82 FR 23514 - Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls, New York

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 98 (May 23, 2017)

Page Range		23514-23516
FR Document		2017-10469

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.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 98 (Tuesday, May 23, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 23, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23514-23516]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[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 http://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 
[email protected].

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

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 23515

II. Background Information and waters: All United States waters of the The Coast Guard received no comments
Regulatory History Lower Niagara River, Niagara Falls, NY from the Small Business Administration
On June 21, 2016, the Coast Guard from a straight line drawn from position on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard
published a notice of proposed 43°07′10.70″ N., 079°04′02.32″ W. (NAD certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
83) and 43°07′09.41″ N., 079°4′05.41″ rule will not have a significant
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Safety Zone;
W. (NAD 83) just south of the whirlpool economic impact on a substantial
Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls,
rapids from the east side of the river to number of small entities.
New York’’ (81 FR 40226). There we This rule may affect the following
the international border of the United
issued the NPRM and invited comments entities, most of which are small
States, to a straight line drawn from
on our proposed regulatory action entities: The owners or operators of
position 43°06′34.01″ N., 079°03′28.04″
related to this permanent safety zone. vessels intending to transit in the
W. (NAD 83) and 43°06′33.52″ N.,
During the 90 day comment period that portion of American waters at the
079°03′30.42″ W. (NAD 83) at the
ended September 19, 2016, we received whirlpool rapids. This safety zone will
International Railroad Bridge. Entry
five comments. not have a significant economic impact
into, transiting, or anchoring within the
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule safety zone is prohibited unless on a substantial number of small entities
authorized by the Captain of the Port for the following reasons: There have
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule
Zone Buffalo or a designated not been a substantial number of small
under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The entities attempting to transit this section
Coast Guard has already established a representative.
of the river.
permanent safety zone in the Upper V. Regulatory Analyses Under section 213(a) of the Small
Niagara River per 33 CFR 165.902(a) in We developed this rule after Business Regulatory Enforcement
order to protect the boating public from considering numerous statutes and Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
the dangers of the waters above and at Executive orders related to rulemaking. we want to assist small entities in
the Niagara Falls. These waters include Below we summarize our analyses understanding this rule. If the rule
the United States waters of the Niagara based on a number of these statutes and would affect your small business,
River from the crest of the American Executive orders. organization, or governmental
and Horseshoe Falls, New York to a line jurisdiction and you have questions
drawn across the Niagara River from the A. Regulatory Planning and Review
concerning its provisions or options for
downstream side of the mouth of Gill Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 compliance, please contact the person
Creek to the upstream end of the direct agencies to assess the costs and listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
breakwater at the mouth of the Welland benefits of available regulatory CONTACT section.
River. alternatives and, if regulation is Small businesses may send comments
The heavy rapids in the section of the necessary, to select regulatory on the actions of Federal employees
Lower Niagara River downstream of approaches that maximize net benefits. who enforce, or otherwise determine
Niagara Falls have not historically been Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the compliance with, Federal regulations to
regularly navigated by vessels. In early importance of quantifying both costs the Small Business and Agriculture
2014, the Captain of the Port Zone and benefits, of reducing costs, of Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
Buffalo received reports of vessels harmonizing rules, and of promoting and the Regional Small Business
transiting this section of the Niagara flexibility. This rule has not been Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
River. These reports prompted further designated a ‘‘significant regulatory Ombudsman evaluates these actions
evaluation of the safety of the entire action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. annually and rates each agency’s
waterway by federal, state, and local Accordingly, it has not been reviewed responsiveness to small business. If you
agencies. The purpose of the evaluation by the Office of Management and wish to comment on actions by
was to determine what, if any, rescue Budget. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
capability exists that would be able to We conclude that this rule is not a 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The
respond to vessels and/or passengers in significant regulatory action because we Coast Guard will not retaliate against
distress in the heavy rapids of the river anticipate that it will have minimal small entities that question or complain
south of the whirlpool rapids to the impact on the economy, will not about this rule or any policy or action
International Railroad Bridge. interfere with other agencies, will not of the Coast Guard.
The Captain of the Port Buffalo adversely alter the budget of any grant
(COTP) has determined that no feasible or loan recipients, and will not raise any C. Collection of Information
rescue capability exists for vessels in novel legal or policy issues. The safety This rule will not call for a new
distress or persons in the water in the zone created by this rule will be collection of information under the
heavy rapids south of the whirlpool relatively small and is designed to Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
rapids to the International Railroad minimize its impact on navigable U.S.C. 3501–3520).
Bridge. waters.
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, B. Impact on Small Entities Governments
and the Rule The Regulatory Flexibility Act of A rule has implications for federalism
As noted above, we received five 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, under Executive Order 13132,
comments on our NPRM published June requires Federal agencies to consider Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
21, 2016. All five comments were the potential impact of regulations on effect on the States, on the relationship
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES

generally supportive of the proposed small entities during rulemaking. The between the national government and
safety zone with no objections or term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small the States, or on the distribution of
recommendations. There are no changes businesses, not-for-profit organizations power and responsibilities among the
in the regulatory text of this rule from that are independently owned and various levels of government. We have
the language proposed in the NPRM. operated and are not dominant in their analyzed this rule under that Order and
This rule establishes a permanent fields, and governmental jurisdictions have determined that it is consistent
safety zone to include the following with populations of less than 50,000. with the fundamental federalism

VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:41 May 22, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM 23MYR1

23516 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

principles and preemption requirements message can be received without SUMMARY: In accordance with the
described in Executive Order 13132. jeopardizing the safety or security of Presidential directive as expressed in
Also, this rule does not have tribal people, places or vessels. the memorandum of January 20, 2017,
implications under Executive Order from the Assistant to the President and
13175, Consultation and Coordination List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Chief of Staff, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
with Indian Tribal Governments, Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Freeze Pending Review,’’ this action
because it does not have a substantial (water), Reporting and recordkeeping temporarily delays, until June 5, 2017,
direct effect on one or more Indian requirements, Security measures, the effective date of the final rule titled
tribes, on the relationship between the Waterways. ‘‘Minimum Training Requirements for
Federal Government and Indian tribes, For the reasons discussed in the Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle
or on the distribution of power and preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Operators,’’ initially effective on
responsibilities between the Federal CFR part 165 as follows: February 6, 2017.
Government and Indian tribes. If you DATES: The effective date of the final
believe this rule has implications for PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION rule published on December 8, 2016 (81
federalism or Indian tribes, please AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS FR 88732), delayed to March 21, 2017
contact the person listed in the FOR at 82 FR 8903 and then further delayed
■ 1. The authority citation for part 165
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. to May 22, 2017 at 82 FR 14476, is
continues to read as follows:
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act further delayed until June 5, 2017.
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; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Department of Homeland Security Delegation Richard Clemente, Driver and Carrier
Federal agencies to assess the effects of No. 0170.1. Operations (MC–PSD) Division,
their discretionary regulatory actions. In ■ 2. In § 165.902, revise the section FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
particular, the Act addresses actions heading and add paragraph (b) to read Washington, DC 20590–0001, by
that may result in the expenditure by a as follows: telephone at 202–366–4325, or by email
State, local, or tribal government, in the at MCPSD@dot.gov.
§ 165.902 Safety Zone; Lower Niagara SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FMCSA
aggregate, or by the private sector of River at Niagara Falls, New York.
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or bases this action on the Presidential
more in any one year. Though this rule * * * * * directive as expressed in the
(b) The following is a safety zone— memorandum of January 20, 2017, from
will not result in such expenditure, we
The United States waters of the Lower the Assistant to the President and Chief
do discuss the effects of this rule
Niagara River, Niagara Falls, NY from a of Staff, entitled ‘‘Regulatory Freeze
elsewhere in this preamble.
straight line drawn from position Pending Review’’ (the January 20, 2017,
F. Environment 43°07′10.70″ N., 079°04′02.32″ W. (NAD memorandum). That memorandum
We have analyzed this rule under 83) and 43°07′09.41″ N., 079°04′05.41″ directed the heads of Executive
Department of Homeland Security W. (NAD 83) just south of the whirlpool Departments and Agencies to
Management Directive 023–01 and rapids from the east side of the river to temporarily postpone for 60 days from
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, the international border of the United the date of the memorandum the
which guide the Coast Guard in States, to a straight line drawn from effective dates of certain regulations that
complying with the National position 43°06′34.01″ N., 079°03′28.04″ had been published in the Federal
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 W. (NAD 83) and 43°06′33.52″ N., Register, but had not yet taken effect.
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 079°03′30.42″ W. (NAD 83) at the Because the original effective date of the
determined that this action is one of a International Railroad Bridge. final rule published on December 8,
category of actions that do not Dated: April 20, 2017. 2016, fell within that 60-day window,
individually or cumulatively have a J.S. Dufresne, the effective date of the rule was
significant effect on the human Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the extended to March 21, 2017, in a final
environment. This rule involves the Port Buffalo. rule published on February 1, 2017 (82
establishment of a permanent safety [FR Doc. 2017–10469 Filed 5–22–17; 8:45 am] FR 8903). Consistent with the
zone in a small section of the Lower BILLING CODE 9110–04–P memorandum of the Assistant to the
Niagara River. It is categorically President and Chief of Staff, and as
excluded from further review under stated in the February 1, 2017, final rule
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION delaying the effective date, the Agency
Commandant Instruction. An further delayed the effective date of this
environmental analysis checklist Federal Motor Carrier Safety regulation until May 22, 2017 (82 FR
supporting this determination and a Administration 14476, March 21, 2017). The Agency
Categorical Exclusion Determination are now delays the effective date until June
available in the docket where indicated 49 CFR Parts 380, 383, and 384 5, 2017.
under ADDRESSES. We seek any The Agency’s implementation of this
[FMCSA–2007–27748] action without opportunity for public
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant RIN 2126–AB66 comment is based on the good cause
environmental impact from this rule. exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and
Minimum Training Requirements for 553(d)(3), in that seeking public
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES

G. Protest Activities Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle comment is impracticable, unnecessary
The Coast Guard respects the First Operators and contrary to the public interest. The
Amendment rights of protesters. AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety delay in the effective date until June 5,
Protesters are asked to contact the Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 2017, is necessary to provide the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER opportunity for further review and
ACTION: Final rule; further delay of
INFORMATION CONTACT section to consideration of this new regulation,
effective date.
coordinate protest activities so that your consistent with the January 20, 2017,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:41 May 22, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM 23MYR1

Document Created: 2017-05-23 02:14:29
Document Modified: 2017-05-23 02:14:29

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		Final rule.
Dates		This rule is effective June 22, 2017.
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 [email protected]
FR Citation		82 FR 23514
RIN Number		1625-AA00
CFR Associated		Harbors; Marine Safety; Navigation (water); Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Security Measures and Waterways

82 FR 23514 - Safety Zone; Lower Niagara River at Niagara Falls, New York

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 98 (May 23, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard