Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara, Niagara River, North Tonawanda, NY, 19920-19923 [E9-9993]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
19920
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 82 / Thursday, April 30, 2009 / Proposed Rules
petition as a wine industry marketing
effort. A local resident states that the
proposed Paso Robles Westside
viticultural area ‘‘includes a wide
diversity of land, climate, geology and
soils as to be a completely arbitrary
division.’’ Other commenters contend,
similar to the PRAVAC, that the
recognized ‘‘west side’’ of the Paso
Robles region encompasses only a
western portion of the City of Paso
Robles and the Adelaida District, not the
significantly larger proposed Paso
Robles Westside viticultural area.
Dr. Thomas Rice, a certified
professional soil scientist who provided
soil information for the Paso Robles
Westside viticultural area petition,
submitted two comments opposing
Notice No. 71 (comments 94 and 129).
In his opposing comments, Dr. Rice
states that some of his soils information
‘‘has been inaccurately quoted’’ and that
‘‘some erroneous conclusions regarding
the soils in the Paso Robles AVA have
been stated in the final petition.’’ He
adds that ‘‘not a single soil series
mapped by the USDA that occurs within
the proposed Paso Robles Westside
AVA is unique to that area.’’ He
concludes by urging TTB ‘‘to reject the
Paso Robles Westside petition based on
its inaccurate, misleading and false
statements related to topography and
soils diversity within the larger Paso
Robles AVA.’’
Opposing commenter Richard
Hoenisch (comment 112), a plant
pathologist at the University of
California, Davis, and the education
director for the western region of the
National Plant Diagnostic Network,
explains that he served for six years as
the founding manager of the Tablas
Creek Winery in Paso Robles. Mr.
Hoenisch states that, based on his past
and current experience and knowledge,
the proposed Paso Robles Westside
viticultural area ‘‘includes too many
different geologies, soil types, and
micro-climates.’’ Mr. Hoenisch
concludes that the Paso Robles area
contains many distinct and excellent
potential viticultural area sites.
Mr. Donald Schucraft, a certified
consulting meteorologist with the
Western Weather Group, explains in his
opposing comment (comment 122) that
in the mid-1990’s he led a team of
meteorologists and physical scientists
that established a network of automated
weather stations in the Paso Robles
region, and that these stations continue
to provide key information for localized
Paso Robles weather forecasts. Based on
the data from these stations, Mr.
Schucraft states that the Salinas River
does not provide a suitable boundary
line for the many different
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Apr 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
microclimates found in the Paso Robles
viticultural area. He notes that there are
distinct microclimates to the west of the
Salinas River within the proposed Paso
Robles Westside viticultural area, and
that these microclimates change from
north to south as well as to east to west.
Seasonal rainfall, according to Mr.
Schucraft, varies from 11 to 12 inches in
the northern-most part of the proposed
Paso Robles Westside viticultural area to
27 to 28 inches in the southern-most
part. Also, air temperatures, influenced
by the marine air passing through the
Templeton Gap, and wind speeds,
influenced by the Salinas River Valley
Basin, vary widely within the proposed
viticultural area. Mr. Schucraft
concludes that observed weather in the
Paso Robles region fails to define the
proposed Paso Robles Westside
viticultural area as a single viticultural
region, but instead supports the
existence of multiple viticultural
regions within the existing Paso Robles
viticultural area.
on July 15, 2008 (see Notice No. 85, 73
FR 40474).
TTB Finding
TTB notes that there is a marked lack
of unanimity among the commenters
concerning the appropriateness of
establishing the proposed Paso Robles
Westside viticultural area. While
substantial petition evidence and a large
number of comments support the
establishment of the proposed
viticultural area, we also received a
significant number of comments setting
forth information that refutes, or is
otherwise inconsistent with that
petition evidence. Some of those
comments challenge the
appropriateness of the Paso Robles
Westside name. Other commenters,
including scientific experts, contradict
the geographical feature evidence
presented in the petition and relied
upon by TTB in Notice No. 71 as a basis
for proposing the establishment of the
Paso Robles Westside viticultural area.
Given the conflicting information
before us, we cannot conclude that a
delimited grape-growing region exists
that is recognized by the name ‘‘Paso
Robles Westside,’’ or that the area
described in Notice No. 71 is
distinguishable by geographical
features. Accordingly, TTB hereby
withdraws its proposal to establish the
Paso Robles Westside viticultural area.
With regard to the petitions submitted
by the PRAVAC to establish 11 smaller
viticultural areas within the Paso Robles
viticultural area, TTB will review those
11 petitions independently from this
regulatory action. A notice regarding the
PRAVAC proposal to expand the
existing Paso Robles viticultural area
was published in the Federal Register
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Signed: February 12, 2009.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: February 27, 2009.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. E9–9855 Filed 4–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[USCG–2009–0110]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara,
Niagara River, North Tonawanda, NY
ACTION:
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
establishment of a safety zone for a
powerboat race in the Captain of the
Port Buffalo zone. This proposed rule is
intended to restrict vessels from areas of
water during events that pose a hazard
to public safety. The safety zone
established by this proposed rule is
necessary to protect spectators,
participants, and vessels from the
hazards associated with a powerboat
race.
DATES: Comments and related materials
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 29, 2009. Requests for
public meetings must be received by the
Coast Guard on or before May 29, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2009–0110 using one of the following
methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these four methods. See the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
E:\FR\FM\30APP1.SGM
30APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 82 / Thursday, April 30, 2009 / Proposed Rules
section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, contact Lieutenant Brian Sadler,
Prevention Department, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Buffalo, at (716) 843–9573.
If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2009–0110),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online (via https://
www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or
hand deliver, but please use only one of
these means. If you submit a comment
online via https://www.regulations.gov, it
will be considered received by the Coast
Guard when you successfully transmit
the comment. If you fax, hand delivery,
or mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a telephone number in the
body of your document so that we can
contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG–
2009–0110 in the Docket ID box, press
Enter, and then click on the balloon
shape in the Actions column. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail
and would like to know that they
reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Apr 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period and may change
the proposed rule in view of them.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, insert USCG–
2009–0119 in the Docket ID box, press
Enter, and then click on the item in the
Docket ID column. You may also visit
either the Docket Management Facility
in Room W12–140 on the ground floor
of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays;
or the Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, 1
Fuhrmann Blvd., Buffalo, NY 14203
between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation to use the
Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of all comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one on or before May 29, 2009 using
one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you
believe a public meeting 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
Temporary safety zones are necessary
to ensure the safety of vessels and
spectators from the hazards associated
with powerboat races. Based on recent
accidents that have occurred in other
Captain of the Port zones, the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, has determined
powerboat races pose significant risks to
public safety and property. The likely
combination of large numbers of
recreational vessels, congested
waterways, and alcohol use, could
easily result in serious injuries or
fatalities.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
19921
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule and associated
safety zone are necessary to ensure the
safety of vessels and people during
events in the Captain of the Port Buffalo
area of responsibility that may pose a
hazard to the public. The proposed
safety zone is described in subparagraph
(1) of this regulation. The proposed
safety zone will be enforced only
immediately before and during the
event which poses hazard to the public
and only upon notice by the Captain of
the Port. The Captain of the Port Buffalo
will cause notice of enforcement of the
safety zone established by this section to
be made by all appropriate means to the
affected segments of the public
including publication in the Federal
Register as practicable, in accordance
with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means of
notification may also include, but are
not limited to Broadcast Notice to
Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners.
The Captain of the Port will issue a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying
the public when enforcement of the
safety zone established by this section is
suspended.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary. The Coast Guard’s use of
this safety zone will be periodic in
nature, of short duration, and designed
to minimize the impact on navigable
waters. This safety zone will only be
enforced immediately before and during
the time the event occurs. Furthermore,
this safety zone has been designed to
allow vessels to transit unrestricted to
portions of the waterway not affected by
the safety zone. The Coast Guard
expects insignificant adverse impact to
mariners from the activation of this
safety zone.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
E:\FR\FM\30APP1.SGM
30APP1
19922
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 82 / Thursday, April 30, 2009 / Proposed Rules
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 affect the
following entities, some of which might
be small entities: the owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in the area designated as the
safety zone in subparagraph (1) during
the date and time the safety zone is
being enforced. This safety zone would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reasons. The safety
zone in this proposed rule would be in
effect for short periods of time and only
once per year. The proposed safety zone
has been designed to allow traffic to
pass safely around the zone whenever
possible and vessels will be allowed to
pass through the zone with the
permission of the Captain of the Port.
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 proposed rule would affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact
LT Brian Sadler, Prevention
Department, Coast Guard Sector Buffalo,
Buffalo, NY at (716) 843–9573. 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Apr 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
Federalism
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.
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 will not
result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this proposed rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not effect the
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
Risks. This proposed 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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 0023–01
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
under the Instruction that this action is
one of a category of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist
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.
E:\FR\FM\30APP1.SGM
30APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 82 / Thursday, April 30, 2009 / Proposed Rules
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 Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
Dated: March 6, 2009.
R.S. Burchell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. E9–9993 Filed 4–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
Coast Guard
1. The authority citation for Part 165
continues to read as follows:
33 CFR Part 165
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(a) Location. The following area is a
temporary safety zone: all waters of the
Upper Niagara River, North Tonawanda,
NY within two miles of the Grand
Island Bridge located at 42°03′36″ N,
078°54′45″ W to 43°03′09″ N, 078°55′21″
W to 43°03′00″ N, 078°53′42″ W to
43°02′42″ N, 078°54′09″ W. All
Geographic coordinates are North
American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
(b) Effective Period. This regulation is
effective from 11 a.m. August 29, 2009
to 6 p.m. August 30, 2009. This zone
will be enforced from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m.
on August 29, 2009 and August 30,
2009.
(c) Regulations.
(1) The general regulations contained
in 33 CFR 165.23 apply.
(2) All persons and vessels must
comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the
designated on scene patrol personnel.
Coast Guard patrol personnel include
commissioned, warrant, and petty
officers of the U.S. Coast Guard. Upon
being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard
vessel via siren, radio, flashing light, or
other means, the operator shall proceed
as directed.
(3) Commercial vessels may request
permission from the Captain of the Port
Buffalo to transit the safety zone.
Approval will be made on a case-bycase basis. Requests must be made in
advance and approved by the Captain of
the Port before transits will be
authorized. The Captain of the Port may
be contacted via U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Buffalo on Channel 16, VHF–FM.
Jkt 217001
Security Zone; Freeport Channel
Entrance, Freeport, TX
ACTION:
§ 165.T09–0110 Safety Zone; Thunder on
Niagara, Niagara River, North Tonawanda,
NY.
15:01 Apr 29, 2009
RIN 1625–AA87
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
2. Add § 165.T09–0110 to read as
follows:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0125]
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
establish moving security zones for
certain vessels, for which the Captain of
the Port, Houston-Galveston deems
enhanced security measures necessary
on a case-by-case basis. These moving
security zones would extend 1,000
yards ahead and astern and 500 yards
on each side of certain vessels, which
would display the international signal
flag or pennant number five to signal a
security zone is established around the
vessel. The moving security zone may
commence at any point after certain
vessels bound for the Port of Freeport
enter the U.S. territorial waters (12
nautical miles) in the Captain of the Port
(COTP) Houston-Galveston zone. These
security zones are needed to safeguard
the vessels, the public, and the
surrounding area from sabotage or other
subversive acts, accidents, or other
events of a similar nature. Unless
exempted under this rule, entry into or
movement within these security zones
would be prohibited without permission
from the COTP Houston-Galveston.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 1, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2008–0125 using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
19923
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
(5) To avoid duplication, please use
only one of these four methods. See the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Cliff Harder, Marine Safety
Unit Galveston, telephone (409) 978–
2700, extension 2705, or e-mail
cliff.j.harder@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–0125),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online (via https://
www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://
www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the
comment. If you fax, hand-deliver, or
mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a telephone number in the
body of your document so that we can
contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, select the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG–
2008–0124’’ in the Docket ID box, press
Enter, and then click on the balloon
shape in the Actions column. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand
E:\FR\FM\30APP1.SGM
30APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 82 (Thursday, April 30, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19920-19923]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9993]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[USCG-2009-0110]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara, Niagara River, North Tonawanda,
NY
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishment of a safety zone for a
powerboat race in the Captain of the Port Buffalo zone. This proposed
rule is intended to restrict vessels from areas of water during events
that pose a hazard to public safety. The safety zone established by
this proposed rule is necessary to protect spectators, participants,
and vessels from the hazards associated with a powerboat race.
DATES: Comments and related materials must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 29, 2009. Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before May 29, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2009-0110 using one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the
[[Page 19921]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, contact Lieutenant Brian Sadler, Prevention Department, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, at (716) 843-9573. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2009-0110), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via https://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
deliver, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert ``USCG-2009-0110 in the Docket ID box, press Enter, and
then click on the balloon shape in the Actions column. If you submit
your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to
know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the proposed
rule in view of them.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert USCG-2009-0119 in the Docket ID box, press Enter, and
then click on the item in the Docket ID column. You may also visit
either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the Coast Guard
Sector Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann Blvd., Buffalo, NY 14203 between 8 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one on or before May 29, 2009 using one of the four methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public
meeting 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
Temporary safety zones are necessary to ensure the safety of
vessels and spectators from the hazards associated with powerboat
races. Based on recent accidents that have occurred in other Captain of
the Port zones, the Captain of the Port Buffalo, has determined
powerboat races pose significant risks to public safety and property.
The likely combination of large numbers of recreational vessels,
congested waterways, and alcohol use, could easily result in serious
injuries or fatalities.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule and associated safety zone are necessary to
ensure the safety of vessels and people during events in the Captain of
the Port Buffalo area of responsibility that may pose a hazard to the
public. The proposed safety zone is described in subparagraph (1) of
this regulation. The proposed safety zone will be enforced only
immediately before and during the event which poses hazard to the
public and only upon notice by the Captain of the Port. The Captain of
the Port Buffalo will cause notice of enforcement of the safety zone
established by this section to be made by all appropriate means to the
affected segments of the public including publication in the Federal
Register as practicable, in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means
of notification may also include, but are not limited to Broadcast
Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port
will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public when
enforcement of the safety zone established by this section is
suspended.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The Coast
Guard's use of this safety zone will be periodic in nature, of short
duration, and designed to minimize the impact on navigable waters. This
safety zone will only be enforced immediately before and during the
time the event occurs. Furthermore, this safety zone has been designed
to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the waterway
not affected by the safety zone. The Coast Guard expects insignificant
adverse impact to mariners from the activation of this safety zone.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered
[[Page 19922]]
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 affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in the area designated as the safety
zone in subparagraph (1) during the date and time the safety zone is
being enforced. This safety zone would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following
reasons. The safety zone in this proposed rule would be in effect for
short periods of time and only once per year. The proposed safety zone
has been designed to allow traffic to pass safely around the zone
whenever possible and vessels will be allowed to pass through the zone
with the permission of the Captain of the Port.
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
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact LT Brian Sadler,
Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, Buffalo, NY at (716)
843-9573. 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 will not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not effect the 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
Risks. This proposed 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 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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 0023-01 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 under the Instruction that this
action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. A
preliminary environmental analysis checklist 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.
[[Page 19923]]
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 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add Sec. 165.T09-0110 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-0110 Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara, Niagara River,
North Tonawanda, NY.
(a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all
waters of the Upper Niagara River, North Tonawanda, NY within two miles
of the Grand Island Bridge located at 42[deg]03'36'' N, 078[deg]54'45''
W to 43[deg]03'09'' N, 078[deg]55'21'' W to 43[deg]03'00'' N,
078[deg]53'42'' W to 43[deg]02'42'' N, 078[deg]54'09'' W. All
Geographic coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
(b) Effective Period. This regulation is effective from 11 a.m.
August 29, 2009 to 6 p.m. August 30, 2009. This zone will be enforced
from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. on August 29, 2009 and August 30, 2009.
(c) Regulations.
(1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply.
(2) All persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on scene patrol
personnel. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant,
and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard. Upon being hailed by a U.S.
Coast Guard vessel via siren, radio, flashing light, or other means,
the operator shall proceed as directed.
(3) Commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of
the Port Buffalo to transit the safety zone. Approval will be made on a
case-by-case basis. Requests must be made in advance and approved by
the Captain of the Port before transits will be authorized. The Captain
of the Port may be contacted via U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo on
Channel 16, VHF-FM.
Dated: March 6, 2009.
R.S. Burchell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. E9-9993 Filed 4-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
