[Federal Register: May 20, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 97)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 27464-27466]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20my03-8]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD09-03-213]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Betsie Bay, Lake Michigan
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in
Betsie Bay, Frankfort, Michigan. This safety zone is necessary to
protect vessels and spectators from potential airborne hazards during a
planned fireworks display over a portion of Betsie Bay. The safety zone
is intended to restrict vessel traffic from a portion of Betsie Bay in
Lake Michigan, Frankfort, Michigan.
DATES: This temporary final rule is effective from 9 p.m. (local) until
11 p.m. (local) on June 28, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket, are part of docket CDG09-03-213 and are available for
inspection or copying at: U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office
Chicago, 215 W. 83rd Street, Chicago, Illinois 60527 between 7:30 a.m.
and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MST2 Kenneth Brockhouse, U.S. Coast
Guard Marine Safety Office Chicago, at (630) 986-2125.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory 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. The permit application was not
received in time to publish an NPRM followed by a final rule before the
effective date. Delaying this rule would be contrary to the public
interest of ensuring the safety of spectators and vessels during this
event and immediate action is necessary to prevent possible loss of
life or property. The Coast Guard has not received any complaints or
negative comments previously with regard to this event.
Background and Purpose
A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
vessels and spectators from the hazards associated with fireworks
displays. Based on recent accidents that have occurred in other
[[Page 27465]]
Captain of the Port zones, and the explosive hazard of fireworks, the
Captain of the Port Chicago has determined fireworks launches in close
proximity to watercraft pose significant risks to public safety and
property. The likely combination of large numbers of recreational
vessels, congested waterways, darkness punctuated by bright flashes of
light, alcohol use, and debris falling into the water could easily
result in serious injuries or fatalities. Establishing a safety zone to
control vessel movement around the location of the launch platform will
help ensure the safety of persons and property at these events and help
minimize the associated risks.
Discussion of Rule
The safety zone for the Elberta fireworks will encompass all waters
of Betsie Bay in Lake Michigan, off Frankfort, Michigan within the arc
of a circle with a 250-foot radius from the fireworks launch site with
its center in the approximate position 44[deg]37'41'' N,
086[deg]14'05'' W. These coordinates are based upon North American
Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on scene patrol
personnel. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Chicago or
his designated on scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
Regulatory Information
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. It is not ``significant'' under
the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that the full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory
policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Regulatory Evaluation
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 this
rule under that Order. It is not significant under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10(e) of the
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
This determination is based on the minimal time that vessels will
be restricted from the zone and the zone is in an area where the Coast
Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the zones'
activation.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant 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 commercial
vessels intending to transit a portion of an activated safety zone.
This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The
proposed zone is only in effect for two hours on the day of the event.
The designated area is being established to allow for maximum use
of the waterway for commercial vessels to enjoy the fireworks display
in a safe manner. In addition, commercial vessels transiting the area
can transit around the area. The Coast Guard will give notice to the
public via a Broadcast to Mariners that the regulation is in effect.
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 rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects and participate in the rulemaking process. 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 Marine Safety Office Chicago
(see ADDRESSES.)
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
(1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13132 and
have determined that this rule does not have implications for
federalism under that Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that 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 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 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
The Coast Guard has analyzed this proposed rule under Executive
Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically
[[Page 27466]]
significant rule and does not concern an environmental risk to health
or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children.
Environment
We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule
and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph 32(g) of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, this proposed rule is categorically excluded
from further environmental documentation. A written categorical
exclusion determination is available in the docket for inspection or
copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.
Energy Effects
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. 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.
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.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g),
6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.
0
2. A new temporary Sec. 165.T09-213 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-213 Safety Zone; Betsie Bay, Frankfort, Michigan.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all waters and
adjacent shoreline of Betsie Bay (off Frankfort, Michigan), Lake
Michigan within the arc of a circle with a 250-foot radius from the
fireworks launch site with its center in the approximate position of
44[deg]37'41'' N, 086[deg]14'05'' W (NAD 83).
(b) Effective date. This safety zone is effective from 9 p.m.
(local) until 11 p.m. (local), June 28, 2003.
(c) Regulations. This safety zone is being established to protect
the boating public during a planned fireworks display. In accordance
with the general regulations in Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into
this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of
the Port, Chicago, or the designated Patrol Commander.
Dated: May 5, 2003.
Raymond E. Seebald,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Chicago.
[FR Doc. 03-12495 Filed 5-19-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P