory text we are proposing appears
at the end of this document.
IV. 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 and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 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. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the limited size
and enforcement of the proposed security zone. Although expanding upon
the current security zone, the proposed modification only encompasses a
small designated area of Bowery Bay. Additionally, the proposed
security zone will only be enforced during the infrequent visits of
domestic and foreign dignitaries for as limited duration as necessary
to safeguard against destruction, loss, or injury from sabotage or
other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature.
Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via
VHF-FM marine channel 16 prior to periods of enforcement. Lastly, the
rule would continue to allow vessels to seek permission to transit 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
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
security zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this 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.
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. 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would 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 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 is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, 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. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, which guides the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (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 the modification of a security zone that would prohibit entry
into Bowery Bay for a limited duration and for a limited number of
instances each year. Normally such actions are categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of
DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A draft Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is 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.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
[[Page 23621]]
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.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
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 proposes
to amend 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. In Sec. 165.164, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
(a) * * *
(3) Marine Air Terminal, LaGuardia Airport Security Zone: All
waters of Bowery Bay, Queens, New York, inside of a line drawn from the
start of the Rikers Island Bridge in Queens at approximate position
40[deg]46'37'' N, 073[deg]53'30'' W to the intersecting point on the
southern side of Rikers Island at approximate position 40[deg]47'12''
N, 073[deg]53'06'' W, then a line drawn east to the western end of
LaGuardia Airport at approximate position 40[deg]47'00'' N,
073[deg]52'44'' W, then a line drawn south following the shoreline back
to the point of origin at 40[deg]46'37'' N, 073[deg]53'30'' W (NAD
1983).
Dated: May 7, 2018.
M.H. Day,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2018-10899 Filed 5-21-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P