Regulated Navigation Area and Safety Zone, Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Romeoville, IL, 24722-24728 [E9-12179]
Download as PDF
24722
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
to latitude 45°39′02.10″ N, longitude
122°45′21.67″ W; thence continuing
east-southeasterly to latitude
45°38′59.15″ N, longitude 122°45′16.38″
W; thence continuing southwesterly to
latitude 45°38′51.03″ N, longitude
122°45′25.57″ W; thence continuing
westerly to latitude 45°38′51.54″ N,
longitude 122°45′26.35″ W; thence
continuing northwesterly to latitude
45°39′06.27″ N, longitude 122°45′40.50″
W; thence continuing northnortheasterly to the beginning point.
(9) Upper Vancouver Anchorage. An
area enclosed by a line beginning northnortheast of Hayden Island at latitude
45°38′43.44″ N, longitude 122°44′39.50″
W; thence continuing northeasterly to
45°38′26.98″ N, longitude 122°43′25.87″
W; thence continuing east-northeasterly
to latitude 45°38′17.31″ N, longitude
122°42′54.69″ W; thence continuing
easterly to latitude 45°38′12.40″ N,
longitude 122°42′43.93″ W; thence
continuing east-southeasterly to latitude
45°37′40.53″ N, longitude 122°41′44.08″
W; thence south-southeasterly to
latitude 45°37′36.11″ N, longitude
122°41′48.86″ W; thence continuing
west-southwesterly to latitude
45°37′52.20″ N, longitude 122°42′19.50″
W; thence continuing westsouthwesterly to latitude 45°38′10.75″
N, longitude 122°43′08.89″ W; thence
continuing southwesterly to latitude
45°38′18.79″ N, longitude 122°43′44.83″
W; thence continuing westerly to
latitude 45°38′41.37″ N, longitude
122°44′40.44″ W; thence continuing
northeasterly to the point of beginning.
(10) Cottonwood Island Anchorage.
An area enclosed by a line beginning
west-southwest of Longview, WA at
latitude 46°05′56.88″ N, longitude
122°56′53.19″ W; thence continuing
easterly to latitude 46°05′14.06″ N,
longitude 122°54′45.71″ W; thence
continuing east-southeasterly to latitude
46°04′57.12″ N, longitude 122°54′12.41″
W; thence continuing southeasterly to
latitude 46°04′37.55″ N, longitude
122°53′45.80″ W; thence continuing
southeasterly to latitude 46°04′13.72″ N,
longitude 122°53′23.66″ W; thence
continuing southeasterly to latitude
46°03′54.94″ N, longitude 122°53′11.81″
W; thence continuing southerly to
latitude 46°03′34.96″ N, longitude
122°53′03.17″ W; thence continuing
westerly to latitude 46°03′32.06″ W,
longitude 122°53′19.68″ N; thence
continuing north-northwesterly to
latitude 46°03′50.84″ N, longitude
122°53′27.81″ W; thence continuing
northwesterly to latitude 46°04′08.10″
N, longitude 122°53′38.70″ W; thence
continuing northwesterly to latitude
46°04′29.41″ N, longitude 122°53′58.17″
W; thence continuing north-
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
northwesterly to latitude 46°04′49.89″
N, longitude 122°54′21.57″ W; thence
continuing northwesterly to latitude
46°05′06.95″ N, longitude 122°54′50.65″
W; thence continuing northwesterly to
latitude 46°05′49.77″ N, longitude
122°56′8.12″ W; thence continuing eastnortheasterly to the point of the
beginning.
(b) Regulations. (1) All designated
anchorages are intended for the primary
use of deep-draft vessels over 200 feet
in length.
(2) If a vessel under 200 feet in length
is anchored in a designated anchorage,
the master or person in charge of the
vessel shall:
(i) Ensure that the vessel is anchored
so as to minimize conflict with large,
deep-draft vessels utilizing or seeking to
utilize the anchorage; and
(ii) Move the vessel out of the area if
requested by the master of a large, deepdraft vessel seeking to enter or depart
the area or if directed by the Captain of
the Port.
(3) Vessels desiring to anchor in
designated anchorages shall contact the
pilot office that manages that anchorage
to request an appropriate position to
anchor. Columbia River Bar Pilots
manage Astoria North Anchorage and
Astoria South Anchorage. Columbia
River Pilots manage all designated
anchorages upriver from Astoria.
(4) No vessel may occupy a
designated anchorage for more than 30
consecutive days without permission
from the Captain of the Port.
(5) No vessel being layed-up or
dismantled or undergoing major
alterations or repairs may occupy a
designated anchorage without
permission from the Captain of the Port.
(6) No vessel carrying a Cargo of
Particular Hazard listed in § 126.10 of
this chapter may occupy a designated
anchorage without permission from the
Captain of the Port.
(7) No vessel in a condition such that
it is likely to sink or otherwise become
a hazard to the operation of other
vessels shall occupy a designated
anchorage except in an emergency, and
then only for such periods as may be
authorized by the Captain of the Port.
(8) Vessels anchoring in Astoria North
Anchorage should avoid placing their
anchor in the charted cable area.
Dated: May 8, 2009.
J.P. Currier,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9–12060 Filed 5–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–1247]
RIN 1625–AA11
Regulated Navigation Area and Safety
Zone, Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal, Romeoville, IL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
establishing a regulated navigation area
and safety zone on the Chicago Sanitary
and Ship Canal near Romeoville,
Illinois. This proposed regulated
navigation area and safety zone places
navigational and operational restrictions
on all vessels transiting the navigable
waters located adjacent to and over the
Army Corps of Engineers electrical
dispersal fish barrier system.
DATES: Comments and related material
must either be submitted to our online
docket via https://www.regulations.gov
on or before July 27, 2009 or reach the
Docket Management Facility by that
date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2008–1247 using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: 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–
0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these methods. For instructions
on submitting comments, see the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule call LT Ann Henkelman,
Waterways Management Branch, Ninth
Coast Guard District, telephone 216–
902–6288. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826.
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of all comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–1247),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online, or by fax, mail or hand
delivery, but please use only one of
these means. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing
address, an e-mail address, or a phone
number in the body of your document
so that we can contact you if we have
questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG–
2008–1247’’ in the Docket ID box, press
Enter, and then click on the balloon
shape in the Actions column. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit them by mail and
would like to know that they reached
the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your
comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, insert USCG–
2008–1247 in the Docket ID box, press
Enter, and then click on the item in the
Docket ID column. You may also visit
the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12–140 on the ground floor of
the Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one to the Docket Management
Facility 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 Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance
Prevention and Control Act of 1990, as
amended by the National Invasive
Species Act of 1996, authorized the
Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps)
to conduct a demonstration project to
identify an environmentally sound
method for preventing and reducing the
dispersal of non-indigenous aquatic
nuisance species through the Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal. The Army
Corps selected an electric barrier
because it is a non-toxic deterrent with
a proven history and also does not
overtly interfere with navigation in the
canal.
In April 2002, the Army Corps
energized a demonstration electrical
dispersal barrier located in the Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal approximately
30 miles from Lake Michigan. The
demonstration barrier, commonly
referred to as ‘‘Barrier I,’’ generates a
low-voltage electric field (a maximum of
approximately one-volt per inch) across
the canal, which connects the Illinois
River to Lake Michigan. The electric
field is created by pulsing low voltage
DC current through steel cables secured
to the bottom of the canal. Barrier I was
built to block the passage of aquatic
nuisance species, such as Asian carp,
and prevent them from moving between
the Mississippi River basin and Great
Lakes via the canal.
In the spring of 2004, a commercial
towboat operator reported an electrical
arc between a wire rope and timberhead
while making up a tow in the vicinity
of the Barrier I. During subsequent
Army Corps safety testing in January
2005, sparking was observed upon
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24723
metal-to-metal contact between two
independent barges in the barrier field.
In 2006, the Army Corps completed
construction of a second barrier,
‘‘Barrier IIA.’’ Barrier IIA was
constructed 800 to 1300 feet
downstream of the Barrier I. Barrier IIA
is designed to operate continuously at
one-volt per inch, and can operate at
higher levels. Because of its design,
Barrier IIA can generate a more
powerful electric field, over a larger area
within the Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal, than Barrier I. The potential field
strength for Barrier IIA will be up to
four times that of the Barrier I. Barrier
IIA was successfully operated for the
first time, for approximately seven
weeks in September and October 2008,
while Barrier I was taken down for
maintenance. Construction on a third
barrier (Barrier IIB) is planned; Barrier
IIB would augment the capabilities of
Barriers I and IIA.
The electric current in the water poses
a safety risk to commercial and
recreational boaters transiting the area.
The Navy Experimental Diving Unit
(NEDU) was tasked with researching
how the electric current from the
barriers would affect a human body if
immersed in the water. This
comprehensive, independent analysis of
Barriers I and IIA, conducted in 2008, at
the one-volt per inch level, found a
serious risk of injury or death to persons
immersed in the water located adjacent
to and over the barrier. The NEDU final
report concluded that the possible
effects to a human body if immersed in
the water include paralysis of body
muscles, inability to breathe, and
ventricular fibrillation. Additionally,
sparking between barges transiting the
barrier (a risk to flammable cargoes)
occurred at the one-volt per inch level.
Operating Barrier IIA at four-volts per
inch (the maximum capacity) presents a
higher risk; however, there is no data
yet to indicate how much higher.
A Safety Work Group facilitated by
the Coast Guard and in partnership with
the Army Corps and industry initially
met in February 2008, and focused on
three goals: (1) Education and public
outreach, (2) keeping people out of the
water, and (3) egress/rescue efforts.
Eleven stakeholders have regularly
attended the Safety Work Group. Key
partners include the American
Waterways Operators; Illinois River
Carriers Association; Army Corps,
Chicago District, Coast Guard Marine
Safety Unit Chicago; Coast Guard Sector
Lake Michigan; and the Ninth Coast
Guard District. During the past 12
months, the Coast Guard has hosted 5
Safety Work Group meetings with full
participation from stakeholders. The
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
24724
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Coast Guard and the Army Corps
developed regulations and safety
guidelines, with stakeholder input,
which addressed the risks and hazards
associated with operating the barriers at
the one-volt per inch level. These
regulations were published in 33 CFR
165.923, 70 FR 76692, Dec. 28, 2005,
and in a series of temporary final rules:
71 FR 4488, Jan. 27, 2006; 71 FR 19648,
Apr. 17, 2006; 73 FR 33337, Jun. 12,
2008; 73 FR 37810, Jul. 2, 2008; 73 FR
45875, Aug. 7, 2008; and 73 FR 63633,
Oct. 27, 2008.
The Army Corps notified the Coast
Guard in December 2008, that it
planned to activate Barrier IIA on a fulltime basis starting in middle to late
January 2009. Due to technical issues,
Barrier IIA was not activated until April
8, 2009. Both Barrier IIA and Barrier I
are operating at the same time.
Operation of both Barrier I and Barrier
IIA at the same time provides a back up
should one barrier cease to operate.
The Coast Guard advised the Army
Corps in December 2008, that it had no
objection to the Army Corps activating
Barrier IIA at a maximum strength of
one-volt per inch, which is the
operating strength of Barrier I. In
addition, the Coast Guard advised the
Army Corps that it did not object to the
Army Corps’ plans for additional testing
of Barrier IIA at peak field strength of
up to four-volts per inch. Peak field
strength tests are necessary to evaluate
safety risks to mariners and their vessels
when Barrier IIA is operated at a higher
voltage.
Based on the commercial significance
and successful transit history of the
Barrier I by thousands of barges since its
inception in April 2002, and Barrier IIA
during Fall 2008, the Coast Guard has
not chosen to close the waterway
despite the proven electrical discharge
hazard and additional safety concerns.
Tows spanning Barrier IIA and the coalfired power plant barge loading area just
south of the regulated navigation area
remain a concern. Accordingly, because
of the safety risks involved, it is
imperative that the Coast Guard
implements increased safety measures
for the operation of both Barriers I and
IIA.
To mitigate the safety risks created by
operation of both barriers, the Coast
Guard established a temporary interim
rule (TIR) on January 16, 2009, which
placed navigational and operational
restrictions on all vessels transiting
through a regulated navigation area
located adjacent to and over the barriers.
33 CFR 165.T09–1247, 74 FR 6357, Feb.
9, 2009. The TIR public comment period
closed on April 10, 2009. To date, no
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
comments have been received regarding
the TIR.
This notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) proposes establishment of
permanent regulations, similar to the
regulations contained in the TIR. Like
the TIR, this rule proposes placement of
navigational and operational restrictions
on all vessels transiting through a
regulated navigation area located
adjacent to and over the barriers.
Specifically, the Coast Guard proposes
requiring vessels transiting the regulated
navigation area to adhere to specified
operational and navigational
requirements. In addition, the Coast
Guard will occasionally enforce a safety
zone, which prohibits the movement of
all vessels and persons through the
electrical dispersal barriers during tests
or other periods of time that Barrier IIA
is operated at voltages higher than onevolt per inch.
To view the TIR, this NPRM, as well
as documents mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov
at any time, click on ‘‘Search for
Dockets,’’ and enter the docket number
for this rulemaking (USCG–2008–1247)
in the Docket ID box, and click enter.
You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This rule proposes removal of 33 CFR
165.923 and 33 CFR 165.T09–1247. This
rule proposes establishment of
permanent regulations, which would
place navigational and operational
restrictions on all vessel transits through
the navigable waters located adjacent to
and over the electrical dispersal barriers
located on the Chicago Sanitary and
Ship Canal. The regulated navigation
area encompasses all waters of the
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal
located between mile marker 295.0
(approximately 1.1 miles south of the
Romeo Road Bridge) and mile marker
297.5 (approximately 1.3 miles
northeast of the Romeo Road Bridge).
The requirements placed on commercial
vessels include: (1) Vessels engaged in
commercial service, as defined in 46
U.S.C. 2101(5), may not pass (meet or
overtake) in the regulated navigation
area and must make a SECURITE call
when approaching the regulated
navigation area to announce intentions;
(2) vessels engaged in commercial
service must work out passing
arrangements prior to entering the
regulated navigation area and may only
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
pass (meet or overtake) another vessel
outside of the regulated navigation area;
(3) commercial tows transiting the
regulated navigation area must be made
up with wire rope to ensure electrical
connectivity between all segments of the
tow; and (4) all up-bound and downbound barge tows that contain one or
more red flag barges must be assisted by
a bow boat until the entire tow is clear
of the regulated navigation area. The
Army Corps has informed the Coast
Guard that the Army Corps will
continue to contract bow boat assistance
for barge tows containing one or more
red flag barges through the remainder of
the current fiscal year (i.e., through
September 30, 2009). The Army Corps
has informed the Coast Guard that it
will request funds for bow boat
assistance in its fiscal year 2010 budget
request. However, because of the federal
budget process, there is currently no
way to determine if those funds will be
appropriated. In the event Army Corps
funding would cease, operators of tows
containing one or more red flag barges
that need to transit through the
regulated navigation area would incur
the cost of bow boat assistance.
Operators of tows containing one or
more red flag barges must notify the
bow boat contractor at least two hours
prior to the need for assistance. The tow
operator must then remain in contact
with the contractor after the initial call
for bow boat assistance and advise the
contractor of any delays.
Red flag barges are barges certificated
to carry, in bulk, any hazardous material
as defined in 46 CFR 150.115. Currently,
46 CFR 150.115 defines hazardous
material as:
(a) A flammable liquid as defined in
46 CFR 30.10–22 or a combustible
liquid as defined in 46 CFR 30.10–15;
(b) A material listed in Table 151.05,
Table 1 of part 153, or Table 4 of part
154 of Title 46, CFR; or
(c) A liquid, liquefied gas, or
compressed gas listed in 49 CFR
172.101.
This rule proposes additional
restrictions and operating requirements
on all vessels within a smaller portion
of the regulated navigation area,
specifically, the waters between the
Romeo Road Bridge (approximate mile
marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7
(aerial pipeline located approximately
0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road
Bridge). Within this smaller area, this
rule proposes the prohibition of vessel
loitering, mooring or laying up on the
right or left descending banks, or
making or breaking tows on the waters
between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and
mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
located approximately 0.52 miles north
east of Romeo Road Bridge). In addition,
vessels may only enter the waters
between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and
mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north
east of Romeo Road Bridge) for the sole
purpose of transiting to the other side
and must maintain headway throughout
the transit. All vessels and persons are
prohibited from dredging, laying cable,
dragging, fishing, conducting salvage
operations, or any other activity, which
could disturb the bottom of the canal in
the area located between the Romeo
Road Bridge (approximate mile marker
296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52
miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
The rule also proposes that all persons
on open decks of a vessel engaged in
commercial service must wear a Coast
Guard approved Type I personal
flotation device while on the waters
between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and
mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north
east of Romeo Road Bridge). All persons
on recreational vessels that are
propelled or controlled by machinery,
sails, oars, paddles, poles or another
vessel must wear the Coast Guard
approved personal flotation device
(PFD) that is required to be onboard by
33 CFR Part 175, while on the waters
between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and
mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north
east of Romeo Road Bridge).
These restrictions are necessary for
safe navigation of the regulated
navigation area and to ensure the safety
of vessels and their personnel as well as
the public’s safety due to the electrical
discharges noted during safety tests
conducted by the Army Corps.
Deviation from this rule would be
prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Commander, Ninth
Coast Guard District, or his designated
representatives. The Commander, Ninth
Coast Guard District, will designate
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan and
Commanding Officer, Marine Safety
Unit Chicago, as his designated
representatives for the purposes of the
proposed regulated navigation area.
A safety zone would be enforced
during tests or other periods of time that
Barrier IIA is operated at voltages higher
than one volt per inch. This proposed
safety zone, which would encompass all
the waters of the Chicago Sanitary and
Ship Canal located between mile marker
296.0 (approximately 958 feet south of
the Romeo Road Bridge) and mile
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline located
approximately 0.52 miles north east of
Romeo Road Bridge), would be enforced
by the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan, for such times before, during,
and after barrier testing as he or she
deems necessary to protect mariners and
vessels from damage or injury. The
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan
would cause notice of enforcement or
suspension of enforcement of this safety
zone to be made by all appropriate
means to effect the widest publicity
among the affected segments of the
public. Such means of notification will
include, but will not be limited to,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local
Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan would issue a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying
the public when enforcement of the
safety zone is suspended. In addition,
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan
maintains a telephone line that is
manned 24 hours a day, seven days a
week. The public may obtain
information concerning enforcement of
the safety zone by contacting the
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan via
the Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan
Command Center at 414–747–7182.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
Nevertheless, we have prepared a
preliminary Regulatory Analysis of
potential costs and benefits which is
available in the docket where indicated
under the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble. A summary of the analysis
follows:
This proposed rule would mitigate
safety risks associated with the
electrical fish barrier system in the
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal near
Romeoville, Illinois. The Army Corps
operates and maintains the fish barrier.
Navigational and operational
restrictions are necessary for all vessels
transiting through the navigable waters
located adjacent to and over the barriers
in order to mitigate safety risks.
The proposed rule would establish a
permanent regulated navigation area for
navigable waters adjacent to and over
the electrical fish barrier. The
rulemaking would also require certain
provisions while transiting the regulated
navigation area, including bow boat
assistance for tows with red flag barges.
Other proposed requirements of this
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24725
rulemaking clarify navigation
requirements that are normal industry
practice (e.g., commercial tows using
wire ropes) or have been in existence
since 2002 as a result of the Army
Corps’ development, operation, and
maintenance of the electrical fish
barrier. See the ‘‘Background and
Purpose’’ and ‘‘Discussion of Proposed
rule’’ sections for additional details on
the requirements.
This proposed rule would affect
traffic transiting over the electrical fish
barrier and surrounding waters. The
Army Corps maintains data about the
commercial vessels using the Lockport
Lock and Dam, which provides access to
the proposed regulated navigation area.
During 2007, the commercial traffic
through the Lockport Lock consisted of
147 towing vessels and 13,411 barges.
Of those, 100 towing vessels and 2,246
barges were handling red flag cargo.
There were 983 lockages involving red
flag barges in 2007.
The potential cost associated with this
proposed rule would be for bow boat
assistance. The Army Corps currently
covers this cost through contract
funding. In the event that such funding
would cease, operators needing to
transit the regulated navigation area
with one or more red flag barges would
incur a cost of approximately $850 per
one-way transit (i.e., based on current
Army Corps funding estimates).
If bow boat assistance funding were to
cease, we estimate the undiscounted
annual recurring cost to industry to be
$835,550 (i.e., 983 potential red flag
transits × $850 for bow boat assistance
fee). Based on this potential annual cost,
we estimate the total present value 10year (2010–2019) cost to industry of this
proposed rule to be approximately $5.9
million at a seven percent discount rate
and $7.1 million at a three percent
discount rate.
We expect this proposed rule would
mitigate the marine safety risks as a
result of the permanent operation and
maintenance of the electrical fish
barriers. This rulemaking would also
allow commerce to continue through the
waters adjacent to or over these barriers.
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.
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
24726
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
An Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) discussing the impact
of this proposed rule on small entities
is available in the docket where
indicated under the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ section of this preamble.
From our analysis, we found the
proposed rule would affect an estimated
23 entities, of which 10 are considered
small entities according to SBA size
standards. If operators incur the direct
cost of bow boat assistance, we estimate
five (or fifty percent) of the affected
small entities would incur a cost impact
of less than or equal to one percent of
revenue and eight (or eighty percent) of
the affected small entities would incur
a cost impact of less than or equal to
three percent of revenue.
At this time, 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. 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 to the
docket as detailed under ADDRESSES. In
your comment explain why, how, and to
what degree you think this proposed
rule would have an economic impact on
you.
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 the rule so that they may
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 LT Ann
Henkelman, Waterways Management
Branch, Ninth Coast Guard District,
1240 East Ninth Street, Cleveland, OH
44199; 216–902–6288. 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 substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 rule would not result in
such 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 concern an environmental risk
to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty
rights of Native American Tribes.
Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed
to working with Tribal Governments to
implement local policies and to mitigate
tribal concerns. We have determined
that these regulations and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible.
We have also determined that this
proposed 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.
Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
questions concerning the provisions of
this proposed rule or options for
compliance are encouraged to contact
the point of contact listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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
procedure; and related management
system 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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01
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 made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore, this
rule is categorically excluded, under
section 2.B.2. Figure 2–1, paragraph
34(g), of the Instruction and neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required. This rule involves the
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
establishing, disestablishing, or
changing regulated navigation areas and
security or safety zones. 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 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 3306, 3703 and Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–
6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
§ 165.923
[Removed]
2. Remove § 165.923.
3. Add § 165.924 to read as follows:
§ 165.924 Regulated Navigation Area and
Safety Zone, Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal, Romeoville, IL
(a) Regulated Navigation Area. The
following is a Regulated Navigation
Area: All waters of the Chicago Sanitary
and Ship Canal, Romeoville, IL, located
between mile marker 295.0
(approximately 1.1 miles south of the
Romeo Road Bridge) and mile marker
297.5 (approximately 1.3 miles
northeast of the Romeo Road Bridge).
(1) Definitions. The following
definitions apply to this section:
Bow boat means a towing vessel
capable of providing positive control of
the bow of a tow containing one or more
barges, while transiting the regulated
navigation area. The bow boat must be
capable of preventing a tow containing
one or more barges from coming into
contact with the shore and other moored
vessels.
Designated representatives means the
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan and
Commanding Officer, Marine Safety
Unit Chicago.
Hazardous material means any
material as defined in 46 CFR 150.115.
On-scene representative means any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been designated
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
by the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan to act on his behalf.
Red flag barge means any barge
certificated to carry any hazardous
material in bulk.
(2) Regulations. (i) The general
regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.13
apply.
(ii) All up-bound and down-bound
barge tows that contain one or more red
flag barges transiting through the
regulated navigation area must be
assisted by a bow boat until the entire
tow is clear of the regulated navigation
area.
(iii) Vessels engaged in commercial
service, as defined in 46 U.S.C 2101(5),
may not pass (meet or overtake) in the
regulated navigation area and must
make a SECURITE call when
approaching the regulated navigation
area to announce intentions. Vessels
engaged in commercial service must
work out passing arrangements prior to
entering the regulated navigation area
and may only pass (meet or overtake)
another vessel outside of the regulated
navigation area.
(iv) Commercial tows transiting the
regulated navigation area must be made
up with wire rope to ensure electrical
connectivity between all segments of the
tow.
(v) All vessels are prohibited from
loitering between the Romeo Road
Bridge (approximate mile marker
296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52
miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(vi) Vessels may enter the waters
between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and
mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north
east of Romeo Road Bridge) for the sole
purpose of transiting to the other side
and must maintain headway throughout
the transit. All vessels and persons are
prohibited from dredging, laying cable,
dragging, fishing, conducting salvage
operations, or any other activity, which
could disturb the bottom of the canal in
the area located between the Romeo
Road Bridge (approximate mile marker
296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52
miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(vii) All persons on open decks of a
vessel engaged in commercial service
must wear a Coast Guard approved Type
I personal flotation device (PFD) while
in the waters between the Romeo Road
Bridge (approximate mile marker
296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52
miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
All persons on recreational vessels that
are propelled or controlled by
machinery, sails, oars, paddles, poles or
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24727
another vessel must wear the Coast
Guard approved PFD that is required to
be onboard by 33 CFR Part 175, while
on the waters between the Romeo Road
Bridge (approximate mile marker
296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52
miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(viii) Vessels may not moor or lay up
on the right or left descending banks of
the waters between the Romeo Road
Bridge (approximate mile marker
296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52
miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(ix) Towboats may not make or break
tows if any portion of the towboat or
tow is located in the waters between the
Romeo Road Bridge (approximate mile
marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7
(aerial pipeline located approximately
0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road
Bridge).
(3) Compliance. All persons and
vessels must comply with this section
and any additional instructions or
orders of the Ninth Coast Guard District
Commander, or his designated
representatives.
(4) Waiver. For any vessel, the Ninth
Coast Guard District Commander, or his
designated representatives, may waive
any of the requirements of this section,
upon finding that operational
conditions or other circumstances are
such that application of this section is
unnecessary or impractical for the
purposes of vessel and mariner safety.
(b) Safety Zone. (1) The following area
is a safety zone: All waters of the
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal
located between mile marker 296.0
(approximately 958 feet south of the
Romeo Road Bridge) and mile marker
296.7 (aerial pipeline located
approximately 0.52 miles north east of
Romeo Road Bridge).
(2) Notice of enforcement or
suspension of enforcement. The Captain
of the Port Lake Michigan will enforce
the safety zone established by this
section only upon notice. Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan will cause notice of
the enforcement of this safety zone to be
made by all appropriate means to effect
the widest publicity among the affected
segments of the public including
publication in the Federal Register as
practicable, in accordance with 33 CFR
165.7(a). Such means of notification
may also include, but are not limited to,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local
Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan will issue a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local
Notice to Mariners notifying the public
when enforcement of these safety zones
is suspended.
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
24728
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(3) Regulations. (i) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, or
his on-scene representative.
(ii) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Lake Michigan or his on-scene
representative.
(iii) The on-scene representative of
the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan
may be aboard either a Coast Guard or
Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his
on-scene representative may be
contacted via VHF Channel 16.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan or his on-scene representative
to obtain permission to do so. Vessel
operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his
on-scene representative.
Dated: May 12, 2009.
D.R. Callahan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Ninth Coast Guard District Acting.
[FR Doc. E9–12179 Filed 5–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter VI
Negotiated Rulemaking Committees;
Establishment
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary
Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Establishment of negotiated
rulemaking committees; and notice of
public hearings.
SUMMARY: We announce our intention to
establish one or more negotiated
rulemaking committees to prepare
proposed regulations under Title IV of
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended (HEA). The committees will
include representatives of organizations
or groups with interests that are
significantly affected by the subject
matter of the proposed regulations. We
also announce three public hearings, at
which interested parties may suggest
additional issues that should be
considered for action by the negotiating
committees. In addition, for anyone
unable to attend a public hearing, we
announce that the Department will
accept written comments.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
The Department will also be
conducting forums after each of the
three hearings to discuss (1) how
changes in the Department’s financial
aid communications and processes
(including the Free Application for
Federal Student Aid (FAFSA)) could
improve college planning, preparation
and access, and (2) how best to leverage
Federal postsecondary programs to
foster student educational persistence
and degree attainment.
DATES: The dates, times, and locations
of the public hearings are listed under
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this notice. We must receive written
comments suggesting issues that should
be considered for action by the
negotiating committees on or before
June 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Please send written
comments to Wendy Macias, U.S.
Department of Education, 1990 K Street,
NW., Room 8017, Washington, DC
20006, or by fax to Wendy Macias at
(202) 502–7874. You may also e-mail
your comments to negreg09@ed.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about the public hearings
and forums, go to https://www.ed.gov/
policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/
2009/negreg-summerfall.html or
contact: Mary Miller, U.S. Department
of Education, 1990 K Street, NW., Room
8066, Washington, DC 20006.
Telephone: (202) 502–7824. You may
also e-mail your questions about the
public hearings to: Mary.Miller@ed.gov.
For information about negotiated
rulemaking in general, see The
Negotiated Rulemaking Process for Title
IV Regulations, Frequently Asked
Questions at https://www.ed.gov/policy/
highered/reg/hearulemaking/hea08/negreg-faq.html. For further information
about negotiated rulemaking contact:
Wendy Macias, U.S. Department of
Education, 1990 K Street, NW., Room
8017, Washington, DC 20006.
Telephone (202) 502–7526. You may
also e-mail your questions about
negotiated rulemaking to:
Wendy.Macias@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at
1–800–877–8339.
Individuals with disabilities can
obtain this document in an accessible
format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) by
contacting the person responsible for
information about the public hearings.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
492 of the HEA requires that, before
publishing any proposed regulations to
implement programs authorized under
Title IV of the HEA, the Secretary obtain
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
public involvement in the development
of the proposed regulations. After
obtaining advice and recommendations
from the public, the Secretary uses a
negotiated rulemaking process to
develop the proposed regulations.
We announce our intent to develop
proposed regulations by following the
negotiated rulemaking procedures in
section 492 of the HEA. We intend to
select participants for the negotiated
rulemaking committees from nominees
of the organizations and groups that
represent the interests significantly
affected by the proposed regulations. To
the extent possible, we will select, from
the nominees, individual negotiators
who reflect the diversity among program
participants, in accordance with section
492(b)(1) of the HEA.
Regulatory Issues
We intend to convene one committee
to develop proposed regulations
governing foreign schools, including the
implementation of the changes made to
the HEA by the Higher Education
Opportunity Act (HEOA), Public Law
110–315, that affect foreign schools.
We intend to convene at least one
other committee to develop proposed
regulations to maintain or improve
program integrity in the Title IV, HEA
programs, relating to topics such as the
following:
• Satisfactory academic progress.
• Incentive compensation paid by
institutions to persons or entities
engaged in student recruiting or
admission activities.
• Gainful employment in a
recognized occupation.
• State authorization as a component
of institutional eligibility.
• Definition of a credit hour, for
purposes of determining program
eligibility status, particularly in the
context of awarding Pell Grants.
• Verification of information
included on student aid applications.
• Definition of a high school diploma
as a condition of receiving Federal
student aid.
After a complete review of the public
comments presented at the public
hearings and from the written
submissions, we will publish a
subsequent notice (or notices)
announcing the specific subject areas for
which we intend to establish negotiated
rulemaking committees, and a request
for nominations for individual
negotiators for those committees who
represent the interests significantly
affected by the proposed regulations.
Public Hearings
We will hold three public hearings for
interested parties to discuss the agenda
E:\FR\FM\26MYP1.SGM
26MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 26, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24722-24728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12179]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2008-1247]
RIN 1625-AA11
Regulated Navigation Area and Safety Zone, Chicago Sanitary and
Ship Canal, Romeoville, IL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a regulated navigation
area and safety zone on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal near
Romeoville, Illinois. This proposed regulated navigation area and
safety zone places navigational and operational restrictions on all
vessels transiting the navigable waters located adjacent to and over
the Army Corps of Engineers electrical dispersal fish barrier system.
DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via https://www.regulations.gov on or before July 27, 2009
or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2008-1247 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. For
instructions on submitting comments, see the ``Public Participation and
Request for Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule call LT Ann Henkelman, Waterways Management Branch, Ninth Coast
Guard District, telephone 216-902-6288. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
[[Page 24723]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2008-1247), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of
these means. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing
address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your
document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert ``USCG-2008-1247'' in the Docket ID box, press Enter,
and then click on the balloon shape in the Actions column. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert USCG-2008-1247 in the Docket ID box, press Enter, and
then click on the item in the Docket ID column. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one to the Docket Management Facility 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 Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of
1990, as amended by the National Invasive Species Act of 1996,
authorized the Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) to conduct a
demonstration project to identify an environmentally sound method for
preventing and reducing the dispersal of non-indigenous aquatic
nuisance species through the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. The Army
Corps selected an electric barrier because it is a non-toxic deterrent
with a proven history and also does not overtly interfere with
navigation in the canal.
In April 2002, the Army Corps energized a demonstration electrical
dispersal barrier located in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal
approximately 30 miles from Lake Michigan. The demonstration barrier,
commonly referred to as ``Barrier I,'' generates a low-voltage electric
field (a maximum of approximately one-volt per inch) across the canal,
which connects the Illinois River to Lake Michigan. The electric field
is created by pulsing low voltage DC current through steel cables
secured to the bottom of the canal. Barrier I was built to block the
passage of aquatic nuisance species, such as Asian carp, and prevent
them from moving between the Mississippi River basin and Great Lakes
via the canal.
In the spring of 2004, a commercial towboat operator reported an
electrical arc between a wire rope and timberhead while making up a tow
in the vicinity of the Barrier I. During subsequent Army Corps safety
testing in January 2005, sparking was observed upon metal-to-metal
contact between two independent barges in the barrier field.
In 2006, the Army Corps completed construction of a second barrier,
``Barrier IIA.'' Barrier IIA was constructed 800 to 1300 feet
downstream of the Barrier I. Barrier IIA is designed to operate
continuously at one-volt per inch, and can operate at higher levels.
Because of its design, Barrier IIA can generate a more powerful
electric field, over a larger area within the Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal, than Barrier I. The potential field strength for Barrier IIA
will be up to four times that of the Barrier I. Barrier IIA was
successfully operated for the first time, for approximately seven weeks
in September and October 2008, while Barrier I was taken down for
maintenance. Construction on a third barrier (Barrier IIB) is planned;
Barrier IIB would augment the capabilities of Barriers I and IIA.
The electric current in the water poses a safety risk to commercial
and recreational boaters transiting the area. The Navy Experimental
Diving Unit (NEDU) was tasked with researching how the electric current
from the barriers would affect a human body if immersed in the water.
This comprehensive, independent analysis of Barriers I and IIA,
conducted in 2008, at the one-volt per inch level, found a serious risk
of injury or death to persons immersed in the water located adjacent to
and over the barrier. The NEDU final report concluded that the possible
effects to a human body if immersed in the water include paralysis of
body muscles, inability to breathe, and ventricular fibrillation.
Additionally, sparking between barges transiting the barrier (a risk to
flammable cargoes) occurred at the one-volt per inch level. Operating
Barrier IIA at four-volts per inch (the maximum capacity) presents a
higher risk; however, there is no data yet to indicate how much higher.
A Safety Work Group facilitated by the Coast Guard and in
partnership with the Army Corps and industry initially met in February
2008, and focused on three goals: (1) Education and public outreach,
(2) keeping people out of the water, and (3) egress/rescue efforts.
Eleven stakeholders have regularly attended the Safety Work Group. Key
partners include the American Waterways Operators; Illinois River
Carriers Association; Army Corps, Chicago District, Coast Guard Marine
Safety Unit Chicago; Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan; and the Ninth
Coast Guard District. During the past 12 months, the Coast Guard has
hosted 5 Safety Work Group meetings with full participation from
stakeholders. The
[[Page 24724]]
Coast Guard and the Army Corps developed regulations and safety
guidelines, with stakeholder input, which addressed the risks and
hazards associated with operating the barriers at the one-volt per inch
level. These regulations were published in 33 CFR 165.923, 70 FR 76692,
Dec. 28, 2005, and in a series of temporary final rules: 71 FR 4488,
Jan. 27, 2006; 71 FR 19648, Apr. 17, 2006; 73 FR 33337, Jun. 12, 2008;
73 FR 37810, Jul. 2, 2008; 73 FR 45875, Aug. 7, 2008; and 73 FR 63633,
Oct. 27, 2008.
The Army Corps notified the Coast Guard in December 2008, that it
planned to activate Barrier IIA on a full-time basis starting in middle
to late January 2009. Due to technical issues, Barrier IIA was not
activated until April 8, 2009. Both Barrier IIA and Barrier I are
operating at the same time. Operation of both Barrier I and Barrier IIA
at the same time provides a back up should one barrier cease to
operate.
The Coast Guard advised the Army Corps in December 2008, that it
had no objection to the Army Corps activating Barrier IIA at a maximum
strength of one-volt per inch, which is the operating strength of
Barrier I. In addition, the Coast Guard advised the Army Corps that it
did not object to the Army Corps' plans for additional testing of
Barrier IIA at peak field strength of up to four-volts per inch. Peak
field strength tests are necessary to evaluate safety risks to mariners
and their vessels when Barrier IIA is operated at a higher voltage.
Based on the commercial significance and successful transit history
of the Barrier I by thousands of barges since its inception in April
2002, and Barrier IIA during Fall 2008, the Coast Guard has not chosen
to close the waterway despite the proven electrical discharge hazard
and additional safety concerns. Tows spanning Barrier IIA and the coal-
fired power plant barge loading area just south of the regulated
navigation area remain a concern. Accordingly, because of the safety
risks involved, it is imperative that the Coast Guard implements
increased safety measures for the operation of both Barriers I and IIA.
To mitigate the safety risks created by operation of both barriers,
the Coast Guard established a temporary interim rule (TIR) on January
16, 2009, which placed navigational and operational restrictions on all
vessels transiting through a regulated navigation area located adjacent
to and over the barriers. 33 CFR 165.T09-1247, 74 FR 6357, Feb. 9,
2009. The TIR public comment period closed on April 10, 2009. To date,
no comments have been received regarding the TIR.
This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposes establishment of
permanent regulations, similar to the regulations contained in the TIR.
Like the TIR, this rule proposes placement of navigational and
operational restrictions on all vessels transiting through a regulated
navigation area located adjacent to and over the barriers.
Specifically, the Coast Guard proposes requiring vessels transiting the
regulated navigation area to adhere to specified operational and
navigational requirements. In addition, the Coast Guard will
occasionally enforce a safety zone, which prohibits the movement of all
vessels and persons through the electrical dispersal barriers during
tests or other periods of time that Barrier IIA is operated at voltages
higher than one-volt per inch.
To view the TIR, this NPRM, as well as documents mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and
enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-1247) in the
Docket ID box, and click enter. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This rule proposes removal of 33 CFR 165.923 and 33 CFR 165.T09-
1247. This rule proposes establishment of permanent regulations, which
would place navigational and operational restrictions on all vessel
transits through the navigable waters located adjacent to and over the
electrical dispersal barriers located on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal. The regulated navigation area encompasses all waters of the
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal located between mile marker 295.0
(approximately 1.1 miles south of the Romeo Road Bridge) and mile
marker 297.5 (approximately 1.3 miles northeast of the Romeo Road
Bridge). The requirements placed on commercial vessels include: (1)
Vessels engaged in commercial service, as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(5),
may not pass (meet or overtake) in the regulated navigation area and
must make a SECURITE call when approaching the regulated navigation
area to announce intentions; (2) vessels engaged in commercial service
must work out passing arrangements prior to entering the regulated
navigation area and may only pass (meet or overtake) another vessel
outside of the regulated navigation area; (3) commercial tows
transiting the regulated navigation area must be made up with wire rope
to ensure electrical connectivity between all segments of the tow; and
(4) all up-bound and down-bound barge tows that contain one or more red
flag barges must be assisted by a bow boat until the entire tow is
clear of the regulated navigation area. The Army Corps has informed the
Coast Guard that the Army Corps will continue to contract bow boat
assistance for barge tows containing one or more red flag barges
through the remainder of the current fiscal year (i.e., through
September 30, 2009). The Army Corps has informed the Coast Guard that
it will request funds for bow boat assistance in its fiscal year 2010
budget request. However, because of the federal budget process, there
is currently no way to determine if those funds will be appropriated.
In the event Army Corps funding would cease, operators of tows
containing one or more red flag barges that need to transit through the
regulated navigation area would incur the cost of bow boat assistance.
Operators of tows containing one or more red flag barges must notify
the bow boat contractor at least two hours prior to the need for
assistance. The tow operator must then remain in contact with the
contractor after the initial call for bow boat assistance and advise
the contractor of any delays.
Red flag barges are barges certificated to carry, in bulk, any
hazardous material as defined in 46 CFR 150.115. Currently, 46 CFR
150.115 defines hazardous material as:
(a) A flammable liquid as defined in 46 CFR 30.10-22 or a
combustible liquid as defined in 46 CFR 30.10-15;
(b) A material listed in Table 151.05, Table 1 of part 153, or
Table 4 of part 154 of Title 46, CFR; or
(c) A liquid, liquefied gas, or compressed gas listed in 49 CFR
172.101.
This rule proposes additional restrictions and operating
requirements on all vessels within a smaller portion of the regulated
navigation area, specifically, the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
Within this smaller area, this rule proposes the prohibition of vessel
loitering, mooring or laying up on the right or left descending banks,
or making or breaking tows on the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
[[Page 24725]]
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge). In
addition, vessels may only enter the waters between the Romeo Road
Bridge (approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial
pipeline located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road
Bridge) for the sole purpose of transiting to the other side and must
maintain headway throughout the transit. All vessels and persons are
prohibited from dredging, laying cable, dragging, fishing, conducting
salvage operations, or any other activity, which could disturb the
bottom of the canal in the area located between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge). The
rule also proposes that all persons on open decks of a vessel engaged
in commercial service must wear a Coast Guard approved Type I personal
flotation device while on the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge). All
persons on recreational vessels that are propelled or controlled by
machinery, sails, oars, paddles, poles or another vessel must wear the
Coast Guard approved personal flotation device (PFD) that is required
to be onboard by 33 CFR Part 175, while on the waters between the Romeo
Road Bridge (approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7
(aerial pipeline located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo
Road Bridge).
These restrictions are necessary for safe navigation of the
regulated navigation area and to ensure the safety of vessels and their
personnel as well as the public's safety due to the electrical
discharges noted during safety tests conducted by the Army Corps.
Deviation from this rule would be prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District, or his
designated representatives. The Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District,
will designate Captain of the Port Lake Michigan and Commanding
Officer, Marine Safety Unit Chicago, as his designated representatives
for the purposes of the proposed regulated navigation area.
A safety zone would be enforced during tests or other periods of
time that Barrier IIA is operated at voltages higher than one volt per
inch. This proposed safety zone, which would encompass all the waters
of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal located between mile marker
296.0 (approximately 958 feet south of the Romeo Road Bridge) and mile
marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline located approximately 0.52 miles north
east of Romeo Road Bridge), would be enforced by the Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan, for such times before, during, and after barrier
testing as he or she deems necessary to protect mariners and vessels
from damage or injury. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan would
cause notice of enforcement or suspension of enforcement of this safety
zone to be made by all appropriate means to effect the widest publicity
among the affected segments of the public. Such means of notification
will include, but will not be limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners
and Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan
would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public when
enforcement of the safety zone is suspended. In addition, Captain of
the Port Lake Michigan maintains a telephone line that is manned 24
hours a day, seven days a week. The public may obtain information
concerning enforcement of the safety zone by contacting the Captain of
the Port Lake Michigan via the Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan Command
Center at 414-747-7182.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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. Nevertheless, we have
prepared a preliminary Regulatory Analysis of potential costs and
benefits which is available in the docket where indicated under the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. A summary of the analysis follows:
This proposed rule would mitigate safety risks associated with the
electrical fish barrier system in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal
near Romeoville, Illinois. The Army Corps operates and maintains the
fish barrier. Navigational and operational restrictions are necessary
for all vessels transiting through the navigable waters located
adjacent to and over the barriers in order to mitigate safety risks.
The proposed rule would establish a permanent regulated navigation
area for navigable waters adjacent to and over the electrical fish
barrier. The rulemaking would also require certain provisions while
transiting the regulated navigation area, including bow boat assistance
for tows with red flag barges. Other proposed requirements of this
rulemaking clarify navigation requirements that are normal industry
practice (e.g., commercial tows using wire ropes) or have been in
existence since 2002 as a result of the Army Corps' development,
operation, and maintenance of the electrical fish barrier. See the
``Background and Purpose'' and ``Discussion of Proposed rule'' sections
for additional details on the requirements.
This proposed rule would affect traffic transiting over the
electrical fish barrier and surrounding waters. The Army Corps
maintains data about the commercial vessels using the Lockport Lock and
Dam, which provides access to the proposed regulated navigation area.
During 2007, the commercial traffic through the Lockport Lock consisted
of 147 towing vessels and 13,411 barges. Of those, 100 towing vessels
and 2,246 barges were handling red flag cargo. There were 983 lockages
involving red flag barges in 2007.
The potential cost associated with this proposed rule would be for
bow boat assistance. The Army Corps currently covers this cost through
contract funding. In the event that such funding would cease, operators
needing to transit the regulated navigation area with one or more red
flag barges would incur a cost of approximately $850 per one-way
transit (i.e., based on current Army Corps funding estimates).
If bow boat assistance funding were to cease, we estimate the
undiscounted annual recurring cost to industry to be $835,550 (i.e.,
983 potential red flag transits x $850 for bow boat assistance fee).
Based on this potential annual cost, we estimate the total present
value 10-year (2010-2019) cost to industry of this proposed rule to be
approximately $5.9 million at a seven percent discount rate and $7.1
million at a three percent discount rate.
We expect this proposed rule would mitigate the marine safety risks
as a result of the permanent operation and maintenance of the
electrical fish barriers. This rulemaking would also allow commerce to
continue through the waters adjacent to or over these barriers.
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.
[[Page 24726]]
An Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) discussing the
impact of this proposed rule on small entities is available in the
docket where indicated under the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' section of this preamble.
From our analysis, we found the proposed rule would affect an
estimated 23 entities, of which 10 are considered small entities
according to SBA size standards. If operators incur the direct cost of
bow boat assistance, we estimate five (or fifty percent) of the
affected small entities would incur a cost impact of less than or equal
to one percent of revenue and eight (or eighty percent) of the affected
small entities would incur a cost impact of less than or equal to three
percent of revenue.
At this time, 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. 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 to the docket as detailed under ADDRESSES. In
your comment explain why, how, and to what degree you think this
proposed rule would have an economic impact on you.
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 the rule so that they may 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 LT Ann Henkelman, Waterways Management
Branch, Ninth Coast Guard District, 1240 East Ninth Street, Cleveland,
OH 44199; 216-902-6288. 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 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 rule would not result in such 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 concern an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American
Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal
Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal
concerns. We have determined that these regulations and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this
proposed 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. Nevertheless, Indian
Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this proposed
rule or options for compliance are encouraged to contact the point of
contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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 procedure; and related management
system 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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, this rule is
categorically excluded, under section 2.B.2. Figure 2-1, paragraph
34(g), of the Instruction and neither an environmental assessment nor
an environmental impact statement is required. This rule involves the
[[Page 24727]]
establishing, disestablishing, or changing regulated navigation areas
and security or safety zones. 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 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 3306, 3703
and Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6,
and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
Sec. 165.923 [Removed]
2. Remove Sec. 165.923.
3. Add Sec. 165.924 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.924 Regulated Navigation Area and Safety Zone, Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal, Romeoville, IL
(a) Regulated Navigation Area. The following is a Regulated
Navigation Area: All waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal,
Romeoville, IL, located between mile marker 295.0 (approximately 1.1
miles south of the Romeo Road Bridge) and mile marker 297.5
(approximately 1.3 miles northeast of the Romeo Road Bridge).
(1) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
Bow boat means a towing vessel capable of providing positive
control of the bow of a tow containing one or more barges, while
transiting the regulated navigation area. The bow boat must be capable
of preventing a tow containing one or more barges from coming into
contact with the shore and other moored vessels.
Designated representatives means the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan and Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Unit Chicago.
Hazardous material means any material as defined in 46 CFR 150.115.
On-scene representative means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant
or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port
Lake Michigan to act on his behalf.
Red flag barge means any barge certificated to carry any hazardous
material in bulk.
(2) Regulations. (i) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.13 apply.
(ii) All up-bound and down-bound barge tows that contain one or
more red flag barges transiting through the regulated navigation area
must be assisted by a bow boat until the entire tow is clear of the
regulated navigation area.
(iii) Vessels engaged in commercial service, as defined in 46 U.S.C
2101(5), may not pass (meet or overtake) in the regulated navigation
area and must make a SECURITE call when approaching the regulated
navigation area to announce intentions. Vessels engaged in commercial
service must work out passing arrangements prior to entering the
regulated navigation area and may only pass (meet or overtake) another
vessel outside of the regulated navigation area.
(iv) Commercial tows transiting the regulated navigation area must
be made up with wire rope to ensure electrical connectivity between all
segments of the tow.
(v) All vessels are prohibited from loitering between the Romeo
Road Bridge (approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7
(aerial pipeline located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo
Road Bridge).
(vi) Vessels may enter the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge) for
the sole purpose of transiting to the other side and must maintain
headway throughout the transit. All vessels and persons are prohibited
from dredging, laying cable, dragging, fishing, conducting salvage
operations, or any other activity, which could disturb the bottom of
the canal in the area located between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(vii) All persons on open decks of a vessel engaged in commercial
service must wear a Coast Guard approved Type I personal flotation
device (PFD) while in the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge). All
persons on recreational vessels that are propelled or controlled by
machinery, sails, oars, paddles, poles or another vessel must wear the
Coast Guard approved PFD that is required to be onboard by 33 CFR Part
175, while on the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge (approximate
mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline located
approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(viii) Vessels may not moor or lay up on the right or left
descending banks of the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(ix) Towboats may not make or break tows if any portion of the
towboat or tow is located in the waters between the Romeo Road Bridge
(approximate mile marker 296.18) and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline
located approximately 0.52 miles north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(3) Compliance. All persons and vessels must comply with this
section and any additional instructions or orders of the Ninth Coast
Guard District Commander, or his designated representatives.
(4) Waiver. For any vessel, the Ninth Coast Guard District
Commander, or his designated representatives, may waive any of the
requirements of this section, upon finding that operational conditions
or other circumstances are such that application of this section is
unnecessary or impractical for the purposes of vessel and mariner
safety.
(b) Safety Zone. (1) The following area is a safety zone: All
waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal located between mile
marker 296.0 (approximately 958 feet south of the Romeo Road Bridge)
and mile marker 296.7 (aerial pipeline located approximately 0.52 miles
north east of Romeo Road Bridge).
(2) Notice of enforcement or suspension of enforcement. The Captain
of the Port Lake Michigan will enforce the safety zone established by
this section only upon notice. Captain of the Port Lake Michigan will
cause notice of the enforcement of this safety zone to be made by all
appropriate means to effect the widest publicity among the affected
segments of the public including publication in the Federal Register as
practicable, in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means of
notification may also include, but are not limited to, Broadcast Notice
to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local Notice to
Mariners notifying the public when enforcement of these safety zones is
suspended.
[[Page 24728]]
(3) Regulations. (i) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan, or his on-scene representative.
(ii) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as
may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-
scene representative.
(iii) The on-scene representative of the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan may be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary
vessel. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-
scene representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan or his on-scene representative.
Dated: May 12, 2009.
D.R. Callahan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District
Acting.
[FR Doc. E9-12179 Filed 5-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P