Connecting Waters From Lake Huron to Lake Erie; Traffic Rules
| Citation | 85 FR 60926 |
| Record Number | 2020-19238 |
| Published date | 29 September 2020 |
| Section | Proposed rules |
| Court | Coast Guard |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 189 (Tuesday, September 29, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60926-60928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19238]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 162
[Docket No. USCG-2020-0521]
RIN 1625-AA11
Connecting Waters From Lake Huron to Lake Erie; Traffic Rules
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the navigation
regulations between the Great Lakes. Specifically, this proposed
amendment would allow a vessel to overtake another vessel that has
slowed its speed to await berth availability or to make the turn for
Rouge River and the overtaking vessel has so advised the Canadian Coast
Guard Marine communications and Traffic Services Centre located in
Sarnia, Ontario. Currently, the regulation only permits vessels to
overtake vessels engaged in towing between the west end of Belle Isle
and Peche Island Light. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related materials must reach the Coast Guard on or
before October 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0521 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 on this proposed
rule, call or email Tracy Girard, Sector Detroit, Coast Guard;
telephone (313) 568-9564, 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
The purpose of this rulemaking is to update the navigation rule in
Sec. 162.134(a)(4) to improve traffic efficiency on the river while
maintaining safety. The Canadian Coast
[[Page 60927]]
Guard has modified their traffic rules to reflect this change and the
Lake Carriers Association has endorsed this change. This proposed rule
would provide consistency on the river, and would apprise the public in
a timely manner through permanent publication in Title 33 of the Code
of Federal Regulations.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed modification to the rule will allow a vessel to
overtake another vessel that has slowed its speed to await berth
availability or to make the turn for Rouge River and the overtaking
vessel has so advised the Canadian Coast Guard Marine Communications
and Traffic Services Centre located in Sarnia, Ontario. This will
improve traffic efficiency on the river while maintaining safety.
Currently 33 CFR 162.134(a)(4) states, ``Between the west end of Belle
Isle and Peche Island Light, vessels may only overtake vessels engaged
in towing.'' We propose to replace 33 CFR 162.134(a)(4) with ``Between
the west end of Belle Isle and Peche Island Light, vessels may overtake
vessels if the vessel to be overtaken is engaged in towing or has
slowed its speed to await berth availability or to make the turn for
Rouge River, and the overtaking vessel has so advised the Canadian
Coast Guard Marine Communications and Traffic Services Centre located
in Sarnia, Ontario.''
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. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. 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), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
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
regulated areas 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 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 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 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 contact 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 effects of this 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 navigation
rules. 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 contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your
[[Page 60928]]
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 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 http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://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 eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 162
Navigation (water), Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 162 as follows:
PART 162--INLAND WATERWAYS NAVIGATION REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 162 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. In Sec. 162.134, revise paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 162.134 Connecting waters from Lake Huron to Lake Erie; traffic
rules.
(a) * * *
(4) Between the west end of Belle Isle and Peche Island Light,
vessels may overtake vessels if the vessel to be overtaken is engaged
in towing or has slowed its speed to await berth availability or to
make the turn for Rouge River, and the overtaking vessel has so advised
the Canadian Coast Guard Marine Communications and Traffic Services
Centre located in Sarnia, Ontario.
* * * * *
Dated: August 26, 2020.
Brad. W. Kelly,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2020-19238 Filed 9-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
