Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63315 

The bridge will be able to open for 

emergencies and there is no immediate 

alternate route for vessels to pass. The 

Coast Guard will also inform the users 

of the waterways through our Local and 

Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the 

change in operating schedule for the 

bridge so that vessels can arrange their 

transits to minimize any impact caused 

by the temporary deviation. 

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), 

the drawbridges must return to its 

regular operating schedule immediately 

at the end of the designated time period. 

This deviation from the operating 

regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 

117.35. 

Dated: October 10, 2014. 

Steven M. Fischer, 

Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard 

District. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25271 Filed 10–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2014–0849] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Ordinance Removal; 

Saipan Harbor, CNMI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a safety zone in support of 

World War II ordinance disposal found 

southeast of Buoy 3 in Saipan Harbor. 

This safety zone will encompass a 140 

yard radius centered around a blue and 

white buoy, located at approximately 15 

degrees 13.370 minutes North Latitude, 

145 degrees 42.256 minutes East 

Longitude, southeast of Buoy 3 in 

Saipan Harbor. (NAD 1983) 

DATES: This rule is effective without 

actual notice from October 23, 2014 

until December 18, 2014. For the 

purposes of enforcement, actual notice 

will be used from September 19, 2014, 

until October 23, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble are part of docket USCG– 

2014–0849. 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. (EST), Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call Chief Kristina Gauthier, U.S. 

Coast Guard Sector Guam at (671) 355– 

4866. If you have any questions on 

viewing or submitting material to the 

docket, call Cheryl Collins Program 

Manager, Docket Operations, at (202) 

366–9826 or 1–800–647–5527. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

COTP Captain of the Port 

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 (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because doing 

so would be impracticable. The Coast 

Guard received notice of the ordinance 

on September 10, 2014. Due to the 

emergent nature of this incident, the 

Coast Guard did not have time to issue 

a notice of proposed rulemaking. The 

ordinance was discovered during 

operations related to the grounded M/V 

PAUL RUSS which was covered under 

the temporary final rule USCG–2013– 

0203. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), for the same 

reason mentioned above, the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Due to the late notice and 

inherent danger in removal of 

ordinance, and a grounded vessel, 

delaying the effective period of this 

safety zone would be contrary to the 

public interest. 

B. Basis and Purpose 

The legal basis for this rule is the 

Coast Guard’s authority to establish 

regulated navigation areas and other 

limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 33 

CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; and 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. 

A safety zone is a water area, shore 

area, or water and shore area, for which 

access is limited to authorized person, 

vehicles, or vessels for safety or 

environmental purposes. The purpose of 

this rulemaking is to protect mariners 

from the potential hazards associated 

with salvage operations. Approaching 

too close to such operations could 

potentially expose the mariner to 

hazardous conditions. 

C. Discussion of Rule 

In order to protect the public from the 

hazards associated with the ordinance 

and subsequent removal operations, the 

Coast Guard is establishing a temporary 

safety zone, effective from September 

19, 2014 until December 18, 2014. The 

enforcement period for this rule is from 

September 19, 2014 until December 18, 

2014. 

The safety zone is located within the 

Guam COTP Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–15), 

and will cover all waters bounded by a 

circle with a 140-yard radius centered 

around the ordinance, located at 

approximately 15 degrees 13.370 North 

Latitude, 145 degrees 42.256 minutes 

East Longitude, from the surface of the 

water to the ocean floor. 

The general regulations governing 

safety zones contained in 33 CFR 165.23 

apply. Entry into, transit through or 

anchoring within this zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the COTP or a 

designated representative thereof. Any 

Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or 

petty officer, and any other COTP 

representative permitted by law, may 

enforce the zone. The COTP may waive 

any of the requirements of this rule for 

any person, vessel, or class of vessel 

upon finding that application of the 

safety zone is unnecessary or 

impractical for the purpose of maritime 

safety. Vessels or persons violating this 

rule may be subject to the penalties set 

forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and/or 50 U.S.C. 

192. 

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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
63316 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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. The Coast Guard expects the 

economic impact of this rule to be 

extremely minimal based on the limited 

geographic area affected by it. 

2. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA), 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. 

This safety zone will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons. Traffic will be 

allowed to pass through the zone with 

the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander 671–355–4821. During the 

effective period, we will issue maritime 

advisories widely available to users of 

the Saipan shipping channel and 

surrounding waters. 

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 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, 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 calls for no 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 State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this rule under that Order and have 

determined that it 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 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. 

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 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 a 

closed area of the Saipan Harbor, to 

vessel traffic and water sports above and 

below the water, until further notice. 

This rule is categorically excluded, 

under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of 

the Instruction. 

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; 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. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T14–0849 to read as 

follows: 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 205 / Thursday, October 23, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 63317 

§ 165.T14–0849 Safety Zone; Ordinance 

Removal, Saipan Harbor, CNMI. 

(a) Location. The following area, 

within the Guam Captain of the Port 

(COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–15), 

from the surface of the water to the 

ocean floor, is a safety zone: All waters 

bounded by a circle with a 140-yard 

radius, centered around the World War 

II era ordinance, located at 

approximately 15 degrees 13.370 

minutes North Latitude, 145 degrees 

42.256 minutes East Longitude, 

southeast of Buoy 3 in Saipan Harbor 

(NAD 1983). 

(b) Effective period. This rule is 

effective from September 19, 2014 until 

December 18, 2014. 

(c) Enforcement period. This safety 

zone will be enforced from September 

19, 2014 until December 18, 2014. 

(d) Regulations. The general 

regulations governing safety zones 

contained in § 165.23 apply. Entry into, 

transit through or within this zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

COTP or a designated representative 

thereof. 

(e) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, 

and any other COTP representative 

permitted by law, may enforce this 

temporary safety zone. 

(f) Waiver. The COTP may waive any 

of the requirements of this rule for any 

person, vessel, or class of vessel upon 

finding that application of the safety 

zone is unnecessary or impractical for 

the purpose of maritime security. 

(g) Penalties. Vessels or persons 

violating this rule are subject to the 

penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 

50 U.S.C. 192. 

Dated: September 19, 2014. 

B.J. Kettner, 

Commander, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of 

the Port Guam, Acting. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25273 Filed 10–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Part 685 

RIN 1840–AD17 

[Docket ID ED–2014–OPE–0082] 

William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan 

Program 

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary 

Education, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Final regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the 

regulations governing the William D. 

Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) 

Program. These regulations strengthen 

and improve administration of the 

Federal Direct PLUS Loan Program 

authorized under title IV of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended 

(HEA). 

DATES: These regulations are effective 

July 1, 2015. Implementation date: For 

the implementation date, see the 

Implementation Date of These 

Regulations section of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Smith, U.S. Department of 

Education, 1990 K Street NW., Room 

8082, Washington, DC 20006. 

Telephone (202) 502–7551 or by email: 

Brian.Smith@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary: Purpose of This 

Regulatory Action: We are amending 

§ 685.200 of title 34 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) to update the 

standard for determining if a potential 

parent or student borrower has an 

adverse credit history for purposes of 

eligibility for a Direct PLUS Loan (PLUS 

loan). Specifically, the final regulations 

will revise the definition of ‘‘adverse 

credit history’’ and require that parents 

and students who have an adverse 

credit history but who are approved for 

a PLUS loan on the basis that 

extenuating circumstances exist or who 

obtain an endorser for the PLUS loan 

must receive loan counseling before 

receiving the loan. The current 

regulations governing adverse credit 

history determinations have not been 

updated since the Direct Loan Program 

was established in 1994. The final 

regulations will reflect programmatic 

and economic changes that have 

occurred since 1994. 

Summary of the Major Provisions of 

This Regulatory Action: These final 

regulations will— 

• Revise the student PLUS loan 

borrower eligibility criteria to state more 

clearly that the PLUS loan adverse 

credit history requirements apply to 

student, as well as parent, PLUS loan 

borrowers. 

• Add definitions of the terms 

‘‘charged off’’ and ‘‘in collection’’ for 

purposes of determining whether an 

applicant for a PLUS loan has an 

adverse credit history. 

• Specify that a PLUS loan applicant 

has an adverse credit history if the 

applicant has one or more debts with a 

total combined outstanding balance 

greater than $2,085 that are 90 or more 

days delinquent as of the date of the 

credit report, or that have been placed 

in collection or charged off during the 

two years preceding the date of the 

credit report. 

• Provide that the combined 

outstanding balance threshold of $2,085 

will be increased over time based on the 

rate of inflation, as measured by the 

Consumer Price Index for All Urban 

Consumers (CPI–U). 

• Revise the provision that specifies 

the types of documentation the 

Secretary may accept as a basis for 

determining that extenuating 

circumstances exist for a PLUS loan 

applicant who is determined to have an 

adverse credit history. 

• Specify that an applicant for a 

PLUS loan who is determined to have 

an adverse credit history, but who 

obtains an endorser, must complete 

PLUS loan counseling offered by the 

Secretary before receiving a PLUS loan. 

• Specify that an applicant for a 

PLUS loan who is determined to have 

an adverse credit history, but who 

documents to the Secretary’s 

satisfaction that extenuating 

circumstances exist, must complete 

PLUS loan counseling offered by the 

Secretary before receiving the PLUS 

loan. 

Costs and Benefits: As further detailed 

in the Regulatory Impact Analysis 

section of this document, the final 

regulations will affect applicants for 

parent and student PLUS loans by 

modifying the standard for a 

determination of an adverse credit 

history. In particular, a student or 

parent will be considered to have an 

adverse credit history if the student or 

parent has one or more debts with a 

combined outstanding balance greater 

than $2,085 that are 90 or more days 

delinquent as of the date of the credit 

report, or that have been placed in 

collection or charged off during the two 

years preceding the date of the credit 

report. 

The final regulations will also require 

that an applicant for a PLUS loan who 

is determined to have an adverse credit 

history but who documents to the 

satisfaction of the Secretary that 

extenuating circumstances exist or who 

obtains an endorser must complete 

PLUS loan counseling offered by the 

Secretary prior to receiving the loan. 

In November 2011, the Department 

modified its procedures relating to 

adverse credit history determinations to 

be consistent with the regulations. This 

modification resulted in an increase in 

the number of PLUS loan applicants 

who were determined to have an 

adverse credit history. The Department 

expects that the final regulations will 

increase the number of PLUS loan 

applicants who pass the adverse credit 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES