Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, ME, Casco Bay, 13125-13126 [E8-4821]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations certain affiliated corporations), the resulting loss is treated as a loss from the sale or exchange, on the last day of the taxable year, of a capital asset. See section 165(g)(1) and paragraph (c) of this section. To abandon a security, a taxpayer must permanently surrender and relinquish all rights in the security and receive no consideration in exchange for the security. For purposes of this section, all the facts and circumstances determine whether the transaction is properly characterized as an abandonment or other type of transaction, such as an actual sale or exchange, contribution to capital, dividend, or gift. (2) Effective/applicability date. This paragraph (i) applies to any abandonment of stock or other securities after March 12, 2008. * * * * * Linda E. Stiff, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. Approved: March 3, 2008. Eric Solomon, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy). [FR Doc. E8–4862 Filed 3–11–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket No. USCG–2008–0076] RIN 1625–AA01 Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, ME, Casco Bay Coast Guard, DHS. Final rule. AGENCY: jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard hereby establishes three special anchorage areas in Yarmouth, Maine, Casco Bay. This action is necessary to facilitate safe navigation in that area and provide safe and secure anchorages for vessels not more than 65 feet in length. This action is intended to increase the safety of life and property in Yarmouth, improve the safety of anchored vessels, and provide for the overall safe and efficient flow of vessel traffic and commerce. DATES: This rule is effective April 11, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket (CGD01–07–009), and are VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Mar 11, 2008 Jkt 214001 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, MA 02110, Telephone (617) 223–8355, e-mail: John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil. Regulatory Information On May 24, 2007, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, Maine, Casco Bay’’ in the Federal Register (72 FR 29095). We received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held. Background and Purpose This rule is intended to reduce the risk of vessel collisions by creating three special anchorage areas in Yarmouth, Maine: (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, creating anchorage for approximately 350 vessels. The Coast Guard is designating the special anchorage areas in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 471. Under that statute, vessels will not be required to sound signals or exhibit anchor lights or shapes which are otherwise required by rule 30 and 35 of the Inland Navigation Rules, codified at 33 U.S.C. 2030 and 2035. The Coast Guard has defined the anchorage areas contained herein with the advice and consent of the Army Corps of Engineers, Northeast, located at 696 Virginia Rd., Concord, MA 01742. Discussion of Comments and Changes The Coast Guard received no comments for the NPRM and no changes were made to this final rule. Regulatory Evaluation 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. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This finding is based on the fact that this rule conforms to the changing needs of the Town of Yarmouth, the changing PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 13125 needs of recreational, fishing, and commercial vessels, and makes the best use of the available navigable water. This rule is in the interest of safe navigation and protection of Yarmouth and the marine environment. 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. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding this 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 John J. Mauro, at the address listed in ADDRESSES above. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 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). 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 compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have E:\FR\FM\12MRR1.SGM 12MRR1 13126 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 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 would not result in such an 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 will not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 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 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. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:40 Mar 11, 2008 Jkt 214001 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 proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast 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 this action is not likely to have a significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ section of this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 Anchorage grounds. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 110 as follows: I § 110.5 * * * * (f) Yarmouth Harbor and adjacent waters. (1) Anchorage A. All of the waters enclosed by a line from a point located at 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) Anchorage B. All of the waters enclosed by a line from a point located Northeast of Birch Point on Cousins Island at latitude 43°45′27″ N., longitude 70°09′32″ W.; thence to 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) Anchorage C. All of the waters enclosed by a line from a point located 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 paragraph (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 anchoring 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 anchorage area. * PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS Casco Bay, Maine. * * * * * 1. The authority citation for part 110 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Dated: February 21, 2008. Timothy S. Sullivan, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E8–4821 Filed 3–11–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P I 2. Amend § 110.5 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows: I PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12MRR1.SGM 12MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 12, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13125-13126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4821]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0076]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, ME, Casco Bay

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard hereby establishes three special anchorage 
areas in Yarmouth, Maine, Casco Bay. This action is necessary to 
facilitate safe navigation in that area and provide safe and secure 
anchorages for vessels not more than 65 feet in length. This action is 
intended to increase the safety of life and property in Yarmouth, 
improve the safety of anchored vessels, and provide for the overall 
safe and efficient flow of vessel traffic and commerce.

DATES: This rule is effective April 11, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket (CGD01-07-009), and are 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, MA 02110, 
Telephone (617) 223-8355, e-mail: John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil.

Regulatory Information

    On May 24, 2007, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Yarmouth, Maine, Casco Bay'' 
in the Federal Register (72 FR 29095). We received no letters 
commenting on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and 
none was held.

Background and Purpose

    This rule is intended to reduce the risk of vessel collisions by 
creating three special anchorage areas in Yarmouth, Maine: (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, creating anchorage for 
approximately 350 vessels.
    The Coast Guard is designating the special anchorage areas in 
accordance with 33 U.S.C. 471. Under that statute, vessels will not be 
required to sound signals or exhibit anchor lights or shapes which are 
otherwise required by rule 30 and 35 of the Inland Navigation Rules, 
codified at 33 U.S.C. 2030 and 2035.
    The Coast Guard has defined the anchorage areas contained herein 
with the advice and consent of the Army Corps of Engineers, Northeast, 
located at 696 Virginia Rd., Concord, MA 01742.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comments for the NPRM and no changes 
were made to this final rule.

Regulatory Evaluation

    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.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    This finding is based on the fact that this rule conforms to the 
changing needs of the Town of Yarmouth, the changing needs of 
recreational, fishing, and commercial vessels, and makes the best use 
of the available navigable water. This rule is in the interest of safe 
navigation and protection of Yarmouth and the marine environment.

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.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding this 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 John J. Mauro, at 
the address listed in ADDRESSES above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
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).

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 compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under 
that Order and have

[[Page 13126]]

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 would not result in such an 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 will not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
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 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 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 proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast 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 this action is not likely to 
have a significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary 
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' supporting this determination is 
available in the docket where indicated under the ``Public 
Participation and Request for Comments'' section of this preamble. We 
seek any comments or information that may lead to discovery of a 
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1.


0
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) Anchorage A. All of 
the waters enclosed by a line from a point located at 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) Anchorage B. All of the waters enclosed by a line from a point 
located 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) Anchorage C. All of the waters enclosed by a line from a point 
located 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 paragraph (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 anchoring 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 anchorage area.

* * * * *

    Dated: February 21, 2008.
Timothy S. Sullivan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
 [FR Doc. E8-4821 Filed 3-11-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P