80 FR 24816 - Safety Zone; Floating Construction Platform, Chicago River, Chicago, IL
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 84 (May 1, 2015)
Coast Guard
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 84 (May 1, 2015)
| Page Range | 24816-24819 | |
| FR Document | 2015-10215 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 84 (Friday, May 1, 2015)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 24816-24819] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-10215] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0333] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Floating Construction Platform, Chicago River, Chicago, IL AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the South Branch of the Chicago River, Chicago, Illinois. This temporary safety zone is intended to restrict vessels from a designated portion of the South [[Page 24817]] Branch of the Chicago River due to the transit of a floating construction platform on April 26, 2015, or alternatively on a later date. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect the surrounding public and vessels from the hazards associated with the transit of the floating construction platform. DATES: This rule is effective from May 1, 2015 until May 9, 2015. ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket USCG-2015-0333. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, contact or email MST1 John Ng, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Chicago, at (630) 986-2122 or [email protected]. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, 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 TFR Temporary Final Rule A. Regulatory History and Information The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and contrary to public interest. On April 22, 2015, the Coast Guard established a temporary safety zone to accommodate the transit of the floating construction platform, which was scheduled for April 19, 2015 (USCG-2015-0277). However, we recently learned that scheduled transit would be postponed to April 26, 2015. We did not know of this change and the final details for this event until there was insufficient time remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would be both impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect participants, spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with this operation, which are discussed further below. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register for the same reasons discussed in the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. B. Basis and Purpose The legal basis for this rule is the Coast Guard's authority to establish safety zones: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. On April 26, 2015, or alternatively on a later date on or prior to May 9, 2015, a floating construction platform will transit up the South Branch of the Chicago River, Chicago, Illinois from the Canal Street Bridge to the Lake Street Bridge. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined that the transit of the floating construction platform poses a significant risk to public safety and property. Such hazards include limited maneuverability and restricted visibility associated with the transit of a floating construction platform. C. Discussion of the Final Rule With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, has determined that this temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels during the transit of the floating construction platform on the South Branch of the Chicago River. This rule was enforced from 5:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on April 26, 2015. However, enforcement may occur on a later date within this effective period due to an unanticipated delay. In the event of a postponement, advanced notice of the enforcement time will be provided through Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The safety zone will encompass all waters of South Branch of the Chicago River, Chicago, IL, from the Canal Street Bridge to the Lake Street Bridge. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or a designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. D. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes and executive orders. 1. Regulatory Planning and Review This 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. 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 only impact a small area of the Chicago River and will be enforced for an estimated period of seven hours on one day between April 25, 2015 and May 9, 2015. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of the Port or a designated on-scene representative. 2. Impact on Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered the impact of this temporary rule on small entities. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the affected portion of the South Branch of the Chicago River between 5:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. on April 26, 2015, or alternatively on a later date. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a [[Page 24818]] substantial number of small entities for the reasons cited in the Regulatory Planning and Review section. Additionally, before the enforcement of the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to Mariners so vessel owners and operators can plan accordingly. 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 rule. If this 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. 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. 4. 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). 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 8. Taking of Private Property This rule will 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 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 We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. 11. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. 12. Energy Effects This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. 13. Technical Standards This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. 14. 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 (NEPA) (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 safety zone and, therefore 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. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping 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; 46 U.S.C. Chapters 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 0 2. Add Sec. 165.T09-0333 to read as follows: Sec. 165.T09-0333 Safety Zone; Floating Construction Platform, Chicago River, Chicago, IL. (a) Location. All waters of the South Branch of the Chicago River, Chicago, IL, from Canal Street Bridge to Lake Street Bridge. (b) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule is effective from May 1, 2015 until May 9, 2015. This rule was enforced on April 26, 2015, by actual notice. This rule may be enforced by actual or constructive notice after publication until May 9, 2015. (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless [[Page 24819]] authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on- scene representative. (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene representative. (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan to act on his or her behalf. (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative. Dated: April 22, 2015. K.M. Moser, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. 2015-10215 Filed 4-30-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
![24816 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
does not require an assessment of 6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Management Directive 023–01 and
potential costs and benefits under The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires which guides the Coast Guard in
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Federal agencies to assess the effects of complying with the National
Office of Management and Budget has their discretionary regulatory actions. In Environmental Policy Act of 1969
not reviewed it under those Orders. particular, the Act addresses actions (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
The Coast Guard does not consider that may result in the expenditure by a have concluded that this action is one
this rule to be ‘‘significant’’ under that State, local, or tribal government, in the of a category of actions that do not
Order because it is an administrative aggregate, or by the private sector of individually or cumulatively have a
change and does not affect the way $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or significant effect on the human
vessels operate on the waterway. more in any one year. Though this rule environment. This rule involves
2. Impact on Small Entities will not result in such an expenditure, removing 33 CFR 117.1089(b) from the
we do discuss the effects of this rule regulations. This rule is categorically
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, elsewhere in this preamble.
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
requires federal agencies to consider the 7. Taking of Private Property Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
potential impact of regulations on small This rule will not cause a taking of the Instruction, an environmental
entities during rulemaking. The term private property or otherwise have analysis checklist and a categorical
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small taking implications under Executive exclusion determination are not
businesses, not-for-profit organizations Order 12630, Governmental Actions and required for this rule.
that are independently owned and Interference with Constitutionally
operated and are not dominant in their List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Protected Property Rights.
fields, and governmental jurisdictions Bridges.
with populations of less than 50,000. 8. Civil Justice Reform For the reasons discussed in the
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. This rule meets applicable standards preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
605(b) that this rule will not have a in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive CFR part 117 as follows:
significant economic impact on a Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
substantial number of small entities. minimize litigation, eliminate PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
This rule will have no effect on small ambiguity, and reduce burden. OPERATION REGULATIONS
entities since this drawbridge has been
removed and the regulation governing 9. Protection of Children ■ 1. The authority citation for part 117
draw operations for this bridge is no We have analyzed this rule under continues to read as follows:
longer applicable. There is no new Executive Order 13045, Protection of Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
restriction or regulation being imposed Children from Environmental Health Department of Homeland Security Delegation
by this rule; therefore, the Coast Guard Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not No. 0170.1.
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this an economically significant rule and
final rule will not have a significant § 117.1089 [Amended]
does not create an environmental risk to
economic impact on a substantial health or risk to safety that might ■ 2. In § 117.1089 remove and reserve
number of small entities. disproportionately affect children. paragraph (b).
3. Collection of Information 10. Indian Tribal Governments Dated: April 20, 2015.
This rule calls for no new collection F.M. Midgette,
This rule does not have tribal
of information under the Paperwork Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
implications under Executive Order
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Ninth Coast Guard District.
13175, Consultation and Coordination
3520). [FR Doc. 2015–10238 Filed 4–30–15; 8:45 am]
with Indian Tribal Governments,
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
4. Federalism because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
A rule has implications for federalism tribes, on the relationship between the
under Executive Order 13132, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct SECURITY
or on the distribution of power and
effect on the States, on the relationship responsibilities between the Federal
between the national government and Coast Guard
Government and Indian tribes.
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the 11. Energy Effects 33 CFR Part 165
various levels of government. We have This action is not a ‘‘significant [Docket No. USCG–2015–0333]
analyzed this rule under that Order and energy action’’ under Executive Order RIN 1625–AA00
have determined that it does not have 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
implications for federalism. That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Safety Zone; Floating Construction
5. Protest Activities Distribution, or Use. Platform, Chicago River, Chicago, IL
The Coast Guard respects the First 12. Technical Standards AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
Amendment rights of protesters. This rule does not use technical ACTION: Temporary final rule.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Protesters are asked to contact the standards. Therefore, we did not
person listed in the FOR FURTHER consider the use of voluntary consensus SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
INFORMATION CONTACT section to standards. establishing a temporary safety zone on
coordinate protest activities so that your the South Branch of the Chicago River,
message can be received without 13. Environment Chicago, Illinois. This temporary safety
jeopardizing the safety or security of We have analyzed this rule under zone is intended to restrict vessels from
people, places or vessels. Department of Homeland Security a designated portion of the South
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Apr 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM 01MYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_24900/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 24819
authorized by the Captain of the Port disorder to qualify for the HCHV 2012), VA only had authority to provide
Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene program. This change makes the HCHV services to veterans with serious
representative. program available to all homeless mental illness, including veterans who
(2) This safety zone is closed to all veterans who are enrolled in or eligible are homeless. As amended, the law
vessel traffic, except as may be for VA health care. The rule also authorizes VA to make services under
permitted by the Captain of the Port updates the definition of homeless to the HCHV program available to all
Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene match in part the one used by the homeless veterans VA provides care and
representative. Department of Housing and Urban services to, regardless of whether they
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of Development (HUD). The rule further have a serious mental illness. VA fully
the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan clarifies that the services provided by supports the change in law, and agrees
is any Coast Guard commissioned, the HCHV program through non-VA with the commenter that benefits for
warrant or petty officer who has been community-based providers must homeless veterans provided through the
designated by the Captain of the Port include case management services, HCHV program should not be
Lake Michigan to act on his or her including non-clinical case predicated on a diagnosis of serious
behalf. management, as appropriate. mental illness. This regulation will
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter DATES: This final rule is effective June remove that requirement, thereby
or operate within the safety zone must 1, 2015. allowing all eligible homeless veterans
contact the Captain of the Port Lake FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
to receive services. VA is not making a
Michigan or an on-scene representative Robert Hallett, Health Care for Homeless change based on this comment.
to obtain permission to do so. The Another commenter asked VA to
Veterans Manager, c/o Bedford VA
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an make the changes in the proposed rule,
Medical Center, Veterans Health
on-scene representative may be stating that homeless veterans should be
Administration, 200 Springs Road, Bldg.
contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel provided resources through the HCHV
17, Bedford, MA 01730; (781) 687–3187.
operators given permission to enter or program regardless of whether or not
(This is not a toll-free number.) they have a mental illness. Another
operate in the safety zone must comply SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
with all directions given to them by the commenter stated her wholehearted
HCHV program is authorized by section support for the proposed amendment.
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an 2031 of title 38, United States Code
on-scene representative. Another commenter stated the proposed
(U.S.C.), under which VA may provide changes need to be passed. We
Dated: April 22, 2015. to eligible veterans outreach; care, appreciate the commenters taking the
K.M. Moser, treatment, and rehabilitative services time to review this rulemaking.
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting (directly or by contract in community- Another commenter expressed
Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan. based treatment facilities, including support for the rule and noted that the
[FR Doc. 2015–10215 Filed 4–30–15; 8:45 am] halfway houses); and therapeutic proposed change could reduce the
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P transitional housing assistance, under social stigma many homeless veterans
38 U.S.C. 2032, in conjunction with who do not suffer from a serious mental
work therapy under 38 U.S.C. 1718(a)– illness feel about seeking assistance to
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS (b). Under current regulations, only address their homelessness. Another
AFFAIRS veterans who are homeless, enrolled in commenter noted that removing the
the VA health care system or eligible for requirement of a diagnosis for mental
38 CFR Part 63 VA health care under title 38, Code of illness would also help homeless
Federal Regulations (CFR), § 17.36 or veterans with serious mental illness
RIN 2900–AO71
17.37, and have a serious mental illness access the program, as they may not
Health Care for Homeless Veterans and/or substance use disorder are have been willing to acknowledge their
Program eligible for the program. 38 CFR 63.3(a). disability before. We agree and believe
In a document published in the that these changes will help more
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. Federal Register on May 15, 2014 (79 homeless veterans, both those with and
ACTION: Final rule. FR 27826), VA proposed to amend part without a serious mental illness, access
63 of 38 CFR to remove the requirement the health care services they need
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans that homeless veterans must suffer from through the HCHV program.
Affairs (VA) amends its medical a serious mental illness or substance use One commenter expressed support for
regulations concerning eligibility for the disorder to be eligible for HCHV, to the proposed changes, but identified
Health Care for Homeless Veterans modify the definition of the term two concerns. First, the commenter
(HCHV) program. The HCHV program ‘‘homeless’’ to match in part the urged VA to request increased funding
provides per diem payments to non-VA definition used by HUD, and to require and resources to accommodate the
community-based facilities that provide HCHV providers to offer case number of new enrollees that would be
housing, outreach services, case management services to homeless eligible as a result of the proposed rule.
management services, and rehabilitative veterans, as appropriate. We provided a Second, the commenter stated their
services, and may provide care and/or 60-day comment period, which ended concern that the proposed rule could
treatment to homeless veterans who are on July 14, 2014. We received seven have the unintended effect of
enrolled in or eligible for VA health comments, all of which supported the disadvantaging homeless veterans with
care. The rule modifies VA’s HCHV proposed changes to part 63. a serious mental illness if HCHV
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
regulations to conform to changes One commenter stated that it is providers find that veterans without a
enacted in the Honoring America’s shameful that homeless veterans have to mental illness are easier to place or
Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune be diagnosed with an illness before they receive the bulk of the services
Families Act of 2012. Specifically, the can receive the benefits they have available. While the first comment is
rule removes the requirement that earned through military service. Before somewhat outside the scope of this rule,
homeless veterans be diagnosed with a the enactment of Public Law 112–154, VA will take into account the changes
serious mental illness or substance use § 302, 126 Stat. 1164, 1184 (Aug. 6, made as a result of this rule when
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Apr 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM 01MYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_24900/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-21 10:20:34
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 10:20:34
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Temporary final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule is effective from May 1, 2015 until May 9, 2015. | |
| Contact | If you have questions on this rule, contact or email MST1 John Ng, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Chicago, at (630) 986-2122 or [email protected] If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366-9826. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 24816 | |
| RIN Number | 1625-AA00 | |
| CFR Associated | Harbors; Marine Safety; Navigation (water); Reporting and Record Keeping Requirements; Security Measures and Waterways |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR