Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 85053 

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

To view documents mentioned in this 

rule as being available in the docket, 

find the docket as described in the 

previous paragraph, and then select 

‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the 

Document Type column. Public 

comments will also be placed in our 

online docket and can be viewed by 

following instructions on the https://

www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 

Questions web page. We review all 

comments received, but we will only 

post comments that address the topic of 

the rule. We may choose not to post offtopic, inappropriate, or duplicate 

comments that we receive. Additionally, 

if you click on the’’ Dockets’’ tab and 

then the rule, you should see a 

‘‘Subscribe’’ option for email alerts. 

Selecting this option will enable 

notifications when comments are 

posted, or if/when a final rule is 

published. 

We accept anonymous comments. 

Comments we post to https://

www.regulations.gov will include any 

personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1. Revision No. 01.3 

■ 2. Section 117.261 is amended by 

revising paragraph (p). 

§ 117.261 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway 

from St. Marys River to Key Largo. 

* * * * * 

(p) Indiantown Road Bridge, mile 

1006.2, at Jupiter. The draw shall open 

on the hour and half hour except that 

the draw need not open from 7 a.m. to 

9 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Monday 

through Friday except Federal holidays 

until 11:59 p.m. on August 31, 2025. 

* * * * * 

Dated: October 18, 2024. 

Douglas M. Schofield, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Coast Guard Seventh District. 

[FR Doc. 2024–24711 Filed 10–24–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2024–0957] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zones; Houston Ship Channel 

and Morgan’s Point, TX 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing two temporary safety zones, 

a 100-yard radius moving safety zone 

and a 25-yard radius fixed safety zone, 

around the M/V PIETERSGRACHT, in 

the navigable waters of the Houston 

Ship Channel and its vicinity. The 

temporary safety zones are necessary to 

protect persons, property, and the 

marine environment from potential 

hazards associated with the transfer of 

gantry cranes. Persons and vessels are 

prohibited from entering, transiting 

through, anchoring in, or remaining 

within the safety zones unless 

specifically authorized by the Captain of 

the Port Sector Houston-Galveston or a 

designated representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 1 a.m. 

on October 29, 2024, through 5 p.m. on 

November 15, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2024– 

0957 in the search box, and click 

‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type 

column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related 

Material.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this rule, call 

or email First Class Marine Science 

Technician Christopher Morgan, Sector 

Houston-Galveston Waterways 

Management Division, U.S. Coast 

Guard; telephone 713–398–5823, email 

houstonwwm@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

COTP Captain of the Port 

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 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary rule under authority in 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B). This statutory 

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.’’ The Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because it is 

impracticable. Prompt action is needed 

to respond to potential safety hazards 

associated with the transfer of this 

equipment. It is impracticable to 

publish an NPRM because we must 

establish these safety zones by October 

29, 2024. 

Also, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the 

Coast Guard finds that good cause exists 

for making this rule effective less than 

30 days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Delaying the effective date of 

this rule would be impracticable 

because prompt action is needed to 

respond to the potential safety hazards 

associated with the transfer of gantry 

cranes scheduled to begin on October 

29, 2024. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule 

under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034. The 

Captain of the Port Sector HoustonGalveston (COTP) has determined that 

potential hazards associated with the 

transfer of gantry cranes starting October 

29, 2024, will be a safety concern for 

anyone within a 100-yard radius of the 

M/V PIETERSGRACHT while in transit 

and within a 25-yard radius of the M/ 

V PIETERSGRACHT while moored. This 

rule is needed to protect persons, 

property, and the marine environment 

within the navigable waters of the safety 

zones while the M/V PIETERSGRACHT 

transits to and unloads gantry cranes in 

Morgan’s Point, Texas. 

IV. Discussion of the Rule 

This rule establishes two temporary 

safety zones from 1 a.m. on October 29, 

2024, through 5 p.m. on November 15, 

2024. The temporary safety zones 

include a moving safety zone, covering 

all navigable waters within a 100-yard 

radius of the M/V PIETERSGRACHT, a 

general cargo ship, while underway and 

a fixed safety zone covering all 

navigable waters within a 25-yard 

radius of the M/V PIETERSGRACHT 

while moored. The duration of these 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
85054 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

zones is intended to ensure the safety of 

the public, vessels and the navigable 

waters in the specified areas during the 

transit of the gantry cranes in the 

Houston Ship Channel and while the 

vessel is moored and unloading. No 

vessel or person will be permitted to 

enter, transit through, anchor in, or 

remain within the safety zones without 

obtaining permission from the COTP or 

a designated representative. 

Moving Safety Zone: This area 

includes all waters within a 100-yard 

radius of the M/V PIETERSGRACHT as 

the vessel transits from the Gulf of 

Mexico off the coast of Galveston and 

through the Houston Ship Channel. The 

approximate start position is 

29°19′01.21′′ N, 094°38′38.1′′ W, located 

in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of 

Galveston, Texas. 

Fixed Safety Zone: This area includes 

all waters within a 25-yard radius of the 

M/V PIETERSGRACHT once the M/V 

PIETERSGRACHT is moored at 

Barbours Cut Terminal in Morgan’s 

Point, Texas, at coordinates 29°41′03′′ N, 

094°59′40′′ W. 

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, and we discuss the 

First Amendment rights of protestors. 

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. 

This rule has not been designated a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as 

amended by Executive Order 14094 

(Modernizing Regulatory Review). 

Accordingly, the Office of Management 

and Budget has not reviewed this rule. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the safety zones’ size, 

location, duration, and time-of-day. The 

safety zones will be subject to 

enforcement the entire duration of the 

effective period to facilitate the safe 

transfer of gantry cranes in the Houston 

Ship Channel. Although the rule 

prohibits persons and vessels from 

entering, transiting through, anchoring 

in, or remaining within the regulated 

area without authorization from the 

COTP or a designated representative, 

persons and vessels may be present in 

the surrounding areas during the 

enforcement period. The Coast Guard 

will provide advance notification of the 

safety zones to the local maritime 

community by Local Notice to Mariners 

or Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and the 

rule will allow persons and vessels to 

seek permission to enter the zones. 

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 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. 

While some owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the safety 

zone may be small entities, for the 

reasons stated in section V.A above, this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on any vessel owner 

or operator. 

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 call or email 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 businesses. 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 principles of 

federalism 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. 

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 an 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 

Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated 

implementing instructions, and 

Environmental Planning COMDTINST 

5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Polic1y 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 safety 

zones that will prohibit persons and 

vessels from entering, transiting 

through, anchoring in, or remaining 

within the safety zones around the M/ 

V PIETERSGRACHT while underway 

and moored in the Houston Ship 

Channel. It is categorically excluded 

from further review under paragraph 

L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS 

Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 85055 

Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental 

Consideration supporting this 

determination is available in the docket. 

For instructions on locating the docket, 

see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to call or email 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 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T08–0957 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T08–0957 Fixed and Moving Safety 

Zone; Vicinity of the M/VPIETERSGRACHT, 

Houston Ship Channel and Morgan’s Point, 

TX. 

(a) Location. The following areas are 

temporary safety zones: 

(1) Moving Safety Zone. All waters 

within a 100-yard radius of the M/V 

PIETERSGRACHT, as the vessel transits 

from the approximate coordinates 

29°19′01.21′′ N, 094°38′38.1′′ W, off the 

coast of Galveston, TX, and proceeds 

through the Houston Ship Channel to 

the assigned docking station. 

(2) Fixed Safety Zone. All waters 

within a 25-yard radius of the M/V 

PIETERSGRACHT while moored at the 

Barbours Cut Terminal in Morgan’s 

Point, Texas. 

(b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated 

representative’’ means Coast Guard 

Patrol Commanders, including Coast 

Guard coxswains, petty officers, and 

other officers operating Coast Guard 

vessels, and Federal, state, and local 

officers designated by or assisting the 

Captain of the Port Sector HoustonGalveston (COTP) in the enforcement of 

the safety zones. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general 

safety zone regulations in subpart C of 

this part, all persons and vessels are 

prohibited from entering, transiting 

through, anchoring in, or remaining 

within the safety zones described in 

paragraph (a) of this section unless 

authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s 

designated representative. 

(2) Persons and vessels may request 

authorization to enter, transit through, 

anchor in, or remain within the safety 

zones by contacting the COTP by 

telephone at 866–539–8114, or the 

COTP’s designated representative via 

VHF radio on channel 16. If 

authorization is granted by the COTP or 

the COTP’s designated representative, 

all persons and vessels receiving such 

authorization must comply with the 

lawful instructions of the COTP or the 

COTP’s designated representative. 

(d) Enforcement period. This rule will 

be subject to enforcement from 1 a.m. on 

October 29, 2024, through 5 p.m. on 

November 15, 2024. 

Keith M. Donohue, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Houston-Galveston. 

[FR Doc. 2024–24757 Filed 10–24–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 14 

RIN 2900–AR93 

Fee Reasonableness Reviews; Effect 

of Loss of Accreditation on Direct 

Payment 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) is issuing this final rule to 

address its process for reviewing, 

determining, and allocating reasonable 

fees for claim representation, and to 

address the effect on direct payment of 

the termination of a claims agent’s or 

attorney’s VA accreditation. 

DATES: 

Effective date: This final rule is 

effective April 1, 2025. 

Applicability date: The provisions of 

this final rule shall apply to all fee 

allocation notices issued on or after the 

effective date of this final rule. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jonathan Taylor, Office of General 

Counsel (022D), 810 Vermont Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461– 

7699. (This is not a toll-free telephone 

number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

December 21, 2023, VA published in the 

Federal Register (88 FR 88,295) a 

proposed rule to address its process for 

reviewing, determining, and allocating 

reasonable fees for claim representation, 

and to address the effect on direct 

payment of the termination of a claims 

agent’s or attorney’s VA accreditation. 

The proposed rule allowed for a 

comment period ending on February 20, 

2024. During the comment period, VA 

received 15 comments, which are 

discussed below. After considering 

these comments, VA has decided to 

finalize the proposed rule without 

amendment. 

Comments on Representatives and Fees 

Generally 

One commenter stated that ‘‘the tone 

of [VA’s] proposal suggests that attorney 

involvement in the [claims] process is 

part of some problem.’’ VA thanks the 

commenter for this comment, but, to be 

clear, VA takes no issue with VAaccredited attorneys and claims agents 

(hereinafter ‘‘agents’’) assisting 

claimants and recognizes the important 

service they provide. But the fact of the 

matter is that there has been an increase 

in multi-attorney and multi-agent cases 

and, when those agents and attorneys 

request direct payment, VA needs an 

efficient process to allocate fees in all 

those cases. This rule provides such a 

process. And this rule’s process will (1) 

empower agents and attorneys to 

negotiate fees on their own and (2) 

deliver fees to agents and attorneys 

more expeditiously (and benefits to 

veterans more expeditiously). Those are 

not anti-attorney or anti-agent measures 

or results. 

Another commenter stated that fees 

should be a matter between a veteran 

and representative, and that 

representatives should not get fees from 

VA. VA thanks the commenter, but—to 

be clear—VA does not pay 

representatives independently. VA only 

pays representatives (out of a claimant’s 

past-due benefits) when the claimant 

and the representative have requested it. 

And, under this rule, VA will only get 

involved with the question of fees when 

(1) direct payment is requested or (2) a 

fee reasonableness review is requested 

or otherwise warranted. Moreover, 

consistent with this commenter’s 

general view on fee matters, this rule 

sets forth reasonable default allocations 

that will allow claimants and 

representatives to resolve fee matters on 

their own in many cases. Nevertheless, 

if that effort is unsuccessful, VA’s Office 

of General Counsel (OGC) remains 

available to review and decide a 

reasonable fee allocation for the case. 

A third commenter stated that VA 

should ‘‘require agents or attorneys to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1