[Federal Register: March 11, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 48)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11564-11566]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11mr04-26]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD09-03-233]
RIN 1625-AA08 [Previously AA00]
Special Local Regulations; Head of the Cuyahoga Regatta,
Cleveland, OH
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 16, 2003, the Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) requesting comments on the proposed safety
zone for the annual Head of the Cuyahoga Rowing Regatta in Cleveland,
Ohio. The Coast Guard received four letters with several substantive
comments. Based upon the comments, a new final rule is being proposed
under 33 CFR part 100, in lieu of a safety zone under part 165.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before April 26, 2004.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard
Marine Safety Office Cleveland (CGD09-03-233), 1055 East Ninth Street,
Cleveland, Ohio, 44114. Marine Safety Office Cleveland 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 available
for inspection or copying at Coast Guard MSO Cleveland between 8 a.m.
and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Allen Turner, U.S. Coast
Guard Marine Safety Office Cleveland, at (216) 937-0128.
SUPPLEMENTARY 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 (CGD09-03-
233), 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
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they reached us, please include 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.
Public Meeting
We do not plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard MSO Cleveland 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
On July 16, 2003, the Coast Guard published an NPRM in the Federal
Register proposing a safety zone for the annual Head of the Cuyahoga
Rowing Regatta event (68 FR 41982). The proposed safety zone was
introduced to control vessel traffic within the immediate location of
the regatta to ensure the safety of life and property on the navigable
waters of the United States during the event. The Coast Guard received
four comments in response to the July 16, 2003 NPRM.
The first comment addressed the appropriate use of a safety zone
for this event. The proposed safety zone restricted commercial vessel
traffic on the Cuyahoga River during the event, with the exception of a
two-hour window to allow for commercial transits. We agree that the use
of a safety zone to restrict vessel traffic in the vicinity of a
regatta is not the most appropriate type of waterway regulation for
this event. Therefore, the safety zone will not be implemented.
Alternatively, a proposal to manage vessel traffic using special local
regulations under 33 CFR part 100 is presented below.
The second comment addressed the two-hour window intended to
facilitate commercial vessel traffic during the event. Commercial
entities have determined that the two-hour window was insufficient for
safe passage. We concur with this statement, and the two-hour window
will be withdrawn. The event will now run continuous from 8 a.m. until
3 p.m. The Coast Guard will provide sufficient notice to the public so
commercial entities will have ample opportunity to schedule around the
event.
The third comment addressed the necessity of a Final Rule for this
event, stating that a recurring temporary final rule would be
advantageous to all parties involved because it would allow for
comments each year. We disagree. There is no need to initiate a
separate rulemaking process every time for this annual event. Since
1996, this event has
[[Page 11565]]
been held annually and is expected to continue into the foreseeable
future. The event sponsors will still be required to submit a marine
event permit and the dates will be published annually. However, since
the event is not temporary in nature, a permanent rule should be
established. Furthermore, the final rule can be cancelled if there are
any significant changes.
The fourth comment stated that commercial vessel restrictions on
the river during the event were necessary to ensure the safety of
participants. We agree that vessel traffic on the Cuyahoga River must
be managed to ensure safety of life and property on the navigable
waters of the United States during this event. Using special local
regulations under 33 CFR part 100 allows the Coast Guard to manage
vessel traffic during the event and ensure safety of competitors,
shells, and course markings from recreational and commercial vessels.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would establish special local regulations for an
annual event on the third Saturday of September from 8 a.m. until 3
p.m. We intend to maintain positive control over all vessel movement in
the vicinity of the event, and therefore all vessels are required to
obtain permission from the Coast Guard Patrol Commander prior to
transiting the area.
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 Transportation (DOT) (44
FR 11040, February 26, 1979). 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 DHS is
unnecessary.
The Coast Guard will publish full and adequate notice of the dates
of the regatta, together with full and complete information of the
special local regulations to ensure commercial entities have ample time
to schedule around the event.
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 the regulated area.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The
proposed special local regulations are only in effect for a few hours
on the day of the event and the Coast Guard will provide full and
adequate notice of the dates of the regatta, together with full and
complete information of the special local regulations to ensure
commercial entities have ample time to schedule around the event.
Recreational vessels can safely pass through the regulated area under
sponsor or Coast Guard escort.
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 (Public Law 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 Cleveland
(see ADDRESSES).
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)
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
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 significant rule and
does not concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
may 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.
Energy Effects
The Coast Guard has analyzed this proposed rule under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have
[[Page 11566]]
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.
Environment
We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction M16475.1C, 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 categorical exclusion under
Section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically
excluded under Figure 2-1, paragraph 35(h) of the Instruction, from
further environmental documentation. A written categorical exclusion
determination is available in the docket for inspection or copying
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
Marine safety, navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
PART 100--REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; and Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add Sec. 100.903 to read as follows:
Sec. 100.903 Head of the Cuyahoga Regatta, Cleveland, OH.
(a) Regulated Area. All portions of the Cuyahoga River between a
line drawn perpendicular to each riverbank at 41[deg]29'19'' N,
81[deg]40'50'' W (Marathon Bend), to a line drawn perpendicular to each
riverbank at 41[deg]29'56'' N, 81[deg]42'27'' W (confluence with the
Old River). These coordinates are based upon North American Datum (NAD
1983).
(b) Enforcement Period. This section will be enforced annually on
the third Saturday of September from 8 a.m. until 3 p.m. The Coast
Guard will publish the dates annually.
(c) Special Local Regulations. All vessels are prohibited from
transiting the area without permission from Coast Guard Patrol
Commander via VHF/FM Radio, Channel 16, to transit the area.
Dated: February 23, 2004.
Lorne W. Thomas,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Cleveland.
[FR Doc. 04-5466 Filed 3-10-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P