[Federal Register: September 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 169)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 52054-52056]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01se05-29]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05-05-104]
RIN 1625-AA08
Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Spa Creek,
Annapolis, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish permanent special local
regulations for the ``Tug-of-War'', a marine event conducted over the
waters of Spa Creek between Eastport and Annapolis, Maryland. Special
local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waters during the event. This action is intended to restrict
vessel traffic in portions of Spa Creek during the event.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before October 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(oax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth,
Virginia 23704-5004, hand-deliver them to Room 119 at the same address
between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays, or fax them to (757) 398-6203. The Auxiliary and Recreational
Boating Safety Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, 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 are part of docket CGD05-05-104, will become
part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at
the above address between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Sens, Project Manager,
Auxiliary and Recreational Boating Safety Branch, at (757) 398-6204.
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 CGD05-05-
104, 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 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.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would
aid this rulemaking, we
[[Page 52055]]
will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
Annually, the City of Annapolis sponsors the ``Tug-of-War'', across
the waters of Spa Creek between Eastport and Annapolis, Maryland. The
event consists of a tug of war between teams on the Eastport side of
Spa Creek pulling against teams on the Annapolis side of Spa Creek. The
opposing teams will pull a floating rope approximately 1700 feet in
length, spanning Spa Creek. A fleet of spectator vessels is
anticipated. Due to the need for vessel control while the rope is
spanned across Spa Creek, vessel traffic would be temporarily
restricted to provide for the safety of participants, spectators and
transiting vessels.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish this permanent rule on
specified waters of Spa Creek. The regulated area would include a 400
foot buffer on either side of the rope that spans Spa Creek from
shoreline to shoreline. This rule would be enforced annually from 10:30
a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on the first Saturday in November and would restrict
general navigation in the regulated area during the event. Except for
participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, no person or vessel could enter or remain in the regulated
area. The Coast Guard Patrol Commander could stop the event to allow
vessels to transit the regulated area. For 2005 only, the enforcement
period of the regulation would be changed from the first Saturday in
November to the last Saturday in October.
Regulatory Evaluation
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. 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 the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Although this proposed permanent rule prevents traffic from
transiting a portion of Spa Creek during the event, the effect of this
regulation will not be significant due to the limited duration that the
regulated area will be in effect and the extensive advance
notifications that will be made to the maritime community via marine
information broadcasts, local radio stations and area newspapers so
mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Additionally, the proposed
regulated area has been narrowly tailored to impose the least impact on
general navigation yet provide the level of safety deemed necessary.
Vessel traffic will be able to transit the regulated area when the
Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do so.
Small Entities
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 rule will effect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Spa Creek during the
event.
This proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
rule will be in effect for only a 4-hour period. Vessel traffic will be
able to transit the regulated area when the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander deems it is safe to do so. Before the enforcement period, we
will issue maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans
accordingly.
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
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Dennis Sens, Project Manager,
Auxiliary and Recreational Boating Safety Branch, at (757) 398-6204.
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 proposed rule would call 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 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 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
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
[[Page 52056]]
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
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
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.
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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
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 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, we believe that this rule should
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, an
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is not required for this rule.
Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final
decision on whether to categorically exclude this rule from further
environmental review.
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--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233, Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add Sec. 100.534 to read as follows:
Sec. 100.534 Tug-of-War; Spa Creek, Annapolis, Maryland.
(a) Regulated area. A regulated area is established for the waters
of Spa Creek from shoreline to shoreline, extending 400 feet from
either side of a rope spanning Spa Creek from a position at latitude
38[deg]58'36.9'' N, longitude 076[deg]29'03.8'' W on the Annapolis
shoreline to a position at latitude 38[deg]58'26.4'' N, longitude
076[deg]28'53.7'' W on the Eastport shoreline. All coordinates
reference Datum NAD 1983.
(b) Definitions. (1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard who has been
designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
(3) Participant means all vessels participating in the ``Tug of
War'' under the auspices of the Marine Event Permit issued to the event
sponsor and approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore.
(c) Special local regulations. (1) Except for event participants
and persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area.
(2) The operator of any vessel in the regulated area must:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any
official patrol.
(ii) Proceed as directed by any official patrol.
(iii) Unless otherwise directed by the official patrol, operate at
a minimum wake speed not to exceed six (6) knots.
(d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced annually from
10:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on the first Saturday in November. In 2005 the
section will be enforced on the last Saturday in October instead of the
first Saturday in November.
Dated: August 18, 2005.
L.L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 05-17427 Filed 8-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P