[Federal Register: February 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 27)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 6713-6715]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09fe06-20]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05-06-006]
RIN 1625-AA08
Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Maryland Swim for
Life, Chester River, Chestertown, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend the special local
regulations at 33 CFR 100.533, established for the ``Maryland Swim for
Life'' held annually on the waters of the Chester River, near
Chestertown, Maryland by changing the event date to the third Saturday
in June. This proposed rule is intended to restrict vessel traffic in
portions of the Chester River and is necessary to provide for the
safety of life on navigable waters during the event.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before April 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(oax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth,
Virginia
[[Page 6714]]
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, 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 M. 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 (CGD05-06-
006), 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. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the address listed 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 June 17, 2006, the Maryland Swim for Life Association will
sponsor the ``Maryland Swim for Life'', an open water swimming
competition held on the waters of the Chester River, near Chestertown,
Maryland. Approximately 100 swimmers start from Rolph's Wharf and swim
up-river 2.5 miles then swim down-river returning back to Rolph's
Wharf. A fleet of approximately 20 support vessels accompanies the
swimmers. The regulations at 33 CFR 100.533 are effective annually for
the Maryland Swim for Life marine event. Paragraph (d) of Section
100.533 establishes the enforcement date for the Maryland Swim for
Life. This regulation proposes to change the enforcement date from the
second Saturday in July to the third Saturday in June each year. Notice
of exact time, date and location will be published in the Federal
Register prior to the event. The Maryland Swim for Life Association who
is the sponsor for this event intends to hold it annually. To provide
for the safety of participants and support vessels, the Coast Guard
will temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the event area during the
swim.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend the regulations at 33 CFR 100.533
by revising the date of enforcement in paragraph (d) to reflect the
event will be conducted annually on the third Saturday in June. This
proposed change is needed to accommodate attendance by a wide range of
participants at the event. The special local regulations will be
enforced from 6:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. on June 17, 2006, and will
restrict general navigation in the regulated area during the swimming
event. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the
regulated area during the effective period. The regulated area is
needed to control vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety
of participants and transiting vessels.
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. The effect of this proposed
action merely establishes the dates on which the existing regulations
would be in effect and modifies the boundaries of the regulated area
and would not impose any new restrictions on vessel traffic.
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 proposed rule would effect the following
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the
Chester River during the event.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
proposed rule would merely establish the dates on which the existing
regulations would be in effect of the regulated area and would not
impose any new restrictions on vessel traffic.
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 (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 the address listed under
ADDRESSES. 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).
[[Page 6715]]
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
Safety 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 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)(h), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Special local regulations issued in
conjunction with a regatta or marine event permit are specifically
excluded from further analysis and documentation under that section.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, an
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' are 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. In Sec. 100.533, revise paragraph (d), to read as follows:
Sec. 100.533 Maryland Swim for Life, Chester River, Chestertown,
Maryland.
* * * * *
(d) Enforcement period. (1) This section will be enforced annually
on the third Saturday in June. A notice of enforcement of this section
will be published annually in the Federal Register and disseminated
through the Fifth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners
announcing the specific event dates and times. Notice will also be made
via marine Safety Radio Broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio channel
22 (157.1 MHz).
(2) For 2006, this section will be enforced from 6:30 a.m. to 1:30
p.m. on June 17, 2006.
Dated: January 23, 2006.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-1740 Filed 2-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P