NCC-46-08-00001-P Posting of Speed Limit Signage on the Canal System  

  • 11/12/08 N.Y. St. Reg. NCC-46-08-00001-P
    NEW YORK STATE REGISTER
    VOLUME XXX, ISSUE 46
    November 12, 2008
    RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES
    NEW YORK STATE CANAL CORPORATION
    PROPOSED RULE MAKING
    NO HEARING(S) SCHEDULED
     
    I.D No. NCC-46-08-00001-P
    Posting of Speed Limit Signage on the Canal System
    PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following proposed rule:
    Proposed Action:
    Amendment of section 151.15 of Title 21 NYCRR.
    Statutory authority:
    Public Authorities Law, sections 354(5), 382(7)(d) and (k); and Canal Law, sections 10(9), (26) and 85
    Subject:
    Posting of speed limit signage on the Canal System.
    Purpose:
    To clarify that float speed shall not exceed any posted speed on canalized river sections of the Canal System.
    Text of proposed rule:
    § 151.15 Speed on canals.
    Every operator of a float is responsible for the wake of that float. In dug sections of the canal system, float speed shall not exceed 10 miles per hour, except within 100 feet of a dock, pier, raft, float, anchored or moored, float speed shall not exceed five miles per hour. In canalized rivers of the canal system, float speed shall not exceed the posted speed or, if there is no posted speed, shall depend on the conditions of traffic but shall not exceed 45 miles per hour, except within 100 feet of a dock, pier, raft, anchored or moored float, speed shall not exceed five miles per hour, unless such float is being operated near such dock, pier, raft, anchored or moored float for the purpose of enabling a person engaged in water skiing to take off or land. In lakes of the canal system, float speed shall depend on the conditions of traffic, except within 100 feet of the shoreline, a dock, pier, raft, anchored or moored float, speed shall not exceed five miles per hour, unless such float is being operated near such dock, pier, raft, anchored or moored float for the purpose of enabling a person engaged in water skiing to take off or land. So far as may be practicable, the rates of speed will be indicated for the various sections at each lock and in no event shall such rates of speed be exceeded. Any operator of a float violating this section shall be subject to a penalty not exceeding $100 for each offense and the lock or bridge at which the float first appears following such violation, may refuse such float passage for a period of not more than six hours.
    Text of proposed rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
    Marcy Pavone, Legal Assistant, New York State Thruway Authority, 200 Southern Blvd., Albany, New York 12209, (518) 436-2860, email: marcy_pavone@thruway.state.ny.us
    Data, views or arguments may be submitted to:
    Same as above.
    Public comment will be received until:
    45 days after publication of this notice.
    Regulatory Impact Statement
    1. Statutory Authority:
    Public Authorities Law (PAL) section 354, subdivision 5, authorizes the Thruway Authority to make "rules and regulations governing the use of the thruways and all other properties and facilities under its jurisdiction." Further, section 382, subdivision 7(d) authorizes the Canal Corporation to "make and alter by-laws for its organization and internal management and make rules and regulations governing the use of its property and facilities." Subdivision 7(k) of the same section authorizes the Canal Corporation to "exercise those powers and duties of the authority pursuant to the canal law." Canal Law section 85 states that, "[T]he corporation shall prescribe and enforce rules and regulations, not inconsistent with the law, governing navigation on the canals and for the use of the terminals connected with the canals and for the use of all other property of the corporation under the corporation's control and maintained as a part of the canal system." Canal Law section 10, subdivision 9 authorizes the Canal Corporation to "prescribe rules and regulations not inconsistent with law relating to the navigation, protection and maintenance of the canal system…" and subdivision 26 authorizes the Canal Corporation to "[P]erform such other acts as in its judgment constitute a duty required to efficiently administer the canal system."
    2. Legislative Objectives:
    The amendment to 21 NYCRR 151.15 would add to the existing language prescribing maximum speed limits on canalized river sections of the Canal System, clarifying language that references that float speed shall not exceed the posted speed. This additional language clarifies the Canal Corporation's authority to post lower limits, where appropriate, in the interest of public safety and shoreline protection.
    3. Needs and Benefits:
    The proposed language that specifies that speed shall not exceed posted speed limits makes it clear that, where appropriate in the interest of public safety and shoreline protection, there may be posted speed limits that are lower than the existing maximum speed limit of 45 miles per hour on canalized river sections of the Canal System. This change has been requested by Troop T of the New York State Police to assist in marine law enforcement operations and is preferable to the establishment by regulation of speed limits for each reach, or section, of the Canal System. Concurrent with this clarification, speed limit signage will be erected at certain locations where safety or operational concerns dictate speeds lower than forty-five miles per hour.
    4. Costs:
    There is no cost to regulated parties for the implementation of and continuing compliance with the regulation. There are no additional administrative costs for implementation of the revised regulation.
    5. Local Government Mandates:
    This rule imposes no additional program, service, duty, or responsibility on local government beyond any law enforcement program already in place.
    6. Paperwork:
    None.
    7. Duplication:
    There is no duplication of State or Federal Law.
    8. Alternatives:
    The Canal Corporation considered a no action alternative but chose to pursue this rule as an effort to protect the safety and welfare of users of the New York State Canal system. The New York State Police advocated for the need for different speed limits on certain sections of the canal for law enforcement purposes. In addition to the New York State Police, the Canal Corporation regularly consulted with State Council on Waterways (SCOW) President Tom Ryan on this issue. In 2005 a boater forum sponsored by SCOW was held in Little Falls to get feedback on boating speed along the canal. Furthermore, the Canal Corporation also held a joint press conference in Baldwinsville in 2006 with SCOW President Tom Ryan on the matter. Though they favored reducing the river speed limit from 45 MPH to a universal 10 MPH, they were open to a compromise, which is area-appropriate speed limits consistent with Canal regulations. The proposed language that specifies that speed shall not exceed posted speed limits makes it clear that, where appropriate in the interest of public safety, to reduce shoreline erosion or to minimize impacts to property along the canal, there may be posted speed limits that are lower than the existing maximum speed limit of 45 miles per hour on canalized river sections of the Canal System.
    9. Federal Standards:
    There is no specific federal requirement.
    10. Compliance Schedule:
    Ongoing.
    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    This regulation will not impose any adverse economic impact on reporting, record keeping or other compliance requirements on small businesses or local governments. As such, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required.
    Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
    This regulation does not impose any adverse impact on rural areas whether through reporting, record keeping or other compliance requirements on public or private entities in rural areas; as such, a Rural Area Flexibility Analysis is not required.
    Job Impact Statement
    Based on the nature and purpose of the proposed rule, it will not have a substantial adverse impact on jobs and employment opportunities. As such, a Job Impact Statement is not required.