[Federal Register: June 10, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 112)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32444-32445]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10jn04-4]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[CGD09-03-284]
RIN 2115-AA01
Special Anchorage Area; Madeline Island, WI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is enlarging the existing special anchorage
area in Madeline, Wisconsin. This action is taken at the request of the
La Pointe Yacht Club, which, due to low water levels, has lost usable
anchorage space. This rule will make additional space available within
the special anchorage area.
DATES: This rule is effective July 12, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket [CGD09-03-284] and are available for inspection or
copying at the Ninth Coast Guard District, Room 2069, 1240 E. Ninth
Street, Cleveland, OH, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commander Michael Gardiner, Chief,
Marine Safety Analysis and Policy Branch, Ninth Coast Guard District
Marine Safety Office, at (216) 902-6056.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On December 24, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Special Anchorage Area; Madeline Island, WI in the
Federal Register (68 FR 74536). We received no letters commenting on
the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
This rule is in response to a request from the La Pointe Yacht Club
to increase the size of the Madeline Island, Wisconsin special
anchorage area as described in 33 CFR Sec. 110.77b. This regulation
will alleviate crowding of boats outside the anchorage area boundaries
due to years of low water levels, and accommodate boats with drafts
deeper than three feet.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
No comments were received.
Regulatory Evaluation
This 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. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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 rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Small
entities may contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT for assistance in understanding and participating in this
rulemaking. We also have a point of contact for commenting on actions
by employees of the Coast Guard.
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 rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
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 affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
[[Page 32445]]
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 health 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.
Energy Effects
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. 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.
Technical Standards
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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this 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
concluded 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, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, from further environmental
documentation.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 110 as follows:
PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, and
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g). Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
0
2. Revise Sec. 110.77b to read as follows:
Sec. 110.77b Madeline Island, Wisconsin
The waters off of La Pointe Harbor, Madeline Island, Wisconsin,
encompassed by the following: starting at 46[deg]46'44.8'' N,
090[deg]47'14.0'' W; then south southwesterly to 46[deg]46'35.5'' N,
090[deg]47'17.0'' W; then south southeasterly to 46[deg]46'27'' N,
090[deg]47'12.8'' W; then east southeasterly to 46[deg]46'22.6'' N,
090[deg]46'58.8'' W; then following the shoreline back to the starting
point (NAD 83).
Dated: June 2, 2004.
R.J. Papp, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 04-13075 Filed 6-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P