Security Zone; Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, AK, 13015-13017 [2024-03486]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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 will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rulemaking
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01,
Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental
Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined 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
promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. Normally
such actions are categorically excluded
from further review, under paragraph
L49, of chapter 3, table 3–1 of the U.S.
Coast Guard Environmental Planning
Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental
Consideration nor a Memorandum for
the Record are required for this
rulemaking. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Feb 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
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–2022–0854 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 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.
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.
Additionally, if you go to the online
docket and sign up for email alerts, you
will be notified when comments are
posted, when a final rule is published,
and of any posting or updates to the
docket.
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 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 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
and DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision
No. 01.3.
2. Revise § 117.799(e) to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13015
§ 117.799 Long Island, New York Inland
Waterway from East Rockaway Inlet to
Shinnecock Canal.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) The draw of the Atlantic Beach
Bridge across Reynolds Channel, mile
0.4, shall operate as follows:
(1) From October 1 through May 14
the draw shall open on signal from 8
a.m. to midnight.
(2) From midnight to 8 a.m. yearround, the draw shall open on signal if
at least eight (8) hours of notice is given
by calling the Bridge Tower at 516–239–
1821.
(3) From May 15 through September
30, the bridge will open on signal except
from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and
from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Saturdays,
Sundays, Memorial Day, Independence
Day, and Labor Day when the bridge
will open on the hour and half-hour.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 14, 2024.
J.W. Mauger,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2024–03455 Filed 2–20–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2024–0157]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone; Port Valdez and Valdez
Narrows, Valdez, AK
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The current Trans-Alaska
Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal
complex (Terminal) security zone
encompasses a waterside portion and
2000 yards inland, which includes the
shoreside portion of the terminal and
adjacent land. The Coast Guard is
proposing to amend the TAPS Terminal
security zone to exclude the land
portion from the security zone. The
Coast Guard has never exercised any
legal authority, nor has it enforced
regulations within the inland portion of
the security zone. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before March 22, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2024–0157 using the Federal DecisionSUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21FEP1.SGM
21FEP1
13016
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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. This notice of proposed
rulemaking with its plain-language, 100word-or-less proposed rule summary
will be available in this same docket.
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant
Junior Grade Abigail Ferrara, Marine
Safety Unit Valdez, U.S. Coast Guard.
Telephone 907–835–7209, email
Abigail.C.Ferrara@uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Prince William
Sound
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
TAPS Trans-Alaska Pipeline
U.S.C. United States Code
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
In response to the terrorist attacks on
September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard
instituted several temporary security
zones in the Trans-Alaska Pipeline
(TAPS) Terminal and Port Valdez areas.
Between 2002 and 2004, Coast Guard
published several proposed and
supplemental proposed rulemakings to
establish security zones in the area. This
culminated with a final rule (71 FR
2152) published on January 13, 2006,
which established the current
permanent security zones in 33 CFR
165.1710.
The current TAPS Terminal security
zone encompasses a waterside portion
and 2000 yards inland, which includes
the shoreside portion of the terminal
and adjacent land. The Coast Guard has
never exercised any legal authority, nor
has it enforced regulations within the
inland portion of the security zone. The
Captain of the Port Prince William
Sound (COTP) determined that the
current practice of non-enforcement
within the inland portion of the security
zone could create confusion for future
stakeholders and the public. It would be
an arbitrary and unreasonable burden
upon the facility and industry
employees who have freely entered the
inland portion without COTP
permission for decades if a COTP were
to begin enforcing their authority over
the inland portion of the security zone
in the future.
17:01 Feb 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to amend the
current security zone found in 33 CFR
165.1710(a)(1) to excise the 2000-yard
inland portion of the zone. This would
result in the security zone
encompassing only the water up to the
shoreline. 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.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
VerDate Sep<11>2014
The Coast Guard is proposing this
rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70051 and 70124.
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
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094
(Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination
is based on the size and location of the
current waterside portion security zone
remaining the same. Moreover, the
landside portion of the facility has had
other security regulations in place for
roughly two decades.
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.
This regulatory change would not
affect any small entities, as the COTP
does not enforce the requirements for
the landside portion of the security
zone, and the waterside security zone
coordinates will remain unchanged.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 rulemaking 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
E:\FR\FM\21FEP1.SGM
21FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
potential effects of this proposed rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023–01, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves excising the 2000-yard
inland portion TAPS Terminal security
zone. Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(b) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
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–2024–0157 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Feb 20, 2024
Jkt 262001
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. Also, if you click
on the Dockets tab and then the
proposed rule, you should see a
‘‘Subscribe’’ option for email alerts. The
option will notify you when comments
are posted, or a final rule is published.
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:
■
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.
2. Revise § 165.1710(a)(1) to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.1710 Port Valdez and Valdez
Narrows, Valdez, Alaska—security zones.
(a) * * *
(1) Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS)
Valdez Terminal complex (Terminal),
Valdez, Alaska and TAPS tank vessels.
All waters enclosed within a line
beginning on the southern shoreline of
Port Valdez at 61°05′03.6″ N, 146°25′42″
W; thence northerly to yellow buoy at
61°06′00″ N, 146°25′42″ W; thence east
to the yellow buoy at 61°06′00″ N,
146°21′30″ W; thence south to 61°05′06″
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13017
N, 146°21′30″ W; thence west along the
shoreline to the beginning point.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 14, 2024.
S.K. Rousseau,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port Prince William Sound.
[FR Doc. 2024–03486 Filed 2–20–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 42
[Docket No. PTO–P–2023–0058]
RIN 0651–AD75
Expanding Opportunities To Appear
Before the Patent Trial and Appeal
Board
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
As part of its initiatives to
expand access to practice before the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO or Office), the USPTO proposes
to amend the rules regarding admission
to practice before the Patent Trial and
Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) in
proceedings under the Leahy-Smith
America Invents Act (AIA proceedings)
to give parties the option to designate
non-registered practitioners who are
recognized pro hac vice (i.e., granted
recognition in a specific PTAB
proceeding) as lead counsel; excuse
parties from the requirement to
designate back-up counsel upon a
showing of good cause such as a lack of
resources to hire two counsel; establish
a streamlined alternative procedure for
recognizing counsel pro hac vice that is
available when counsel has previously
been recognized pro hac vice in a
different PTAB proceeding; and clarify
that those recognized pro hac vice have
a duty to inform the Board of
subsequent events that render
inaccurate or incomplete
representations they made to obtain pro
hac vice recognition.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before May 21, 2024.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, comments must be submitted
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at www.regulations.gov. To submit
comments via the portal, one should
enter docket number PTO–P–2023–0058
on the homepage and select ‘‘search.’’
The site will provide search results
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21FEP1.SGM
21FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 21, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13015-13017]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-03486]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2024-0157]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, AK
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The current Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal
complex (Terminal) security zone encompasses a waterside portion and
2000 yards inland, which includes the shoreside portion of the terminal
and adjacent land. The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the TAPS
Terminal security zone to exclude the land portion from the security
zone. The Coast Guard has never exercised any legal authority, nor has
it enforced regulations within the inland portion of the security zone.
We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 22, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2024-0157 using the Federal Decision-
[[Page 13016]]
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.
This notice of proposed rulemaking with its plain-language, 100-word-
or-less proposed rule summary will be available in this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Abigail
Ferrara, Marine Safety Unit Valdez, U.S. Coast Guard. Telephone 907-
835-7209, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Prince William Sound
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
TAPS Trans-Alaska Pipeline
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
In response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the
Coast Guard instituted several temporary security zones in the Trans-
Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Terminal and Port Valdez areas. Between 2002 and
2004, Coast Guard published several proposed and supplemental proposed
rulemakings to establish security zones in the area. This culminated
with a final rule (71 FR 2152) published on January 13, 2006, which
established the current permanent security zones in 33 CFR 165.1710.
The current TAPS Terminal security zone encompasses a waterside
portion and 2000 yards inland, which includes the shoreside portion of
the terminal and adjacent land. The Coast Guard has never exercised any
legal authority, nor has it enforced regulations within the inland
portion of the security zone. The Captain of the Port Prince William
Sound (COTP) determined that the current practice of non-enforcement
within the inland portion of the security zone could create confusion
for future stakeholders and the public. It would be an arbitrary and
unreasonable burden upon the facility and industry employees who have
freely entered the inland portion without COTP permission for decades
if a COTP were to begin enforcing their authority over the inland
portion of the security zone in the future.
The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46
U.S.C. 70051 and 70124.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to amend the current security zone found in
33 CFR 165.1710(a)(1) to excise the 2000-yard inland portion of the
zone. This would result in the security zone encompassing only the
water up to the shoreline. 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.
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 section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination is based on the size and
location of the current waterside portion security zone remaining the
same. Moreover, the landside portion of the facility has had other
security regulations in place for roughly two decades.
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.
This regulatory change would not affect any small entities, as the
COTP does not enforce the requirements for the landside portion of the
security zone, and the waterside security zone coordinates will remain
unchanged.
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 rulemaking 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
[[Page 13017]]
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 involves excising
the 2000-yard inland portion TAPS Terminal security zone. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
L60(b) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01,
Rev. 1. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
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-2024-0157 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. Also, if you click on the Dockets tab and then the
proposed rule, you should see a ``Subscribe'' option for email alerts.
The option will notify you when comments are posted, or a final rule is
published.
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. Revise Sec. 165.1710(a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1710 Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska--
security zones.
(a) * * *
(1) Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal complex
(Terminal), Valdez, Alaska and TAPS tank vessels. All waters enclosed
within a line beginning on the southern shoreline of Port Valdez at
61[deg]05'03.6'' N, 146[deg]25'42'' W; thence northerly to yellow buoy
at 61[deg]06'00'' N, 146[deg]25'42'' W; thence east to the yellow buoy
at 61[deg]06'00'' N, 146[deg]21'30'' W; thence south to 61[deg]05'06''
N, 146[deg]21'30'' W; thence west along the shoreline to the beginning
point.
* * * * *
Dated: February 14, 2024.
S.K. Rousseau,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Prince William Sound.
[FR Doc. 2024-03486 Filed 2-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
