Regulated Navigation Areas; Harbor Entrances Along the Coast of Northern California, 76502-76504 [2020-26176]
Download as PDF
76502
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules
require through regulations. The FHWA
has determined that this proposal does
not contain collection of information
requirements for the purposes of the
PRA and there was no PRA number
associated with this regulation.
However, the elimination of this
regulatory section will alleviate current
burdens imposed on the State by
reducing the need to file a lengthy
Affirmative Action Plan along with
filing duplicative EEO–4 documents to
FHWA.
National Environmental Policy Act
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 230
Federal-aid construction contracts;
Grant programs—transportation;
Highways and roads; Equal employment
opportunity; Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.85(a)(1).
Nicole R. Nason,
Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration.
The Agency has analyzed this
proposed action for the purpose of the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321) and has
determined that it qualifies for a
categorical exclusion under 23 CFR
771.117(c)(20), which applies to the
promulgation of regulations, and that no
unusual circumstances are present
under 23 CFR 771.117(b). Categorically
excluded actions meet the criteria for
categorical exclusions under the
Council on Environmental Quality
regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and under
23 CFR 771.117(a) and normally do not
require any further NEPA approvals by
FHWA.
PART 230—EXTERNAL PROGRAMS
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
The FHWA has analyzed this action
under E.O. 13175 and believes that the
proposed action would not have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes; would not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
Tribal governments; and, would not
preempt Tribal law. Therefore, a Tribal
summary impact statement is not
required.
Coast Guard
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
AGENCY:
The FHWA has analyzed this
proposed rule under E.O. 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that the rule will not
constitute a significant energy action
under that order because it is not likely
to have a significant adverse effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
used to cross reference this action with
the Unified Agenda.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number
(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory
action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory
Information Service Center publishes
the Unified Agenda in April and
October of each year. The RIN contained
in the heading of this document can be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Nov 27, 2020
Jkt 253001
1. The authority citation for Part 230
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101, 140, and 315; 42
U.S.C. 2000d et seq.; and 49 CFR 1.81.
Subpart C—State Highway Agency
Equal Employment Opportunity
Programs
2. Remove and reserve Subpart C,
consisting of §§ 230.301 through
Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 230.
■
[FR Doc. 2020–26274 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2019–0785]
RIN 1625–AA11
Regulated Navigation Areas; Harbor
Entrances Along the Coast of Northern
California
ACTION:
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard is proposing
to amend the Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA) at the harbor bar entrance to
Crescent City Harbor. This document
proposes to update coordinates. We
invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before December 30, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2019–0785 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:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant
Marcia Medina, Coast Guard District 11
Waterways Office; telephone 510–437–
2978, email Marcia.A.Medina@uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RNA Regulated Navigation Area
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On July 17, 2020, the Coast Guard
published a final rule titled ‘‘Regulated
Navigation Area: Harbor Entrances
along the Coast of Northern California’’
at 33 CFR 165.1196 (85 FR 43437). That
rule established an RNA at the harbor
entrance of Crescent City, California.
Since publishing the previous rule, the
Eleventh Coast Guard District was
contacted by the National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Marine Chart
Division, part of the Nautical Data
Branch of the Office of Coast Survey of
the National Ocean Service. The NOAA
Marine Chart Division brought to the
Coast Guard’s attention that the
geographic coordinates for the RNA at
the harbor entrance of Crescent City
appeared to incorrectly capture the
entirety of the harbor entrance. The
Coast Guard agreed, and worked with
the NOAA Marine Chart Division to
develop new coordinates that properly
capture the entirety of the harbor
entrance of Crescent City. The Coast
Guard is proposing to revise the RNA to
account for these discussions and to
ensure the safety and security of the
marine environment. The Coast Guard
proposes this rulemaking under
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Commander of the Eleventh Coast
Guard District proposes to amend the
Regulated Navigation Area: Harbor
Entrances along the Coast of Northern
California at (33 CFR 165.1196) by
updating the coordinates of the Crescent
City RNA. Updating the coordinates will
not materially affect the size or the
general geographic location of the RNA.
Instead, the update will correct an issue
raised by the NOAA Marine Chart
Division. Specifically, the updated
coordinates will fully and properly
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules
capture the entirety of the harbor
entrance to Crescent City. 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.
TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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 economic impact
of this proposed rule amendment. The
proposed rule will merely update
geographic coordinates. It has no
bearing on the impact or the effective
period of the current RNA.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 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.
This rule may affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: Owners and operators of
waterfront facilities, commercial
vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in
recreational activities and sightseeing, if
these facilities or vessels are in the
vicinity of the RNA at times when the
RNA has been activated. This rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reason: The rule
merely updates geographic coordinates
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:33 Nov 27, 2020
Jkt 253001
and does not alter the existing RNA in
any other way.
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this rule. If the rule
would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76503
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, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 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 a RNA that would prohibit
the transit of maritime traffic in times of
unsafe conditions. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from
further review under 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 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
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
76504
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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, 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:
■
2. Amend § 165.1196 by:
a. Removing paragraph (a)(3),
definition for Crescent City Harbor
Entrance Channel Regulated navigation
area, and
■ b. Adding new paragraph (a)(3) to read
as follows:
TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
■
■
§ 165.1196 Regulated Navigation Areas;
Harbor Entrances along the Coast of
Northern California.
(a) * * *
(3) Crescent City Harbor Entrance
Channel: The navigable waters of the
Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel
enclosed by the following coordinates:
(i) 41°43′50″ N, 124°11′27″ W (Point A)
17:33 Nov 27, 2020
Jkt 253001
Dated: October 22, 2020.
Brian K. Penoyer,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Coast Guard District Eleven.
[FR Doc. 2020–26176 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Part 3050
[Docket No. RM2021–1; Order No. 5756]
Periodic Reporting
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Commission is
acknowledging a recent filing requesting
the Commission initiate a rulemaking
proceeding to consider changes to
analytical principles relating to periodic
reports (Proposal Seven). This
document informs the public of the
filing, invites public comment, and
takes other administrative steps.
DATES: Comments are due: February 26,
2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit
comments electronically should contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by
telephone for advice on filing
alternatives.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034; 70051; 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
(ii) 41°44′12″ N, 124°11′42″ W (Point B)
(iii) 41°44′26″ N, 124°10′55″ W (Point C)
(iv) 41°44′13″ N, 124°10′20″ W (Point
D); and
Thence back to Point A, in Crescent
City, CA (NAD 83).
*
*
*
*
*
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Proposal Seven
III. Notice and Comment
IV. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On November 9, 2020, the Postal
Service filed a petition pursuant to 39
CFR 3050.11 requesting that the
Commission initiate a rulemaking
proceeding to consider changes to
analytical principles relating to periodic
reports.1 The Petition identifies the
1 Petition of the United States Postal Service for
the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed
Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Seven),
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
proposed analytical changes filed in this
docket as Proposal Seven.
II. Proposal Seven
Background. Proposal Seven relates to
updating the variabilities for certain
types of purchased highway
transportation contracts. Petition at 1. In
recent years, the Postal Service has
made two major operational changes to
its highway transportation network:
Increased reliance on additional
highway transportation during the
seasonal volume peak, and the
introduction of Dynamic Route
Optimization (DRO) contracts. Id. The
Postal Service characterizes both
operational changes as large enough to
qualify as major structural
reorganizations which, in keeping with
Commission guidance, require updating
its variabilities. Id. Along with the
Petition, the Postal Service filed a report
by Professor Michael D. Bradley
supporting the proposal.2 The Postal
Service additionally filed operational
data, econometric programs and results,
and additional under-seal materials
providing detail on competitive
products.3
Proposal. The Postal Service’s
proposal seeks to update its cost-tocapacity variability estimates for
Christmas routes based on data from the
Transportation Contract Support
System, the same data source that was
used to estimate the established cost-tocapacity variabilities for regular
transportation. Petition at 2. The Postal
Service has provided estimates for four
variability equations relating to the
seasonal peak: Christmas Intra sectional
center facility (SCF) van transportation,
Christmas Intra SCF tractor trailer
transportation, Christmas Inter SCF
transportation, and Christmas network
distribution center transportation. Id.
The Postal Service states that the
provided variability estimates follow
established methodology, and that in all
four instances, estimated variability has
increased over the current estimates. Id.
at 2–3.
With regards to the DRO contracts, the
Postal Service notes differences from
traditional purchased highway
November 9, 2020 (Petition). The Postal Service
also filed a notice of non-public materials relating
to Proposal Seven. Notice of Filing of USPS–
RM2021–1–1 and RM2021–1–NP1 and Application
for Nonpublic Treatment, November 9, 2020.
2 Professor Michael D. Bradley (Department of
Economics, George Washington University),
Research on Updating Purchased Highway
Transportation Variabilities to Account for
Structural Changes (Bradley Study).
3 See Library Reference USPS–RM2021–1–1
(showing operational data, programs, and results);
Library Reference USPS–RM2021–1–NP1 (showing
detail for competitive products).
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 230 (Monday, November 30, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76502-76504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26176]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2019-0785]
RIN 1625-AA11
Regulated Navigation Areas; Harbor Entrances Along the Coast of
Northern California
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the Regulated Navigation
Area (RNA) at the harbor bar entrance to Crescent City Harbor. This
document proposes to update coordinates. We invite your comments on
this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before December 30, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0785 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 Lieutenant Marcia Medina, Coast
Guard District 11 Waterways Office; telephone 510-437-2978, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RNA Regulated Navigation Area
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
On July 17, 2020, the Coast Guard published a final rule titled
``Regulated Navigation Area: Harbor Entrances along the Coast of
Northern California'' at 33 CFR 165.1196 (85 FR 43437). That rule
established an RNA at the harbor entrance of Crescent City, California.
Since publishing the previous rule, the Eleventh Coast Guard District
was contacted by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Marine Chart Division, part of the Nautical Data
Branch of the Office of Coast Survey of the National Ocean Service. The
NOAA Marine Chart Division brought to the Coast Guard's attention that
the geographic coordinates for the RNA at the harbor entrance of
Crescent City appeared to incorrectly capture the entirety of the
harbor entrance. The Coast Guard agreed, and worked with the NOAA
Marine Chart Division to develop new coordinates that properly capture
the entirety of the harbor entrance of Crescent City. The Coast Guard
is proposing to revise the RNA to account for these discussions and to
ensure the safety and security of the marine environment. The Coast
Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Commander of the Eleventh Coast Guard District proposes to
amend the Regulated Navigation Area: Harbor Entrances along the Coast
of Northern California at (33 CFR 165.1196) by updating the coordinates
of the Crescent City RNA. Updating the coordinates will not materially
affect the size or the general geographic location of the RNA. Instead,
the update will correct an issue raised by the NOAA Marine Chart
Division. Specifically, the updated coordinates will fully and properly
[[Page 76503]]
capture the entirety of the harbor entrance to Crescent City. 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
economic impact of this proposed rule amendment. The proposed rule will
merely update geographic coordinates. It has no bearing on the impact
or the effective period of the current RNA.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 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.
This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: Owners and operators of waterfront facilities,
commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational
activities and sightseeing, if these facilities or vessels are in the
vicinity of the RNA at times when the RNA has been activated. This rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities for the following reason: The rule merely updates
geographic coordinates and does not alter the existing RNA in any other
way.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
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, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
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 a RNA that
would prohibit the transit of maritime traffic in times of unsafe
conditions. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from
further review under 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 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
[[Page 76504]]
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, 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: 46 U.S.C. 70034; 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. Amend Sec. 165.1196 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (a)(3), definition for Crescent City Harbor
Entrance Channel Regulated navigation area, and
0
b. Adding new paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1196 Regulated Navigation Areas; Harbor Entrances along the
Coast of Northern California.
(a) * * *
(3) Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel: The navigable waters of
the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel enclosed by the following
coordinates:
(i) 41[deg]43'50'' N, 124[deg]11'27'' W (Point A)
(ii) 41[deg]44'12'' N, 124[deg]11'42'' W (Point B)
(iii) 41[deg]44'26'' N, 124[deg]10'55'' W (Point C)
(iv) 41[deg]44'13'' N, 124[deg]10'20'' W (Point D); and
Thence back to Point A, in Crescent City, CA (NAD 83).
* * * * *
Dated: October 22, 2020.
Brian K. Penoyer,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard District Eleven.
[FR Doc. 2020-26176 Filed 11-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P