76502 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

require through regulations. The FHWA 

has determined that this proposal does 

not contain collection of information 

requirements for the purposes of the 

PRA and there was no PRA number 

associated with this regulation. 

However, the elimination of this 

regulatory section will alleviate current 

burdens imposed on the State by 

reducing the need to file a lengthy 

Affirmative Action Plan along with 

filing duplicative EEO–4 documents to 

FHWA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

The Agency has analyzed this 

proposed action for the purpose of the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321) and has 

determined that it qualifies for a 

categorical exclusion under 23 CFR 

771.117(c)(20), which applies to the 

promulgation of regulations, and that no 

unusual circumstances are present 

under 23 CFR 771.117(b). Categorically 

excluded actions meet the criteria for 

categorical exclusions under the 

Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and under 

23 CFR 771.117(a) and normally do not 

require any further NEPA approvals by 

FHWA. 

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) 

The FHWA has analyzed this action 

under E.O. 13175 and believes that the 

proposed action would not have 

substantial direct effects on one or more 

Indian tribes; would not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Tribal governments; and, would not 

preempt Tribal law. Therefore, a Tribal 

summary impact statement is not 

required. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) 

The FHWA has analyzed this 

proposed rule under E.O. 13211, 

Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that the rule will not 

constitute a significant energy action 

under that order because it is not likely 

to have a significant adverse effect on 

the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

Regulation Identification Number 

A regulation identification number 

(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory 

action listed in the Unified Agenda of 

Federal Regulations. The Regulatory 

Information Service Center publishes 

the Unified Agenda in April and 

October of each year. The RIN contained 

in the heading of this document can be 

used to cross reference this action with 

the Unified Agenda. 

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 230 

Federal-aid construction contracts; 

Grant programs—transportation; 

Highways and roads; Equal employment 

opportunity; Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR part 1.85(a)(1). 

Nicole R. Nason, 

Administrator, Federal Highway 

Administration. 

PART 230—EXTERNAL PROGRAMS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 230 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101, 140, and 315; 42 

U.S.C. 2000d et seq.; and 49 CFR 1.81. 

Subpart C—State Highway Agency 

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Programs 

■ 2. Remove and reserve Subpart C, 

consisting of §§ 230.301 through 

Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 230. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26274 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2019–0785] 

RIN 1625–AA11 

Regulated Navigation Areas; Harbor 

Entrances Along the Coast of Northern 

California 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to amend the Regulated Navigation Area 

(RNA) at the harbor bar entrance to 

Crescent City Harbor. This document 

proposes to update coordinates. We 

invite your comments on this proposed 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before December 30, 2020. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2019–0785 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http:// 

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 Lieutenant 

Marcia Medina, Coast Guard District 11 

Waterways Office; telephone 510–437– 

2978, email Marcia.A.Medina@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

RNA Regulated Navigation Area 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal 

Basis 

On July 17, 2020, the Coast Guard 

published a final rule titled ‘‘Regulated 

Navigation Area: Harbor Entrances 

along the Coast of Northern California’’ 

at 33 CFR 165.1196 (85 FR 43437). That 

rule established an RNA at the harbor 

entrance of Crescent City, California. 

Since publishing the previous rule, the 

Eleventh Coast Guard District was 

contacted by the National 

Oceanographic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) Marine Chart 

Division, part of the Nautical Data 

Branch of the Office of Coast Survey of 

the National Ocean Service. The NOAA 

Marine Chart Division brought to the 

Coast Guard’s attention that the 

geographic coordinates for the RNA at 

the harbor entrance of Crescent City 

appeared to incorrectly capture the 

entirety of the harbor entrance. The 

Coast Guard agreed, and worked with 

the NOAA Marine Chart Division to 

develop new coordinates that properly 

capture the entirety of the harbor 

entrance of Crescent City. The Coast 

Guard is proposing to revise the RNA to 

account for these discussions and to 

ensure the safety and security of the 

marine environment. The Coast Guard 

proposes this rulemaking under 

authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Commander of the Eleventh Coast 

Guard District proposes to amend the 

Regulated Navigation Area: Harbor 

Entrances along the Coast of Northern 

California at (33 CFR 165.1196) by 

updating the coordinates of the Crescent 

City RNA. Updating the coordinates will 

not materially affect the size or the 

general geographic location of the RNA. 

Instead, the update will correct an issue 

raised by the NOAA Marine Chart 

Division. Specifically, the updated 

coordinates will fully and properly 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 76503 

capture the entirety of the harbor 

entrance to Crescent City. The 

regulatory text we are proposing appears 

at the end of this document. 

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. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the limited economic impact 

of this proposed rule amendment. The 

proposed rule will merely update 

geographic coordinates. It has no 

bearing on the impact or the effective 

period of the current RNA. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA), 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. 

This rule may affect the following 

entities, some of which may be small 

entities: Owners and operators of 

waterfront facilities, commercial 

vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in 

recreational activities and sightseeing, if 

these facilities or vessels are in the 

vicinity of the RNA at times when the 

RNA has been activated. This rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

for the following reason: The rule 

merely updates geographic coordinates 

and does not alter the existing RNA in 

any other way. 

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 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. 

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). 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. 

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 

guides 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 a RNA that would prohibit 

the transit of maritime traffic in times of 

unsafe conditions. Normally such 

actions are categorically excluded from 

further review under 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 

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 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
76504 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

1Petition of the United States Postal Service for 

the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed 

Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Seven), 

November 9, 2020 (Petition). The Postal Service 

also filed a notice of non-public materials relating 

to Proposal Seven. Notice of Filing of USPS– 

RM2021–1–1 and RM2021–1–NP1 and Application 

for Nonpublic Treatment, November 9, 2020. 

2Professor Michael D. Bradley (Department of 

Economics, George Washington University), 

Research on Updating Purchased Highway 

Transportation Variabilities to Account for 

Structural Changes (Bradley Study). 

3See Library Reference USPS–RM2021–1–1 

(showing operational data, programs, and results); 

Library Reference USPS–RM2021–1–NP1 (showing 

detail for competitive products). 

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 

the docket, visit http:// 

www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice. 

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 in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. 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. 

■ 2. Amend § 165.1196 by: 

■ a. Removing paragraph (a)(3), 

definition for Crescent City Harbor 

Entrance Channel Regulated navigation 

area, and 

■ b. Adding new paragraph (a)(3) to read 

as follows: 

§ 165.1196 Regulated Navigation Areas; 

Harbor Entrances along the Coast of 

Northern California. 

(a) * * * 

(3) Crescent City Harbor Entrance 

Channel: The navigable waters of the 

Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel 

enclosed by the following coordinates: 

(i) 41°43′50′′ N, 124°11′27′′ W (Point A) 

(ii) 41°44′12′′ N, 124°11′42′′ W (Point B) 

(iii) 41°44′26′′ N, 124°10′55′′ W (Point C) 

(iv) 41°44′13′′ N, 124°10′20′′ W (Point 

D); and 

Thence back to Point A, in Crescent 

City, CA (NAD 83). 

* * * * * 

Dated: October 22, 2020. 

Brian K. Penoyer, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Coast Guard District Eleven. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26176 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3050 

[Docket No. RM2021–1; Order No. 5756] 

Periodic Reporting 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is 

acknowledging a recent filing requesting 

the Commission initiate a rulemaking 

proceeding to consider changes to 

analytical principles relating to periodic 

reports (Proposal Seven). This 

document informs the public of the 

filing, invites public comment, and 

takes other administrative steps. 

DATES: Comments are due: February 26, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at http://

www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit 

comments electronically should contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section by 

telephone for advice on filing 

alternatives. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 

202–789–6820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Proposal Seven 

III. Notice and Comment 

IV. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

On November 9, 2020, the Postal 

Service filed a petition pursuant to 39 

CFR 3050.11 requesting that the 

Commission initiate a rulemaking 

proceeding to consider changes to 

analytical principles relating to periodic 

reports.1 The Petition identifies the 

proposed analytical changes filed in this 

docket as Proposal Seven. 

II. Proposal Seven 

Background. Proposal Seven relates to 

updating the variabilities for certain 

types of purchased highway 

transportation contracts. Petition at 1. In 

recent years, the Postal Service has 

made two major operational changes to 

its highway transportation network: 

Increased reliance on additional 

highway transportation during the 

seasonal volume peak, and the 

introduction of Dynamic Route 

Optimization (DRO) contracts. Id. The 

Postal Service characterizes both 

operational changes as large enough to 

qualify as major structural 

reorganizations which, in keeping with 

Commission guidance, require updating 

its variabilities. Id. Along with the 

Petition, the Postal Service filed a report 

by Professor Michael D. Bradley 

supporting the proposal.2 The Postal 

Service additionally filed operational 

data, econometric programs and results, 

and additional under-seal materials 

providing detail on competitive 

products.3

Proposal. The Postal Service’s 

proposal seeks to update its cost-tocapacity variability estimates for 

Christmas routes based on data from the 

Transportation Contract Support 

System, the same data source that was 

used to estimate the established cost-tocapacity variabilities for regular 

transportation. Petition at 2. The Postal 

Service has provided estimates for four 

variability equations relating to the 

seasonal peak: Christmas Intra sectional 

center facility (SCF) van transportation, 

Christmas Intra SCF tractor trailer 

transportation, Christmas Inter SCF 

transportation, and Christmas network 

distribution center transportation. Id. 

The Postal Service states that the 

provided variability estimates follow 

established methodology, and that in all 

four instances, estimated variability has 

increased over the current estimates. Id. 

at 2–3. 

With regards to the DRO contracts, the 

Postal Service notes differences from 

traditional purchased highway 


TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS