[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 26 (Thursday, February 8, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5930-5931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2100]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 104 and 120

[USCG-2007-26953]
RIN 1625-ZA12


Technical Amendments; Marine Safety Center Address Change

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: By this final rule, the Coast Guard is making non-substantive 
changes to the address of delivery for all private mail to the United 
States Coast Guard Marine Safety Center as it appears in Coast Guard 
regulations. This rule will have no substantive effect on the regulated 
public.

DATES: This rule is effective February 8, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Any comments and material received from the public will be 
made part of docket, USCG-2006-26953, and will be available for 
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet 
at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
amendment, call Commander Hung Nguyen, Executive Officer, United States 
Coast Guard Marine Safety Center, telephone 202-475-3406. If you have 
questions on viewing the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-493-0402.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory History

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
amendment. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that this 
technical amendment is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking 
requirements because the amendment only makes non-substantive mailing 
address changes. These changes will have no substantive effect on the 
public; therefore, it is unnecessary to publish an NPRM.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    The office of the United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Center 
will change their procedure for receiving private courier mail, 
resulting in the need for an address change in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does 
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not 
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the 
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS). Because this amendment makes only address changes, we 
expect the economic impact to be so minimal that a full Regulatory 
Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is 
unnecessary.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. 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.
    It is not expected that this amendment will have a significant 
economic impact on any small entities. Therefore, the Coast Guard 
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this technical amendment will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Collection of Information

    This amendment calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this amendment 
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications 
for federalism.

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 or more in any 
one year. Though this amendment will not result in such an expenditure, 
we do discuss the effects of this amendment elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This amendment will not effect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This amendment meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this amendment under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This amendment is not an economically significant rule and does 
not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This amendment does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this amendment under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action''

[[Page 5931]]

under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The 
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has 
not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does 
not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This amendment does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did 
not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD 
and DHS Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in 
complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 
U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in 
this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under 
section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically 
excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(a), of the Instruction from 
further environmental documentation. Paragraph (34)(a) excludes 
regulatory actions that are editorial or procedural, such as those 
updating addresses. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(a), of the 
Instruction, an Environmental Analysis Check List and a Categorical 
Exclusion Determination are not required for this technical amendment.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 104

    Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Security measures, Vessels.

33 CFR Part 120

    Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Security measures, Terrorism.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR parts 104 and 120 as follows:

PART 104--VESSEL SECURITY

0
1. The authority citation for part 104 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department 
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  104.400  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  104.400, by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  104.400  General.

* * * * *
    (b) The VSP must be submitted to the Commanding Officer (MSC), USCG 
Marine Safety Center, 1900 Half Street, SW., Suite 1000, Room 525, 
Washington, DC 20024 for visitors. Send all mail to Commanding Officer 
(MSC), United States Coast Guard, JR10-0525, 2100 2nd Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20593, in a written or electronic format. Information 
for submitting the VSP electronically can be found at http://www.uscg.mil/HQ/MSC. Owners or operators of foreign flag vessels that 
are subject to SOLAS Chapter XI-1 or Chapter XI-2 must comply with this 
part by carrying on board a valid International Ship Security 
Certificate that certifies that the verifications required by Section 
19.1 of part A of the ISPS Code (Incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
101.115 of this subchapter) have been completed. As stated in Section 
9.4 of the ISPS Code, part A requires that, in order for the ISSC to be 
issued, the provisions of part B of the ISPS Code need to be taken into 
account.
* * * * *

PART 120--SECURITY OF PASSENGER VESSELS

0
3. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.


Sec.  120.305  [Amended]

0
4. Amend Sec.  120.305, by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  120.305  What is the procedure for examination?

    (a) You must submit two copies of each Vessel Security Plan 
required by Sec.  120.300, or of any Terminal Security Plan or annex 
required or permitted under Sec.  120.303 or Sec.  128.305 of this 
chapter, to the Commanding Officer (MSC), USCG Marine Safety Center, 
1900 Half Street, SW., Suite 1000, Room 525, Washington, DC 20024 for 
visitors. Send all mail to Commanding Officer (MSC), United States 
Coast Guard, JR10-0525, 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593, for 
examination at least 60 days before embarking passengers on a voyage 
described in Sec.  120.100.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 30, 2007.
Steve Venckus,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States 
Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. E7-2100 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P