Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River, Detroit, MI, 23793-23795 [E9-11835]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
■ 1. The authority citation for part 1308
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
continues to read as follows:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b),
you have questions on this rule, call or
unless otherwise noted.
e-mail CDR Joseph Snowden,
Prevention Department, Sector Detroit,
■ 2. Section 1308.12 is amended in the
Coast Guard; telephone (313) 568–9580,
table by adding a new paragraph (c)(28)
e-mail Joseph.H.Snowden@uscg.mil. If
to read as follows:
you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
§ 1308.12 Schedule II.
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
*
*
*
*
*
202–366–9826.
(c) * * *
(28) Tapentadol .................................
9780 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
*
*
*
*
*
On April 16, 2009, we published a
Dated: May 15, 2009.
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
Michele M. Leonhart,
entitled Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race,
Deputy Administrator.
Detroit River, Detroit, MI in the Federal
[FR Doc. E9–11933 Filed 5–20–09; 8:45 am]
Register (74 FR 17627). We received one
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
comment on the proposed rule. No
public meeting was requested, and none
was held.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
SECURITY
Guard finds that good cause exists for
making this rule effective less than 30
Coast Guard
days after publication in the Federal
Register. Delaying this rule would be
33 CFR Part 165
contrary to the public interest of
ensuring, to the extent practicable, the
[Docket No. USCG–2009–0089]
safety and security of the spectators and
RIN 1625–AA00
participants during this event and
immediate action is necessary to
Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit prevent possible injury, loss of life, or
River, Detroit, MI
property.
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
Background and Purpose
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
This temporary safety zone is
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone on
the Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan.
This zone will restrict vessels from
portions of the Detroit River during the
Red Bull Air Race. This temporary
safety zone is necessary to protect
spectators and vessels from the hazards
associated with air races.
DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m.
on June 11, 2009 through 6:30 p.m. on
June 14, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, are part
of docket USCG–2009–0089 and are
available online by going to https://
www.regulations.gov, selecting the
Advanced Docket Search option on the
right side of the screen, inserting USCG–
2009–0089 in the Docket ID box,
pressing Enter, and then clicking on the
item in the Docket ID column. This
material is also available for inspection
or copying at the Docket Management
Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
necessary to ensure, to the extent
practicable, the safety of vessels and
spectators from hazards associated with
an air race. The Captain of the Port
Detroit has determined air races in close
proximity to watercraft and
infrastructure pose significant risk to
public safety and property. The likely
combination of large numbers of
recreation vessels, possible alcohol use,
airplanes traveling at high speeds and
performing aerial acrobatics, and large
numbers of spectators in close
proximity to the water could easily
result in serious injuries or fatalities.
Establishing a safety zone around the
location of the race course will help
ensure the safety of persons and
property at these events and help
minimize the associated risks.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received one letter, containing
several comments on this rulemaking.
First, the commenter stated that closure
of the Detroit River for these air races
violates the Boundary Waters Treaty of
1909. The Coast Guard disagrees that
the Coast Guard’s action or the action by
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23793
Canada violates this treaty. The
Boundary Waters Treaty does guarantee
that ‘‘navigation of all navigable
boundary waters’’ shall be ‘‘free and
open’’ to ‘‘inhabitants * * * ships,
vessels, and boats’’ of both the United
States and Canada, ‘‘subject, however, to
any laws and regulations of either
country.’’ Both the United States and
Canada have determined, pursuant to
each country’s laws and regulations,
that brief closures of the Detroit River
are reasonably necessary to protect
spectators and vessels from hazards
associated with these air races.
Moreover, under fundamental
principles of international law, only the
States that are a party to an international
agreement are generally entitled to
allege a breach of the terms of the
agreement by the other. For this event,
Canada has also agreed that a closure of
a small portion of the river for a short
period of time is a reasonable and
necessary measure.
Second, the commenter stated that the
proposed rule constituted a ‘‘public
taking’’ in contravention of the Fifth
Amendment to the United States
Constitution; in that vessel owners will
experience delays that will result in lost
profits. This commenter did not put
forward any specific company or vessel
that would be so affected. The Coast
Guard disagrees with this comment. In
general, a ‘‘taking’’ occurs when a
governmental entity uses its powers to
permanently deprive a person or entity
of property. The Captain of the Port has
considered the needs of port
stakeholders and the maritime
community and has determined that
this safety zone is necessary to protect
the public and maintain safety of
navigation. Further, the rule is only
temporary in nature, not permanent,
and in the event that this temporary
safety zone affects shipping, commercial
vessels may request permission from the
Captain of the Port Detroit to transit
through the safety zone. Moreover, the
safety zone will only be enforced for a
short period of time on the enforcement
dates. Lastly, the Coast Guard believes
vessel owners have had sufficient
advance notice of this safety zone, such
that they should be able to work vessel
schedules around the enforcement
periods of the proposed safety zone to
minimize or avoid lost profits.
Third, the commenter stated that the
race sponsor must be required to agree
in advance to reasonably compensate
vessel owners for losses incurred by
delays and post a bond sufficient to
cover anticipated vessel losses.
Otherwise, this commenter stated, there
is no incentive for race organizers to
work collaboratively with vessel
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
23794
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
operators. The commenter also stated
that if a vessel delayed by the proposed
safety zone missed the closing of the
Sault Ste. Marie locks at the end of the
navigation season in January 2010, then
that vessel owner should be
compensated for any lost cargo
transportation opportunities by the race
sponsors.
This comment is outside the scope of
this rulemaking and the Coast Guard
disagrees with this comment. The Coast
Guard is authorized by Congress to
provide for safe navigation and vessel
safety in U.S. waters and to ensure the
safety of all waterway users. As such, in
this rule, the Coast Guard is balancing
all competing needs by enforcing the
safety zone during the air race, but also
providing ample notification to vessel
owners so that they may plan according
and thereby reduce or avoid lost profits.
The Coast Guard does not believe that
a compensation agreement is necessary
in order for the race sponsors to work
collaboratively with vessel owners.
Compensation for vessel delays based
on the existence of a safety zone is not
required under the law. Likewise, the
Coast Guard has no authority to order
the race sponsors to post bond or agree
to any sort of compensation scheme.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this 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 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 rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
This determination is based on the
minimal time that vessels will be
restricted from the zone; the location of
the zone, which is an area where the
Coast Guard expects insignificant
adverse impact to mariners from the
zone’s activation; and the ability of
commercial vessels to request
permission from the Captain of the Port
Detroit to transit through the safety
zone.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
whether this 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 rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: the owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit or anchor in
the safety zone located in the Detroit
River between 9 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on
June 11, through June 14, 2009.
This safety zone 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 short period of time each
day it is enforced. Additionally, small
entities such as passenger vessels, have
been informed of this event since its
planning stages, and have had ample
time to make alternate arrangements
with regards to mooring positions and
business operations during the hours
this safety zone will be in place.
Furthermore, local sailing and yacht
clubs will be notified prior to the event
by Coast Guard Station Belle Isle with
information on what to expect during
the event with the intention of
minimizing interruptions in their
normal business practices. In the event
that this temporary safety zone affects
shipping, commercial vessels may
request permission from the Captain of
the Port Detroit to transit through the
safety zone. The Coast Guard will give
notice to the public via a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners that the regulation is
in effect. Additionally, the COTP will
suspend enforcement of the safety zone
if the event for which the zone is
established ends earlier than the
expected time.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
in the NPRM we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so
that they could better evaluate its effects
on them and participate in the
rulemaking process.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 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. We did not receive
any comments for this section.
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520). We did not receive any
comments for this section.
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 rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have
implications for federalism. We did not
receive any comments for this section.
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 rule will not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble. We did not receive any
comments for this section.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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. We did not
receive any comments for this section.
Civil Justice Reform
This 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. We did
not receive any comments for this
section.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this 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 create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children. We
did not receive any comments for this
section.
Indian Tribal Governments
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty
rights of Native American Tribes.
Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed
to working with Tribal Governments to
implement local policies and to mitigate
Tribal concerns. We have determined
that this rule and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible.
We have also determined that this 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.
Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have
questions concerning the provisions of
this rule or options for compliance are
encouraged to contact the point of
contact listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. We did not
receive any comments for this section.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this 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.
We did not receive any comments for
this section.
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards. We did not receive any
comments for this section.
Environment
We have analyzed this 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 concluded this action is one of a
category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This event
establishes a safety zone, therefore
paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction
applies.
An environmental analysis checklist
and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
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 amends 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, 160.5; Public
Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
a line extending from a point on land
southwest of Joe Louis Arena at position
42°19.4′ N; 083°3.3′ W, northeast along
the Detroit shoreline to a point on land
at position 42°20.0′ N; 083°1.2′ W,
southeast to the international boarder
with Canada at position 42°19.8′ N;
083°1.0′ W, southwest along the
international border to position 42°19.2′
N; 083°3.3′ W, and northwest to the
point of origin at position 42°19.4′ N;
083°3.3′ W. (DATUM: NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement Period. The safety
zone will be enforced daily from 9 a.m.
to 6:30 p.m. on June 11, 2009 through
June 14, 2009.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Detroit, or his
designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Detroit or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port is any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer who has been designated by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.
The on-scene representative of the
Captain of the Port will be aboard either
a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary
vessel. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on scene representative may
be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Detroit
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so.
(5) Vessel operators given permission
to enter or operate in the safety zone
must comply with all directions given to
them by the Captain of the Port or his
on-scene representative.
Dated: May 6, 2009.
F.M. Midgette,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. E9–11835 Filed 5–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
2. Section 165.T09–0089 is added to
read as follows:
■
§ 165.T09–0089 Safety Zone; Red Bull Air
Race, Detroit River, Detroit, MI.
(a) Location. The following area is a
temporary safety zone: all U.S. waters of
the Detroit River, Detroit, MI, bound by
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23795
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 97 (Thursday, May 21, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23793-23795]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11835]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2009-0089]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River, Detroit, MI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan. This zone will restrict vessels from
portions of the Detroit River during the Red Bull Air Race. This
temporary safety zone is necessary to protect spectators and vessels
from the hazards associated with air races.
DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. on June 11, 2009 through 6:30
p.m. on June 14, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2009-0089 and are available online by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket Search option
on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0089 in the Docket
ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in the Docket ID
column. This material is also available for inspection or copying at
the 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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail CDR Joseph Snowden, Prevention Department, Sector
Detroit, Coast Guard; telephone (313) 568-9580, e-mail
Joseph.H.Snowden@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On April 16, 2009, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River, Detroit,
MI in the Federal Register (74 FR 17627). We received one comment on
the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying this rule would be
contrary to the public interest of ensuring, to the extent practicable,
the safety and security of the spectators and participants during this
event and immediate action is necessary to prevent possible injury,
loss of life, or property.
Background and Purpose
This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure, to the extent
practicable, the safety of vessels and spectators from hazards
associated with an air race. The Captain of the Port Detroit has
determined air races in close proximity to watercraft and
infrastructure pose significant risk to public safety and property. The
likely combination of large numbers of recreation vessels, possible
alcohol use, airplanes traveling at high speeds and performing aerial
acrobatics, and large numbers of spectators in close proximity to the
water could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities.
Establishing a safety zone around the location of the race course will
help ensure the safety of persons and property at these events and help
minimize the associated risks.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received one letter, containing several comments on this
rulemaking. First, the commenter stated that closure of the Detroit
River for these air races violates the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909.
The Coast Guard disagrees that the Coast Guard's action or the action
by Canada violates this treaty. The Boundary Waters Treaty does
guarantee that ``navigation of all navigable boundary waters'' shall be
``free and open'' to ``inhabitants * * * ships, vessels, and boats'' of
both the United States and Canada, ``subject, however, to any laws and
regulations of either country.'' Both the United States and Canada have
determined, pursuant to each country's laws and regulations, that brief
closures of the Detroit River are reasonably necessary to protect
spectators and vessels from hazards associated with these air races.
Moreover, under fundamental principles of international law, only the
States that are a party to an international agreement are generally
entitled to allege a breach of the terms of the agreement by the other.
For this event, Canada has also agreed that a closure of a small
portion of the river for a short period of time is a reasonable and
necessary measure.
Second, the commenter stated that the proposed rule constituted a
``public taking'' in contravention of the Fifth Amendment to the United
States Constitution; in that vessel owners will experience delays that
will result in lost profits. This commenter did not put forward any
specific company or vessel that would be so affected. The Coast Guard
disagrees with this comment. In general, a ``taking'' occurs when a
governmental entity uses its powers to permanently deprive a person or
entity of property. The Captain of the Port has considered the needs of
port stakeholders and the maritime community and has determined that
this safety zone is necessary to protect the public and maintain safety
of navigation. Further, the rule is only temporary in nature, not
permanent, and in the event that this temporary safety zone affects
shipping, commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of
the Port Detroit to transit through the safety zone. Moreover, the
safety zone will only be enforced for a short period of time on the
enforcement dates. Lastly, the Coast Guard believes vessel owners have
had sufficient advance notice of this safety zone, such that they
should be able to work vessel schedules around the enforcement periods
of the proposed safety zone to minimize or avoid lost profits.
Third, the commenter stated that the race sponsor must be required
to agree in advance to reasonably compensate vessel owners for losses
incurred by delays and post a bond sufficient to cover anticipated
vessel losses. Otherwise, this commenter stated, there is no incentive
for race organizers to work collaboratively with vessel
[[Page 23794]]
operators. The commenter also stated that if a vessel delayed by the
proposed safety zone missed the closing of the Sault Ste. Marie locks
at the end of the navigation season in January 2010, then that vessel
owner should be compensated for any lost cargo transportation
opportunities by the race sponsors.
This comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking and the Coast
Guard disagrees with this comment. The Coast Guard is authorized by
Congress to provide for safe navigation and vessel safety in U.S.
waters and to ensure the safety of all waterway users. As such, in this
rule, the Coast Guard is balancing all competing needs by enforcing the
safety zone during the air race, but also providing ample notification
to vessel owners so that they may plan according and thereby reduce or
avoid lost profits. The Coast Guard does not believe that a
compensation agreement is necessary in order for the race sponsors to
work collaboratively with vessel owners. Compensation for vessel delays
based on the existence of a safety zone is not required under the law.
Likewise, the Coast Guard has no authority to order the race sponsors
to post bond or agree to any sort of compensation scheme.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this 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 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 rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
This determination is based on the minimal time that vessels will
be restricted from the zone; the location of the zone, which is an area
where the Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners
from the zone's activation; and the ability of commercial vessels to
request permission from the Captain of the Port Detroit to transit
through the safety zone.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in the safety zone located in the Detroit River between 9
a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on June 11, through June 14, 2009.
This safety zone 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 short period of time each day it is
enforced. Additionally, small entities such as passenger vessels, have
been informed of this event since its planning stages, and have had
ample time to make alternate arrangements with regards to mooring
positions and business operations during the hours this safety zone
will be in place. Furthermore, local sailing and yacht clubs will be
notified prior to the event by Coast Guard Station Belle Isle with
information on what to expect during the event with the intention of
minimizing interruptions in their normal business practices. In the
event that this temporary safety zone affects shipping, commercial
vessels may request permission from the Captain of the Port Detroit to
transit through the safety zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to
the public via a Broadcast Notice to Mariners that the regulation is in
effect. Additionally, the COTP will suspend enforcement of the safety
zone if the event for which the zone is established ends earlier than
the expected time.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). 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. We did not receive any comments for this
section.
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). We did not
receive any comments for this section.
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 rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism. We did not receive any comments for this section.
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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. We did
not receive any comments for this section.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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. We did not receive any comments for this section.
Civil Justice Reform
This 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. We did not receive any comments
for this section.
[[Page 23795]]
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this 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 create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children. We did not receive any comments for
this section.
Indian Tribal Governments
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American
Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal
Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate Tribal
concerns. We have determined that this rule and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this
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. Nevertheless, Indian Tribes
that have questions concerning the provisions of this rule or options
for compliance are encouraged to contact the point of contact listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We did not receive any comments
for this section.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this 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.
We did not receive any comments for this section.
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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. We did not receive
any comments for this section.
Environment
We have analyzed this 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 concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This event establishes a safety zone,
therefore paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction applies.
An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
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, 160.5;
Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Section 165.T09-0089 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-0089 Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River,
Detroit, MI.
(a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all
U.S. waters of the Detroit River, Detroit, MI, bound by a line
extending from a point on land southwest of Joe Louis Arena at position
42[deg]19.4[min] N; 083[deg]3.3[min] W, northeast along the Detroit
shoreline to a point on land at position 42[deg]20.0[min] N;
083[deg]1.2[min] W, southeast to the international boarder with Canada
at position 42[deg]19.8[min] N; 083[deg]1.0[min] W, southwest along the
international border to position 42[deg]19.2[min] N; 083[deg]3.3[min]
W, and northwest to the point of origin at position 42[deg]19.4[min] N;
083[deg]3.3[min] W. (DATUM: NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement Period. The safety zone will be enforced daily from
9 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on June 11, 2009 through June 14, 2009.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Detroit, or his designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated on-
scene representative.
(3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been
designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-
scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or
his designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so.
(5) Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port or his on-scene representative.
Dated: May 6, 2009.
F.M. Midgette,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. E9-11835 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P