Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Emerald Isle, NC, 57063-57066 [2012-22798]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 180 / Monday, September 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(i) The expiration of the period within
which a response to a show cause order
must be filed if the respondent does not
file a response as required by paragraph
(d) of this section;
(ii) The conference described in
paragraph (e) of this section if the
Internal Revenue Service finds that the
respondent is described in paragraph (b)
of this section;
(iii) The respondent’s failure to
appear, either personally or through an
authorized representative, at a
conference scheduled by the Internal
Revenue Service under paragraph (e) of
this section.
(2) Duration of suspension. A
suspension under this section will
commence on the date that the written
notice of expedited suspension is served
on the practitioner, either personally or
through an authorized representative.
The suspension will remain effective
until the earlier of:
(i) The date the Internal Revenue
Service lifts the suspension after
determining that the practitioner is no
longer described in paragraph (b) of this
section or for any other reason; or
(ii) The date the suspension is lifted
by an Administrative Law Judge or the
Secretary of the Treasury, or delegate
deciding appeals, in a proceeding
referred to in paragraph (g) of this
section and instituted under § 10.60.
(g) Practitioner request for § 10.60
proceeding. If the Internal Revenue
Service suspends a practitioner under
the expedited suspension procedures
described in this section, the
practitioner may demand that the
Internal Revenue Service institute a
proceeding under § 10.60 and issue the
complaint described in § 10.62. The
request must be in writing, specifically
reference the suspension action under
§ 10.82, and be made within 2 years
from the date on which the
practitioner’s suspension commenced.
The Internal Revenue Service must
issue a complaint demanded under this
paragraph (g) within 45 calendar days of
receiving the demand.
(h) Effective/applicability date. This
section is applicable beginning on the
date that final regulations are published
in the Federal Register.
Par. 12. Section 10.91 is revised to
read as follows:
§ 10.91
Saving provision.
Any proceeding instituted under this
part prior to the date that final
regulations are published in the Federal
Register, for which a final decision has
not been reached or for which judicial
review is still available is not affected
by these revisions. Any proceeding
under this part based on conduct
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Sep 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
engaged in prior to the date that final
regulations are published in the Federal
Register, which is instituted after that
date, will apply subpart D and E of this
part as revised, but the conduct engaged
in prior to the effective date of these
revisions will be judged by the
regulations in effect at the time the
conduct occurred.
Par. 13. Section 10.93 is revised to
read as follows:
§ 10.93
Effective date.
Except as otherwise provided in each
section and subject to § 10.91, Part 10 is
applicable on the date that final
regulations are published in the Federal
Register.
Steven T. Miller,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2012–22836 Filed 9–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
57063
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590–0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. The telephone number is 202–
366–9329.
See the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for further instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email CWO4 Joseph M. Edge, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector North Carolina; telephone
252–247–4525, email
Joseph.M.Edge@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Table of Acronyms
Coast Guard
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2012–0812]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway; Emerald Isle, NC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
extend a temporary safety zone on the
waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway at Emerald Isle, North
Carolina. The safety zone is necessary to
provide for the safety of mariners on
navigable waters during maintenance of
the NC 58 Fixed Bridge crossing the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile
226, at Emerald Isle, North Carolina.
The safety zone extension would
temporarily restrict vessel movement
within the designated area starting on
December 12, 2012 through February 14,
2013.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before October 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail or Delivery: Docket
Management Facility (M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
A. 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.
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking, 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 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you
successfully transmit the comment. If
you fax, hand deliver, or mail your
comment, it will be considered as
having been received by the Coast
Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend
that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your
document so that we can contact you if
we have questions regarding your
submission.
E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM
17SEP1
57064
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 180 / Monday, September 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number (USCG–2012–0812) in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on ‘‘Submit a
Comment’’ on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
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
comments 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.
2. 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, type the
docket number (USCG–2012–0432) in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. 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.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of 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).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one, using one of the methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please
explain why you believe a public
meeting 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.
B. Regulatory History and Information
This proposed rule would extend an
existing safety zone in the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway at Emerald Isle.
The Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking for the existing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Sep 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
safety zone on June 15, 2012 (USCG–
2012–0432, 77 FR 35906), no comments
were received and we published a final
rule on July 30, 2012 (77 FR 44463).
C. Basis and Purpose
North Carolina Department of
Transportation has contracted Marine
Contracting Corporation of Virginia
Beach, Virginia to perform bridge
maintenance on the NC 58 Fixed Bridge
crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 226, at Emerald Isle,
North Carolina. The contract provides
for replacement of the fender system to
commence on September 12, 2012 with
a completion date of December 12, 2012.
The contractor has been granted an
extension by North Carolina Department
of Transportation until February 14,
2013 to complete the bridge
maintenance. The contractor will utilize
a 140 foot deck barge with a 40 foot
beam as a work platform and for
equipment staging. The existing safety
zone needs to be extended to provide a
safety buffer for transiting vessels as
bridge repairs present potential hazards
to mariners and property due to
reduction of horizontal clearance.
D. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed temporary safety zone
will encompass the waters directly
under the NC 58 Fixed Bridge crossing
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile
226, at Emerald Isle, North Carolina
(34°40′28″ N, 077°03′56″ W). This initial
zone is in effect from 8 a.m. September
12, 2012 through 8 p.m. December 12,
2012. The proposed extension will be in
effect from 8 p.m. December 12, 2012
through 8 p.m. February 14, 2013.
During this period the Coast Guard
would require a one hour notification to
the work supervisor at NC 58 Fixed
Bridge, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
crossing, mile 226, Emerald Isle, North
Carolina. The notification requirement
would apply during the maintenance
period for vessels requiring a horizontal
clearance of greater than 50 feet.
E. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes or
executive orders.
1. 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, as supplemented
by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, and
does not require an assessment of
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order
13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those
Orders. This rule does restrict traffic
from transiting a portion of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway; it imposes a one
hour notification to ensure the
waterway is clear of impediment to
allow passage to vessels requiring a
horizontal clearance of greater than 50
feet.
2. Impact on Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
the impact of this proposed rule on
small entities. The Coast Guard certifies
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed
rule would affect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities:
The owners or operators of commercial
tug and barge companies, recreational
and commercial fishing vessels
intending to transit the specified portion
of Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from
8 p.m. December 12, 2012 through 8
p.m. February 14, 2013.
This safety zone would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons. Although the
safety zone will apply to this section of
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
vessel traffic will be able to request
passage by providing a one hour
advanced notification. Before the
effective period, the Coast Guard will
issue maritime advisories widely
available to the users of the waterway.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule. 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 the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will
not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this
E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM
17SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 180 / Monday, September 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules
proposed rule or any policy or action of
the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This proposed rule will not call for a
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this proposed rule under that
Order and determined that this rule
does not have implications for
federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Sep 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
10. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use 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.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
14. 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 that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves the establishment of a
temporary safety zone. This rule is
categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure
2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. A
preliminary environmental analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57065
checklist supporting this determination
and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
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. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T05–0812 to read as
follows:
§ 165.T05–0812 Safety Zone; Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, Emerald Isle, NC.
(a) Regulated Area. The following area
is a safety zone: This zone includes the
waters directly under and 100 yards
either side of the NC 58 Fixed Bridge
crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 226, at Emerald Isle,
North Carolina (latitude 34°40′28″ N,
longitude 077°03′56″ W).
(b) Regulations. The general safety
zone regulations found in 33 CFR
165.23 apply to the safety zone created
by this temporary section, § 165.T05–
0432. In addition the following
regulations apply:
(1) All vessels requiring greater than
50 feet horizontal clearance to safely
transit through the NC 58 Fixed Bridge
crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 226, at Emerald Isle,
North Carolina must contact the work
supervisor on VHF–FM marine band
radio channels 13 and 16 one hour in
advance of intended transit.
(2) All Coast Guard assets enforcing
this safety zone can be contacted on
VHF–FM marine band radio channels
13 and 16.
(3) The operator of any vessel within
or in the immediate vicinity of this
safety zone shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon
being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
on board a vessel displaying a Coast
Guard Ensign, and
(ii) Proceed as directed by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM
17SEP1
57066
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 180 / Monday, September 17, 2012 / Proposed Rules
on board a vessel displaying a Coast
Guard Ensign.
(c) Definitions.
(1) Captain of the Port North Carolina
means the Commander, Coast Guard
Sector North Carolina or any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant or petty
officer who has been authorized by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.
(2) Designated representative means
any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been
authorized by the Captain of the Port
North Carolina to assist in enforcing the
safety zone described in paragraph (a) of
this section.
(3) Work Supervisor means the
contractors on site representative.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast
Guard may be assisted by Federal, State
and local agencies in the patrol and
enforcement of the zone.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from through 8 p.m.
December 12, 2012 through 8 p.m.
February 14, 2013 unless cancelled
earlier by the Captain of the Port.
Dated: August 30, 2012.
A. Popiel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2012–22798 Filed 9–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Tributary 31 (backwater effects from
Caney Creek), Canfield Branch
(backwater effects from Green River),
Cypress Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Cypress Creek Tributary 1
(backwater effects from Green River),
Green River, Irwin Creek (backwater
effects from Green River), Isaacs Creek
(backwater effects from Green River),
Jacobs Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Jacobs Creek Tributary 7
(backwater effects from Green River),
Little Cypress Creek, Little Cypress
Creek Tributary 16 (backwater effects
from Little Cypress Creek), Little
Cypress Creek Tributary 8 (backwater
effects from Little Cypress Creek), Log
Creek (backwater effects from Green
River), Mud River (backwater effects
from Green River), Muddy Fork
(backwater effects from Green River),
Nelson Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Opossum Run (backwater
effects from Sandlick Creek), Plum
Creek (backwater effects from Green
River), Plum Creek Tributary 5
(backwater effects from Green River),
Pond Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Pond Creek (backwater
effects from Sandlick Creek), Pond
Creek Tributary 29 (backwater effects
from Green River), Pond Creek Tributary
30 (backwater effects from Green River),
Pond River (backwater effects from
Green River) and Sandlick Creek
Tributary 2 (backwater effects from
Sandlick Creek).
Comments are to be submitted
on or before December 17, 2012.
DATES:
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FEMA–B–
1095, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief,
Engineering Management Branch,
Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4064
or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
ADDRESSES:
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA–2010–0003; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1095]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
AGENCY:
On May 21, 2010, FEMA
published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that contained an
erroneous table. This notice provides
corrections to that table, to be used in
lieu of the information published at 75
FR 28511. The table provided here
represents the flooding sources, location
of referenced elevations, effective and
modified elevations, and communities
affected for Muhlenberg County,
Kentucky and Incorporated Areas.
Specifically, it addresses the following
flooding sources: Brier Creek (backwater
effects from Green River), Caney Creek,
Caney Creek Tributary 27.1 (backwater
effects from Caney Creek), Caney Creek
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Sep 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
Luis
Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064 or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed
determinations of Base (1% annualchance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and
modified BFEs for communities
participating in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP), in
accordance with section 110 of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,
42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed BFEs and modified
BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR
60.3, are minimum requirements. They
should not be construed to mean that
the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The
community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own or
pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities.
These proposed elevations are used to
meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and also are
used to calculate the appropriate flood
insurance premium rates for new
buildings built after these elevations are
made final, and for the contents in those
buildings.
Corrections
In the proposed rule published at 75
FR 28511, in the May 21, 2010, issue of
the Federal Register, FEMA published a
table under the authority of 44 CFR
67.4. The table, entitled ‘‘Muhlenberg
County, Kentucky, and Incorporated
Areas’’ addressed the following flooding
sources: Brier Creek (backwater effects
from Green River), Caney Creek, Caney
Creek Tributary 27.1 (backwater effects
from Caney Creek), Caney Creek
Tributary 31 (backwater effects from
Caney Creek), Canfield Branch
(backwater effects from Green River),
Cypress Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Cypress Creek Tributary 1
(backwater effects from Green River),
Green River, Irwin Creek (backwater
effects from Green River), Isaacs Creek
(backwater effects from Green River),
Jacobs Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Jacobs Creek Tributary 7
(backwater effects from Green River),
Little Cypress Creek, Little Cypress
Creek Tributary 16 (backwater effects
from Little Cypress Creek), Little
Cypress Creek Tributary 8 (backwater
effects from Little Cypress Creek), Log
Creek (backwater effects from Green
River), Mud River (backwater effects
from Green River), Muddy Fork
(backwater effects from Green River),
Nelson Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Opossum Run (backwater
effects from Sandlick Creek), Plum
Creek (backwater effects from Green
River), Plum Creek Tributary 5
(backwater effects from Green River),
Pond Creek (backwater effects from
Green River), Pond Creek (backwater
effects from Sandlick Creek), Pond
Creek Tributary 29 (backwater effects
from Green River), Pond Creek Tributary
30 (backwater effects from Green River),
E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM
17SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 180 (Monday, September 17, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57063-57066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22798]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2012-0812]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Emerald Isle, NC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to extend a temporary safety zone on
the waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at Emerald Isle, North
Carolina. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of
mariners on navigable waters during maintenance of the NC 58 Fixed
Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 226, at
Emerald Isle, North Carolina. The safety zone extension would
temporarily restrict vessel movement within the designated area
starting on December 12, 2012 through February 14, 2013.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before October 2, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email CWO4 Joseph M. Edge, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North
Carolina; telephone 252-247-4525, email Joseph.M.Edge@uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
A. 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.
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, 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 at
https://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
[[Page 57064]]
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2012-0812) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
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 comments 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.
2. 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,
type the docket number (USCG-2012-0432) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. 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.
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of 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).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting 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.
B. Regulatory History and Information
This proposed rule would extend an existing safety zone in the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at Emerald Isle. The Coast Guard
published a notice of proposed rulemaking for the existing safety zone
on June 15, 2012 (USCG-2012-0432, 77 FR 35906), no comments were
received and we published a final rule on July 30, 2012 (77 FR 44463).
C. Basis and Purpose
North Carolina Department of Transportation has contracted Marine
Contracting Corporation of Virginia Beach, Virginia to perform bridge
maintenance on the NC 58 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 226, at Emerald Isle, North Carolina. The
contract provides for replacement of the fender system to commence on
September 12, 2012 with a completion date of December 12, 2012. The
contractor has been granted an extension by North Carolina Department
of Transportation until February 14, 2013 to complete the bridge
maintenance. The contractor will utilize a 140 foot deck barge with a
40 foot beam as a work platform and for equipment staging. The existing
safety zone needs to be extended to provide a safety buffer for
transiting vessels as bridge repairs present potential hazards to
mariners and property due to reduction of horizontal clearance.
D. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed temporary safety zone will encompass the waters
directly under the NC 58 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 226, at Emerald Isle, North Carolina
(34[deg]40'28'' N, 077[deg]03'56'' W). This initial zone is in effect
from 8 a.m. September 12, 2012 through 8 p.m. December 12, 2012. The
proposed extension will be in effect from 8 p.m. December 12, 2012
through 8 p.m. February 14, 2013. During this period the Coast Guard
would require a one hour notification to the work supervisor at NC 58
Fixed Bridge, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway crossing, mile 226,
Emerald Isle, North Carolina. The notification requirement would apply
during the maintenance period for vessels requiring a horizontal
clearance of greater than 50 feet.
E. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.
1. 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,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This rule does restrict
traffic from transiting a portion of the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway; it imposes a one hour notification to ensure the waterway is
clear of impediment to allow passage to vessels requiring a horizontal
clearance of greater than 50 feet.
2. Impact on Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of
commercial tug and barge companies, recreational and commercial fishing
vessels intending to transit the specified portion of Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway from 8 p.m. December 12, 2012 through 8 p.m.
February 14, 2013.
This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone will apply to this section of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, vessel traffic will be able to request passage
by providing a one hour advanced notification. Before the effective
period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories widely available
to the users of the waterway. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically
affect it.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this
[[Page 57065]]
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 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.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
14. 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 that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the establishment of a temporary safety zone. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the 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. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add Sec. 165.T05-0812 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T05-0812 Safety Zone; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
Emerald Isle, NC.
(a) Regulated Area. The following area is a safety zone: This zone
includes the waters directly under and 100 yards either side of the NC
58 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 226,
at Emerald Isle, North Carolina (latitude 34[deg]40'28'' N, longitude
077[deg]03'56'' W).
(b) Regulations. The general safety zone regulations found in 33
CFR 165.23 apply to the safety zone created by this temporary section,
Sec. 165.T05-0432. In addition the following regulations apply:
(1) All vessels requiring greater than 50 feet horizontal clearance
to safely transit through the NC 58 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 226, at Emerald Isle, North Carolina must
contact the work supervisor on VHF-FM marine band radio channels 13 and
16 one hour in advance of intended transit.
(2) All Coast Guard assets enforcing this safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channels 13 and 16.
(3) The operator of any vessel within or in the immediate vicinity
of this safety zone shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on board a vessel displaying a
Coast Guard Ensign, and
(ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer
[[Page 57066]]
on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign.
(c) Definitions.
(1) Captain of the Port North Carolina means the Commander, Coast
Guard Sector North Carolina or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port to act
on his behalf.
(2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port North Carolina to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) Work Supervisor means the contractors on site representative.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal,
State and local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the zone.
(e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from through
8 p.m. December 12, 2012 through 8 p.m. February 14, 2013 unless
cancelled earlier by the Captain of the Port.
Dated: August 30, 2012.
A. Popiel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2012-22798 Filed 9-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
