Safety Zone; Restricted Visibility in Tampa Bay; Tampa Bay, Tampa, FL, 5824-5826 [2023-01755]

Download as PDF 5824 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2023 / Proposed Rules The Proposal The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to revoke Colored Federal airway R–39 in the vicinity of Bethel, AK due to the decommissioning of the OSE, VTR, ICW NDBs. R–39 currently navigates between OSE and ICW. The FAA proposes to revoke R–39 in its entirety. Colored Federal airways are published in paragraph 6009(d) of FAA Order JO 7400.11G dated August 19, 2022 and effective September 15, 2022, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Colored Federal airway listed in this document would be removed subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11. FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15. Regulatory Notices and Analyses The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Environmental Review This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final regulatory action. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Jan 27, 2023 Jkt 259001 PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows: ■ Paragraph 6009(b) Airways. * * * Colored Federal * * * * R–39 [Remove] * * * Issued in Washington, DC, on January 24, 2023. Brian Konie, Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations. [FR Doc. 2023–01791 Filed 1–27–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG–2022–0978] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; Restricted Visibility in Tampa Bay; Tampa Bay, Tampa, FL Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to revise an existing safety zone regulation in Tampa Bay within the geographic boundaries of the Captain of the Port (COTP) St. Petersburg Zone. The proposed change is designed to align the coordinates in the regulation with the coordinates needed to properly control traffic in cases of restricted visibility in Tampa Bay. The current coordinates do not reflect the safety zones that the Coast Guard intended to put in place. The Coast Guard invites your comments on this proposed rulemaking. DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before March 1, 2023. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2022–0978 using the Federal Decision Making 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 Marine Science Technician First Class Regina L. Cuevas, Sector St. Petersburg Prevention Department, Coast Guard; telephone (813) 228–2191, email Regina.L.Cuevas@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis On June 26, 2015, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled, ‘‘Safety Zones, St. Petersburg Captain of the Port Zone.1 ’’ This action was taken to establish safety zones that restrict port operations in the event of reduced or restricted visibility, or during natural disasters, e.g. hurricanes, and establish safety zones around firework platforms, structures or barges during the storage, preparation, and launching of fireworks. This final rule established seven zones that could be used to direct vessel movement in times of restricted visibility. In 2022, it was brought to the attention of the Seventh Coast Guard District that the safety zones listed in 33 CFR 165.782(a)(4) and (a)(5) did not reflect the zones that were needed for the Captain of the Port (COTP) to properly control vessel movement in times of reduced visibility. More specifically, the errors were discovered in the first coordinate of zone 4 in § 165.782(a)(4) and the second coordinate of zone 5 in § 165.782(a)(5). With this proposed rule, the Coast Guard is correcting the points needed by the COTP to ensure safety amongst all port users, particularly in time of reduced visibility. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule This rule is proposing to modify zones 4 and 5 listed in § 165.782(a)(4) and (a)(5) to align with the zones that were intended by the COTP, and are 1 80 E:\FR\FM\30JAP1.SGM FR 36716. 30JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2023 / Proposed Rules necessary to control vessel movement during times of reduced visibility. The proposed rule would to make the following changes in §§ 165.782(a)(4) and (a)(5): move the first coordinate in zone 4, from 27°46′34″ N, 82°34′04″ W, to 27°46′36″ N; 82°24′04″ W, and move the second coordinate in zone 5 from 27°58′59″ N, 82°40′34″ W, to 27°38′59″ N, 82°40′35″ W. 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. 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). This regulatory action determination is based on four specific factors: (1) these zones will only be activated in times of restricted visibility; (2) the zones will only be activated for short periods of time; (3) persons and vessels may operate within the security zone when authorized by Captain of the Port of St. Petersburg or a designated representative; and (4) the zones are already in place, this regulatory action only represents a minor change in the boundaries. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Jan 27, 2023 Jkt 259001 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 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. PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5825 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 potential effects of this proposed 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 only involves correction of coordinates identifying the reduced visibility of safety zones 4 and 5 that had already been established for several years. 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 E:\FR\FM\30JAP1.SGM 30JAP1 5826 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2023 / Proposed Rules 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. Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2022–0978 in the search box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If you cannot submit your material by using https:// www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate instructions. Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous paragraph, and then select ‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https:// www.regulations.gov. Frequently Asked Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive. Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions to the docket in response to this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). 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—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 ■ Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Jan 27, 2023 Jkt 259001 2. In § 165.782, revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) to read as follows: ■ § 165.782 Safety Zone; restricted visibility in Tampa Bay. (a) * * * (4) Zone 4 (Middle Tampa Bay) means all navigable waters within a box marked by the following coordinates: 27°46′36″ N; 82°24′04″ W; thence to 27°38′40″ N, 82°31′54″ W; thence to 27°44′38″ N, 82°40′44″ W; thence to 27°46′15″ N, 82°40′46″ W. This zone encompasses all navigable waterways between Cut ‘‘6F’’ (LLNR 22830) Channel to Tampa Bay ‘‘1C’’ (LLNR 22590). (5) Zone 5 (Lower Tampa Bay/ Manatee) means all navigable waters within a box marked by the following coordinates: 27°44′33″ N, 82°40′37″ W; thence to 27°38′59″ N, 82°40′35″ W; thence to 27°36′18″ N, 82°38′57″ W; thence to 27°34′10″ N, 82°34′50″ W; thence to 27°37′56″ N, 82°31′15″ W. This zone encompasses all navigable waterways between Tampa Bay ‘‘1C’’ (LLNR 22590) to Sunshine Skyway Bridge. * * * * * Dated: January 23, 2023. Micheal P. Kahle, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector St. Petersburg. [FR Doc. 2023–01755 Filed 1–27–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2022–0427; FRL–10165– 01–R9] Air Plan Approval and Limited Approval-Limited Disapproval; California; Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District; Stationary Source Permits; New Source Review Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing approval, and a limited approval and limited disapproval of a revision to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD or ‘‘District’’) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The EPA is proposing to take action on nine rules submitted on August 3, 2021. We SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 are proposing approval of three rules, and limited approval and limited disapproval of six rules. These revisions concern the District’s New Source Review (NSR) permitting program for new and modified sources of air pollution under part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’). If finalized, this action will update the AVAQMD’s current SIP with nine revised rules. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. Comments must be received on or before March 1, 2023. DATES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2022–0427 at https:// www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaheerah Kelly, Permits Office (Air–3– 1), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947–4156, kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. E:\FR\FM\30JAP1.SGM 30JAP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 19 (Monday, January 30, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5824-5826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01755]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0978]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Restricted Visibility in Tampa Bay; Tampa Bay, 
Tampa, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to revise an existing safety zone 
regulation in Tampa Bay within the geographic boundaries of the Captain 
of the Port (COTP) St. Petersburg Zone. The proposed change is designed 
to align the coordinates in the regulation with the coordinates needed 
to properly control traffic in cases of restricted visibility in Tampa 
Bay. The current coordinates do not reflect the safety zones that the 
Coast Guard intended to put in place. The Coast Guard invites your 
comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before March 1, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0978 using the Federal Decision Making 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 Marine Science Technician First 
Class Regina L. Cuevas, Sector St. Petersburg Prevention Department, 
Coast Guard; telephone (813) 228-2191, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On June 26, 2015, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled, 
``Safety Zones, St. Petersburg Captain of the Port Zone.\1\ '' This 
action was taken to establish safety zones that restrict port 
operations in the event of reduced or restricted visibility, or during 
natural disasters, e.g. hurricanes, and establish safety zones around 
firework platforms, structures or barges during the storage, 
preparation, and launching of fireworks. This final rule established 
seven zones that could be used to direct vessel movement in times of 
restricted visibility. In 2022, it was brought to the attention of the 
Seventh Coast Guard District that the safety zones listed in 33 CFR 
165.782(a)(4) and (a)(5) did not reflect the zones that were needed for 
the Captain of the Port (COTP) to properly control vessel movement in 
times of reduced visibility. More specifically, the errors were 
discovered in the first coordinate of zone 4 in Sec.  165.782(a)(4) and 
the second coordinate of zone 5 in Sec.  165.782(a)(5). With this 
proposed rule, the Coast Guard is correcting the points needed by the 
COTP to ensure safety amongst all port users, particularly in time of 
reduced visibility. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under 
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 80 FR 36716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This rule is proposing to modify zones 4 and 5 listed in Sec.  
165.782(a)(4) and (a)(5) to align with the zones that were intended by 
the COTP, and are

[[Page 5825]]

necessary to control vessel movement during times of reduced 
visibility. The proposed rule would to make the following changes in 
Sec. Sec.  165.782(a)(4) and (a)(5): move the first coordinate in zone 
4, from 27[deg]46'34'' N, 82[deg]34'04'' W, to 27[deg]46'36'' N; 
82[deg]24'04'' W, and move the second coordinate in zone 5 from 
27[deg]58'59'' N, 82[deg]40'34'' W, to 27[deg]38'59'' N, 82[deg]40'35'' 
W.

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. 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).
    This regulatory action determination is based on four specific 
factors: (1) these zones will only be activated in times of restricted 
visibility; (2) the zones will only be activated for short periods of 
time; (3) persons and vessels may operate within the security zone when 
authorized by Captain of the Port of St. Petersburg or a designated 
representative; and (4) the zones are already in place, this regulatory 
action only represents a minor change in the boundaries.

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 proposed 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 proposed 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 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 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 potential effects of 
this proposed 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 only involves 
correction of coordinates identifying the reduced visibility of safety 
zones 4 and 5 that had already been established for several years. 
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

[[Page 5826]]

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.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through 
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To 
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0978 in the 
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the 
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment 
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate 
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this 
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as 
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & 
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will 
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following 
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov. Frequently Asked 
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only 
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may 
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that 
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we 
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal 
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions 
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking 
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

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--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, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. In Sec.  165.782, revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  165.782  Safety Zone; restricted visibility in Tampa Bay.

    (a) * * *
    (4) Zone 4 (Middle Tampa Bay) means all navigable waters within a 
box marked by the following coordinates: 27[deg]46'36'' N; 
82[deg]24'04'' W; thence to 27[deg]38'40'' N, 82[deg]31'54'' W; thence 
to 27[deg]44'38'' N, 82[deg]40'44'' W; thence to 27[deg]46'15'' N, 
82[deg]40'46'' W. This zone encompasses all navigable waterways between 
Cut ``6F'' (LLNR 22830) Channel to Tampa Bay ``1C'' (LLNR 22590).
    (5) Zone 5 (Lower Tampa Bay/Manatee) means all navigable waters 
within a box marked by the following coordinates: 27[deg]44'33'' N, 
82[deg]40'37'' W; thence to 27[deg]38'59'' N, 82[deg]40'35'' W; thence 
to 27[deg]36'18'' N, 82[deg]38'57'' W; thence to 27[deg]34'10'' N, 
82[deg]34'50'' W; thence to 27[deg]37'56'' N, 82[deg]31'15'' W. This 
zone encompasses all navigable waterways between Tampa Bay ``1C'' (LLNR 
22590) to Sunshine Skyway Bridge.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 23, 2023.
Micheal P. Kahle,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector St. Petersburg.
[FR Doc. 2023-01755 Filed 1-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.