Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.Start Printed Page 24902
The Coast Guard proposes establishment of a safety zone for a powerboat race in the Captain of the Port Buffalo zone. This proposed rule is intended to restrict vessels from areas of water during events that pose a hazard to public safety. The safety zone established by this proposed rule is necessary to protect spectators, participants, and vessels from the hazards associated with a powerboat race.
Comments and related materials must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 21, 2008.
You may mail comments and related material to Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann Boulevard, Buffalo, NY 14203. Sector Buffalo Prevention Department maintains the 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, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
If you have further questions on this rule, contact Lieutenant Tracy Wirth, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, at (716) 843-9573.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [USCG-2008-0328], 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 they 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 Commander, Coast Guard Sector Buffalo 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
Temporary safety zones are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators from the hazards associated with powerboat races. Based on recent accidents that have occurred in other Captain of the Port zones, the Captain of the Port Buffalo, has determined powerboat races pose significant risks to public safety and property. The likely combination of large numbers of recreational vessels, congested waterways, and alcohol use, could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule and associated safety zones are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and people during events in the Captain of the Port Buffalo area of responsibility that may pose a hazard to the public. The proposed safety zone is described in subparagraph (1) of this regulation. The proposed safety zone will be enforced only immediately before and during the event which poses hazard to the public and only upon notice by the Captain of the Port. The Captain of the Port Buffalo will cause notice of enforcement of the safety zone established by this section to be made by all appropriate means to the affected segments of the public including publication in the Federal Register in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means of notification may also include, but are not limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public when enforcement of the safety zone established by this section is suspended.
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 it under that Order.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
The Coast Guard's use of this safety zone will be periodic in nature, of short duration, and designed to minimize the impact on navigable waters. This safety zone will only be enforced immediately before and during the time the event occurs. Furthermore, this safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the waterway not affected by the safety zone. The Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the activation of this safety zone.
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 vessels intending to transit or anchor in the area designated as the safety zone in subparagraph (1) during the date and time the safety zone is being enforced. This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The safety zone in this proposed rule would be in effect for short periods of time and only once per year. The safety zone has been designed to allow traffic to pass safely around the zone whenever possible and vessels will be allowed to pass through the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 LT Tracy Wirth, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, Buffalo, NY Start Printed Page 24903at (716) 843-9573. 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 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 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 will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not effect the 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 proposed 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.
Indian Tribal Governments
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal concerns. We have determined that these special local regulations and fishing rights protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this Proposed 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. Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this Proposed Rule or options for compliance are encouraged to contact the point of contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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 systems 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 which guides 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 this action is not likely to leave a significant impact on the human environment. A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
- Marine safety
- Navigation (water)
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Security measures
- and Waterways
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 § 165.T09-002 to read as follows:
(a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all waters of the Upper Niagara River, North Tonawanda, NY within two miles of the Grand Island Bridge located at 42°03′36″ N, 078°54′45″ W to 43°03′09″ N, 078°55′21″ W to 43°03′00″ N, 078°53′42″ W to 43°02′42″ N, 078°54′09″ W. All Geographic coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
(b) Effective Period. This regulation is effective from 11 a.m. May 31, 2008 to 6 p.m. June 1, 2008. This zone will be enforced from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. on May 31, 2008 and June 1, 2008.
(1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply.
(2) All persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on scene patrol personnel. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard. Upon Start Printed Page 24904being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel via siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator shall proceed as directed.
(3) Commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of the Port Buffalo to transit the safety zone. Approval will be made on a case-by-case basis. Requests must be made in advance and approved by the Captain of the Port before transits will be authorized. The Captain of the Port may be contacted via U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo on Channel 16, VHF-FM.
Dated: April 14, 2008.
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. E8-10005 Filed 5-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P