Safety Zone; Tanapag Harbor, Saipan, CNMI, 74304-74306 [2020-25766]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
74304
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 225 / Friday, November 20, 2020 / Proposed Rules
assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required. If FDA
determines a categorical exclusion does
not apply, we will request an
environmental assessment and make it
available for public inspection.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. FDA–2017–C–6238]
Colorcon, Inc.; Filing of Color Additive
Petition
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
[FR Doc. 2020–25600 Filed 11–19–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
Notification of petition.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
announcing that we have filed a
petition, submitted by Colorcon, Inc.,
proposing that the color additive
regulations be amended to expand the
safe use of calcium carbonate to include
use in dietary supplement tablets and
capsules.
DATES: The color additive petition was
filed on October 15, 2020.
ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts,
and/or go to the Dockets Management
Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852, 240–402–7500.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Kampmeyer, Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
Food and Drug Administration, 5001
Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740,
240–402–1255.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under
section 721(d)(1) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.
379e(d)(1)), we are giving notice that we
have filed a color additive petition (CAP
0C0318), submitted by Colorcon, Inc.,
275 Ruth Rd., Harleysville, PA 19438.
The petition proposes to amend the
color additive regulations in 21 CFR
73.70, ‘‘Calcium carbonate,’’ to expand
the use of calcium carbonate to include
use in dietary supplement tablets and
capsules, including coatings and
printing inks, in amounts consistent
with good manufacturing practice.
The petitioner has claimed that this
action is categorically excluded under
21 CFR 25.32(k) because the substance
is intended to remain in food through
ingestion by consumers and is not
intended to replace macronutrients in
food. In addition, the petitioner has
stated that, to their knowledge, no
extraordinary circumstances exist. If
FDA determines a categorical exclusion
applies, neither an environmental
SUMMARY:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Dated: November 16, 2020.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for
Policy.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Nov 19, 2020
Jkt 253001
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. FDA–2020–C–2131]
Ecoflora SAS; Filing of Color Additive
Petition
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notification of petition.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
announcing that we have filed a
petition, submitted by Ecoflora SAS,
proposing that the color additive
regulations be amended to provide for
the safe use of jagua (genipin-glycine)
blue in various food categories at levels
consistent with good manufacturing
practice.
DATES: The color additive petition was
filed on July 31, 2020.
ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts,
and/or go to the Dockets Management
Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852, 240–402–7500.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard E. Bonnette, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and
Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr.,
College Park, MD 20740, 240–402–1235.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under
section 721(d)(1) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.
379e(d)(1)), we are giving notice that we
have filed a color additive petition (CAP
0C0317), submitted by Ecoflora, SAS, c/
o Exponent, Inc., 1150 Connecticut Ave.
NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036.
The petition proposes to amend the
color additive regulations in part 73 (21
CFR part 73, ‘‘Listing of Color Additives
Exempt From Certification’’) to provide
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
for the safe use of jagua (genipinglycine) blue derived from jagua fruit
pulp (Genipa americana) as a color
additive in: (1) Flavored milk; (2) dairy
drinks and substitutes (milk shakes,
milk substitutes, and other dairy
drinks); (3) yogurt (dairy and non-dairy);
(4) desserts (ice cream and frozen dairy
and non-dairy desserts; pudding;
gelatins, ices, and sorbets); (5) ready-toeat cereals; (6) savory snacks (flavored
potato chips; tortilla, corn, other chips);
(7) candy and chewing gum; (8) nonalcoholic beverages (fruit drinks;
nutritional beverages; smoothies); (9)
flavored cream cheese-based spread;
and (10) jams, syrups, icings, frostings,
and fruit toppings and fillings, at levels
consistent with good manufacturing
practice.
The petitioner has claimed that this
action is categorically excluded under
21 CFR 25.32(k) because the substance
is intended to remain in food through
ingestion by consumers and is not
intended to replace macronutrients in
food. In addition, the petitioner has
stated that, to their knowledge, no
extraordinary circumstances exist. If
FDA determines a categorical exclusion
applies, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required. If FDA
determines a categorical exclusion does
not apply, we will request an
environmental assessment and make it
available for public inspection.
Dated: November 16, 2020.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020–25604 Filed 11–19–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2020–0459
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Tanapag Harbor, Saipan,
CNMI
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to establish a recurring safety zone for
navigable waters within Tanapag
Harbor, Saipan. This safety zone will
encompass the designated swim course
for the Escape from Managaha swim
event in the waters of Tanapag Harbor,
Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 225 / Friday, November 20, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Mariana Islands. This action is
necessary to protect all persons and
vessels participating in this marine
event from potential safety hazards
associated with vessel traffic in the area.
Race participants, chase boats, and
organizers of the event will be exempt
from the safety zone. Entry of persons or
vessels into the safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port (COTP) Guam. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before December 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2020–0459 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.
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Chief Petty
Officer Robert Davis, Sector Guam, U.S.
Coast Guard, by telephone at (671) 355–
4866, or email at WWMGuam@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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
The Escape from Managaha swim
event is a recurring annual event. We
have established safety zones for this
swim event in past years.
The purpose of this rule is to ensure
the safety of the participants and the
navigable waters in the safety zone
before, during, and after the scheduled
swim event. The Coast Guard is
proposing this rulemaking under
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously
codified in 33 U.S.C. 1231).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a
safety zone from 5:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
for one day on a Saturday or Sunday
occurring annually between February
and April. This safety zone is necessary
to protect all persons and vessels
participating in this marine event from
potential safety hazards associated with
vessel traffic in the area. Race
participants, chase boats, and organizers
of the event will be exempt from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Nov 19, 2020
Jkt 253001
safety zone. Entry of persons or vessels
into this safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the COTP. 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 size, location, duration,
and time-of-day of the safety zone.
Vessel traffic will be able to safely
transit around this safety zone, which
will impact a small designated area of
Tanapag Harbor for 2 hours. Moreover,
the Coast Guard will issue a 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 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74305
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 call or email 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 Executive
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 call or email 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
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
74306
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 225 / Friday, November 20, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guide 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 a safety zone lasting for 2
hours that will prohibit entry within
100-yards of swim participants.
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. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Nov 19, 2020
Jkt 253001
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, call or email 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
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645,
September 26, 2018).
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 is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—SAFETY ZONE; TANAPAG
HARBOR, SAIPAN, CNMI
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034; 46 U.S.C.
70051; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and
160.5; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.1417 before the center
heading ‘‘Seventeenth Coast Guard
District’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 165.1417 Safety Zone; Tanapag Harbor,
Saipan, CNMI.
(a) Location. The following area,
within the Guam Captain of the Port
(COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–15), all
navigable waters within a 100-yard
radius of race participants for Escape for
Managaha Swim in Tanapag Harbor,
Saipan. Race participants, chase boats,
and organizers of the event will be
exempt from the safety zone.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, including a Coast Guard
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of
the Port (COTP) Sector Guam in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in section
§ 165.23, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
COTP or a designated on-scene
representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
persons and vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a
designated on-scene representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the COTP is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
who has been designated by the COTP
to act on his or her behalf.
(4) Persons and Vessel operators
desiring to enter or operate within the
safety zone must contact the COTP or an
on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The COTP or an
on-scene representative may be
contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel
operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the
COTP or an on-scene representative.
(d) Enforcement period. This safety
zone will be enforced at a specified date
between February and April. The Coast
Guard will provide advance notice of
enforcement and a broadcast notice to
mariners to inform public of specific
date.
Dated: November 17, 2020.
Christopher M. Chase,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Guam.
[FR Doc. 2020–25766 Filed 11–19–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1986–0005; EPA–HQ–SFUND–
1990–0010; FRL–10016–73–OLEM]
Proposed Deletions From the National
Priorities List
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is issuing a Notice of
Intent to partially delete four sites from
the National Priorities List (NPL) and
requests public comments on this
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 225 (Friday, November 20, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74304-74306]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25766]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2020-0459
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Tanapag Harbor, Saipan, CNMI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a recurring safety
zone for navigable waters within Tanapag Harbor, Saipan. This safety
zone will encompass the designated swim course for the Escape from
Managaha swim event in the waters of Tanapag Harbor, Saipan,
Commonwealth of the Northern
[[Page 74305]]
Mariana Islands. This action is necessary to protect all persons and
vessels participating in this marine event from potential safety
hazards associated with vessel traffic in the area. Race participants,
chase boats, and organizers of the event will be exempt from the safety
zone. Entry of persons or vessels into the safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Guam. We invite
your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before December 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0459 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 Chief Petty Officer Robert Davis,
Sector Guam, U.S. Coast Guard, by telephone at (671) 355-4866, or email
at [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 Escape from Managaha swim event is a recurring annual event. We
have established safety zones for this swim event in past years.
The purpose of this rule is to ensure the safety of the
participants and the navigable waters in the safety zone before,
during, and after the scheduled swim event. The Coast Guard is
proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034
(previously codified in 33 U.S.C. 1231).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone from 5:00 a.m. to
8:30 a.m. for one day on a Saturday or Sunday occurring annually
between February and April. This safety zone is necessary to protect
all persons and vessels participating in this marine event from
potential safety hazards associated with vessel traffic in the area.
Race participants, chase boats, and organizers of the event will be
exempt from the safety zone. Entry of persons or vessels into this
safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP. 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 size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
will be able to safely transit around this safety zone, which will
impact a small designated area of Tanapag Harbor for 2 hours. Moreover,
the Coast Guard will issue a 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
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 call or email 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 Executive
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 call or email 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
[[Page 74306]]
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, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide 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 a safety
zone lasting for 2 hours that will prohibit entry within 100-yards of
swim participants. 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. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 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 call or email 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, call or email 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
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
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 is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--SAFETY ZONE; TANAPAG HARBOR, SAIPAN, CNMI
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034; 46 U.S.C. 70051; 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. 165.1417 before the center heading ``Seventeenth Coast
Guard District'' to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1417 Safety Zone; Tanapag Harbor, Saipan, CNMI.
(a) Location. The following area, within the Guam Captain of the
Port (COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-15), all navigable waters within a
100-yard radius of race participants for Escape for Managaha Swim in
Tanapag Harbor, Saipan. Race participants, chase boats, and organizers
of the event will be exempt from the safety zone.
(b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port (COTP) Sector Guam in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
section Sec. 165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this
safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all persons and vessel traffic,
except as may be permitted by the COTP or a designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the COTP is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the
COTP to act on his or her behalf.
(4) Persons and Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate
within the safety zone must contact the COTP or an on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The COTP or an on-scene
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the COTP or an on-scene
representative.
(d) Enforcement period. This safety zone will be enforced at a
specified date between February and April. The Coast Guard will provide
advance notice of enforcement and a broadcast notice to mariners to
inform public of specific date.
Dated: November 17, 2020.
Christopher M. Chase,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Guam.
[FR Doc. 2020-25766 Filed 11-19-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
