Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, Maine, Casco Bay, 29095-29097 [E7-9969]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 100 / Thursday, May 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
rigging of any anchored vessel shall
extend outside the limits of the
anchorage area.
(7) The anchorage of vessels is under
the coordination of the local
Harbormaster.
Dated: April 9, 2007.
Timothy S. Sullivan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7–9968 Filed 5–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[CGD01–07–009]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth,
Maine, Casco Bay
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
establish three special anchorage areas
in Yarmouth, Maine on Casco Bay. This
action is necessary to facilitate safe
navigation in that area and to provide
safe and secure anchorages for vessels of
not more than 65 feet. This proposal is
intended to increase the safety for life
and property on Casco Bay, improve the
safety of anchored vessels, create
workable boundaries for future mooring
expansion, and provide for the overall
safe and efficient flow of recreational
vessels and commerce.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
July 23, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpw), First Coast Guard District, 408
Atlantic Ave., Boston, Massachusetts
02110, who maintains the public docket
for this rulemaking. Comments and
material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at room 628, First Coast Guard
District Boston, between 8 a.m. and 3
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
John J. Mauro, Commander (dpw), First
Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave.,
Boston, Massachusetts 02110,
Telephone (617) 223–8355 or e-mail at
John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 23, 2007
Jkt 211001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 (CGD01–07–009),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know they reached us, please enclose
a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change
this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to the
Waterways Management Branch at the
address under ADDRESSES explaining
why one would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time
and place announced by a later notice
in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The proposed rule is the result of
collaboration with the Town of
Yarmouth’s Harbor and Waterfront
Committee and Yarmouth town council
to accommodate vessels mooring in the
area. The proposed rule would establish
three separate special anchorage areas
organized from the current
accommodations of approximately 350
moorings. The proposed rule is
designed to aid the Town of Yarmouth
in enforcing its mooring and boating
regulations by clearly defining the
available mooring fields. In addition,
the proposed rule will provide finite
expansion boundaries of town mooring
fields, ensure that there are transient
anchorage areas available, and extend
the convenience of a special anchorage
to local vessel owners. The areas under
consideration are currently established
mooring areas.
In developing this proposed rule, the
Coast Guard has consulted with the
Army Corps of Engineers, Northeast,
located at 696 Virginia Road., Concord,
MA 01742.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would create three
special anchorage areas located in
Yarmouth, Maine on Casco Bay: (1)
Littlejohn Island/Doyle Point Cousins
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29095
Island Special Anchorage,(2) Madeleine
and Sandy Point Special Anchorage,
and (3) Drinkwater Point and Princes
Point Special Anchorage.
The Town of Yarmouth has
delineated transient anchorage areas in
each of the three special anchorage
areas. These transient anchorage areas
are located near or next to town-owned
property that has limited access to
parking and, in some cases, dock tie-up
space.
The special anchorage areas would be
limited to vessels no greater than 65 feet
in length. Vessels not more than 65 feet
in length are not required to sound
signals as required by rule 35 of the
Inland Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C.
2035) nor exhibit anchor lights or
shapes required by rule 30 of the Inland
Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C 2030) when
at anchor in a special anchorage area.
Mariners utilizing the anchorage areas
are encouraged to contact local and state
authorities, such as the local
harbormaster, to ensure compliance
with any additional applicable state and
local laws. Such laws may involve, for
example, compliance with direction
from the local harbormaster when
placing or using moorings within the
anchorage.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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 proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary.
This finding is based on the fact that
this proposal conforms to the changing
needs of the Town of Yarmouth, the
changing needs of recreational, fishing
and commercial vessels, and to make
the best use of the available navigable
water. The proposed special anchorage
areas do not impede the passage of
recreational or commercial vessels as
they are not located in the primary
entrance channel to Yarmouth Harbor.
The proposed special anchorage areas
are a consolidation and delineation of
existing mooring fields. Thus, the
special anchorage area will have a
minimal economic impact. This
proposed rule is in the interest of safe
navigation, protection of the vessels
moored at the Town of Yarmouth, and
protection of the marine environment.
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
29096
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 100 / Thursday, May 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed 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 proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This proposed rule would affect the
following entities, some of which might
be small entities: the owners or
operators of recreational or commercial
vessels intending to transit in a portion
of the Casco Bay in and around the
special anchorage areas. However, these
special anchorage areas would not have
a significant economic impact on these
entities for the following reasons: The
proposed special anchorage areas are
not located near the primary entrance
into Yarmouth Harbor. The Littlejohn
Island/Doyle Point Cousins Island
Special Anchorage allows for a 100 yard
channel between its boundary and buoy
N ″18″ on the south side of Littlejohn
Island. This is more than enough room
for the types of vessels which operate in
the area. The Town of Yarmouth will set
two red (nun) and two green (can)
seasonal buoys between April and
November to mark an eighty foot
fairway from the main channel to the
Wharf Road Dock to delineate the path
taken by the Chebeague Island
Transportation Company (CTC) ferry.
The largest vessel operated by CTC is a
65 foot tow vessel and barge. The
special anchorage area will not impede
safe and efficient vessel transit in the
area.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 23, 2007
Jkt 211001
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact Mr. John J.
Mauro, Commander (dpw), First Coast
Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave.,
Boston, Massachusetts 02110,
Telephone (617) 223–8355 or e-mail at
John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil.
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 proposed rule would call 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not affect 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 proposed 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 proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD and Department of
Homeland Security Management
Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 100 / Thursday, May 24, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
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, we believe that
this rule should be categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(f), of the Instruction from further
environmental documentation. This rule
fits the category selected from paragraph
(34)(f) as it would establish a special
anchorage area.
A preliminary ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ are available
in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the
final decision on whether this rule
should be categorically excluded from
further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:
PART 110—ANCHORAGE
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 110
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through
1236, 2030, 2035 and 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g);
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
latitude 43°45′35″ N., longitude
70°09″50′ W.; thence to latitude
43°45′63″ N., longitude 70°09′18″ W.;
thence to latitude 43°45′95″ N.,
longitude 70°08′98″ W.; thence to
latitude 43°45′99″ N., longitude
70°08′83″ W. DATUM: NAD 83.
(3) Drinkwater Point and Princes
Point Special Anchorage. All of the
waters enclosed by a line connecting the
following points: starting south of
Drinkwater Point in Yarmouth, Maine at
latitude 43°46′42″ N., longitude
70°09′25″ W.; thence to latitude
43°46′35″ N., longitude 70°09′16″ W.;
thence to latitude 43°46′07″ N.,
longitude 70°09′77″ W.; thence to
latitude 43°45′48″ N., longitude
70°10′40″ W.; thence to latitude
43°45′65″ N., longitude 70°10′40″ W.
DATUM: NAD 83.
Note to § 110.5(f): An ordinance of the
Town of Yarmouth, Maine requires the
approval of the Yarmouth Harbor Master for
the location and type of moorings placed in
these special anchorage areas. All anchorings
in the areas are under the supervision of the
Yarmouth Harbor Master or other such
authority as may be designated by the
authorities of the Town of Yarmouth, Maine.
All moorings are to be so placed that no
moored vessel will extend beyond the limit
of the area.
Dated: April 9, 2007.
Timothy S. Sullivan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7–9969 Filed 5–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
2. Amend § 110.5 by adding
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 110.5
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Casco Bay, Maine.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Yarmouth Harbor and adjacent
waters—(1) Littlejohn Island/Doyle
Point Cousins Island Special
Anchorage. All of the waters enclosed
by a line connecting the following
points: starting from the northernmost
point of Littlejohn Island at latitude
43°45′86″ N., longitude 70°06′95″ W.;
thence to latitude 43°45′78″ N.,
longitude 70°06′89″ W.; thence to
latitude 43°45′43″ N., longitude
70°07′38″ W.; thence to latitude
43°45′28″ N., longitude 70°07′68″ W.;
thence to latitude 43°44′95″ N.,
longitude 70°08′45″ W.; thence to
latitude 43°44′99″ N., longitude
70°08′50″ W. DATUM: NAD 83.
(2) Madeleine and Sandy Point
Special Anchorage. All of the waters
enclosed by a line connecting the
following points: starting from a point
northeast of Birch Point on Cousins
Island at latitude 43°45′27″ N.,
longitude 70°09′32″ W.; thence to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 23, 2007
Jkt 211001
34 CFR Part 75
[Docket ID ED–2007–OCFO–0132]
RIN 1890–AA15
Direct Grant Programs
Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes to
amend the regulations in 34 CFR part
75, regarding the determination and
recovery of indirect costs by grantees.
The proposed amendments would
address procedural aspects related to
the establishment of temporary indirect
cost rates, specify the temporary rate
that would apply to grants generally,
and clarify how indirect costs are
determined for a group of applicants
that apply for a single training grant.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before June 25, 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29097
Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
or hand delivery. We will not accept
comments by fax or by e-mail. Please
submit your comments only one time, in
order to ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies. In addition, please
include the Docket ID at the top of your
comments.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select
‘‘Department of Education’’ from the
agency drop-down menu, then click
‘‘Submit.’’ In the Docket ID column,
select ED–2007–OCFO–0132 to add or
view public comments and to view
supporting and related materials
available electronically. Information on
using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for submitting comments,
accessing documents, and viewing the
docket after the close of the comment
period, is available through the site’s
‘‘User Tips’’ link.
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery. If you mail or deliver
your comments about these proposed
regulations, address them to Richard
Mueller, U.S. Department of Education,
830 First Street, NE., room 21C7,
Washington, DC 20202–4450.
ADDRESSES:
Privacy Note: The Department’s policy for
comments received from members of the
public (including those comments submitted
by mail, commercial delivery, or hand
delivery) is to make these submissions
available for public viewing on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov All submissions will be
posted to the Federal eRulemaking Portal
without change, including personal
identifiers and contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Mueller. Telephone: (202) 377–
3838 or via Internet:
Richard.Mueller@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), you may call
the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–
800–877–8339.
Individuals with disabilities may
obtain this document in an alternative
format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request to the contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation To Comment
We invite you to submit comments
regarding these proposed regulations.
To ensure that your comments have
maximum effect in developing the final
regulations, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific section or sections of
the proposed regulations that each of
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 100 (Thursday, May 24, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29095-29097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9969]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[CGD01-07-009]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, Maine, Casco Bay
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish three special anchorage
areas in Yarmouth, Maine on Casco Bay. This action is necessary to
facilitate safe navigation in that area and to provide safe and secure
anchorages for vessels of not more than 65 feet. This proposal is
intended to increase the safety for life and property on Casco Bay,
improve the safety of anchored vessels, create workable boundaries for
future mooring expansion, and provide for the overall safe and
efficient flow of recreational vessels and commerce.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before July 23, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpw), First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston,
Massachusetts 02110, who maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at room 628, First Coast Guard District Boston, between 8 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John J. Mauro, Commander (dpw),
First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston, Massachusetts
02110, Telephone (617) 223-8355 or e-mail at John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 (CGD01-07-
009), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the Waterways Management Branch at
the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The proposed rule is the result of collaboration with the Town of
Yarmouth's Harbor and Waterfront Committee and Yarmouth town council to
accommodate vessels mooring in the area. The proposed rule would
establish three separate special anchorage areas organized from the
current accommodations of approximately 350 moorings. The proposed rule
is designed to aid the Town of Yarmouth in enforcing its mooring and
boating regulations by clearly defining the available mooring fields.
In addition, the proposed rule will provide finite expansion boundaries
of town mooring fields, ensure that there are transient anchorage areas
available, and extend the convenience of a special anchorage to local
vessel owners. The areas under consideration are currently established
mooring areas.
In developing this proposed rule, the Coast Guard has consulted
with the Army Corps of Engineers, Northeast, located at 696 Virginia
Road., Concord, MA 01742.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would create three special anchorage areas
located in Yarmouth, Maine on Casco Bay: (1) Littlejohn Island/Doyle
Point Cousins Island Special Anchorage,(2) Madeleine and Sandy Point
Special Anchorage, and (3) Drinkwater Point and Princes Point Special
Anchorage.
The Town of Yarmouth has delineated transient anchorage areas in
each of the three special anchorage areas. These transient anchorage
areas are located near or next to town-owned property that has limited
access to parking and, in some cases, dock tie-up space.
The special anchorage areas would be limited to vessels no greater
than 65 feet in length. Vessels not more than 65 feet in length are not
required to sound signals as required by rule 35 of the Inland
Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C. 2035) nor exhibit anchor lights or shapes
required by rule 30 of the Inland Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C 2030) when
at anchor in a special anchorage area. Mariners utilizing the anchorage
areas are encouraged to contact local and state authorities, such as
the local harbormaster, to ensure compliance with any additional
applicable state and local laws. Such laws may involve, for example,
compliance with direction from the local harbormaster when placing or
using moorings within the anchorage.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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 proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
This finding is based on the fact that this proposal conforms to
the changing needs of the Town of Yarmouth, the changing needs of
recreational, fishing and commercial vessels, and to make the best use
of the available navigable water. The proposed special anchorage areas
do not impede the passage of recreational or commercial vessels as they
are not located in the primary entrance channel to Yarmouth Harbor. The
proposed special anchorage areas are a consolidation and delineation of
existing mooring fields. Thus, the special anchorage area will have a
minimal economic impact. This proposed rule is in the interest of safe
navigation, protection of the vessels moored at the Town of Yarmouth,
and protection of the marine environment.
[[Page 29096]]
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed 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 proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: the owners or operators of recreational
or commercial vessels intending to transit in a portion of the Casco
Bay in and around the special anchorage areas. However, these special
anchorage areas would not have a significant economic impact on these
entities for the following reasons: The proposed special anchorage
areas are not located near the primary entrance into Yarmouth Harbor.
The Littlejohn Island/Doyle Point Cousins Island Special Anchorage
allows for a 100 yard channel between its boundary and buoy N ''18'' on
the south side of Littlejohn Island. This is more than enough room for
the types of vessels which operate in the area. The Town of Yarmouth
will set two red (nun) and two green (can) seasonal buoys between April
and November to mark an eighty foot fairway from the main channel to
the Wharf Road Dock to delineate the path taken by the Chebeague Island
Transportation Company (CTC) ferry. The largest vessel operated by CTC
is a 65 foot tow vessel and barge. The special anchorage area will not
impede safe and efficient vessel transit in the area.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Mr. John J. Mauro, Commander
(dpw), First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston,
Massachusetts 02110, Telephone (617) 223-8355 or e-mail at
John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil.
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 proposed rule would call 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not affect 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive
5100.1, which guide the Coast
[[Page 29097]]
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary
determination 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, we believe that this rule should be
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the
Instruction from further environmental documentation. This rule fits
the category selected from paragraph (34)(f) as it would establish a
special anchorage area.
A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be
considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule
should be categorically excluded from further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:
PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035 and
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Amend Sec. 110.5 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 110.5 Casco Bay, Maine.
* * * * *
(f) Yarmouth Harbor and adjacent waters--(1) Littlejohn Island/
Doyle Point Cousins Island Special Anchorage. All of the waters
enclosed by a line connecting the following points: starting from the
northernmost point of Littlejohn Island at latitude 43[deg]45'86'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]06'95'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]45'78'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]06'89'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]45'43'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]07'38'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]45'28'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]07'68'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]44'95'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]08'45'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]44'99'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]08'50'' W. DATUM: NAD 83.
(2) Madeleine and Sandy Point Special Anchorage. All of the waters
enclosed by a line connecting the following points: starting from a
point northeast of Birch Point on Cousins Island at latitude
43[deg]45'27'' N., longitude 70[deg]09'32'' W.; thence to latitude
43[deg]45'35'' N., longitude 70[deg]09''50' W.; thence to latitude
43[deg]45'63'' N., longitude 70[deg]09'18'' W.; thence to latitude
43[deg]45'95'' N., longitude 70[deg]08'98'' W.; thence to latitude
43[deg]45'99'' N., longitude 70[deg]08'83'' W. DATUM: NAD 83.
(3) Drinkwater Point and Princes Point Special Anchorage. All of
the waters enclosed by a line connecting the following points: starting
south of Drinkwater Point in Yarmouth, Maine at latitude 43[deg]46'42''
N., longitude 70[deg]09'25'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]46'35'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]09'16'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]46'07'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]09'77'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]45'48'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]10'40'' W.; thence to latitude 43[deg]45'65'' N.,
longitude 70[deg]10'40'' W. DATUM: NAD 83.
Note to Sec. 110.5(f): An ordinance of the Town of Yarmouth,
Maine requires the approval of the Yarmouth Harbor Master for the
location and type of moorings placed in these special anchorage
areas. All anchorings in the areas are under the supervision of the
Yarmouth Harbor Master or other such authority as may be designated
by the authorities of the Town of Yarmouth, Maine. All moorings are
to be so placed that no moored vessel will extend beyond the limit
of the area.
Dated: April 9, 2007.
Timothy S. Sullivan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7-9969 Filed 5-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P