Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 220 / Thursday, November 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 53411 

resource’s actual costs are verified afterthe-fact. A resource would also be 

eligible for a make-whole payment if it 

is dispatched and its verified cost-based 

incremental energy offer exceeds 

$2,000/MWh. All resources, regardless 

of type, are eligible to submit cost-based 

incremental energy offers in excess of 

$1,000/MWh. 

[FR Doc. 2017–24803 Filed 11–15–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

30 CFR Part 917 

[KY–254–FOR; OSM–2011–0005; 

S1D1SSS08011000SX064A000189S180110; 

S2D2SSS08011000SX066A00018XS501520] 

Kentucky Regulatory Program 

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule; approval of 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: We are approving an 

amendment to the Kentucky regulatory 

program (hereinafter, the ‘‘Kentucky 

program’’) under the Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 

(SMCRA or the Act). Kentucky 

submitted a proposed amendment to 

OSMRE that includes revisions to the 

Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) as 

authorized by House Bill 385 (HB 385), 

regarding bonding of surface coal 

mining and reclamation operations. 

DATES: The effective date is December 

18, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Evans, Telephone: (859) 260– 

3900. Email: bevans@osmre.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background on the Kentucky Program 

II. Description of the Amendment 

III. OSMRE’s Findings 

IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments 

V. OSMRE’s Decision 

VI. Procedural Determinations 

I. Background on the Kentucky 

Program 

Section 503(a) of the Act permits a 

State to assume primacy for the 

regulation of surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations on non-Federal 

and non-Indian lands within its borders 

by demonstrating that its program 

includes, among other things, State laws 

and regulations that govern surface coal 

mining and reclamation operations in 

accordance with the Act and consistent 

with the Federal regulations. See 30 

U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis 

of these criteria, the Secretary of the 

Interior conditionally approved the 

Kentucky program on May 18, 1982. 

You can find background information 

on the Kentucky program, including the 

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of 

comments, and conditions of approval 

of the Kentucky program in the May 18, 

1982, Federal Register (47 FR 21404, 

21434). You can also find later actions 

concerning Kentucky’s program and 

program amendments at 30 CFR 917.11, 

917.12, 917.13, 917.15, 917.16, and 

917.17. 

II. Description of the Proposed 

Amendment 

On May 10, 2011, Kentucky submitted 

an amendment to OSMRE for approval 

that proposed bonding revisions to the 

KRS as authorized by HB 385, which 

passed during the State’s regular 2011 

legislative session. HB 385 was passed 

in response to OSMRE’s findings in its 

January 5, 2011, National Priority 

Oversight Evaluation of the Adequacy of 

Kentucky Reclamation Performance 

Bond Amounts (National Oversight 

Study) report. In that report, OSMRE 

oversight and programmatic reviews 

identified that current reclamation 

performance bonds in Kentucky are not 

sufficient to complete the reclamation 

required in approved permits. On 

February 3, 2011, the Kentucky 

Department for Natural Resources 

(KYDNR) and OSMRE signed an Action 

Plan detailing the steps necessary for 

correcting identified bond calculation 

deficiencies. The Action Plan required 

KYDNR to complete revised bonding 

protocols by April 1, 2011, along with 

a timetable for implementation for new 

and existing permits. HB 385 amends 

Kentucky Revised Statutes 350.060 to 

provide that: 

Within thirty (30) days of a cabinet 

determination of a need to change a bond 

protocol currently in use, the cabinet shall 

immediately promulgate administrative 

regulations setting forth bonding 

requirements including, but not limited to, 

requirements for the amount, duration, 

release, and forfeiture of bonds. Bond 

protocols shall not be exempt from KRS 

13A.100 and shall be established by 

promulgating administrative regulations 

under KRS Chapter 13A. Failure to include 

the formula for establishing the amount of 

the bond in any administrative regulation on 

bonding requirements shall be deemed a 

failure to comply with the prescriptions of 

this section and the administrative regulation 

shall automatically be declared deficient in 

accordance with KRS Chapter 13A. 

We announced receipt of the 

amendment and asked for comments in 

a Federal Register notice published on 

August 15, 2011 (76 FR 50436). In the 

same document, we opened the public 

comment period and provided an 

opportunity for a public hearing or 

meeting. We did not hold a public 

hearing or meeting because no one 

requested one. The public comment 

period ended on September 14, 2011. 

We received comments from two 

organizations. 

III. OSMRE’s Findings 

The following are the findings we 

made concerning Kentucky’s proposed 

amendment under SMCRA at Section 

509, 30 U.S.C. 1259 and the Federal 

regulations at 30 CFR 800.14 and 

800.15. 

KRS 350.060 (11) Processing Permit 

Applications 

The new language in KRS 350.060 

(11) is intended to ensure that bond 

protocol regulations include the formula 

for establishing the amount of the bond. 

Failure to do so would result in any 

administrative regulations or bonding 

requirements to be declared deficient 

automatically, in accordance with KRS 

Chapter 13A. 

While these proposed State revisions 

have no direct Federal counterparts 

there is no provision in SMCRA or its 

implementing regulations that prohibits 

a State from requiring its bond protocols 

to be implemented solely as regulations. 

On their face, the proposed revisions are 

not inconsistent with Section 509 of 

SMCRA and 30 CFR 800.14, and we are 

therefore approving them, as noted 

below. 

While HB 385 could be construed to 

require the KYDNR to implement all 

bond adjustments as regulations before 

the adjustments can be made, to do so 

would be inconsistent with the literal 

construction of the language of the bill. 

Therefore, we do not construe HB 385 

to apply to individual bonding 

adjustments, or other individual 

bonding decisions. 

Rather, we are approving the 

proposed amendment, in accordance 

with its plain language, which will not 

impede implementation of the 

requirement in Section 509 of SMCRA 

that ‘‘[t]he amount of the bond shall be 

sufficient to assure the completion of 

the reclamation plan if the work had to 

be performed by the regulatory authority 

in the event of forfeiture.’’ Nor will the 

proposed amendment impede the 

obligation of the regulatory authority to 

adjust the amount of bond in 

accordance with 30 CFR 800.15. Should 

we find, however, during oversight, that 

the amendment is being interpreted in 

a manner that would render it 

inconsistent with either Section 509 of 


nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
53412 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 220 / Thursday, November 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

SMCRA or 30 CFR 800.15 we will 

initiate proceedings under 30 CFR 

730.11(a), to publish a notice in the 

Federal Register setting forth the text or 

a summary of that provision and 

provide 30 days’ notice for public 

comment. Following the public 

comment period, a final determination 

will be made and published in the 

Federal Register. 

Further, we are approving the 

proposed amendment because, in 

accordance with its plain language, it 

will not impede the regulatory 

authority’s ability to address the current 

bond deficiencies identified in the 

National Oversight Study and the 

February 3, 2011, Action Plan detailing 

the steps necessary for correcting bond 

calculation deficiencies that were 

identified in the study. Specifically, 

OSMRE expects the KYDNR to ensure 

the adequacy of bonds on all currently 

issued permits through the adjustment 

process, and all permits issued pending 

the formal revision to any existing 

bonding protocol. Should we find, 

however, during oversight, that the 

amendment is being implemented in a 

manner that would impede the 

regulatory authority’s ability to address 

current bond deficiencies, we will 

initiate proceedings under 30 CFR 

730.11(a), as appropriate, to have the 

provisions of the amendment set forth 

and set aside. 

Finally, we are approving the 

amendment with the understanding that 

it would not apply to bond protocols or 

bonding regulations in existence as of 

the date that HB 385 became effective. 

Should we find, however, during 

oversight, that the amendment is being 

interpreted in a manner that would 

render it applicable to bond protocols or 

regulations in existence as of the date 

that the amendment became effective, 

we will initiate proceedings under 30 

CFR 730.11(a) to publish a notice in the 

Federal Register setting forth the text or 

a summary of that provision and 

provide 30 days’ notice for public 

comment. Following the public 

comment period, a final determination 

will be made and published in the 

Federal Register. 

IV. Summary and Disposition of 

Comments 

Public Comments 

We asked for public comments on the 

amendment and received responses 

from Coal Operators & Associates, Inc. 

(COA) and Kentucky Resources Council 

(KRC). 

1. COA stated that the language of our 

August 15, 2011, Federal Register 

Notice (76 FR 50436) was somewhat 

misleading, insofar as it would lead one 

to believe that HB 385 addresses 

individual bond amounts. To the 

contrary, according to COA, HB 385 

pertains to ‘‘bond protocols’’ and 

‘‘bonding requirements,’’ not ‘‘a bond 

amount.’’ The plural nature of the 

phrases as well as common usage of the 

words ‘‘protocols’’ and ‘‘requirements’’ 

accurately reflect the fact that HB 385 

addresses the overall scheme or 

template that will be used to establish 

bond amounts and the ‘‘formula’’ to be 

used. 

Response—OSMRE has interpreted 

HB 385 to apply to bond protocols and 

bond formulas and not individual bond 

amounts. OSMRE’s approval of the 

proposed amendment reflects its 

understanding that it addresses these 

protocols and bond formulas used to 

determine bond amounts and that 

Kentucky will require all surface coal 

mining and reclamation permit 

applications to post a bond amount 

sufficient to meet the requirement in 

Section 509 of SMCRA that ‘‘[t]he 

amount of the bond shall be sufficient 

to assure the completion of the 

reclamation plan if the work had to be 

performed by the regulatory authority in 

the event of forfeiture.’’ 

2. COA stated that the intent of HB 

385 is to prevent Kentucky from 

arbitrarily changing bond protocols, 

requirements or formulae without 

adequate transparency and public 

comment. 

Response—We believe that our 

approval of this amendment, with the 

limitations as set forth in the Findings 

above, will not diminish any 

requirements of the Kentucky program 

regarding the ability of the public to 

comment on regulations regarding 

bonding. 

3. According to COA, the purpose of 

HB 385 is to insure that the Energy and 

Environment Cabinet (EEC) follows the 

statutory mandates that have existed 

since the inception of the Kentucky 

Permanent Regulatory Program. To 

accomplish that, HB 385 provides for 

statutory declarations of deficiency if 

the bonding formula is not promulgated 

as a KRS Ch. 13A regulation. 

Response—While we agree that HB 

385 provides for statutory declaration of 

deficiency in the event bonding 

formulas are not promulgated as 

regulation, the basis of our decision is 

based on the understanding that bond 

adjustments for specific surface coal 

mining operations are not required to be 

promulgated as regulations. 

4. The COA stated that the KRS Ch. 

13A Administrative Regulation process 

is one based upon public input, 

comment and review. Briefly, proposed 

regulations are not only published in 

the Administrative Register of 

Kentucky, but, EEC provides electronic 

notification to any interested citizen or 

stakeholder. Oral testimonies at public 

hearings, written comments that are 

submitted, as well as testimonies before 

the Administrative Regulation Review 

Sub-committee and the appropriate 

House and Senate Committees provide 

interested parties adequate notice and 

input on proposed regulations. 

Response—This is not an issue before 

OSMRE in its consideration or review of 

Kentucky’s proposed amendment on 

bonding protocols. 

5. COA explained that some concern 

has been expressed about the length of 

time it takes under KRS Ch. 13A to 

adopt new, ordinary regulations. The 

Governor of the Commonwealth can 

issue an emergency regulation which 

becomes effective upon his signature. 

(KRS 13A.170 and 190). The ordinary 

regulation is filed simultaneously and 

proceeds through the mandatory 

process. Concurrently, the emergency 

regulation is in effect. 

Response—OSMRE agrees that the 

Kentucky Governor can, under 

appropriate circumstances, issue 

emergency regulations. 

6. KRC stated its belief that HB 385 

was sought by the Kentucky coal 

industry as a mechanism for delaying 

the adoption of changes in the bonding 

calculations and amounts. 

Response—As stated previously, 

OSMRE’s approval of the proposed 

amendment is based on its conclusion 

that it applies to bond protocols and 

formulas, and does not require bond 

adjustments for specific surface coal 

mining operations to be promulgated as 

regulations. 

7. KRC asserted that HB 385 was 

enacted at a time when Kentucky was in 

default of its ongoing, enforceable 

obligation under 30 CFR 733.11 to 

‘‘implement, administer, enforce and 

maintain it in accordance with the Act, 

this chapter and the provisions of the 

approved State program.’’ More 

specifically, Kentucky was, and is, in 

continuing violation of mandatory 

obligations outlined in 30 CFR 800.4. 

KRC also believes that absent a 

commitment from Kentucky to resolve 

the bond amount issue, they are in 

default as required by 30 CFR 733.11. 

Therefore, KRC urged OSMRE to take 

steps to promptly remove State 

regulation approval with respect to 

bond calculation and adjustment for 

new and existing permits, and to 

substitute direct Federal enforcement of 

the requirements of 30 U.S.C. 1259, 

unless Kentucky revises the bond 

calculation protocols to assure adequate 


nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 220 / Thursday, November 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 53413 

bond amounts for new and existing 

permits, and commits to incorporate 

those revisions into emergency 

regulation. 

Response—This comment, which 

requests that we take action pursuant to 

30 CFR part 733 is beyond the scope of 

this rulemaking. 

8. KRC does not oppose the 

amendments on their face, since 

SMCRA is silent as to whether bond 

calculation methodologies must be 

implemented in regulatory form, and 

since requiring these methodologies to 

be promulgated as regulations will 

require OSMRE approval and public 

opportunity to comment. However, KRC 

states that OSMRE should request that 

the State clarify that it interprets the 

amendment to apply to bond calculation 

formulae and not to individual bond 

calculation decisions, or revisions 

thereto. 

Response—As noted in the Findings, 

above, OSMRE is approving this 

proposed amendment based on the 

plain language of the amendment and 

OSMRE’s conclusion that the 

amendment does not apply to bond 

calculations for individual permits. 

9. Next, KRC stated that OSMRE 

should require the State to clarify that 

the provision declaring deficient any 

bond calculation formula that is not 

promulgated as a regulation applies 

only to changes in such protocols, and 

not to existing protocols. KRC further 

stated that clarification should also be 

sought as to the State’s interpretation of 

the last sentence of the amendment, 

since, read broadly; it could affect 

existing, approved bonding regulations 

that are a necessary component of the 

state regulatory program. 

Response—As noted above, we are 

approving the amendment based on our 

understanding that the proposed 

amendment would not apply to bond 

protocols or bonding regulations in 

existence on the date that HB 385 

became effective. Further, approval of 

this proposed amendment will not affect 

existing, approved bonding regulations 

that are a necessary component of the 

State regulatory program. If OSMRE 

finds that the promulgation of 

regulations impedes the implementation 

of the bond sufficiency requirement, 

OSMRE will notify Kentucky that the 

approval of the amendment will be 

revoked. If this occurs, the State will not 

be permitted to amend bond protocols 

via regulation. 

Federal Agency Comments 

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and 

Section 503(b) of SMCRA, on August 15, 

2011, we requested comments on the 

amendments from various Federal 

agencies with an actual or potential 

interest in the Kentucky program 

(Administrative Record No. KY–1665). 

No comments were received. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Concurrence and Comments 

Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we 

are required to get a written concurrence 

from EPA for those provisions of the 

program amendment that relate to air or 

water quality standards issued under 

the authority of the Clean Water Act (33 

U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act 

(42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the 

revisions that Kentucky proposed to 

make in this amendment pertains to air 

or water quality standards. Therefore, 

we did not ask EPA to concur on the 

amendment. 

V. OSMRE’s Decision 

Based on our findings, OSMRE 

approves the amendment Kentucky sent 

to us on May 10, 2011, revising the 

Kentucky Revised Statues (KRS) as 

authorized by HB 385 regarding bonding 

of surface coal mining and reclamation 

operations. 

To implement this decision, we are 

amending the Federal regulations at 30 

CFR part 917 which codify decisions 

concerning the Kentucky program. In 

accordance with the Administrative 

Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 

30 days after date of publication. 

Section 503(a) of SMCRA requires that 

the State’s program demonstrate that the 

State has the capability of carrying out 

the provisions of the Act and meeting its 

purposes. SMCRA requires consistency 

of State and Federal standards. 

VI. Procedural Determinations 

Executive Order 12630—Takings 

This rule does not have takings 

implications. This determination is 

based on the analysis performed for the 

counterpart Federal regulation. 

Executive Order 12866—Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This rule is exempted from review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866. 

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice 

Reform 

The Department of the Interior has 

conducted the reviews required by 

Section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and 

has determined that this rule meets the 

applicable standards of Subsections (a) 

and (b) of that section. However, these 

standards are not applicable to the 

actual language of State regulatory 

programs and program amendments 

because each program is drafted and 

promulgated by a specific State, not by 

OSMRE. Under Sections 503 and 505 of 

SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 

730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), 

decisions on proposed State regulatory 

programs and program amendments 

submitted by the States must be based 

solely on a determination of whether the 

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and 

its implementing Federal regulations 

and whether the other requirements of 

30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have 

been met. 

Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

This rule does not have Federalism 

implications. SMCRA delineates the 

roles of the Federal and State 

governments with regard to the 

regulation of surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations. One of the 

purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a 

nationwide program to protect society 

and the environment from the adverse 

effects of surface coal mining 

operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of 

SMCRA requires that State laws 

regulating surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations be ‘‘in 

accordance with’’ the requirements of 

SMCRA, and Section 503(a)(7) requires 

that State programs contain rules and 

regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ 

regulations issued by the Secretary 

pursuant to SMCRA. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Government 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated the potential 

effects of this rule on Federally 

recognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that the rule does not have 

substantial direct effects 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. 

The basis for this determination is that 

our decision is on a State Regulatory 

program and does not involve a Federal 

Regulation involving Indian Lands. 

Executive Order 13211—Regulations 

That Significantly Affect the Supply, 

Distribution, or Use of Energy 

Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 

2001, requires agencies to prepare a 

Statement of Energy Effects for a rule 

that is (1) considered significant under 

Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

Because this rule is exempt from review 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 


nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
53414 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 220 / Thursday, November 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This rule does not require an 

environmental impact statement 

because Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 

U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency 

decisions on proposed State regulatory 

program provisions do not constitute 

major Federal actions within the 

meaning of Section 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not contain 

information collection requirements that 

require approval by OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3507 et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, 

which is the subject of this rule, is based 

upon counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an economic analysis was 

prepared and certification made that 

such regulations would not have a 

significant economic effect upon a 

substantial number of small entities. In 

making the determination as to whether 

this rule would have a significant 

economic impact, the Department relied 

upon data and assumptions for the 

counterpart Federal regulations. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: (a) Does not have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million; 

(b) will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions; and (c) does not 

have significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. This 

determination is based upon the fact 

that the Kentucky submittal, which is 

the subject of this rule, is based upon 

counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation was not considered a major 

rule. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule will not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of $100 million or more in any given 

year. This determination is based upon 

the fact that the Kentucky submittal, 

which is the subject of this rule, is based 

upon counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation did not impose an unfunded 

mandate. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 917 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: September 19, 2017. 

Thomas D. Shope 

Regional Director, Appalachian Region. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 30 CFR part 917 is amended 

as set forth below: 

PART 917—KENTUCKY 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 917 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 917.15 is amended by 

adding a new entry to the table in 

paragraph (a) in chronological order by 

‘‘Date of final publication’’ to read as 

follows: 

917.15 Approval of Kentucky regulatory 

program amendments. 

(a) * * * 

Original amendment submission date Date of final publication Citation/description 

*******

May 10, 2011 .................................................... November 16, 2017 .......................................... KRS 350.060(11). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–24707 Filed 11–15–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket Number USCG–2015–0427] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation; Mavericks 

Surf Competition, Half Moon Bay, CA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising a 

special local regulation in the navigable 

waters of Half Moon Bay, CA, near Pillar 

Point in support of the Mavericks Surf 

Competition, an annual invitational surf 

competition held at the Mavericks 

Break. This revision is necessary to 

improve the regulation by making it 

clearer and to have it better reflect the 

natural conditions that must be met for 

this surf competition to take place. This 

regulation is necessary to provide for 

the safety of life on the navigable waters 

immediately prior to, during, and 

immediately after the surfing 

competition, which is held only one day 

between November 1 of each year and 

March 31 of the following year. This 

revision temporarily restricts vessel 

traffic in the vicinity of Pillar Point and 

prohibits vessels and persons not 

participating in or directly supporting 

the surfing event from entering the 

dedicated surfing area and a designated 

no-entry area. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

18, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to http://

www.regulations.gov, type the docket 

number USCG–2015–0427 in the 

‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ 

Click on Open Docket Folder on the line 

associated with this rule. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this 

rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant 

Junior Grade Christina Ramirez, U.S. 

Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; 

telephone (415) 399–2001, email at D11- 

PF-MarineEvents@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

COTP Captain of the Port 

PATCOM Patrol Commander 

OCMI Officer in Charge of Marine 

Inspections 

NRPM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

U.S.C. United States Code 


nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES