Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL, 46449-46451 [2018-19934]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
new safety and effectiveness
information learned about the device
from ongoing or completed studies that
may reasonably affect an evaluation of
the safety or effectiveness of the device
or that may reasonably affect the
statement of contraindications,
warnings, precautions, and adverse
reactions in the draft labeling. The
update report shall be consistent with
the data reporting provisions of the
protocol. The applicant shall submit any
update report in electronic format and
shall include in the report the number
assigned by FDA to the PMA. These
updates are considered to be
amendments to the PMA. The time
frame for review of a PMA will not be
extended due to the submission of an
update report unless the update is a
major amendment under § 814.37(c)(1).
The applicant shall submit these
reports—
*
*
*
*
*
(f) If a color additive subject to section
721 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act is used in or on the device
and has not previously been listed for
such use, then, in lieu of submitting a
color additive petition under part 71 of
this chapter, at the option of the
applicant, the information required to
be submitted under part 71 may be
submitted as part of the PMA. When
submitted as part of the PMA, the
information shall be submitted in
electronic format. A PMA for a device
that contains a color additive that is
subject to section 721 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act will not
be approved until the color additive is
listed for use in or on the device.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(1) For devices regulated by the
Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, send it to the current address
displayed on the website https://
www.fda.gov/cdrhsubmissionaddress.
(2) For devices regulated by the
Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research, send it to the current address
displayed on the website https://
www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/
OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/
CBER/ucm385240.htm.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. Amend § 814.39 by revising
paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
§ 814.39
§ 814.20(b)(3) is required for only a
supplement submitted for new
indications for use of the device,
significant changes in the performance
or design specifications, circuits,
components, ingredients, principles of
operation, or physical layout of the
device, or when otherwise required by
FDA. The applicant shall submit a PMA
supplement in electronic format and
shall include information relevant to the
proposed changes in the device. A PMA
supplement shall include a separate
section that identifies each change for
which approval is being requested and
explains the reason for each such
change. The applicant shall submit
additional information, if requested by
FDA, in electronic format. The time
frames for review of, and FDA action on,
a PMA supplement are the same as
those provided in § 814.40 for a PMA.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Amend § 814.104 by revising
paragraphs (d) introductory text and
(d)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
§ 814.104
Original applications.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Address for submissions and
correspondence. All original HDEs,
amendments and supplements, as well
as any correspondence relating to an
HDE, must be provided in electronic
format. These materials must be sent or
delivered to one of the following:
(1) For devices regulated by the
Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, send it to the current address
found on the website https://
www.fda.gov/cdrhsubmissionaddress.
(2) For devices regulated by the
Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research, send it to the current address
displayed on the website https://
www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/
OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/
CBER/ucm385240.htm.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: September 7, 2018.
Scott Gottlieb,
Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
PMA supplements.
*
*
*
*
(c)(1) All procedures and actions that
apply to an application under § 814.20
also apply to PMA supplements except
that the information required in a
supplement is limited to that needed to
support the change. A summary under
18:19 Sep 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2018–0713]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy
Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
reduce the size of the Navy Pier
Southeast Safety Zone within the
Chicago Harbor. This action is necessary
to alleviate congestion near the Chicago
Lock during regularly scheduled
fireworks events. The current safety
zone encompasses part of the lock
restricting vessels during events. This
proposed rulemaking would still
prohibit persons and vessels from
entering the safety zone, but would
allow the lock to remain in full
operation during the fireworks display.
We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before October 15, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2018–0713 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.
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions about this rule, call
or email LT John Ramos, Waterways
Management Division, Marine Safety
Unit Chicago, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone (630) 986–2155, email D09DG-MSUChicago-Waterways@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
I. Table of Abbreviations
[FR Doc. 2018–19865 Filed 9–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
46449
The Coast Guard regularly enforces
the Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy
Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL listed in 33
CFR 165.931 for weekly fireworks
events during the boating season. The
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13SEP1.SGM
13SEP1
46450
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
current safety zone encompasses all
waters of Lake Michigan within Chicago
Harbor bounded by coordinates
beginning at 41°53′26.5″ N, 087°35′26.5″
W; then south to 41°53′7.6″ N,
087°35′26.3″ W; then west to 41°53′7.6″
N, 087°36′23.2″ W; then north to
41°53′26.5″ N, 087°36′24.6″ W; then east
back to the point of origin (NAD 83).
The purpose of this proposed
rulemaking is to reduce the size of the
pre-existing safety zone to reduce
congestion near the Chicago Lock. This
safety zone will help ensure the safety
of vessels and the navigable waters near
the fireworks barge before, during, and
after the scheduled events and alleviate
congestion issues around the Chicago
Lock. The proposed rule would not
significantly change the regulatory
language found in 33 CFR 165.931. The
change would only reduce the size of
the safety zone and update the
coordinates found in 33 CFR 165.931
(a).
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.
We conclude that this rule is not a
significant regulatory action because we
anticipate that it will have minimal
impact on the economy, will not
interfere with other agencies, will not
adversely alter the budget of any grant
or loan recipients, and will not raise any
novel legal or policy issues. The safety
zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and will be enforced
intermittently only for a short period of
time. Under certain conditions,
moreover, vessels may still transit
through the safety zones when
permitted by the Captain of the Port.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP proposes to reduce the
established safety zone outlined in 33
CFR 165.931. The current safety zone
encompasses all waters of Lake
Michigan within Chicago Harbor
bounded by coordinates beginning at
41°53′26.5″ N, 087°35′26.5″ W; then
south to 41°53′7.6″ N, 087°35′26.3″ W;
then west to 41°53′7.6″ N, 087°36′23.2″
W; then north to 41°53′26.5″ N,
087°36′24.6″ W; then east back to the
point of origin (NAD 83).
The newly proposed safety zone
would ensure a safe distance for
spectators. It would encompasses all
waters of Lake Michigan within Chicago
Harbor bounded by coordinates
beginning at 41°53′23.74″ N,
087°35′35.70″ W; then south to
41°53′3.95″ N, 087°35′35.11″ W; then
west to 41°53′3.48″ N, 087°36′8.52″ W;
then north to 41°53′23.30″ N,
087°36′9.08″ W; then east back to the
point of origin (NAD 83).
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 safety
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
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:19 Sep 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 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
E:\FR\FM\13SEP1.SGM
13SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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 a safety zone enforced
intermittently. 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
preliminary 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.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:19 Sep 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
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 165.931 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.
2. Amend § 165.931 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 165.931 Safety Zone, Chicago Harbor,
Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: The waters of Lake
Michigan within Chicago Harbor
bounded by coordinates beginning at
41°53′23.74″ N, 087°35′35.70″ W; then
south to 41°53′3.95″ N, 087°35′35.11″
W; then west to 41°53′3.48″ N,
087°36′8.52″ W; then north to
41°53′23.30″ N, 087°36′9.08″ W; then
east back to the point of origin (NAD
83).
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 16, 2018.
Thomas J. Stuhlreyer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2018–19934 Filed 9–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 228
RIN 0596–AD32
Locatable Minerals
Forest Service, USDA.
Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for comment.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Forest Service is
requesting comments from the public
regarding the need to clarify or to
otherwise enhance its regulations that
minimize adverse environmental
impacts on National Forest System
surface resources in connection with
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46451
operations authorized by the United
States mining laws. These rules and
procedures govern prospecting,
exploration, development, mining, and
processing operations conducted on
National Forest System lands authorized
by the Mining Law of 1872, as amended,
subsequent reclamation of the land, and
any necessary long-term post-closure
resource management. The goals of the
regulatory revision are to expedite
Forest Service review of certain
proposed mineral operations authorized
by the United States mining laws, and,
where applicable, Forest Service
approval of some of these proposals by
clarifying the regulations, to increase
consistency with the United States
Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) surface
management regulations governing
operations authorized by the United
States mining laws to assist those who
conduct these operations on lands
managed by each agency, and to
increase the Forest Service’s nationwide
consistency in regulating mineral
operations authorized by the United
States mining laws by clarifying its
regulations .
DATES: Comments must be received by
October 15, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Please submit comments via
one of the following methods:
• Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FS–2018–0052, which is the
docket number for this Advanced Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking. Then, in the
Search panel on the left side of the
screen, under the Document Type
heading, click on the Notice link to
locate this document. You may submit
a comment by clicking on ‘‘Comment
Now!’’
• By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
to: USDA-Forest Service. Attn:
Director—MGM Staff, 1617 Cole
Boulevard, Building 17, Lakewood, CO
80401.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cheryl Nabahe, Minerals and Geology
Management, 202–205–0800.
Individuals who use telecommunication
devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the
Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8:00
a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
advance notice is intended to give the
E:\FR\FM\13SEP1.SGM
13SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46449-46451]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19934]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2018-0713]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to reduce the size of the Navy Pier
Southeast Safety Zone within the Chicago Harbor. This action is
necessary to alleviate congestion near the Chicago Lock during
regularly scheduled fireworks events. The current safety zone
encompasses part of the lock restricting vessels during events. This
proposed rulemaking would still prohibit persons and vessels from
entering the safety zone, but would allow the lock to remain in full
operation during the fireworks display. We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before October 15, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2018-0713 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 rule,
call or email LT John Ramos, Waterways Management Division, Marine
Safety Unit Chicago, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (630) 986-2155, 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
The Coast Guard regularly enforces the Safety Zone; Chicago Harbor,
Navy Pier Southeast, Chicago, IL listed in 33 CFR 165.931 for weekly
fireworks events during the boating season. The
[[Page 46450]]
current safety zone encompasses all waters of Lake Michigan within
Chicago Harbor bounded by coordinates beginning at 41[deg]53'26.5'' N,
087[deg]35'26.5'' W; then south to 41[deg]53'7.6'' N, 087[deg]35'26.3''
W; then west to 41[deg]53'7.6'' N, 087[deg]36'23.2'' W; then north to
41[deg]53'26.5'' N, 087[deg]36'24.6'' W; then east back to the point of
origin (NAD 83).
The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to reduce the size of
the pre-existing safety zone to reduce congestion near the Chicago
Lock. This safety zone will help ensure the safety of vessels and the
navigable waters near the fireworks barge before, during, and after the
scheduled events and alleviate congestion issues around the Chicago
Lock. The proposed rule would not significantly change the regulatory
language found in 33 CFR 165.931. The change would only reduce the size
of the safety zone and update the coordinates found in 33 CFR 165.931
(a).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP proposes to reduce the established safety zone outlined in
33 CFR 165.931. The current safety zone encompasses all waters of Lake
Michigan within Chicago Harbor bounded by coordinates beginning at
41[deg]53'26.5'' N, 087[deg]35'26.5'' W; then south to 41[deg]53'7.6''
N, 087[deg]35'26.3'' W; then west to 41[deg]53'7.6'' N,
087[deg]36'23.2'' W; then north to 41[deg]53'26.5'' N,
087[deg]36'24.6'' W; then east back to the point of origin (NAD 83).
The newly proposed safety zone would ensure a safe distance for
spectators. It would encompasses all waters of Lake Michigan within
Chicago Harbor bounded by coordinates beginning at 41[deg]53'23.74'' N,
087[deg]35'35.70'' W; then south to 41[deg]53'3.95'' N,
087[deg]35'35.11'' W; then west to 41[deg]53'3.48'' N,
087[deg]36'8.52'' W; then north to 41[deg]53'23.30'' N,
087[deg]36'9.08'' W; then east back to the point of origin (NAD 83).
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.
We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and will be enforced intermittently only for a short
period of time. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may still
transit through the safety zones when permitted by the Captain of the
Port.
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
safety 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 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
[[Page 46451]]
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 a safety zone enforced intermittently. 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 preliminary 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.
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 165.931 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. Amend Sec. 165.931 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 165.931 Safety Zone, Chicago Harbor, Navy Pier Southeast,
Chicago, IL.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: The waters of
Lake Michigan within Chicago Harbor bounded by coordinates beginning at
41[deg]53'23.74'' N, 087[deg]35'35.70'' W; then south to
41[deg]53'3.95'' N, 087[deg]35'35.11'' W; then west to 41[deg]53'3.48''
N, 087[deg]36'8.52'' W; then north to 41[deg]53'23.30'' N,
087[deg]36'9.08'' W; then east back to the point of origin (NAD 83).
* * * * *
Dated: August 16, 2018.
Thomas J. Stuhlreyer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2018-19934 Filed 9-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
