Certifications and Exemptions Under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, 5235-5236 [2010-2121]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
5235
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of the Indian tribal
governments and does not impose
substantial direct compliance costs, the
funding and consultation requirements
of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.
comply with the following specific
provisions of 72 COLREGS without
interfering with its special function as a
naval ship: Annex I, paragraph 3(a),
pertaining to the horizontal distance
between the forward and after masthead
lights. The Deputy Assistant Judge
Advocate General (Admiralty and
Maritime Law) has also certified that the
lights involved are located in closest
possible compliance with the applicable
72 COLREGS requirements.
Moreover, it has been determined, in
accordance with 32 CFR Parts 296 and
701, that publication of this amendment
for public comment prior to adoption is
impracticable, unnecessary, and
contrary to public interest since it is
based on technical findings that the
placement of lights on this vessel in a
manner differently from that prescribed
herein will adversely affect the vessel’s
ability to perform its military functions.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
32 CFR Part 706
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains no information
collection requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
Certifications and Exemptions Under
the International Regulations for
Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972
AGENCY:
ACTION:
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Department of Transportation has
determined that the requirements of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to this
rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 331
Air carriers.
Authority: Section 185, Transportation,
Treasury, Housing and Urban Development,
the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and
Independent Agencies Appropriation Act,
2006, Public Law 109–115, 119 Stat. 2396
(2005); 49 U.S.C. 322(a).
Accordingly, under the authority of
119 Stat. 2396 (2005) and 49 U.S.C.
322(a), the Department of
Transportation amends 14 CFR chapter
2 by removing part 331:
■
PART 331—PROCEDURES FOR
REIMBURSEMENT OF GENERAL
AVIATION OPERATORS AND SERVICE
PROVIDERS IN THE WASHINGTON, DC
AREA
PART 331—[REMOVED AND
RESERVED]
Remove and reserve Part 331,
consisting of subparts A through C.
■
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 25,
2010.
Susan Kurland,
Assistant Secretary for Aviation and
International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2010–2134 Filed 2–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P
Department of the Navy, DoD.
Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy
is amending its certifications and
exemptions under the International
Regulations for Preventing Collisions at
Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that
the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General (Admiralty and Maritime Law)
has determined that USS BUNKER HILL
(CG 52)) is a vessel of the Navy which,
due to its special construction and
purpose, cannot fully comply with
certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS
without interfering with its special
function as a naval ship. The intended
effect of this rule is to warn mariners in
waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
DATES: This rule is effective February 2,
2010 and is applicable beginning
January 21, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Commander Ted Cook,
JAGC, U.S. Navy, Admiralty Attorney,
(Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of
the Judge Advocate General, Department
of the Navy, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE.,
Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard, DC
20374–5066, telephone number: 202–
685–5040.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C.
1605, the Department of the Navy
amends 32 CFR Part 706.
This amendment provides notice that
the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate
General (Admiralty and Maritime Law),
under authority delegated by the
Secretary of the Navy, has certified that
USS BUNKER HILL (CG 52)) is a vessel
of the Navy which, due to its special
construction and purpose, cannot fully
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 706
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and
Vessels.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Navy amends part 706 of
title 32 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
■
PART 706—CERTIFICATIONS AND
EXEMPTIONS UNDER THE
INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS FOR
PREVENTING COLLISIONS AT SEA,
1972
1. The authority citation for part 706
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1605.
2. Section 706.2 is amended in Table
Five by revising the entry for USS
BUNKER HILL (CG 52) to read as
follows:
■
§ 706.2 Certifications of the Secretary of
the Navy under Executive Order 11964 and
33 U.S.C. 1605.
*
*
*
*
*
TABLE FIVE
Masthead light
not over all
other lights and
obstructions
Annex I,
section 2(f)
erowe on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Vessel
No.
*
*
USS BUNKER HILL ...................
*
CG 52 .........................................
*
*
*
*
VerDate Nov<24>2008
*
14:43 Feb 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Forward masthead light not in
forward quarter
of ship. Annex I,
section 3(a)
After masthead
light less than 1⁄2
ship’s length aft
of forward masthead light Annex
I, section 3(a)
*
*
X
Fmt 4700
X
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02FER1.SGM
*
02FER1
Percentage horizontal separation
attained
*
36.8
*
5236
*
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
Approved: January 21, 2010.
M. Robb Hyde,
Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy
Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty
and Maritime Law).
Certified to be a true copy of the original
document.
Dated: January 22, 2010.
A.M. Vallandingam,
Lieutenant Commander, Office of the Judge
Advocate General, U.S. Navy, Alternate
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010–2121 Filed 2–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Part 3020
[Docket Nos. MC2010–12 and R2010–2;
Order No. 375]
New Postal Product
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Commission is adding a
bilateral agreement between the U.S.
Postal Service and Canada Post for
inbound market dominant services. This
action is consistent with a postal reform
law. Republication of the Market
Dominant List and Competitive Product
List is also consistent with statutory
provisions.
DATES: Effective February 2, 2010 and is
applicable beginning December 30,
2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202-789-6820 or
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory
History, 74 FR 64771 (December 8,
2009).
erowe on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Comments
IV. Commission Analysis
V. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
The Postal Service seeks to add a new
product identified as Canada PostUnited States Postal Service Contractual
Bilateral Agreement for Inbound Market
Dominant Services to the Market
Dominant Product List. For the reasons
discussed below, the Commission
approves the Request.
II. Background
On November 19, 2009, the Postal
Service filed a request pursuant to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:43 Feb 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
39 U.S.C. 3622(c)(10) and 3642, and
39 CFR 3010.40 et seq. and 3020.30 et
seq. to add the Canada Post–United
States Postal Service Contractual
Bilateral Agreement for Inbound Market
Dominant Services (Bilateral Agreement
or Agreement) to the Market Dominant
Product List.1 This Request has been
assigned Docket No. MC2010–12.
The Postal Service
contemporaneously filed notice that the
Governors have authorized a Type 2 rate
adjustment to establish rates for
inbound market dominant services as
reflected in the Bilateral Agreement.2
More specifically, the Bilateral
Agreement, which has been assigned
Docket No. R2010–2, governs the
exchange of inbound air and surface
letter post (LC/AO).3
Request. In support of its Request, the
Postal Service filed the following
materials: (1) Proposed Mail
Classification Schedule (MCS)
language;4 (2) a Statement of Supporting
Justification as required by 39 CFR
3020.32;5 (3) a redacted version of the
agreement;6 and (4) an application for
non-public treatment of pricing and
supporting documents filed under seal.7
Request at 2.
In the Statement of Supporting
Justification, Lea Emerson, Executive
Director, International Postal Affairs,
reviews the factors of section 3622 and
concludes, inter alia, that the revenues
generated will cover the attributable
costs of the services offered under the
Bilateral Agreement; that the rates are
preferable to default rates set by the
Universal Postal Union; and that the
rates represent a modest increase over
those reflected in the existing bilateral
agreement with Canada Post. Id.,
Attachment 2, at 2–3.
In its Request, the Postal Service
provides information responsive to part
1 Request of United States Postal Service to Add
Canada Post-United States Postal Service
Contractual Bilateral Agreement for Inbound Market
Dominant Services to the Market Dominant Product
List, Notice of Type 2 Rate Adjustment, and Notice
of Filing Agreement (Under Seal), November 19,
2009; and United States Postal Service Notice of
Erratum to Application for Non-Public Treatment,
November 20, 2009 (Request).
2 Type 2 rate adjustments involve negotiated
service agreements. See 39 CFR 3010.5.
3 To elaborate, the Bilateral Agreement covers
Letter Post, including letters, flats, packets, bags,
containers, and International Registered Mail
service ancillary thereto. Request at 3–4.
4 Attachment 1 to the Request.
5 Attachment 2 to the Request.
6 Attachment 3 to the Request.
7 Attachment 4 to the Request. The Postal Service
filed United States Postal Service Notice of Erratum
to Application for Non-Public Treatment, November
20, 2009 (Erratum). It explained that due to a
drafting error, the application contained an
erroneous reference to a nonexistent page of the
Agreement and provided a corrected page.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3010, subpart D, of the Commission’s
rules. To that end, it addresses the
requirements of section 3622(c)(10) as
well as certain details of the negotiated
service agreement. Id. at 2–7. The Postal
Service asserts that the Bilateral
Agreement satisfies all applicable
statutory criteria. Id. at 6–8.
The Postal Service filed much of the
supporting materials, financial analysis,
and the Bilateral Agreement under seal.
Id. at 2. In its Request, the Postal Service
maintains that the Bilateral Agreement
and related financial information should
remain under seal. Id.
The Postal Service has an existing
bilateral agreement with Canada Post,
which is set to expire December 31,
2009.8 Id., Attachment 3, at 7. The
instant Bilateral Agreement is a twoyear agreement comparable to the
existing agreement, with some
modifications. The modifications
include differences in specific
operational details and the Postal
Service’s decision to classify Canada
Post’s ‘‘Xpresspost-USA’’ as a
competitive product instead of a market
dominant product as in the existing
bilateral agreement.9 The Agreement
states it has an effective date of January
1, 2010. Id. at 3. The Request states that
the inbound market dominant rates are
scheduled to become effective on
January 4, 2010. Id.
The Postal Service urges the
Commission to act promptly to add this
product to the Market Dominant
Product List to allow rates to be
implemented under 39 CFR 3010.40. Id.
at 7.
In Order No. 346, the Commission
gave notice of the docket, appointed a
Public Representative, and provided the
public with an opportunity to
comment.10
On December 4, 2009, Chairman’s
Information Request No. 1 (CHIR No. 1)
was issued, which sought clarification
of various elements related to the
proposed Bilateral Agreement. A
response was due from the Postal
Service by December 10, 2009. The
Postal Service filed its responses to
8 The Postal Service maintains that the instant
Bilateral Agreement is functionally comparable to
the agreement in Docket Nos. MC2009–7 and
R2009–1. Id.
9 The Postal Service included Xpresspost in its
Request to Add Canada Post-United States Postal
Service Contractual Bilateral Agreement for
Inbound Competitive Services to the Competitive
Product List. See Docket Nos. CP2010–13 and
MC2010–14.
10 See PRC Order No. 346, Notice and Order
Concerning Bilateral Agreement with Canada Post
for Inbound Market Dominant Services, November
25, 2009 (Order No. 346).
E:\FR\FM\02FER1.SGM
02FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 2, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5235-5236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2121]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
32 CFR Part 706
Certifications and Exemptions Under the International Regulations
for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972
AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy is amending its certifications and
exemptions under the International Regulations for Preventing
Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that the Deputy
Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) has
determined that USS BUNKER HILL (CG 52)) is a vessel of the Navy which,
due to its special construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with
certain provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with its
special function as a naval ship. The intended effect of this rule is
to warn mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS apply.
DATES: This rule is effective February 2, 2010 and is applicable
beginning January 21, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Commander Ted Cook, JAGC,
U.S. Navy, Admiralty Attorney, (Admiralty and Maritime Law), Office of
the Judge Advocate General, Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson
Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5066, telephone
number: 202-685-5040.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the authority granted in 33
U.S.C. 1605, the Department of the Navy amends 32 CFR Part 706.
This amendment provides notice that the Deputy Assistant Judge
Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), under authority
delegated by the Secretary of the Navy, has certified that USS BUNKER
HILL (CG 52)) is a vessel of the Navy which, due to its special
construction and purpose, cannot fully comply with the following
specific provisions of 72 COLREGS without interfering with its special
function as a naval ship: Annex I, paragraph 3(a), pertaining to the
horizontal distance between the forward and after masthead lights. The
Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty and Maritime Law)
has also certified that the lights involved are located in closest
possible compliance with the applicable 72 COLREGS requirements.
Moreover, it has been determined, in accordance with 32 CFR Parts
296 and 701, that publication of this amendment for public comment
prior to adoption is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public
interest since it is based on technical findings that the placement of
lights on this vessel in a manner differently from that prescribed
herein will adversely affect the vessel's ability to perform its
military functions.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 706
Marine safety, Navigation (water), and Vessels.
0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Navy amends part 706 of
title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 706--CERTIFICATIONS AND EXEMPTIONS UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL
REGULATIONS FOR PREVENTING COLLISIONS AT SEA, 1972
0
1. The authority citation for part 706 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1605.
0
2. Section 706.2 is amended in Table Five by revising the entry for USS
BUNKER HILL (CG 52) to read as follows:
Sec. 706.2 Certifications of the Secretary of the Navy under
Executive Order 11964 and 33 U.S.C. 1605.
* * * * *
Table Five
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After masthead
Forward masthead light less than
Masthead light not over all light not in \1/2\ ship's Percentage
Vessel No. other lights and forward quarter length aft of horizontal
obstructions Annex I, of ship. Annex I, forward masthead separation
section 2(f) section 3(a) light Annex I, attained
section 3(a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
USS BUNKER HILL....................... CG 52.................... X X 36.8
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 5236]]
* * * * *
Approved: January 21, 2010.
M. Robb Hyde,
Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate General
(Admiralty and Maritime Law).
Certified to be a true copy of the original document.
Dated: January 22, 2010.
A.M. Vallandingam,
Lieutenant Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy,
Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-2121 Filed 2-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
