27738 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

vessels authorized by the Coast Guard 

Patrol Commander. 

(2) The Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander is a commissioned, 

warrant, petty officer, or auxiliarist of 

the Coast Guard who has been 

designated by Commander, Coast Guard 

Sector Portland. A Coast Guard 

Auxiliarist, when so appointed by the 

COTP per 14 U.S.C 831, may act as the 

Patrol Commander. The Patrol 

Commander is empowered to control 

movement of vessels in the regulated 

area and adjoining waters during the 

hours these regulations are in effect. 

(3) A succession of sharp, short 

signals by whistle, siren, or horn from 

vessels patrolling the area shall serve as 

a signal to stop. Vessels or persons 

signaled shall stop and shall comply 

with the orders of the patrol vessels. 

Failure to due so may result in the 

expulsion from the area, citation, for 

failure to comply or both. 

(4) Any spectator vessel may anchor 

outside the regulated area specified in 

paragraph (a) of this section, but may 

not block a navigable channel. 

Dated: May 4, 2007. 

K.S. Cook, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Commander, 13th Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 07–2460 Filed 5–15–07; 9:58 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 151 

[USCG–2007–28201] 

RIN 1625–ZA13 

Vessels Carrying Oil, Noxious Liquid 

Substances, Garbage, Municipal or 

Commercial Waste, and Ballast Water; 

Technical, Organizational and 

Conforming Amendment 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule makes a nonsubstantive change to Title 33 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations. The 

purpose of this rule is to make a 

conforming amendment and technical 

correction to a Coast Guard navigation 

and navigable water regulation. This 

rule will have no substantive effect on 

the regulated public. 

DATES: This final rule is effective May 

17, 2007. 

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–2007–28201 and are 

available for inspection or copying at 

the Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, room PL–

401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. You may also find this 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call Mr. 

Ray Davis, Coast Guard, telephone 202–

372–1461. If you have questions on 

viewing the docket, call Ms. Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–493–0402. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory History 

We did not publish a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 

regulation. Under both 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(A) and (b)(B), the Coast Guard 

finds this rule is exempt from notice 

and comment rulemaking requirements 

because this change involves agency 

organization and practices, and good 

cause exists for not publishing an NPRM 

for the revision in the rule because it is 

a non-substantive change. This rule 

consists only of a technical and 

conforming amendment. The change 

will have no substantive effect on the 

public; therefore, it is unnecessary to 

publish an NPRM. 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 less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. 

Background and Purpose 

This rule, which becomes effective 

May 17, 2007, makes a technical 

correction to 33 CFR part 151. This rule 

does not create any substantive 

requirements. 

Discussion of Rule 

This rule corrects the authority 

citation in part 151 and amends 33 CFR 

§ 151.2010. When the Coast Guard 

converted the voluntary ballast water 

management guidelines in 33 CFR part 

151, Subpart D, into a mandatory ballast 

water management program (69 FR 

44952, July 28, 2004), we inadvertently 

did not make changes to § 151.2010 to 

reflect several exemptions. Specifically, 

that crude oil tankers engaged in 

coastwise trade and Department of 

Defense and Coast Guard vessels were 

exempted from the mandatory ballast 

water management requirements in 

§ 151.2035, which had previously been 

a voluntary program as stated by 

statutory language in the National 

Invasive Species Act of 1996 (NISA). We 

discussed this exemption and its 

reasoning in the preamble of the 2004 

final rule, stating, ‘‘NISA authorizes 

specific exemptions for crude oil 

tankers engaged in coastwise trade, and 

Department of Defense and Coast Guard 

vessels. Therefore, we do not currently 

have the authority to include these 

vessels in the applicability for the final 

rule.’’ This statement made clear our 

intention to carry that exemption 

forward into the mandatory program. 

With respect to the exemptions for 

vessels operating exclusively within one 

Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, the 

language changed to include only 

exemptions for §§ 151.2040 and 

151.2045, but not § 151.2035. This 

exemption is not taken from NISA. The 

Coast Guard established it as a 

discretionary exercise of its regulatory 

authority after notice and comment 

rulemaking. It would be inappropriate 

to expand the ballast water management 

requirements exemption beyond those 

previously granted by means of a 

technical amendment not subject to a 

notice and comment rulemaking. These 

vessels will continue following the 

requirements in § 151.2035. While this 

includes the requirements in 

§ 151.2035(b), which calls for ballast 

water management for vessels operating 

outside the U.S. EEZ, vessels operating 

exclusively in a COTP Zone will not 

operate outside the U.S. EEZ and, 

therefore, compliance with those 

particular requirements is not 

mandatory. These vessels are reminded, 

however, that they must comply with 

§ 151.2035(a), which calls for ballast 

water management inside of U.S. 

waters. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

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. We expect the economic impact 

of this rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. 

As this rule involves internal agency 

practices and procedures and a nonsubstantive change, it will not impose 

any 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. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27739 

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 

rule does not require a general NPRM 

and, therefore, is exempt from the 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. Although this rule is 

exempt, we have reviewed it for 

potential economic impact on small 

entities and determined that it will not 

have an impact on 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 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 effect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

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 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guides the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded that there are no factors 

in this case that would limit the use of 

a categorical exclusion under section 

2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this 

rule is categorically excluded, under 

figure 2–1, paragraphs (34)(a) and (b), of 

the Instruction from further 

environmental documentation because 

this rule involves editorial, procedural, 

and internal agency functions. A final 

‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’

and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion 

Determination’’ are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 151 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Oil pollution penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Water pollution control. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 151 as follows: 

PART 151—VESSELS CARRYING OIL, 

NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES, 

GARBAGE, MUNICIPAL OR 

COMMERCIAL WASTE, AND BALLAST 

WATER 

■ 1. Revise the authority citation for part 

151 to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321, 1903, 1908; 46 

U.S.C. 6101; Pub. L. 104–227, 110 Stat. 304; 

E.O. 12777, 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 351; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise § 151.2010 to read as 

follows: 

§ 151.2010 Which vessels are exempt from 

the mandatory requirements? 

(a) Two types of vessels are exempt 

from the requirements in §§ 151.2035, 

151.2040, and 151.2045: 

(1) A crude oil tanker engaged in the 

coastwise trade. 

(2) A Department of Defense or Coast 

Guard vessel subject to the requirements 

of section 1103 of the Act, or any vessel 

of the Armed Forces, as defined in the 

Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 

U.S.C. 1322(a)) that is subject to the 

‘‘Uniform National Discharge Standards 

for Vessels of the Armed Forces’’ (33 

U.S.C. 1322(n)). 

(b) One type of vessel is exempt from 

the requirements in §§ 151.2040 and 

151.2045: 

(1) A vessel that operates exclusively 

within one Captain of the Port (COTP) 

Zone. 

(2) [Reserved] 

Dated: May 11, 2007. 

Stefan G. Venckus, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law, United States Coast 

Guard. 

[FR Doc. 07–2459 Filed 5–15–07; 9:58 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with RULES