This PDF is the current document as it appeared on Public Inspection on 04/12/2017 at 08:45 am.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary regulated area during the inbound and outbound transit of the tall ships participating in the Festival of Sail to be held on the waters of Coos Bay. This action is necessary to safeguard participants and spectators from the hazards associated with the limited maneuverability of tall ships and to ensure public safety during their transit. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before May 15, 2017.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-USCG-2017-0207 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email LCDR Laura Springer, MSU Portland Waterways; 503-240-9319, email firstname.lastname@example.org.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
On June 1, 2017, and again on June 5, 2017, several class A and B tall sailing ships will be transiting the waters of Coos Bay as part of the Festival of Sail Coos Bay. To provide for the safety of participants, spectators, support and transiting vessels, the Coast Guard proposes to temporarily restrict vessel traffic during the the inbound and outbound transit of the tall sailing ships.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect the tall ships from potential harm and to protect the public from the hazards associated with the limited maneuverability of these types of ships. Many factors amplify the potential hazardousness of the situation, including: large numbers of local recreational and fishing vessels; a narrow channel; and, low maneuverability of the tall ships. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1233.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a regulated area during the inbound and outbound transit of participating tall sailing ships on June 1, 2017 and June 5, 2017. The regulated area would cover all navigable waters of Coos Bay from the sea buoy to the Ferndale Lower Range in North Bend, OR. The duration of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of vessels, bystanders, and the navigable waters during the tall ships' inbound and outbound transits. The Coast Guard, at its discretion, would allow the passage of affected vessels. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the regulated area without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
E.O.s 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it.
As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'” (February 2, 2017).
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the regulated area. Although this proposal would prevent traffic from transiting portions of Coos Bay, the effect of this regulation would not be significant due to the limited duration that the regulated area will be in effect and will allow waterway users to enter or transit through the zone when deemed safe by the on-scene patrol commander. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the regulated area.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 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 Start Printed Page 17781operated 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.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
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.
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. 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 section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, 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. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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.
We have analyzed this proposed 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that 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 Special Local Regulation for a regulated area lasting less than 3 hours during each transit period that will prohibit vessels from entering an area encompassing Coos Bay from the sea buoy to the Ferndale Lower Range unless given permission to do so by the on-scene patrol commander or his designated representative. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist and Categorical Exclusion Determination are 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.
G. 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.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
- Marine Safety
- Navigation (water)
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:Start Part
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERSEnd Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
2. Add § 100.T13-0207 to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(a) Regulated Area. The following area is designated as a regulated area: All navigable waters of Coos Bay, from the sea buoy to the Ferndale Lower Range.
(b) Special Local Regulations. (1) The Coast Guard may patrol the regulated area under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM). PATCOM may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by the call sign “PATCOM.” Official patrol vessels may consist of any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law enforcement vessels assigned or approved by the Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River.
(2) Entrance into the regulated area is prohibited unless authorized by the Patrol Commander. The Patrol Commander may control the movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled to stop by an official patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an immediate stop and comply with the lawful directions issued. Failure to comply with a lawful direction may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
(3) All vessels permitted to transit the regulated area shall maintain a separation of at least 100 yards away from the participating tall sailing ships and a distance of at least 50 yards away while transiting in the vicinity of the McCullough Memorial Bridge and the Coos Bay railroad bridge.
(c) Enforcement Period. This regulated area is in effect while the tall sailing ships are transiting Coos Bay, inbound on June 1, 2017 and outbound on June 5, 2017.
Dated: April 3, 2017.
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-07513 Filed 4-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P