[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 46 (Monday, March 9, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13598-13601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04735]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 100 and 165

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0486]
RIN 1625-AA00, 1625-AA111625-AA08


Revisions to Notification Procedures for Limited Access Areas and 
Regulated Navigation Areas and Removal of Certain Marine Event and 
Limited Access Area Regulations for the Ninth, Thirteenth, and 
Seventeenth Coast Guard Districts

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to revise portions of our general 
regulation on the notification procedures for the establishment and 
disestablishment of limited access areas and regulated navigation 
areas, as well as to remove certain marine event and limited access 
area regulations for the Ninth, Thirteenth, and Seventeenth Coast Guard 
Districts. The proposed changes reflect current organizational 
procedures and post-promulgation changes in circumstances. We invite 
your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before April 8, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2018-0486 using the Federal eRulemaking 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 Courtney Mallon, Coast Guard; 
telephone 202-372-3758, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
IV. Discussion of Proposed Rule
V. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    The Coast Guard views 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.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. 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.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and 
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's Correspondence 
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
    Documents mentioned in this proposed rule, and all public comments, 
will be available in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov 
and can be viewed by following that website's instructions. 
Additionally, if you visit the online docket and sign up for email 
alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or if a final 
rule is published.

II. Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
LNG Liquefied natural gas
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

III. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Coast Guard is proposing to remove certain marine event and 
limited access area regulations for the Ninth, Thirteenth, and 
Seventeenth Coast Guard Districts. The proposed changes would remove 
regulations for events that are no longer held or are no longer needed 
to ensure the safety of participants and the public. As part of this 
rulemaking, the Coast Guard is also proposing to revise our regulation 
on the notification procedures for the establishment and 
disestablishment of limited access areas and regulated navigation 
areas. These proposed amendments reflect changes in agency 
administrative process and would provide increased transparency and 
clarity. The Coast Guard identified these proposed changes as part of 
the agency's deregulation effort under Executive Order 13771 (Reducing 
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs), Executive Order 13777 
(Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda Deregulatory Process), and 
associated guidance issued in 2017.
    The Coast Guard is conducting this rulemaking under the authority 
of 46 U.S.C. 70041 in regard to changes to 33 CFR part 100; and 46 
U.S.C. 70034 in regard to changes to 33 CFR part 165. The Secretary of 
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has delegated authority to 
exercise general powers for the purpose of executing duties and 
functions of the Coast Guard to the Commandant via Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(23). The Secretary has

[[Page 13599]]

delegated ports and waterways authority, with certain reservations not 
applicable here, to the Commandant via DHS Delegation No. 
0170.1(II)(70). The Commandant has further redelegated these 
authorities within the Coast Guard as described in 33 CFR 1.05-1.

IV. Discussion of Proposed Rule

A. 33 CFR Part 100--Safety of Life on Navigable Waters

Ninth District
    The Coast Guard is proposing to remove a recurring Ninth Coast 
Guard District special local regulation in 33 CFR 100.905 for the 
``Door County Triathlon; Door County, WI.'' The Door Country Triathlon 
event is located in a low traffic, no commercial traffic, safe harbor 
that has no public access outside of the event start and finish areas 
controlled by the event sponsor. The surrounding water access is 
private property; there is no public access for uncontrolled 
spectators. Removal of the regulation would not affect public safety. 
The local sheriff and Department of Natural Resources are normally on 
scene and boating traffic in the area is recreational only.
Thirteenth District
    The Coast Guard is proposing to remove 33 CFR 100.1308, ``Special 
Local Regulation; Hydroplane Races within the Captain of the Port Puget 
Sound Area of Responsibility.'' The Lake Sammamish and Dyes Inlet 
areas, which are covered by 33 CFR 100.1308(a)(1) and (3), have not 
been in use for over 3 years. Although events still occur in the Lake 
Washington area, which are covered by 33 CFR 100.1308(a)(2), removing 
this regulation would not affect the safety of participants or 
spectators. The safety of participants and spectators for events 
occurring in Lake Washington is ensured through 33 CFR 100.1301, 
``Seattle seafair unlimited hydroplane race.''

B. 33 CFR Part 165--Regulated Navigation Areas and Limited Access Areas

General Regulations
    The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the general notice provisions 
for regulated navigation areas and limited access areas by removing 
paragraph (c) from 33 CFR 165.7. The removal of paragraph (c) would 
eliminate the statement that notification of termination of a safety 
zone, security zone, or regulated navigation area is usually made in 
the same form as notification of its establishment. This would not 
change how, in practice, the Coast Guard notifies the public of 
regulated navigation areas and limited access areas. The Coast Guard 
would continue to provide notification, as currently conducted, in 
accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a)--generally by Federal Register 
publication and supplemental notification via marine broadcasts, local 
notice to mariners, and local media. The proposed elimination of 
paragraph (c) is to account for the fact that the language of the 
paragraph, specifically the use of the term ``termination,'' is 
ambiguous. It could mean either the end of the rule's effective period 
or the end of the rule's enforcement period. While the end of the 
effective period for the rule might be the same as the end of the 
enforcement period, this is not always the case. In the event a marine 
event terminates earlier than expected, the local COTP will often make 
the decision to terminate enforcement of the zone(s) before the close 
of the rule's effective date. While the potential for this course of 
action is discussed in the implementing rulemaking document, there is 
typically no follow-up in the Federal Register stating that such 
enforcement has ceased. Rather, in actual practice, this information is 
communicated solely through marine broadcasts, local notice to 
mariners, or other means known to be routinely referenced by the local 
marine community.
Seventeenth District
    The Coast Guard is proposing to remove 33 CFR 165.1709, ``Security 
Zones; Liquefied Natural Gas Tanker Transits and Operations at Phillips 
Petroleum LNG Pier, Cook Inlet, AK.'' The liquefied natural gas (LNG) 
terminal in Cook Inlet has ceased operations for the foreseeable 
future. No tankers have called on it since 2015. The proposed LNG 
pipeline scheme for the future would re-route LNG production to Valdez, 
assuming the price rises to profitable levels. In the event that LNG 
resumes flow to Cook Inlet, a new rule would be appropriate, as the 
facility name might be different.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) 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 (including potential economic, environmental, public 
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive 
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting 
flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control 
regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation 
issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, 
and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and 
controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this 
proposed rule a ``significant regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. Because 
this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action, it is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See the OMB Memorandum 
titled ``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, titled `Reducing 
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 5, 2017).
    The Coast Guard proposes to revise its regulations to provide 
updates and clarifications to existing regulatory text in 33 CFR parts 
100 and 165. The revisions include administrative changes such as 
clarifying edits to general regulations on notice of termination of 
areas regulated under 33 CFR part 165, and the removal of a special 
local regulation no longer needed for safety, a special local 
regulation for an event that is no longer held, and a security zone for 
a facility that has ceased operations. Normal navigation rules 
sufficiently cover the safety of participants and spectators at events 
that are no longer suitable for coverage under a special local 
regulation. This proposed rule would not impose any additional costs on 
the public, maritime industry, or the government. The qualitative 
benefit of these proposed changes would be an increase in the clarity 
of regulations created by editorial corrections, the removal of expired 
enforcement periods, and the removal of events that are no longer held.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have

[[Page 13600]]

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.
    This proposed rule would not have any economic impact on vessel 
owners or operators, or any other maritime industry entity. The 
proposed changes include administrative changes relating to internal 
agency practices and procedures. Therefore, the proposed rule would not 
have a significant economic impact on any small entities. Thus, 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. 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 to the docket at the address under ADDRESSES. In your 
comment, explain why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree 
this proposed rule would economically affect it.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we offer to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule. 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.
    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).

D. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule calls for no new or modified collection of 
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on 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 Executive Order 
13132 and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental 
federalism principles and preemption requirements described in 
Executive Order 13132.

F. 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 
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed 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).

H. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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.

I. Protection of Children

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

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This 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.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed 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.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, codified as a 
note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies to use voluntary consensus 
standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides 
Congress, through OMB, 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.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Management 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. 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.
    This proposed rule would be categorically excluded under paragraphs

[[Page 13601]]

L54, L55, and L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
1-001-01, Rev. 1. Paragraph L54 pertains to promulgation of regulations 
that are editorial or procedural; paragraph L55 pertains to internal 
agency functions; and paragraph L61 pertains to special local 
regulations issued in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade. This 
proposed rule would revise general rulemaking regulations and also 
amend the field regulations for the Ninth, Thirteenth, and Seventeenth 
Coast Guard Districts by incorporating updates and clarifications to 
existing regulatory text in 33 CFR parts 100 and 165.
    These proposed regulation changes were identified as part of the 
Coast Guard's deregulation identification process required by Executive 
Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs), and 
Executive Order 13777 (Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda 
Deregulatory Process), and associated guidance issued in 2017. All of 
the proposed changes are consistent with the Coast Guard's maritime 
safety and stewardship missions. We seek any comments or information 
that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact 
associated with this proposed rule.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Coast Guard is 
proposing to amend 33 CFR parts 100 and 165 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.


Sec.  100.905  [Removed]

0
 2. Remove Sec.  100.905.


Sec.  100.1308  [Removed]

0
 3. Remove Sec.  100.1308.

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
 4. 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.


Sec.  165.7  [Amended]

0
 5. Amend Sec.  165.7 by removing paragraph (c).


Sec.  165.1709  [Removed]

0
 6. Remove Sec.  165.1709.

    Dated: March 3, 2020.
R.V. Timme,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention 
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-04735 Filed 3-6-20; 8:45 a.m.]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P