Safety Zones; Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley Annual and Recurring Safety Zones Update

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard proposes to amend its safety zone regulations for annual events in Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley that are listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section in this document. This proposed rule would add 23 new recurring safety zones and amend the event/sponsor, dates, and/or regulated areas for 31 recurring safety zones already listed in the current table. This action in necessary to protect spectators, participants, and vessels from the hazards associated with annual marine events. This proposed rulemaking would restrict vessel traffic from the safety zones during the events unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES:

Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2018-0065 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email Petty Officer Joshua Herriott, Sector Ohio Valley, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (502) 779-5343, email Joshua.R.Herriott@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

COTP Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley

DHS Department of Homeland Security

FR Federal Register

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking

§ Section

U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) proposes to amend 33 CFR 165.801 to update the table of annual fireworks displays and other marine-related events in Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley. The current list of annual and recurring safety zones occurring in Sector Ohio Valley is published in Table 1 of 33 CFR 165.801. That most recent table was created through the final rule published on June 6, 2017 (82 FR 25965). The current table in 33 CFR 165.801 needs to be amended to include new safety zones expected to recur annually or biannually and provide new information on existing safety zones.

The proposed annually recurring safety zones are necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the events. Based on the nature of these marine events, large numbers of participants and spectators, and event locations, the COTP has determined that the events listed in this proposed rule could pose a risk to participants or waterways users if the normal vessel traffic were to interfere with the events. Possible hazards include risks of injury or death from near or actual contact among participant vessels and spectators or mariners traversing through the regulated area. In order to protect the safety of all waterway users, including event participants and spectators, this proposed rule would establish safety zones for the time and location of each marine event.

This purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels on the navigable waters in the safety zones during the scheduled events. Vessels would not be permitted to enter the safety zone unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

The Coast Guard is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with a 15-day prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to section (d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(d)). This provision authorizes an agency to publish a rule in less than 30 days before its effective date for “good cause found and published with the rule.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for publishing this NPRM with a 15-day comment period because it is impractical to provide a 30-day comment period. These proposed safety zones are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and persons during the marine events. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM with a 30-day comment period because we must establish some of these updates as early as the end of April 2018. A 15-day comment period would allow the Coast Guard to provide for public notice and comment, but also update the safety zones soon enough that the length of the notice and comment period does not compromise public safety.

III. Discussion of the Proposed Rule

The COTP proposes to amend its safety zone regulations for annual events in Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley listed in Table 1 of 33 CFR 165.801. This section requires amendment from time to time to properly reflect the recurring safety zone regulations in Sector Ohio Valley. This rule would add 23 new recurring safety zones and amend the event/sponsor, dates, and/or regulated areas for 31 recurring safety zones already listed in the current table. Other than these 23 new safety zones and 31 changes to the event/sponsor, dates, and/or locations of certain events, the regulations of 33 CFR 165.801 and the other provisions in Table 1 of § 165.801 would remain unchanged.

The Coast Guard proposes to revise regulations at 33 CFR 165.801 Table 1 by adding 23 new safety zones. The 23 safety zones being added to Table 1 are below:

The Coast Guard also proposes to revise regulations at 33 CFR 165.801 Table 1 by amending 31 existing safety zones listed in the current table. The amendments involve changes to marine event dates and/or regulated areas, with reference by line number to the current Table 1 of 33 CFR 165.801. The 31 safety zones being amended are below:

The amendments to this rule are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and people during annual events taking place on or near navigable waters in Sector Ohio Valley. Although this proposed rule would be in effect year-round, the specific safety zones listed in Table 1 of 33 CFR 165.801 would only be enforced during a specified period of time coinciding with the happening of the annual events listed. In accordance with the regulations listed in 33 CFR 165.801(a)-(d), entry into these safety zones is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text of the updated Table 1 of § 165.801 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

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 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. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the safety zones. These safety zones are limited in size and duration, and are usually positioned away from high vessel traffic zones. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zones, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zones.

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 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 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 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. If the proposed 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 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. 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 above.

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.

F. Environment

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 (NEPA) (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. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is 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, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.

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 website'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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

• Harbors
• Marine safety
• Navigation (water)
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Security measures
• Waterways

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the U.S. Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. In § 165.801, revise Table 1 to read as follows: