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 http:// 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 http:// www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http:// 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 http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, visit http:// 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 http://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 http:// 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 http://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 http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://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 http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, visit http://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 http://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