Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls, New York, 23514-23516 [2017-10469]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
23514
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
2017–09–08 The Boeing Company:
Amendment 39–18870; Docket No.
FAA–2016–9439; Directorate Identifier
2016–NM–170–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective June 27, 2017.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model 787–8 airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin B787–81205–SB240027–00,
Issue 002, dated September 6, 2016 (‘‘ASB
B787–81205–SB240027–00, Issue 002’’).
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 24, Electrical power.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a report
indicating that during an airplane inspection
in production, the variable frequency starter
generator (VFSG) power feeder cables were
found to contain terminal lugs incorrectly
installed common to terminal blocks located
in the wing front spar; the lugs were close to
the structure causing the lug sleeve to come
in contact with adjacent fasteners. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct
incorrectly installed terminal lugs which may
contact adjacent structure and be damaged.
Damaged terminal lugs could cause the
potential loss of several functions essential
for safe flight or electrical arcing in a
flammable leakage zone, which could result
in an electrical short and the possible
introduction of energy into the main fuel
tanks.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Inspection of Terminal Lugs and
Corrective Actions
Within 12 months after the effective date
of this AD, do a general visual inspection of
the right and left wing, section 16, VFSG
power feeder cable terminal lugs at the
terminal block for correct installation and do
all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with ASB B787–81205–
SB240027–00, Issue 002. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
(h) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the
actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD,
if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin B787–81205–SB240027–00,
Issue 001, dated January 21, 2014.
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:41 May 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair,
modification, or alteration required by this
AD if it is approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification
deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 27,
2017.
Paul Bernado,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
(j) Related Information
ACTION:
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Brendan Shanley, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch,
ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–
917–6492; fax: 425–917–6590; email:
brendan.shanley@faa.gov.
(2) Service information identified in this
AD that is not incorporated by reference is
available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787–
81205–SB240027–00, Issue 002, dated
September 6, 2016.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For Boeing service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention:
Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600
Westminster Blvd., MC 110–SK57, Seal
Beach, CA 90740–5600; telephone: 562–797–
1717; Internet: https://
www.myboeingfleet.com.
(4) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(5) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2017–10255 Filed 5–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2015–0492]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at
Niagara Falls, New York
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a permanent safety zone
within the Captain of the Port Zone
Buffalo on the Lower Niagara River,
Niagara Falls, NY. This rule is intended
to restrict vessels from a portion of the
Lower Niagara River considered not
navigable as listed in the United States
Coast Pilot Book 6—Great Lakes: Lake
Ontario, Erie, Huron, Michigan, and
Superior and St. Lawrence River and
more specifically as described below.
The safety zone to be established by this
rule is necessary to protect the public
and vessels from the hazards associated
with the heavy rapids in the narrow
waterway of the Lower Niagara River.
DATES: This rule is effective June 22,
2017.
SUMMARY:
To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2015–
0492 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email LT Michael Collet, Chief of
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716–
843–9322, email
SectorBuffaloMarineSafety@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM
23MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
II. Background Information and
Regulatory History
On June 21, 2016, the Coast Guard
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Safety Zone;
Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls,
New York’’ (81 FR 40226). There we
issued the NPRM and invited comments
on our proposed regulatory action
related to this permanent safety zone.
During the 90 day comment period that
ended September 19, 2016, we received
five comments.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule
under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The
Coast Guard has already established a
permanent safety zone in the Upper
Niagara River per 33 CFR 165.902(a) in
order to protect the boating public from
the dangers of the waters above and at
the Niagara Falls. These waters include
the United States waters of the Niagara
River from the crest of the American
and Horseshoe Falls, New York to a line
drawn across the Niagara River from the
downstream side of the mouth of Gill
Creek to the upstream end of the
breakwater at the mouth of the Welland
River.
The heavy rapids in the section of the
Lower Niagara River downstream of
Niagara Falls have not historically been
regularly navigated by vessels. In early
2014, the Captain of the Port Zone
Buffalo received reports of vessels
transiting this section of the Niagara
River. These reports prompted further
evaluation of the safety of the entire
waterway by federal, state, and local
agencies. The purpose of the evaluation
was to determine what, if any, rescue
capability exists that would be able to
respond to vessels and/or passengers in
distress in the heavy rapids of the river
south of the whirlpool rapids to the
International Railroad Bridge.
The Captain of the Port Buffalo
(COTP) has determined that no feasible
rescue capability exists for vessels in
distress or persons in the water in the
heavy rapids south of the whirlpool
rapids to the International Railroad
Bridge.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes,
and the Rule
As noted above, we received five
comments on our NPRM published June
21, 2016. All five comments were
generally supportive of the proposed
safety zone with no objections or
recommendations. There are no changes
in the regulatory text of this rule from
the language proposed in the NPRM.
This rule establishes a permanent
safety zone to include the following
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:41 May 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
waters: All United States waters of the
Lower Niagara River, Niagara Falls, NY
from a straight line drawn from position
43°07′10.70″ N., 079°04′02.32″ W. (NAD
83) and 43°07′09.41″ N., 079°4′05.41″
W. (NAD 83) just south of the whirlpool
rapids from the east side of the river to
the international border of the United
States, to a straight line drawn from
position 43°06′34.01″ N., 079°03′28.04″
W. (NAD 83) and 43°06′33.52″ N.,
079°03′30.42″ W. (NAD 83) at the
International Railroad Bridge. Entry
into, transiting, or anchoring within the
safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Zone Buffalo or a designated
representative.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and
Executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has not been
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory
action,’’ under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
We conclude that this rule is not a
significant regulatory action because we
anticipate that it will have minimal
impact on the economy, will not
interfere with other agencies, will not
adversely alter the budget of any grant
or loan recipients, and will not raise any
novel legal or policy issues. The safety
zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and is designed to
minimize its impact on navigable
waters.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to consider
the potential impact of regulations on
small entities during rulemaking. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23515
The Coast Guard received no comments
from the Small Business Administration
on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
This rule may affect the following
entities, most of which are small
entities: The owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit in the
portion of American waters at the
whirlpool rapids. This safety zone will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reasons: There have
not been a substantial number of small
entities attempting to transit this section
of the river.
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 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 section.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Governments
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 rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent
with the fundamental federalism
E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM
23MYR1
23516
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
principles and preemption requirements
described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. If you
believe this rule has implications for
federalism or Indian tribes, please
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. 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 rule
will not result in such expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
F. Environment
We have analyzed this 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 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have
determined 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 rule involves the
establishment of a permanent safety
zone in a small section of the Lower
Niagara River. It is categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the
Commandant Instruction. An
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 rule.
G. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:41 May 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. In § 165.902, revise the section
heading and add paragraph (b) to read
as follows:
■
§ 165.902 Safety Zone; Lower Niagara
River at Niagara Falls, New York.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The following is a safety zone—
The United States waters of the Lower
Niagara River, Niagara Falls, NY from a
straight line drawn from position
43°07′10.70″ N., 079°04′02.32″ W. (NAD
83) and 43°07′09.41″ N., 079°04′05.41″
W. (NAD 83) just south of the whirlpool
rapids from the east side of the river to
the international border of the United
States, to a straight line drawn from
position 43°06′34.01″ N., 079°03′28.04″
W. (NAD 83) and 43°06′33.52″ N.,
079°03′30.42″ W. (NAD 83) at the
International Railroad Bridge.
Dated: April 20, 2017.
J.S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2017–10469 Filed 5–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
49 CFR Parts 380, 383, and 384
[FMCSA–2007–27748]
RIN 2126–AB66
Minimum Training Requirements for
Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle
Operators
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; further delay of
effective date.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
In accordance with the
Presidential directive as expressed in
the memorandum of January 20, 2017,
from the Assistant to the President and
Chief of Staff, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Freeze Pending Review,’’ this action
temporarily delays, until June 5, 2017,
the effective date of the final rule titled
‘‘Minimum Training Requirements for
Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle
Operators,’’ initially effective on
February 6, 2017.
DATES: The effective date of the final
rule published on December 8, 2016 (81
FR 88732), delayed to March 21, 2017
at 82 FR 8903 and then further delayed
to May 22, 2017 at 82 FR 14476, is
further delayed until June 5, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Richard Clemente, Driver and Carrier
Operations (MC–PSD) Division,
FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
Washington, DC 20590–0001, by
telephone at 202–366–4325, or by email
at MCPSD@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FMCSA
bases this action on the Presidential
directive as expressed in the
memorandum of January 20, 2017, from
the Assistant to the President and Chief
of Staff, entitled ‘‘Regulatory Freeze
Pending Review’’ (the January 20, 2017,
memorandum). That memorandum
directed the heads of Executive
Departments and Agencies to
temporarily postpone for 60 days from
the date of the memorandum the
effective dates of certain regulations that
had been published in the Federal
Register, but had not yet taken effect.
Because the original effective date of the
final rule published on December 8,
2016, fell within that 60-day window,
the effective date of the rule was
extended to March 21, 2017, in a final
rule published on February 1, 2017 (82
FR 8903). Consistent with the
memorandum of the Assistant to the
President and Chief of Staff, and as
stated in the February 1, 2017, final rule
delaying the effective date, the Agency
further delayed the effective date of this
regulation until May 22, 2017 (82 FR
14476, March 21, 2017). The Agency
now delays the effective date until June
5, 2017.
The Agency’s implementation of this
action without opportunity for public
comment is based on the good cause
exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and
553(d)(3), in that seeking public
comment is impracticable, unnecessary
and contrary to the public interest. The
delay in the effective date until June 5,
2017, is necessary to provide the
opportunity for further review and
consideration of this new regulation,
consistent with the January 20, 2017,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM
23MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 23, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23514-23516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10469]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2015-0492]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls, New York
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a permanent safety zone within
the Captain of the Port Zone Buffalo on the Lower Niagara River,
Niagara Falls, NY. This rule is intended to restrict vessels from a
portion of the Lower Niagara River considered not navigable as listed
in the United States Coast Pilot Book 6--Great Lakes: Lake Ontario,
Erie, Huron, Michigan, and Superior and St. Lawrence River and more
specifically as described below. The safety zone to be established by
this rule is necessary to protect the public and vessels from the
hazards associated with the heavy rapids in the narrow waterway of the
Lower Niagara River.
DATES: This rule is effective June 22, 2017.
ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2015-0492 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Michael Collet, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716-843-9322, email
SectorBuffaloMarineSafety@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
[[Page 23515]]
II. Background Information and Regulatory History
On June 21, 2016, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at Niagara
Falls, New York'' (81 FR 40226). There we issued the NPRM and invited
comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this permanent
safety zone. During the 90 day comment period that ended September 19,
2016, we received five comments.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Coast Guard has already established a permanent safety zone
in the Upper Niagara River per 33 CFR 165.902(a) in order to protect
the boating public from the dangers of the waters above and at the
Niagara Falls. These waters include the United States waters of the
Niagara River from the crest of the American and Horseshoe Falls, New
York to a line drawn across the Niagara River from the downstream side
of the mouth of Gill Creek to the upstream end of the breakwater at the
mouth of the Welland River.
The heavy rapids in the section of the Lower Niagara River
downstream of Niagara Falls have not historically been regularly
navigated by vessels. In early 2014, the Captain of the Port Zone
Buffalo received reports of vessels transiting this section of the
Niagara River. These reports prompted further evaluation of the safety
of the entire waterway by federal, state, and local agencies. The
purpose of the evaluation was to determine what, if any, rescue
capability exists that would be able to respond to vessels and/or
passengers in distress in the heavy rapids of the river south of the
whirlpool rapids to the International Railroad Bridge.
The Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has determined that no
feasible rescue capability exists for vessels in distress or persons in
the water in the heavy rapids south of the whirlpool rapids to the
International Railroad Bridge.
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule
As noted above, we received five comments on our NPRM published
June 21, 2016. All five comments were generally supportive of the
proposed safety zone with no objections or recommendations. There are
no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the language
proposed in the NPRM.
This rule establishes a permanent safety zone to include the
following waters: All United States waters of the Lower Niagara River,
Niagara Falls, NY from a straight line drawn from position
43[deg]07'10.70'' N., 079[deg]04'02.32'' W. (NAD 83) and
43[deg]07'09.41'' N., 079[deg]4'05.41'' W. (NAD 83) just south of the
whirlpool rapids from the east side of the river to the international
border of the United States, to a straight line drawn from position
43[deg]06'34.01'' N., 079[deg]03'28.04'' W. (NAD 83) and
43[deg]06'33.52'' N., 079[deg]03'30.42'' W. (NAD 83) at the
International Railroad Bridge. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring
within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port Zone Buffalo or a designated representative.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and is designed to minimize its impact on navigable
waters.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule may affect the following entities, most of which are
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
in the portion of American waters at the whirlpool rapids. This safety
zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the following reasons: There have not been
a substantial number of small entities attempting to transit this
section of the river.
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 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
section.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
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 rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
[[Page 23516]]
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
E. 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 rule will not result in
such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined 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
rule involves the establishment of a permanent safety zone in a small
section of the Lower Niagara River. It is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant
Instruction. An 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 rule.
G. 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.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.
0
2. In Sec. 165.902, revise the section heading and add paragraph (b)
to read as follows:
Sec. 165.902 Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls, New
York.
* * * * *
(b) The following is a safety zone--The United States waters of the
Lower Niagara River, Niagara Falls, NY from a straight line drawn from
position 43[deg]07'10.70'' N., 079[deg]04'02.32'' W. (NAD 83) and
43[deg]07'09.41'' N., 079[deg]04'05.41'' W. (NAD 83) just south of the
whirlpool rapids from the east side of the river to the international
border of the United States, to a straight line drawn from position
43[deg]06'34.01'' N., 079[deg]03'28.04'' W. (NAD 83) and
43[deg]06'33.52'' N., 079[deg]03'30.42'' W. (NAD 83) at the
International Railroad Bridge.
Dated: April 20, 2017.
J.S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2017-10469 Filed 5-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
