8750 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 37 / Thursday, February 26, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

21 Id. P 82. 

22 Id. P 69. 

23 Id. P 82. 

24See discussion at id. P 75–80. 

25The Commission declines to address in this 

order the proper resolution of a dispute concerning 

an entity, not currently responsible for providing 

services relating to a generator’s nuclear plant 

licensing requirements, that is approached by a 

nuclear plant generator operator seeking to procure 

such services. Such issues are better resolved based 

on a case-by-case review of a complete factual 

record, detailing any reliability concerns. 26Order No. 716, 125 FERC ¶ 61,065 at P 75. 

licensing requirements.21 The Final 

Rule reflected the Commission’s 

intention that the approved approach to 

applicability would resolve concerns 

that entities supplying services related 

to nuclear plant licensing requirements 

would balk at executing an interface 

agreement, if execution made them 

subject to NUC–001–1.22 Furthermore, 

given the appeal rights provided for in 

the NERC enforcement process, we do 

not believe that an entity that disagrees 

with its role in providing such services 

will be subject to enforcement without 

recourse. The Commission declines at 

the rulemaking phase to address issues 

concerning individual entities that may 

be approached to provide services 

relating to nuclear plant licensing 

requirements. Such issues are better 

addressed in a proceeding providing a 

record detailing the circumstances of a 

potential transmission entity’s 

registration. 

17. We also reject New York ISO’s 

request for an allotted period of time to 

implement an interface agreement. 

Order No. 716 stated, ‘‘Given that the 

parties have already been able to agree 

to the services needed to meet NRC 

licensing requirements, the same parties 

should be able to successfully identify 

the services provided, confirm that they 

address NRC criteria for off-site power 

and system limits, and document such 

services in an auditable format 

consistent with the NUC–001–1 

Requirements.’’ 23 Thus, it should not be 

a problem for these parties to write up 

existing arrangements in the format 

required by the Nuclear Reliability 

Standard. In addition, in cases where 

there is no immediate risk to grid 

reliability, the Commission approved 

NERC’s proposal that it may order 

mediation as a remedial measure.24 For 

these reasons, we find that it is 

unnecessary to incorporate additional 

time for parties to negotiate and 

implement an interface agreement.25

18. In addition, the Commission in 

Order No. 716 rejected calls for formal 

incorporation of dispute resolution 

procedures to resolve registration and 

contract negotiation disputes and, 

instead, left the use of such procedures 

to NERC’s discretion as a mitigation 

option in the event nuclear plant 

generator operators and transmission 

entities fail to agree.26 Given our 

affirmation of the determination that no 

additional consent is necessary to 

become subject to the Nuclear 

Reliability Standard, we likewise affirm 

our determination that additional 

dispute resolution procedures to 

address a failure to consent are not 

necessary. 

The Commission orders: 

New York ISO’s request for rehearing 

is hereby denied, as discussed in the 

body of this order. 

By the Commission. Commissioner 

Kelliher is not participating. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–3964 Filed 2–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

32 CFR Part 706 

Certifications and Exemptions Under 

the International Regulations for 

Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy 

is amending its certifications and 

exemptions under the International 

Regulations for Preventing Collisions at 

Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that 

the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) 

has determined that USS WAYNE E. 

MEYER (DDG 108) is a vessel of the 

Navy which, due to its special 

construction and purpose, cannot fully 

comply with certain provisions of the 72 

COLREGS without interfering with its 

special function as a naval ship. The 

intended effect of this rule is to warn 

mariners in waters where 72 COLREGS 

apply. 

DATES: This rule is effective February 

26, 2009 and is applicable beginning 

February 11, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Commander M. Robb Hyde, JAGC, U.S. 

Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), 

Office of the Judge Advocate General, 

Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson 

Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy 

Yard, DC 20374–5066, telephone 

number: 202–685–5040. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 

1605, the Department of the Navy 

amends 32 CFR Part 706. 

This amendment provides notice that 

the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), 

under authority delegated by the 

Secretary of the Navy, has certified that 

USS WAYNE E. MEYER (DDG 108) is a 

vessel of the Navy which, due to its 

special construction and purpose, 

cannot fully comply with the following 

specific provisions of 72 COLREGS 

without interfering with its special 

function as a naval ship: Annex I, 

paragraph 2(f)(i), pertaining to the 

placement of the masthead light or 

lights above and clear of all other lights 

and obstructions; Annex I, paragraph 

2(f)(ii), pertaining to the vertical 

placement of task lights; Annex I, 

paragraph 3(a), pertaining to the 

location of the forward masthead light 

in the forward quarter of the ship, and 

the horizontal distance between the 

forward and after masthead lights; and 

Annex I, paragraph 3(c), pertaining to 

placement of task lights not less than 

two meters from the fore and aft 

centerline of the ship in the athwartship 

direction. The Deputy Assistant Judge 

Advocate General (Admiralty and 

Maritime Law) has also certified that the 

lights involved are located in closest 

possible compliance with the applicable 

72 COLREGS requirements. 

Moreover, it has been determined, in 

accordance with 32 CFR Parts 296 and 

701, that publication of this amendment 

for public comment prior to adoption is 

impracticable, unnecessary, and 

contrary to public interest since it is 

based on technical findings that the 

placement of lights on this vessel in a 

manner differently from that prescribed 

herein will adversely affect the vessel’s 

ability to perform its military functions. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 706 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), and 

Vessels. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, amend part 706 of title 32 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations as 

follows: 

PART 706—CERTIFICATIONS AND 

EXEMPTIONS UNDER THE 

INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS FOR 

PREVENTING COLLISIONS AT SEA, 

1972 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 706 

continues to read as follow: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1605. 

■ 2. Section 706.2 is amended as 

follows: 

■ A. In Table Four, Paragraph 15 by 

adding, in numerical order, the 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 37 / Thursday, February 26, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 8751 

following entry for USS WAYNE E. 

MEYER (DDG 108): 

■ B. In Table Four, Paragraph 16 by 

adding, in numerical order, the 

following entry for USS WAYNE E. 

MEYER (DDG 108): 

■ C. In Table Five, by adding, in 

numerical order, the following entry for 

USS WAYNE E. MEYER (DDG 108): 

§ 706.2 Certifications of the Secretary of 

the Navy under Executive Order 11964 and 

33 U.S.C. 1605. 

* * * * * 

Table Four 

* * * * * 

15. * * * 

Vessel Number 

Horizontal distance from the fore 

and aft centerline of the vessel in 

the athwartship direction 

* * * * * * * 

USS WAYNE E. MEYER ............................................. DDG 108 ...................................................................... 1.84 meters. 

16. * * * 

Vessel Number Obstruction angle relative ship’s 

headings 

* * * * * * * 

USS WAYNE E. MEYER ............................................. DDG 108 ...................................................................... 106.71 thru 112.50 [degrees]. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * Table Five 

* * * * * 

Vessel Number 

Masthead 

lights not over 

all other lights 

and obstructions. Annex I, 

sec. 2(f) 

Forward masthead light not 

in forward 

quarter of 

ship. Annex I, 

sec. 3(a) 

After masthead light less 

than 1⁄2 ship’s 

length aft of 

forward masthead light. 

Annex I, sec. 

3(a) 

Percentage 

horizontal separation attained 

* * * * * * * 

USS WAYNE E. MEYER .................. DDG 108 ........................................... X X X 14.5 

* * * * * * * 

Approved: February 11, 2009. 

M. Robb Hyde 

Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Deputy 

Assistant Judge Advocate, General (Admiralty 

and Maritime Law). 

[FR Doc. E9–4094 Filed 2–25–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

32 CFR Part 706 

Certifications and Exemptions Under 

the International Regulations for 

Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy 

is amending its certifications and 

exemptions under the International 

Regulations for Preventing Collisions at 

Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), to reflect that 

the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law) 

has determined that USS DEWEY (DDG 

105) is a vessel of the Navy which, due 

to its special construction and purpose, 

cannot fully comply with certain 

provisions of the 72 COLREGS without 

interfering with its special function as a 

naval ship. The intended effect of this 

rule is to warn mariners in waters where 

72 COLREGS apply. 

DATES: This rule is effective February 

26, 2009 and is applicable beginning 

February 11, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Commander M. Robb Hyde, JAGC, U.S. 

Navy, Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), 

Office of the Judge Advocate General, 

Department of the Navy, 1322 Patterson 

Ave., SE., Suite 3000, Washington Navy 

Yard, DC 20374–5066, telephone 

number: 202–685–5040. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the authority granted in 33 U.S.C. 

1605, the Department of the Navy 

amends 32 CFR Part 706. 

This amendment provides notice that 

the Deputy Assistant Judge Advocate 

General (Admiralty and Maritime Law), 

under authority delegated by the 

Secretary of the Navy, has certified that 

USS DEWEY (DDG 105) is a vessel of 

the Navy which, due to its special 

construction and purpose, cannot fully 

comply with the following specific 

provisions of 72 COLREGS without 

interfering with its special function as a 

naval ship: Annex I, paragraph 2(f)(i),