Federal Register: June 13, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 114)
DOCID: FR Doc 01-14817
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CFR Citation: 46 CFR Part 1
RIN ID: RIN 2115-AG11
USC ID: [USCG 2001-8894]
ACTION: Organization, functions, and authority delegations:
DOCUMENT ACTION: Direct final rule.
Right To Appeal; Director, Great Lakes Pilotage
DATES: This rule is effective September 11, 2001, unless an adverse comment, or notice of intent to submit an adverse comment, reaches the Docket Management Facility on or before August 13, 2001. If an adverse comment, or notice of intent to submit an adverse comment, is received, we will withdraw this direct final rule and publish a timely notice of withdrawal in the Federal Register.
The Coast Guard is amending its appellate procedures to
provide explicit authority for appeal of decisions or actions taken by
the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage. The Coast Guard has consistently
applied those procedures whenever a decision or action taken by the Director has been appealed to higher
authority within the Coast Guard. At this point, the Coast Guard is simply amending its rules to reflect its established policy and practice.
Director, Great Lakes Pilotage; right to appeal Director's decisions to Commandant,
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [USCG 2001 8894], indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material by mail, delivery, fax, or electronic means to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit them by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope.
We are publishing a direct final rule under 33 CFR 1.0555, because we do not expect an adverse comment. Unless we receive an adverse comment or notice of intent to submit one within the comment period specified under DATES, this rule will become effective as stated in DATES. In that case, about 30 days before the effective date, we will publish a document in the Federal Register stating that we received no adverse comment and confirming that this rule will become effective as scheduled. However, if we receive an adverse comment or notice of intent to submit one, we will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the withdrawal of all or part of this rule. If an adverse comment applies only to part of this rule (e.g., to an amendment, a paragraph, or a section) and it is possible to remove that part without defeating the purpose of this rule, we may adopt, as final, those parts of this rule on which we received no adverse comment. We will withdraw any part of this rule that becomes the subject of an adverse comment. If we decide to proceed with a rulemaking following receipt of an adverse comment, we will publish a separate notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and provide a new opportunity for comment.
A comment counts as ``adverse'' if it explains why this rule or a part of this rule would be inappropriate, including a challenge to its underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change.
Background and Purpose
A review of our rules indicates that our policy and practice of permitting a party to appeal any decision or action of the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, in accordance with the procedures 46 CFR Part 1.03 is not one provided for, explicitly, by those rules. Yet it also indicates that the practice has met universal acceptance by persons affected. The purpose of this direct final rule is to codify our established policy and practice on appeals.
Discussion of Rule
To codify these entails (1) amending 46 CFR 1.0315 to take account of 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93 and 46 CFR Chapter III and identify the particular Coast Guard office for appeals; and (2) adding a new 46 CFR 1.0350 to describe the appellate process for decisions or actions of the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage.
Because of an oversight affecting 46 CFR Subpart 1.03Rights of Appeal, the appellate procedures of the Coast Guard do not by their terms apply to decisions or actions taken by the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, under 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93 or 46 CFR Chapter III. Nonetheless, the Coast Guard has consistently followed them whenever a decision or action taken by the Director has been appealed to higher authority within the Coast Guard, Commandant (GMW). This practice has met universal acceptance by persons affected. At this point, the Coast Guard is simply codifying its procedures to reflect its own policy and practice and meet the public's expectation.
This direct final rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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. It is not ``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) [44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979]. Because this rule is administrative in nature and simply codifies the policy and practice already in use since the beginning of Great Lakes Pilotage, we expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601612], we
considered whether this direct final rule will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term
``small entities'' comprises small businesses, notforprofit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with [[Page 31844]]
populations of less than 50,000. This rule does not affect any small entities.
Therefore, 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. We will evaluate, under the criteria in ``Regulatory Information'', any comments submitted in response to this finding.
Collection of Information
This direct final rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 35013520]. Federalism
We have analyzed this direct final rule under Executive Order 13132 and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism under that Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 [2 U.S.C. 15311538] requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions not specifically required by law. 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 direct final 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 direct final 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 direct final 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 direct final 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 concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This direct final 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. Environment
The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this direct final rule and concluded that, under figure 21, paragraph (34)(a) of Commandant Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. It is ``procedural'' within the meaning of that paragraph. A Determination of Categorical Exclusion is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 1
Organization, General Course and Methods Governing Marine Safety Functions.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46 CFR part 1 as follows:
1. Revise the citation of authority for part 1 to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 14 U.S.C. 633; 46 U.S.C. 7701; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.46; Sec. 1.0135 also issued under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507.
2. Revise paragraph (a) of Sec. 1.0315 and add paragraph (h)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.0315 General.
(a) Any person directly affected by a decision or action taken under this chapter or under chapter III of this title, by or on behalf of the Coast Guard, except for matters covered by subpart J of part 5 of this chapterdealing with suspensionandrevocation hearings, shall follow the procedures contained in this section when requesting that the decision or action be reviewed, set aside, or revised.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(5) Commandant (GMW) for appeals involving decisions or actions of the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage.
* * * * *
3. Add Sec. 1.0350 to read as follows:
Sec. 1.0350 Appeals from decisions or actions of the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage.
Any person directly affected by a decision or action of the
Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, may make a formal appeal of that
decision or action to Commandant (GMW), in accordance with the procedures contained in Sec. 1.0315 of this subpart.
Dated: April 24, 2001.
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine, Safety and Environmental Protection.
[FR Doc. 0114817 Filed 61201; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 491015P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
If you have questions on this rule, call Mr. John Bennett, Coast Guard, telephone 2022672856. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Dorothy Beard, Chief, Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone 2023665149.