SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

COTP Captain of the Port

DHS Department of Homeland Security

FR Federal Register

§ Section

U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background and Authority

This technical amendment final rule reorganizes existing safety zones currently listed in Table 1 to 33 CFR 165.941. These changes are necessary to improve clarity. Table 1 to 33CFR 165.941 currently contains safety zone entries for both Sector Detroit and Marine Safety Unit Toledo, with no space between the two entities to add further entries. This combination does not align with the intended structure of the section, which is to provide a quick reference for safety zones by location, and may create confusion during citation and enforcement. By making safety zones easier to track by location, this final rule ensures that the public is more effectively informed of all applicable regulations, protecting personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zones. This rule is issued under the authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.

We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule. Under Title 5 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), section 553(b)(A), the Coast Guard finds that this final rule is exempt from notice and public comment rulemaking requirements, because these changes involve rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice. In addition, the Coast Guard finds that notice and comment procedures are unnecessary for this final rule under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), as this rule consists of only technical and organizational amendments, and these changes will have no substantive effect on the public. For the same reasons, the Coast Guard finds that, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register .

III. Discussion of the Rule

In this final rule, the Coast Guard is splitting Table 1 into two pieces, leaving existing Sector Detroit safety zones in Table 1 (numbered (1) through (34)), moving all existing safety zones for Marine Safety Unit Toledo (currently numbered (35) through (51)) into a new Table 2, and renumbering the Table 2 safety zones for Marine Safety Unit Toledo (1) through (17). This administrative amendment is part of ongoing efforts to improve regulatory clarity and usability. It does not change any safety zone locations, times, or enforcement provisions. The regulatory text appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this final 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.

A. Impact on Small Entities

The regulatory flexibility analysis provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, do not apply to rules that are not subject to notice and comment. Because the Coast Guard has, for good cause, waived the notice and comment requirement that would otherwise apply to this rulemaking, the Regulatory Flexibility Act's flexibility analysis provisions do not apply here.

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), if this rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions, contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards by calling 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.

B. Collection of Information

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

C. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and have determined that it is consistent ( printed page 24132) with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in that Order.

Also, 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.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

As required by The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538), the Coast Guard certifies that this rule will not result in an annual expenditure of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation) by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector.

E. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. A Memorandum for the Record supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. This final rule involves non-substantive technical, organizational, and conforming amendments to existing Coast Guard regulations. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded under paragraph L54 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. Paragraph L54 pertains to regulations that are editorial or procedural.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

91 FR 24131