Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules 53109 compliance, please contact the person 10. Protection of Children For the reasons discussed in the listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION We have analyzed this proposed rule preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to CONTACT, above. under Executive Order 13045, amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: The Coast Guard will not retaliate Protection of Children from PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE against small entities that question or Environmental Health Risks and Safety OPERATION REGULATIONS complain about this proposed rule or Risks. This rule is not an economically any policy or action of the Coast Guard. significant rule and would not create an ■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 4. Collection of Information environmental risk to health or risk to continues to read as follows: safety that might disproportionately This proposed rule would call for no affect children. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; new collection of information under the Department of Homeland Security Delegation Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 11. Indian Tribal Governments No. 0170.1. U.S.C. 3501–3520). This proposed rule does not have ■ 2. From March 1, 2014 until March 1, 2016, suspend § 117.739(b) and add a 5. Federalism tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and new temporary paragraph (p) to read as A rule has implications for federalism Coordination with Indian Tribal follows: under Executive Order 13132, Governments, because it would not have § 117.739 Passaic River. Federalism, if it has a substantial direct a substantial direct effect on one or effect on the States, on the relationship more Indian tribes, on the relationship * * * * * (p) The draw of the Route 1 & 9 between the national government and between the Federal Government and (Lincoln Highway) Bridge, mile 1.8, the States, or on the distribution of Indian tribes, or on the distribution of between Kearny and Newark, shall open power and responsibilities among the power and responsibilities between the on signal if at least a four hour advance various levels of government. We have Federal Government and Indian tribes. analyzed this proposed rule under that notice is given, except that, the draw Order and have determined that it does 12. Energy Effects need not open for the passage of vessel not have implications for federalism. This proposed rule is not a traffic between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. and between 2 p.m. and 6 p.m., Monday 6. Protest Activities ‘‘significant energy action’’ under Executive Order 13211, Actions through Friday, except holidays. Tide The Coast Guard respects the First Concerning Regulations That dependent deep draft vessels may Amendment rights of protesters. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, request bridge openings between 6 a.m. Protesters are asked to contact the Distribution, or Use. and 10 a.m. and between 2 p.m. and 6 person listed in the ‘‘FOR FURTHER p.m. provided at least a twelve hour INFORMATION CONTACT’’ section to 13. Technical Standards advance notice is given by calling the coordinate protest activities so that your This proposed rule does not use number posted at the bridge. message can be received without technical standards. Therefore, we did * * * * * jeopardizing the safety or security of not consider the use of voluntary Dated: August 7, 2013. people, places or vessels. consensus standards. D.B. Abel, 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 14. Environment Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act We have analyzed this proposed rule First Coast Guard District. of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires under Department of Homeland [FR Doc. 2013–20684 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am] Federal agencies to assess the effects of Security Management Directive 023–01, BILLING CODE 9110–04–P their discretionary regulatory actions. In and Commandant Instruction particular, the Act addresses actions M16475.lD which guides the Coast that may result in the expenditure by a Guard in complying with the National DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND State, local, or tribal government, in the Environmental Policy Act of 1969 SECURITY aggregate, or by the private sector of (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and Coast Guard $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or have made a preliminary determination more in any one year. Though this that this action is one of a category of 33 CFR Part 165 proposed rule will not result in such an actions which do not individually or expenditure, we do discuss the effects of cumulatively have a significant effect on [Docket No. USCG–2013–0580] this rule elsewhere in this preamble. the human environment. This proposed RIN 1625–AA87 rule simply promulgates the operating 8. Taking of Private Property regulations or procedures for Security Zones; Naval Base Point This proposed rule would not cause a drawbridges. This rule is categorically Loma; Naval Mine Anti-Submarine taking of private property or otherwise excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph Warfare Command; San Diego Bay, have taking implications under (32)(e), of the Instruction. San Diego, CA Executive Order 12630, Governmental Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of Actions and Interference with the Instruction, an environmental AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Constitutionally Protected Property analysis checklist and a categorical ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Rights. exclusion determination are not SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes 9. Civil Justice Reform required for this rule. We seek any comments or information that may lead extending a portion of an existing San This proposed rule meets applicable to the discovery of significant Diego Bay security zone at Naval Base standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of environmental impact from the Point Loma to support the construction Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice proposed rule. of a new Naval fuel pier. In addition to Reform, to minimize litigation, the extension of the Naval Base Point eliminate ambiguity, and reduce List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Loma security zone, a new security zone burden. Bridges. will be established at the Naval Mine VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:58 Aug 27, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 53110 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command comments and related materials. All and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, to protect the relocated marine mammal comments received will be posted except Federal holidays. program. These security zone without change to http:// 3. Privacy Act modifications are intended to restrict www.regulations.gov and will include vessels from a portion of the San Diego any personal information you have Anyone can search the electronic Bay in order to ensure the safety and provided. form of comments received into any of security of Naval assets. Both Security our dockets by the name of the 1. Submitting Comments Zones will safeguard Naval assets, such individual submitting the comment (or as vessels, property and waterfront If you submit a comment, please signing the comment, if submitted on facilities from destruction, loss of injury include the docket number for this behalf of an association, business, labor from sabotage or other subversive acts. rulemaking, indicate the specific section union, etc.). You may review a Privacy No persons or vessel may enter or of this document to which each Act notice regarding our public dockets remain in the security zones without comment applies, and provide a reason in the January 17, 2008, issue of the permission of the Captain of the Port, for each suggestion or recommendation. Federal Register (73 FR 3316). You may submit your comments and The Commander of Naval Base Point 4. Public Meeting Loma, the Commander of the Naval material online at http:// Mine Anti Submarine Warfare www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or We do not now plan to hold a public Command, the Commander of Naval hand delivery, but please use only one meeting. But you may submit a request Region Southwest, or a designated of these means. If you submit a for one, using one of the methods representative of those individuals. comment online, it will be considered specified under ADDRESSES. Please DATES: Comments and related material received by the Coast Guard when you explain why you believe a public must be received by the Coast Guard on successfully transmit the comment. If meeting would be beneficial. If we or before October 28, 2013. you fax, hand deliver, or mail your determine that one would aid this Requests for public meetings must be comment, it will be considered as rulemaking, we will hold one at a time received by the Coast Guard on or before having been received by the Coast and place announced by a later notice September 27, 2013. Guard when it is received at the Docket in the Federal Register. Management Facility. We recommend ADDRESSES: You may submit comments B. Regulatory History and Information identified by docket number using any that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a On October 1, 2009, the U.S. Coast one of the following methods: Guard published a final rule entitled (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: telephone number in the body of your ‘‘Security Zone; Naval Base Point Loma; http://www.regulations.gov. document so that we can contact you if (2) Fax: 202–493–2251. we have questions regarding your San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA’’ in the (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket submission. Federal Register. At the request of the Management Facility (M–30), U.S. To submit your comment online, go to U.S.