[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 150 (Thursday, August 5, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47211-47212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-19326]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 3 and 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0351]
RIN 1625-ZA25


Navigation and Navigable Waters; Technical, Organizational, and 
Conforming Amendments, Sector Puget Sound, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule makes non-substantive changes throughout our 
regulations. The purpose of this rule is to make conforming amendments 
and technical corrections to reflect the renaming of Sector Seattle to 
Sector Puget Sound as part of the Coast Guard reorganization.

DATES: This final rule is effective August 5, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2010-0351 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this 
docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov, 
inserting USCG-2010-0351 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking 
``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or e-mail Lt. Matthew Jones, Coast Guard; telephone 206-220-7110, 
e-mail [email protected]. If you have questions on viewing the 
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, 
telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A), the Coast Guard finds this rule is 
exempt from notice and comment rulemaking requirements because these 
changes involve rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice. 
In addition, the Coast Guard finds notice and comment procedure are 
unnecessary under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) as this rule consists only of 
corrections and editorial, organizational, and conforming amendments 
and these changes will have no substantive effect on the public.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that, for the same 
reasons, good cause exists for making this rule effective upon 
publication in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    This rule makes technical and editorial corrections to Title 33 
parts 3 and 165 in the Code of Federal Regulations. This rule does not 
create any substantive requirements.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule revises 33 CFR parts 3 and 165 to reflect changes in 
Coast Guard internal organizational structure. Sector Seattle has been 
disestablished and Sector Puget Sound has been established in its 
place. This rule revises 33 CFR Parts 3 and 165 to reflect the Sector 
name change in current regulations. This rule is a technical revision 
reflecting changes in agency procedure and organization, and does not 
indicate new authorities.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    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. Because this rule involves non-
substantive changes and internal agency practices and procedures, it 
will not impose any additional costs on the public.

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.
    We estimate this rule will not impose any additional costs and 
should have little or no impact on small entities because the 
provisions of this rule are technical and non-substantive, and will 
have no substantive effect on the public and will impose no additional 
costs. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

Collection of Information

    This rule 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 rule 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 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in 
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

[[Page 47212]]

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule 
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 rule 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 rule 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'' 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 this action is one of a category of actions that do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, 
figure 2-1, paragraph (34) (a) of the Instruction. This rule involves 
regulations which are editorial and/or procedural, such as those 
updating addresses or establishing application procedures. An 
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion 
determination are available in the docket where indicated under 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 3

    Organization and functions (government agencies).

33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR parts 3 and 165 as follows:

PART 3--COAST GUARD AREAS, DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE INSPECTION 
ZONES, AND CAPTAIN OF THE PORT ZONES

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

    Authority:  14 U.S.C. 92, Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. 2(23).


0
2. In Sec.  3.65-10, revise the introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  3.65-10  Sector Puget Sound Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of 
the Port Zone.

    Sector Puget Sound's office is located in Seattle, WA. The 
boundaries of Sector Puget Sound's Marine Inspection and Captain of the 
Port Zones.
* * * * *

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
3. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.


Sec.  165.1327  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  165.1327(a), remove the phrase ``Sector Seattle'' and add, 
in its place, the phrase ``Sector Puget Sound''.

    Dated: July 30, 2010.
Steve Venckus,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States 
Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2010-19326 Filed 8-3-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P