Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard establishes a temporary safety zone within the navigable waters of the Pacific Ocean in Oceanside Harbor, California for the California Half Ironman Triathlon. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants (swimmers) and spectators of the race, to protect the participating vessels, and to protect other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative.
This rule is effective from 5:30 a.m. (p.s.t.) to 10 a.m. (p.s.t.) on April 5, 2003.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket (COTP San Diego 03-012) and are available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety Office San Diego; 2716 N. Harbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92101-Start Printed Page 149001064 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Petty Officer Austin Murai, USCG, c/o U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, telephone (619) 683-6495.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Due to the complex planning for this event many details were not finalized in time to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking. Publishing a NPRM and delaying the effective date would be contrary to the public interest since the event would occur before the rulemaking process was complete.
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. In addition to the reasons stated above, it would be contrary to the public interest since action is needed to ensure the protection of the public during the California Half Ironman Triathlon.
Background and Purpose
The California Half Ironman Triathlon is an up and coming event located in Oceanside, California. Parts of this event are located on the waters defined as Oceanside Harbor, including the entrance channel. This event includes participant swimmers and staff members of the race.
In order to provide a safe environment for the California Half Ironman Triathlon, the COTP is placing the waters of the harbor and the entrance channel under a safety zone. This zone will provide for the safety of all participants, staff, spectators and other users of the waterways.
Discussion of Rule
Ironman North America is sponsoring the California Half Ironman Triathlon in Oceanside, CA. The water portion of the triathlon will occur in the navigable waters of Oceanside Harbor, including the channel entrance.
In order to provide for the safety of the swimmers, the Triathlon Support Staff, the spectators and other users of the waterways, the COTP will be issuing a safety zone for Oceanside Harbor and the entrance channel.
Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative
This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security.
Due to the temporary safety zone's short duration of four and one half (41/2) hours for just one day, the Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that full regulatory evaluation under paragraph 10(e) of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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.
For the same reasons set forth in the above Regulatory Evaluation, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on any substantial number of entities, regardless of size.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Petty Officer Austin Murai, Marine Safety Office San Diego at (619) 683-6495.
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 (1888-734-3247).
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).
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.
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.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.
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.
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 Start Printed Page 14901health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children.
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.
To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes, we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11, 2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. We invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal governments, even if that impact may not constitute a “tribal implication” under the Order.
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
We considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant Instruction M16475.lC, this proposed rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation because we are proposing to establish a safety zone. A “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
- Marine safety
- Navigation (water)
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Security measures
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREASEnd Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
2. From 5:30 a.m. on April 5, 2003 to 10 a.m. on April 5, 2003, add a new § 165.T11-039 to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(a) Location. The area described as follows is a safety zone: the waters of Oceanside Harbor, CA, including the entrance channel.
(b) Effective dates. This safety zone will be enforced from 5:30 a.m. (PST) to 10 a.m. (PST) on April 5, 2003. If the event concludes prior to the scheduled termination time, the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety zone and will announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
(c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transit through, or anchoring within this zone by all vessels is prohibited, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety zone may request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander, who will be designated by the COTP. The Patrol Commander may be contacted by VHF-FM Channel 16.
Dated: March 17, 2003.
Stephen P. Metruck,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego.
[FR Doc. 03-7298 Filed 3-26-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P