Safety Zone; Saugus River, Lynn, MA, 12089-12091 [E9-6186]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 54 / Monday, March 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
permitted aquaculture activities within
MBNMS and GFNMS; and (2) asking the
Governor to withdraw his objection to
prohibiting the release of introduced
species during research activities in the
MBNMS. The state’s existing review
process for aquaculture projects
provides NOAA with some level of
assurance that NOAA has an
opportunity to provide input and can
minimize the potential for harm to
sanctuary resources from an introduced
species aquaculture project. The
MBNMS permit process would allow
NOAA to issue a permit for an
introduced species research project if
environmental and legal review found
the project to be acceptable. The state
would also retain its authority to issue
permits for introduced species research
projects, or reject such a proposal. By
offering to propose regulatory
exemptions for introduced species that
are cultivated in MBNMS or GFNMS as
part of state-permitted aquaculture
activities, NOAA satisfied a condition of
the governor’s objection. As such, the
objection does not apply to these terms
of designations or the corresponding
regulations in GFNMS. However, by the
close of the review period that ended on
March 9, 2009, the state had not
accepted the compromise solution for
the MBNMS with regard to introduced
species that are released during research
activities. Therefore, the Governor’s
December 23, 2008 letter serves, in
effect, to object to the MBNMS terms of
designation for introduction of
introduced species in the state waters of
the MBNMS.
Effective Date for GFNMS Regulations
The revised regulations for the
GFNMS associated with the November
20, 2008 final rule became effective on
March 9, 2009. NOAA will not enforce
15 CFR 922.82(a)(10), the prohibition on
introducing introduced species, in state
waters of the GFNMS until it has been
amended in accordance with the
Governor’s requirement that it exempt
state-permitted aquaculture. NOAA has
agreed and committed to immediately
initiate a process to modify the
introduced species regulation to exempt
state-permitted introduced species
aquaculture in the GFNMS. As part of
this agreement, NOAA has agreed that it
will not enforce the prohibition on
introducing introduced species in the
state waters of GFNMS until a new
rulemaking process for these regulations
can take place. NOAA will promptly
commence a separate regulatory action
for public comment to determine the
appropriateness of further regulation of
introduced species in the state waters of
the GFNMS. After consideration of all
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:22 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
comments received for that proposed
action, NOAA will publish a new final
rule to address the concerns raised in
the Governor’s December 23, 2008 letter.
That regulation will become effective
soon thereafter, in accordance with
applicable federal law.
Effective Date for MBNMS Regulations
The revised regulations for the
MBNMS associated with the November
20, 2008 final rule became effective on
March 9, 2009 except for 15 CFR
922.132(a)(12), the prohibition on
introducing introduced species, which
will not take effect in state waters of the
MBNMS. Because the Governor objected
to the revised term of designation that
would have provided specific authority
to prohibit the introduction of
introduced species in MBNMS, it
cannot take effect in the state waters of
the MBNMS. The regulation still applies
and took effect in the federal waters of
the MBNMS on March 9, 2009.
The terms of designation for the
MBNMS will also reflect the Governor’s
objection to limit the application of that
specific term of designation to federal
waters. As such, paragraph l of section
1 of Article IV will read: ‘‘l. Introducing
or otherwise releasing from within or
into the Sanctuary an introduced
species. [This provision does not apply
in the area of the Sanctuary lying within
the seaward boundary of California,
because, pursuant to section 304(b) of
the Act, the Governor of California filed
an objection to this provision pursuant
to a December 23, 2008 letter.]
Effective Date for CBNMS Regulations
The revised regulations for the
CBNMS associated with the November
20, 2008 final rule became effective on
March 9, 2009. There are no state waters
in the CBNMS, and thus the terms of
designation for the sanctuary were not
subject to gubernatorial objection.
Dated: March 18, 2009.
William Corso,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean
Services and Coastal Zone Management.
[FR Doc. E9–6267 Filed 3–19–09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12089
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–1026]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Saugus River, Lynn, MA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adopting
the interim safety zone published on
December 29, 2008, as a temporary final
rule. This rule creates a safety zone for
a portion of the Saugus River in Lynn,
Massachusetts as requested by the
Massachusetts Highway Department
(MHD), to allow for vital repair work to
commence on the Route 107/Fox Hill
Bridge during the winter and spring
months. This zone is necessary to
protect mariners from the potential
hazards associated with the work being
conducted by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts in making critical repairs
to the bridge while it is closed to
transiting vessels and vehicular traffic.
DATES: Effective March 23, 2009, the
interim rule amending 33 CFR Part 165
which was published at 73 FR 79363 on
29 December, 2008 is adopted without
change as a temporary final rule.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, are part
of docket USCG–2008–1026 and are
available online by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, selecting the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, inserting USCG–
2008–1026 in the Docket ID box,
pressing Enter, and then clicking on the
item in the Docket ID column. This
material is also available for inspection
or copying at two locations: The Docket
Management Facility (M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays and United
States Coast Guard Sector Boston, 427
Commercial St, Boston, MA 02109
between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
rule, call Chief Petty Officer Eldridge
McFadden, Waterways Management at
617–223–3000. If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
12090
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 54 / Monday, March 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Regulatory Information
On December 29, 2008, we published
an interim rule with request for
comments entitled ‘‘Safety Zone, Saugus
River, Lynn, MA’’ in the Federal
Register (73 FR 79363). We did not
receive any letters commenting on the
interim rule. No public meeting was
requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
A meeting between the Coast Guard,
local lobstermen, local marina
operators, lobster purchasing agents,
and the bridge owner, MHD, was held
on September 10, 2008. The owner of
the bridge presented engineering
evidence of the poor condition of the
bridge and the need to perform major
bridge repairs during the winter months.
It was concluded that in order to keep
the bridge operating safely and reliably
until the major repairs can commence,
the number of bridge openings must be
reduced to save wear and tear on the
mechanical components. A temporary
deviation from standard bridge
operation was deemed necessary in
order to insure that the bridge continues
to operate in a safe and reliable manner
until the major repairs can be made. No
objection to the proposed temporary
deviation schedule was voiced by
interested parties. In a rulemaking
supporting that decision, the Coast
Guard published a temporary change to
the Saugus Drawbridge Operation
regulations (USCG–2008–0969) in the
Federal Register on October 15, 2008
(73 FR 60954) allowing a deviation of
the drawbridge operating guidelines.
That regulation, effective from October
15, 2008 through December 15, 2008,
allowed the bridge to remain closed,
opening on signal only on the half hour
and hour.
In addition, the long term repairs may
only take place by closing the bridge to
both vehicular and vessel traffic, and
removing portions of the bridge for
work. Massachusetts Highway
Department must bring in a large crane
barge in order to conduct work on the
bridge. This barge will be crossing the
river, effectively restricting the use of
the river. Frequently moving the barge
to allow vessel traffic to pass is contrary
to the public interest as it would further
delay the bridge repairs well into the
summer months, which are the primary
boating and fishing seasons in
Massachusetts. In order the assist the
local lobstermen, MHD proposed to
install a temporary dock system on the
downstream of the existing bridge to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:22 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
mitigate the impacts of closing the
bridge and blocking the channel with a
large work barge. During the meeting the
lobstermen indicated that the proposed
dates for the bridge closure and
waterway restriction along with the
installation of a temporary dock system
would be a good compromise that
would satisfy their needs and still allow
the rehabilitation bridge repairs to be
completed late May 2009.
An additional meeting between the
Coast Guard, town officials,
harbormaster and MHD took place on
December 4, 2008 at which time the
MHD agreed to work with affected
waterway users to remove the crane
barge restricting the waterway on no
more than six occasions during the
repair process to allow vessels, that are
able, to pass beneath the bridge while in
a closed position.
On December 10, 2008, Captain of the
Port Boston signed an Interim Rule
creating a safety zone upriver of the
Route 107/Fox Hill Bridge on the
Saugus River in Lynn, MA. That rule
was subsequently published in the
Federal Register on 29 December 2008
as (73 FR 79363). We did not receive
comments on the interim rule.
Discussion of Rule
The COTP Boston is adopting the
currently effective interim rule,
reflected in 33 CFR 165.T01–1026, as a
temporary final rule. This rule
establishes a safety zone that prohibits
vessels from coming within 50 yards of
the upriver side of 107/Fox Hill Bridge
in the Saugus River in Lynn,
Massachusetts. While this safety zone
has the practical effect of closing a
portion of the waterway, the Captain of
the Port anticipates minimal negative
impact on vessel traffic because (1)
Recreational boating traffic is limited
this particular time of year, (2) the MHD
has made alternate mooring and docking
arrangements for the fishermen which
typically dock on the up river side of
the bridge, and (3) MHD will remove the
crane barge restricting waterway access
under the bridge on at least six
occasions allowing vessel traffic, which
may do so, to pass beneath the closed
bridge. Public notifications will be made
prior to and during the effective period
via Local and Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.
Regulatory Analyses
We are adopting the interim rule as a
temporary final rule after considering
numerous statutes and executive orders
related to rulemaking. Below we
summarize our analyses based on 13 of
these statutes or executive orders.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
The Coast Guard expects the
economic impact of this temporary rule
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation is unnecessary. Although
this rule may prevent traffic from
transiting a portion of the Saugus River
during the bridge repairs, the effect of
this rule will not be significant for
several reasons: Alternate arrangements
for the offload and mooring of fishing
vessels have been made, recreational
boaters typically have their boats out of
the water at this time of year in order
to protect them from winter icing, MHD
will remove the crane barge restricting
waterway access on at least six
occasions as requested by a waterway
users (during which times vessel
operators may request permission to
transit through the safety zone
promulgated by this rule), and
continued notifications will be made to
the local maritime community by
broadcast and local notice to mariners.
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.
This rule will affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: The owners or operators of
fishing and recreational vessels
intending to transit or anchor in a
portion of the Saugus River from
midnight December 14, 2008 through
midnight on May 15, 2009. This closure
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities for the reasons described under
the Regulatory Planning and Review
section.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 54 / Monday, March 23, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we offer to assist small entities in
understanding the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking
process.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
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). 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 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
determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
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 will 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:22 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
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
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
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 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.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12091
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded this action is one of a
category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1 paragraph
(34)(g) of the Instruction.
No comments relating to
environmental issues were received in
response to the Interim Rulemaking/
Request for Comment, and no additional
environmental concerns have been
discovered in connection with this
action. The final environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
■
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, under authority of 33 U.S.C.
1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701,
3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1., the interim rule
amending 33 CFR 165.T01–1026 that
was published at 73 FR 79363 on 29
December, 2008 is adopted without
change as a temporary final rule.
■
Dated: February 17, 2009.
Gail P. Kulisch,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Boston.
[FR Doc. E9–6186 Filed 3–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 54 (Monday, March 23, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12089-12091]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6186]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2008-1026]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Saugus River, Lynn, MA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adopting the interim safety zone published
on December 29, 2008, as a temporary final rule. This rule creates a
safety zone for a portion of the Saugus River in Lynn, Massachusetts as
requested by the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD), to allow for
vital repair work to commence on the Route 107/Fox Hill Bridge during
the winter and spring months. This zone is necessary to protect
mariners from the potential hazards associated with the work being
conducted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in making critical
repairs to the bridge while it is closed to transiting vessels and
vehicular traffic.
DATES: Effective March 23, 2009, the interim rule amending 33 CFR Part
165 which was published at 73 FR 79363 on 29 December, 2008 is adopted
without change as a temporary final rule.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2008-1026 and are available online by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket Search option
on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2008-1026 in the Docket
ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in the Docket ID
column. This material is also available for inspection or copying at
two locations: The Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department
of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays and United States Coast
Guard Sector Boston, 427 Commercial St, Boston, MA 02109 between 7 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call Chief Petty Officer Eldridge McFadden, Waterways
Management at 617-223-3000. If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V.
[[Page 12090]]
Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On December 29, 2008, we published an interim rule with request for
comments entitled ``Safety Zone, Saugus River, Lynn, MA'' in the
Federal Register (73 FR 79363). We did not receive any letters
commenting on the interim rule. No public meeting was requested, and
none was held.
Background and Purpose
A meeting between the Coast Guard, local lobstermen, local marina
operators, lobster purchasing agents, and the bridge owner, MHD, was
held on September 10, 2008. The owner of the bridge presented
engineering evidence of the poor condition of the bridge and the need
to perform major bridge repairs during the winter months. It was
concluded that in order to keep the bridge operating safely and
reliably until the major repairs can commence, the number of bridge
openings must be reduced to save wear and tear on the mechanical
components. A temporary deviation from standard bridge operation was
deemed necessary in order to insure that the bridge continues to
operate in a safe and reliable manner until the major repairs can be
made. No objection to the proposed temporary deviation schedule was
voiced by interested parties. In a rulemaking supporting that decision,
the Coast Guard published a temporary change to the Saugus Drawbridge
Operation regulations (USCG-2008-0969) in the Federal Register on
October 15, 2008 (73 FR 60954) allowing a deviation of the drawbridge
operating guidelines. That regulation, effective from October 15, 2008
through December 15, 2008, allowed the bridge to remain closed, opening
on signal only on the half hour and hour.
In addition, the long term repairs may only take place by closing
the bridge to both vehicular and vessel traffic, and removing portions
of the bridge for work. Massachusetts Highway Department must bring in
a large crane barge in order to conduct work on the bridge. This barge
will be crossing the river, effectively restricting the use of the
river. Frequently moving the barge to allow vessel traffic to pass is
contrary to the public interest as it would further delay the bridge
repairs well into the summer months, which are the primary boating and
fishing seasons in Massachusetts. In order the assist the local
lobstermen, MHD proposed to install a temporary dock system on the
downstream of the existing bridge to mitigate the impacts of closing
the bridge and blocking the channel with a large work barge. During the
meeting the lobstermen indicated that the proposed dates for the bridge
closure and waterway restriction along with the installation of a
temporary dock system would be a good compromise that would satisfy
their needs and still allow the rehabilitation bridge repairs to be
completed late May 2009.
An additional meeting between the Coast Guard, town officials,
harbormaster and MHD took place on December 4, 2008 at which time the
MHD agreed to work with affected waterway users to remove the crane
barge restricting the waterway on no more than six occasions during the
repair process to allow vessels, that are able, to pass beneath the
bridge while in a closed position.
On December 10, 2008, Captain of the Port Boston signed an Interim
Rule creating a safety zone upriver of the Route 107/Fox Hill Bridge on
the Saugus River in Lynn, MA. That rule was subsequently published in
the Federal Register on 29 December 2008 as (73 FR 79363). We did not
receive comments on the interim rule.
Discussion of Rule
The COTP Boston is adopting the currently effective interim rule,
reflected in 33 CFR 165.T01-1026, as a temporary final rule. This rule
establishes a safety zone that prohibits vessels from coming within 50
yards of the upriver side of 107/Fox Hill Bridge in the Saugus River in
Lynn, Massachusetts. While this safety zone has the practical effect of
closing a portion of the waterway, the Captain of the Port anticipates
minimal negative impact on vessel traffic because (1) Recreational
boating traffic is limited this particular time of year, (2) the MHD
has made alternate mooring and docking arrangements for the fishermen
which typically dock on the up river side of the bridge, and (3) MHD
will remove the crane barge restricting waterway access under the
bridge on at least six occasions allowing vessel traffic, which may do
so, to pass beneath the closed bridge. Public notifications will be
made prior to and during the effective period via Local and Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.
Regulatory Analyses
We are adopting the interim rule as a temporary final rule after
considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to
rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these
statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this temporary rule
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
Although this rule may prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the
Saugus River during the bridge repairs, the effect of this rule will
not be significant for several reasons: Alternate arrangements for the
offload and mooring of fishing vessels have been made, recreational
boaters typically have their boats out of the water at this time of
year in order to protect them from winter icing, MHD will remove the
crane barge restricting waterway access on at least six occasions as
requested by a waterway users (during which times vessel operators may
request permission to transit through the safety zone promulgated by
this rule), and continued notifications will be made to the local
maritime community by broadcast and local notice to mariners.
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.
This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of fishing and recreational
vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the Saugus River
from midnight December 14, 2008 through midnight on May 15, 2009. This
closure will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the reasons described under the Regulatory
Planning and Review section.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
[[Page 12091]]
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture 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). 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 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 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 will 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 does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
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 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.
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 rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1 paragraph (34)(g)
of the Instruction.
No comments relating to environmental issues were received in
response to the Interim Rulemaking/Request for Comment, and no
additional environmental concerns have been discovered in connection
with this action. The final environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, under authority of 33 U.S.C.
1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat.
2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1., the
interim rule amending 33 CFR 165.T01-1026 that was published at 73 FR
79363 on 29 December, 2008 is adopted without change as a temporary
final rule.
Dated: February 17, 2009.
Gail P. Kulisch,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Boston.
[FR Doc. E9-6186 Filed 3-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
