Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the Lower Colorado River, Laughlin, Nevada, in support of the Laughlin Independence Day fireworks display to be held near the AVI Resort and Casino. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative.
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before July 19, 2006.
You may mail comments and related material to the Office of Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, 2710 N. Harbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92101-1028. The Office of Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego maintains Start Printed Page 35231the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket (COTP San Diego 06-025) and are available for inspection or copying at the Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard Sector San Diego, 2710 N. Harbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92101-1028 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chief Petty Officer Eric Carroll, USCG, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego at (619) 278-7277.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (COTP San Diego 06-025), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know that your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Office of Waterway Management at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
AVI Resort and Casino is sponsoring the Independence Day Fireworks Display, which will be held in the vicinity of AVI Resort and Casino on the Lower Colorado River, Laughlin, Nevada. The fireworks will be fired from an anchored firing barge. The proposed safety zone will be set at a 980-foot radius around the anchored firing barge. This proposed temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the show's crew, spectators, participants of the event, participating vessels and other vessels and users of the waterway.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish one safety zone that will be enforced from 7:45 p.m. Mountain Standard Time (MST) through 9:45 p.m. (MST) on July 2, 2006. The event involves one anchored barge, which will be used as a platform for launching of fireworks. The safety zone is required because the barge's planned firing location is in the navigation channel.
The limits of this temporary safety zone include all areas within 980 feet of the firing location adjacent to the AVI Resort and Casino centered in the navigational channel between Laughlin Bridge and the northwest point of the AVI Resort and Casino Cove in position: 35°00′45″ N, 114°38′16″ W. This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crews, spectators, and participants of the regatta and to protect other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative.
U.S. Coast Guard personnel will enforce this safety zone. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local agencies, including the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Section 165.23 of Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, prohibits any unauthorized person or vessel from entering or remaining in a safety zone.
This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 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 this rule under that Order.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based on the size and location of the safety zone. The safety zone will be of a limited duration, and will be limited to a relatively small geographic area. The entities most likely to be affected are pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing. A Patrol Commander will be on-scene and will authorize recreational traffic to transit the safety zone if and when vessel movement is safe.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 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.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing in a portion of the Lower Colorado River, Laughlin, Nevada in the vicinity of the AVI Resort and Casino from 7:45 p.m. to 9:45 p.m. (MST) on July 2, 2006.
This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The proposed zone will be in effect for only two hours. The safety zone only encompasses a small portion of the waterway, and the Captain of the Port may authorize entry into the zone, if necessary.
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 (Pub. L. 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 proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Chief Petty Officer Eric Carroll, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego at (619) 278-7277. 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.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Start Printed Page 35232Paperwork 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 cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed 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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not affect 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would 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. 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 proposed 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. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management system practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. Paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction applies because this rule establishes a safety zone.
A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether the rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review.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 proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:Start Part
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
2. Add temporary § 165.T11-096 to read as follows:
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All areas within 980 feet of the firing location adjacent to the AVI Resort and Casino centered in the navigational channel between Laughlin Bridge and the northwest point of the AVI Resort and Casino Cove in position 35°00′45″ N, 114°38′16″ W.
(b) Effective Period. This section is effective from 7:45 p.m. (MST) through 9:45 p.m. (MST) on July 2, 2006. If the need for the safety zone ends before the scheduled termination time, the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety zone.
(c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transit through, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego or his designated on-scene representative. Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety zone may request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The Patrol Commander may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16.
(d) Enforcement. All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene patrol personnel. Patrol personnel can be comprised of commissioned, warrant, Start Printed Page 35233and petty officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels. Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or local agencies.
Dated: May 31, 2006.
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector San Diego.
[FR Doc. E6-9588 Filed 6-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P