Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 125 / Wednesday, July 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 31369 

Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics. 

Director, NPFC means the head of the 

U.S. Coast Guard, National Pollution 

Funds Center (NPFC). 

Single-hull means the hull of a tank 

vessel that is constructed or adapted to 

carry, or that carries, oil in bulk as cargo 

or cargo residue, that is not a double 

hull as defined in 33 CFR part 157. 

Single-hull includes the hull of any such 

tank vessel that is fitted with double 

sides only or a double bottom only. 

§ 138.230 Limits of liability. 

(a) Vessels. The OPA 90 limits of 

liability for vessels are— 

(1) For a single-hull tank vessel 

greater than 3,000 gross tons, the greater 

of $3,200 per gross ton or $23,496,000; 

(2) For a tank vessel greater than 3,000 

gross tons, other than a single-hull tank 

vessel, the greater of $2,000 per gross 

ton or $17,088,000. 

(3) For a single-hull tank vessel less 

than or equal to 3,000 gross tons, the 

greater of $3,200 per gross ton or 

$6,408,000. 

(4) For a tank vessel less than or equal 

to 3,000 gross tons, other than a singlehull tank vessel, the greater of $2,000 

per gross ton or $4,272,000. 

(5) For any other vessel, the greater of 

$1,000 per gross ton or $854,400. 

(b) Deepwater ports. The OPA 90 

limits of liability for deepwater ports 

are— 

(1) For any deepwater port other than 

a deepwater port with a limit of liability 

established by regulation under Section 

1004(d)(2) of OPA 90 (33 U.S.C. 

2704(d)(2)) and set forth in paragraph 

(b)(2) of this section, $373,800,000; 

(2) For deepwater ports with limits of 

liability established by regulation under 

Section 1004(d)(2) of OPA 90 (33 U.S.C. 

2704(d)(2)): 

(i) For the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port 

(LOOP), $87,606,000; and 

(ii) [Reserved]. 

(c) [Reserved]. 

§ 138.240 Procedure for calculating limit of 

liability adjustments for inflation. 

(a) Formula for calculating a 

cumulative percent change in the 

Annual CPI–U. The Director, NPFC, 

calculates the cumulative percent 

change in the Annual CPI–U from the 

year the limit of liability was 

established, or last adjusted by statute or 

regulation, whichever is later (i.e., the 

Previous Period), to the most recently 

published Annual CPI–U (i.e., the 

Current Period), using the following 

escalation formula: 

Percent change in the Annual CPI–U = 

[(Annual CPI–U for Current 

Period¥Annual CPI–U for Previous 

Period) ÷ Annual CPI–U for 

Previous Period] × 100. 

This cumulative percent change value 

is rounded to one decimal place. 

(b) Significance threshold. Not later 

than every three years from the year the 

limits of liability were last adjusted for 

inflation, the Director, NPFC, will 

evaluate whether the cumulative 

percent change in the Annual CPI–U 

since that date has reached a 

significance threshold of 3 percent or 

greater. For any three-year period in 

which the cumulative percent change in 

the Annual CPI–U is less than 3 percent, 

the Director, NPFC, will publish a 

notice of no inflation adjustment to the 

limits of liability in the Federal 

Register. If this occurs, the Director, 

NPFC, will recalculate the cumulative 

percent change in the Annual CPI–U 

since the year in which the limits of 

liability were last adjusted for inflation 

each year thereafter until the cumulative 

percent change equals or exceeds the 

threshold amount of 3 percent. Once the 

3-percent threshold is reached, the 

Director, NPFC, will increase the limits 

of liability, by regulation, for all source 

categories (including any new limit of 

liability established by statute or 

regulation since the last time the limits 

of liability were adjusted for inflation) 

by an amount equal to the cumulative 

percent change in the Annual CPI–U 

from the year each limit was 

established, or last adjusted by statute or 

regulation, whichever is later. Nothing 

in this paragraph shall prevent the 

Director, NPFC, in the Director’s sole 

discretion, from adjusting the limits of 

liability for inflation by regulation 

issued more frequently than every three 

years. 

(c) Formula for calculating inflation 

adjustments. The Director, NPFC, 

calculates adjustments to the limits of 

liability in § 138.230 of this part for 

inflation using the following formula: 

New limit of liability = Previous limit of 

liability + (Previous limit of liability 

× percent change in the Annual 

CPI–U calculated under paragraph 

(a) of this section), then rounded to 

the closest $100. 

(d) [Reserved]. 

Dated: June 25, 2009. 

William R. Grawe, 

Acting Director, National Pollution Funds 

Center, United States Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. E9–15563 Filed 6–30–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0489] 

RIN 1625–AA11 

Regulated Navigation Area; Herbert C. 

Bonner Bridge, Oregon Inlet, NC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary regulated 

navigation area (RNA) on the waters of 

Oregon Inlet, North Carolina (NC). The 

RNA is needed to protect maritime 

infrastructure and the maritime public 

during fender repair work on the 

Herbert C. Bonner Bridge. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 p.m. 

on June 22, 2009, through 8 p.m. on July 

31, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials 

received from the public, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket are part 

of docket USCG–2009–0489 and are 

available online by going to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, selecting the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, inserting USCG– 

2009–0489 in the Docket ID box, 

pressing Enter, and then clicking on the 

item in the Docket ID column. This 

material is also available for inspection 

or copying at two locations: The Docket 

Management Facility (M–30), U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays, and at Coast 

Guard Sector North Carolina, 2301 E 

Fort Macon Rd, Atlantic Beach, NC, 

28512, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or e-mail CWO4 Stephen 

Lyons, Waterways Management 

Division Chief, Coast Guard Sector 

North Carolina; telephone (252) 247– 

4525, e-mail 

Stephen.W.Lyons2@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing the docket, 

call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

31370 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 125 / Wednesday, July 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because 

immediate action is needed to protect 

bridge repair workers and the maritime 

public from the hazards associated with 

this maintenance project. Fendering 

system repair workers will be on 

scaffolding in the navigation channel 

underneath the bridge. Vessels 

transiting the channel could knock the 

workers off the scaffolding and into the 

water. Likewise vessels could sustain 

damage by striking the scaffolding. It is 

imperative an RNA is established to 

complete and finalize the fender repair 

work on the bridge. Delaying fendering 

repair work on the bridge to complete 

an NPRM is impractical, unnecessary, 

and contrary to the public interest. For 

the safety concerns noted, it is in the 

public interest to have this regulation in 

place during the construction. In 

addition, the necessary information to 

determine the impact of this 

construction on the maritime public was 

not provided with sufficient time to 

publish an NPRM. The Coast Guard 

received notice from the contractor 

performing construction on the bridge 

that the fender repair work will not be 

completed by June 5, 2009, as originally 

planned, due to unforeseen 

circumstances. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Delaying the effective date 

would be contrary to public interest, 

since immediate action is needed to 

ensure the public’s safety. It is 

imperative an RNA is established 

immediately during the fender repair 

work on the bridge. 

Background and Purpose 

The State of North Carolina 

Department of Transportation awarded a 

contract to Marine Technologies Inc. of 

Baltimore, MD to perform repair work 

on the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge located 

in Oregon Inlet, NC. The contract is for 

the repair of the existing fender system 

that protects the bridge piers located on 

either side of the navigation channel 

from vessel allision. The fender repairs 

began on April 16, 2009 and were 

initially scheduled to continue through 

June 5, 2009. However, the repairs were 

not completed by June 5, 2009. The 

fender repair work will continue from 

June 5, 2009, through July 2009. The 

contractor will utilize scaffolding 

hanging from the fender system to 

perform and complete the repair work. 

During periods of work, the scaffolding 

will reduce the available horizontal 

clearance of the main navigational 

channel to 124′. Because of this 

construction, vessels over a certain size 

will be limited in their ability to transit 

the regulated area as described below. 

Discussion of Rule 

The RNA will encompass the area of 

the main navigational channel directly 

under the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge. All 

vessels of 100 gross tons and greater are 

not permitted to transit the waterway 

unless the vessel asks the District 

Commander or his representative for 

permission to transit. To seek 

permission to transit the area, mariners 

can contact Sector North Carolina at 

telephone number 252–47–4570. 

Any vessel transiting the regulated 

area must do so at a no-wake speed 

during the effective period. Nothing in 

this proposed rule negates the 

requirement to operate at a safe speed as 

provided in the Navigational Rules and 

Regulations. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

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. 

Although this regulation will restrict 

access to the regulated area, the effect of 

this rule will not be significant because: 

(i) The regulated navigation area will be 

in effect for a limited duration of time, 

(ii) the Coast Guard will give advance 

notification via maritime advisories so 

mariners can adjust their plans 

accordingly, and (iii) vessels of 100 

gross tons or greater may be granted 

permission to transit the area by the 

District Commander or his 

representative. 

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. 

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 rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Although the regulated area will apply 

to the waters of the Oregon Inlet, the 

area will not have significant impact on 

small entities because the area will only 

be in place for a limited duration of time 

and maritime advisories will be issued 

in advance to allow the public to adjust 

their plans accordingly. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we offer to assist small entities in 

understanding the rule so that they can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

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. 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 125 / Wednesday, July 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 31371 

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 

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 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. Therefore, this rule is 

categorically excluded, under section 

2.B. Figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the 

Instruction and neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. This rule involves 

establishing, disestablishing, or 

changing a regulated navigation area. 

An environmental analysis checklist 

and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3307; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add temporary § 165.T05–0489 to 

read as follows: 

§ 165.T05–0489 Regulated Navigation 

Area; Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, Oregon 

Inlet, NC. 

(a) Definitions. For the purposes of 

this section: 

District Commander means the 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. 

Designated Representative means any 

Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or 

petty officer who has been authorized 

by the Commander, Fifth U.S. Coast 

Guard District to act as a designated 

representative on his behalf. 

(b) Location. The following area is a 

regulated navigation area: All waters of 

Oregon Inlet, between the fendered 

spans of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge. 

(c) Regulations. (1) The general 

regulations governing regulated 

navigation areas found in § 165.13 of 

this part apply to the regulated 

navigation area described in paragraph 

(b) of this section. 

(2) All vessels of 100 gross tons and 

greater are not permitted to transit the 

regulated area without permission from 

the District Commander or his 

representative. To seek permission to 

transit the area, mariners can contact 

Sector North Carolina at telephone 

number (252) 247–4570. 

(3) Any vessel transiting the regulated 

area must do so at a no-wake speed 

during the effective period. The Coast 

Guard vessels enforcing this section can 

be contacted on Marine Band Radio, 

VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Upon 

being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard 

vessel by siren, radio, flashing light or 

other means, the operator of a vessel 

shall proceed as directed. If permission 

is granted, all persons and vessels must 

comply with the instructions of the 

District Commander or his 

representative and proceed at the 

minimum speed necessary to maintain a 

safe course while within the zone. 

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast 

Guard may be assisted in the patrol and 

enforcement of the zone by Federal, 

State, and local agencies. 

(e) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 8 p.m. on June 22, 

2009, through 8 p.m. on July 31, 2009, 

unless cancelled earlier by the District 

Commander or designated 

representative. 

31372 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 125 / Wednesday, July 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: June 19, 2009. 

P.B. Trapp, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Acting 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E9–15577 Filed 6–30–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

United States Patent and Trademark 

Office 

37 CFR Part 1 

[Docket No.: PTO–P–2009–0025] 

RIN 0651–AC34 

July 2009 Revision of Patent 

Cooperation Treaty Procedures 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO) is revising 

the rules of practice in title 37 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to 

conform them to certain amendments 

made to the Regulations under the 

Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) that 

take effect on July 1, 2009. These 

amendments result in a change to the 

procedure under the PCT whereby 

applicants may make amendments to 

the claims in an international 

application. 

DATES: Effective Date: The changes to 37 

CFR 1.485 are effective on July 1, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard R. Cole, Senior Legal Examiner, 

Office of PCT Legal Administration 

(OPCTLA) directly by telephone at (571) 

272–3281, or by facsimile at (571) 273– 

0459. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the 

September 2008 meeting of the 

Governing Bodies of the World 

Intellectual Property Organization 

(WIPO), the PCT Assembly adopted 

various amendments to the Regulations 

under the PCT that enter into force on 

July 1, 2009. The amended PCT 

Regulations were published in the PCT 

Gazette of December 11, 2008 (38/2008), 

at pages 166–167. The amendments 

include provisions which modify the 

procedures for making amendments to 

the claims in an international 

application. 

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) 

enables an applicant to file one 

application, ‘‘an international 

application’’ or a ‘‘PCT application,’’ in 

a standardized format in a PCT 

Receiving Office and have that 

application acknowledged as a regular 

national or regional filing in as many 

Contracting States to the PCT as the 

applicant desires. The requirements for 

PCT applications are specified in the 

PCT Treaty Articles and the Regulations 

issued under the PCT Treaty (the PCT 

Regulations). Certain requirements of 

the PCT Treaty and PCT Regulations are 

reiterated in the USPTO’s rules of 

practice in 37 CFR for the convenience 

of patent applicants. Changes to the PCT 

Regulations (PCT Rules 46.5 and 66.8) 

that govern the manner of making 

amendments to the claims in 

international applications will become 

effective on July 1, 2009. Under the 

current PCT Regulations, applicants are 

required to submit replacement pages 

for only those pages which contain 

changes, where under the revised PCT 

Regulations applicants will be required 

to submit a complete set of the claims 

when amending any of the claims. The 

USPTO’s rules of practice in 37 CFR (37 

CFR 1.485) set forth the current practice 

for amending claims and must be 

changed to be consistent with the 

changes to the PCT Regulations. 

The changes to 37 CFR 1.485 are 

effective on July 1, 2009, and apply to 

any amendment filed in an international 

application on or after that date 

regardless of the filing date of the 

international application. 

Discussion of Specific Rules 

Title 37 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, part 1, is amended as 

follows: 

Section 1.485: Section 1.485 is 

amended to require that amendments to 

the claims in a PCT international 

application must be made in accordance 

with PCT Rule 66.8. 

Rulemaking Considerations 

A. Administrative Procedure Act: The 

change in this final rule merely revises 

the USPTO’s rules of practice to 

conform to the requirements of the PCT 

Regulations that become effective on 

July 1, 2009. 35 U.S.C. 364(a) provides 

that international applications shall be 

processed by the USPTO in accordance 

with the applicable provisions of the 

PCT, the Regulations under the PCT and 

Title 35 of the United States Code. 

Therefore, these rule changes involve 

interpretive rules or rules of agency 

practice and procedure under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(A). Accordingly, the changes in 

this final rule may be adopted without 

prior notice and opportunity for public 

comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and (c), 

or thirty-day advance publication under 

5 U.S.C. 553(d). See Cooper Techs. Co. 

v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 1336–37, 87 

U.S.P.Q.2d 1705, 1710 (Fed. Cir. 2008) 

(stating that 5 U.S.C. 553, and thus 35 

U.S.C. 2(b)(2)(B), does not require notice 

and comment on rulemaking for 

‘‘‘interpretative rules, general statements 

of policy, or rules of agency 

organization, procedure, or practice.’’’ 

(quoting 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A))). 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: As prior 

notice and an opportunity for public 

comment are not required pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 553 (or any other law), neither a 

regulatory flexibility analysis nor a 

certification under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is 

required. See 5 U.S.C. 603. 

C. Executive Order 13132 

(Federalism): This rulemaking does not 

contain policies with federalism 

implications sufficient to warrant 

preparation of a Federalism Assessment 

under Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 

1999). 

D. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review): This rulemaking 

has been determined to be significant 

for purposes of Executive Order 12866 

(Sept. 30, 1993). 

E. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation): This rulemaking will not: 

(1) Have substantial direct effects on one 

or more Indian Tribes; (2) impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian Tribal governments; or (3) 

preempt Tribal law. Therefore, a Tribal 

summary impact statement is not 

required under Executive Order 13175 

(Nov. 6, 2000). 

F. Executive Order 13211 (Energy 

Effects): This rulemaking is not a 

significant energy action under 

Executive Order 13211 because this 

rulemaking is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, 

a Statement of Energy Effects is not 

required under Executive Order 13211 

(May 18, 2001). 

G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil 

Justice Reform): This rulemaking meets 

applicable standards to minimize 

litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and 

reduce burden as set forth in sections 

3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 

12988 (Feb. 5, 1996). 

H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection 

of Children): This rulemaking does not 

concern an environmental risk to health 

or safety that may disproportionately 

affect children under Executive Order 

13045 (Apr. 21, 1997). 

I. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of 

Private Property): This rulemaking will 

not effect a taking of private property or 

otherwise have taking implications 

under Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 

1988). 

J. Congressional Review Act: Under 

the Congressional Review Act 

provisions of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of