Safety Zone; Town of Olcott Fireworks Display; Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY, 42038-42040 [2015-17483]
Download as PDF
42038
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 136 / Thursday, July 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
via U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake
Michigan on VHF channel 16.
This document is issued under
authority of 33 CFR 165.930 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this
publication in the Federal Register, the
Captain of the Port Lake Michigan will
also provide notice through other
means, which may include Broadcast
Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to
Mariners, local news media, distribution
in leaflet form, and on-scene oral notice.
Additionally, the Captain of the Port
Lake Michigan may notify
representatives from the maritime
industry through telephonic and email
notifications.
Dated: June 30, 2015.
A.B. Cocanour,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Lake Michigan.
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2015–0595]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Town of Olcott Fireworks
Display; Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY. This safety
zone is intended to restrict vessels from
a portion of Lake Ontario during the
Town of Olcott fireworks display. This
temporary safety zone is necessary to
protect mariners and vessels from the
navigational hazards associated with a
fireworks display.
DATES: This rule is effective without
actual notice from July 16, 2015 until
September 6, 2015. For the purposes of
enforcement, actual notice will be used
from June 25, 2015 until July 16, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in
this preamble are part of docket [USCG–
2015–0595]. To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type the docket
number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room
W12–140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Jul 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TFR Temporary Final Rule
[FR Doc. 2015–17459 Filed 7–15–15; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
Building, 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
email LTJG Amanda Garcia, Chief of
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716–
843–9343, email
SectorBuffaloMarineSafety@uscg.mil. If
you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826 or 1–800–647–5527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Regulatory History and Information
The Coast Guard is issuing this
temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment
pursuant to authority under section 4(a)
of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule
without prior notice and opportunity to
comment when the agency for good
cause finds that those procedures are
‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing
so would be impracticable and contrary
to the public interest. The final details
for this event were not known to the
Coast Guard until there was insufficient
time remaining before the event to
publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the
effective date of this rule to wait for a
comment period to run would be
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest because it would inhibit the
Coast Guard’s ability to protect
spectators and vessels from the hazards
associated with a maritime fireworks
display. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this
temporary rule effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal
Register. For the same reasons
discussed in the preceding paragraph,
waiting for a 30 day notice period to run
would be impracticable.
B. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis and authorities for this
rule are found in 33 U.S.C. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Stat. 2064; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1, which collectively authorize the
Coast Guard to establish and define
regulatory safety zones.
Between 9:30 p.m. and 11 p.m. on
July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13,
2015; August 27, 2015; and September
6, 2015, a fireworks display will be held
on the shoreline of Lake Ontario in
Olcott, NY. It is anticipated that
numerous vessels will be in the
immediate vicinity of the launch point.
The Captain of the Port Buffalo has
determined that such a launch
proximate to a gathering of watercraft
pose a significant risk to public safety
and property. Such hazards include
premature and accidental detonations,
dangerous projectiles, and falling or
burning debris.
C. Discussion of the Final Rule
With the aforementioned hazards in
mind, the Captain of the Port Buffalo
has determined that this temporary
safety zone is necessary to ensure the
safety of spectators and vessels during
the Town of Olcott fireworks display.
This zone will be enforced from 9:30
p.m. until 11 p.m. on July 10, 2015; July
23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27,
2015; and September 6, 2015. This zone
will encompass all waters of Lake
Ontario; Olcott, NY within a 1,050-foot
radius of position 43°20′23.6″ N. and
078°43′09.5″ W. (NAD 83).
Entry into, transiting, or anchoring
within the safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene
representative. The Captain of the Port
or his designated on-scene
representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16.
D. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive
orders.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, as supplemented
by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order
13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those
Orders.
E:\FR\FM\16JYR1.SGM
16JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 136 / Thursday, July 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
We conclude that this rule is not a
significant regulatory action because we
anticipate that it will have minimal
impact on the economy, will not
interfere with other agencies, will not
adversely alter the budget of any grant
or loan recipients, and will not raise any
novel legal or policy issues. The safety
zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and enforced for a
relatively short time. Also, the safety
zone is designed to minimize its impact
on navigable waters. Furthermore, the
safety zone has been designed to allow
vessels to transit around it. Thus,
restrictions on vessel movement within
that particular area are expected to be
minimal. Under certain conditions,
moreover, vessels may still transit
through the safety zone when permitted
by the Captain of the Port.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
2. Impact on Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
the impact of this rule on small entities.
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.
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 might be small
entities: The owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit or anchor in
a portion of Lake Ontario on the evening
of July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August
13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and
September 6, 2015.
This safety zone will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons: This safety zone
would be effective, and thus subject to
enforcement, for only 90 minutes late in
the day. Traffic may be allowed to pass
through the zone with the permission of
the Captain of the Port. The Captain of
the Port can be reached via VHF
channel 16. Before the enforcement of
the zone, we would issue local
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–
121), we want to assist small entities in
understanding this rule. 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 person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Jul 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
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.
4. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have
implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
42039
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
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.
12. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
14. 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 determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the
establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination
and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
E:\FR\FM\16JYR1.SGM
16JYR1
42040
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 136 / Thursday, July 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this rule.
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
of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene
representative.
Dated: June 25, 2015.
B.W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2015–17483 Filed 7–15–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 4
RIN 2900–AP38
■
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Agency Interpretation of Prosthetic
Replacement of a Joint
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
AGENCY:
2. Add § 165.T09–0595 to read as
follows:
■
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 165.T09–0595 Safety Zone; Town of
Olcott Fireworks Display; Lake Ontario,
Olcott, NY.
(a) Location. This zone will
encompass all waters of Lake Ontario;
Olcott, NY within a 1,050-foot radius of
position 43°20′23.6″ N. and 078°43′09.5″
W. (NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement period. This
regulation will be enforced on July 10,
2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015;
August 27, 2015; and September 6, 2015
from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23, entry
into, transiting, or anchoring within this
safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo 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
Buffalo or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been designated
by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act
on his behalf.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone must
contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Jul 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
ACTION:
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
The Department of Veterans
Affairs is publishing interpretive
guidance for diagnostic codes (DC) 5051
through 5056, which establish rating
criteria for prosthetic implant
replacements of joints of the
musculoskeletal system. The Schedule
for Rating Disabilities under these DCs
allows for a 1-year, 100-percent
disability evaluation upon prosthetic
replacement of a joint. This final rule
clarifies that VA’s longstanding
interpretation of DCs 5051 through 5056
is that a 100-percent evaluation will be
in place for a period of one year when
the total joint, rather than the partial
joint, has been replaced by a prosthetic
implant.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective July 16, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephanie Li, Chief, Regulations Staff
(211D), Compensation Service,
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20420, (202) 461–9700. (This is not a
toll-free telephone number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Diagnostic
codes (DCs) 5051 through 5056, under
38 CFR 4.71a, govern the Schedule for
Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule) for
prosthetic replacement of joints under
the musculoskeletal system. These DCs
state that a 100-percent evaluation will
be sustained for 1 year following the
prosthetic replacement of the named
joint. This period of total disability
evaluation is designed to provide
temporary convalescence for major
surgery, such as total joint replacement.
Following the convalescent period, a
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) or
VA-approved examination is conducted
to determine any residual disability, and
a new rating evaluation is assigned
based on such residuals.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The field of orthopedic medicine has
progressed to such a degree that total
prosthetic replacement of a joint is not
always necessary. Surgical procedures,
sometimes referred to generally as ‘‘joint
replacements,’’ may only require partial
replacement of the disabled joint.1
Partial replacement has the benefit of
not requiring the same length of time for
convalescence.2 The progression of this
area of medical science has raised an
issue as to whether a veteran who
undergoes a partial replacement of a
joint is entitled to the 100-percent rating
evaluation during the convalescent
period under DCs 5051 through 5056.
VA has long interpreted ‘‘joint
replacement,’’ as used in § 4.71a, to
mean total joint replacement. Recently,
the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims (Veterans Court) issued
a precedential panel decision upholding
VA’s interpretation of § 4.71a. In
Hudgens v. Gibson, 26 Vet. App. 558
(2014), the Veterans Court upheld the
Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision
that DC 5055 applies only to total knee
prosthetic replacements. The Veterans
Court determined that the plain
language of DC 5055 was unambiguous.
Id. at 561. The Veterans Court found
that the medical definition of ‘‘knee
joint’’ encompassed three distinct
compartments of the knee and that
‘‘[n]othing in the plain language of the
regulation indicates that it applies to
replacements of less than a complete
knee joint . . .’’. Id. In addition, the
Veterans Court cited DC 5054, for hip
joint prosthesis, as an example of when
VA intends to evaluate partial joint
replacement. Diagnostic Code 5054, also
under § 4.71a, provides evaluation
criteria for ‘‘[p]rosthetic replacement of
the head of the femur or of the
acetabulum’’ (italics added), which
together make up the hip joint. Id. The
Veterans Court concluded that ‘‘DC
5055 applies only to total knee
replacements, as the Secretary has
demonstrated in other parts of § 4.71(a)
[sic] that he is aware of how to include
partial joint replacements as part of
disability rating criteria in other parts of
§ 4.71(a) [sic].’’ Id. at 562.
In view of the above court decision,
and VA’s longstanding interpretation,
VA is amending its regulations to clarify
that the language of § 4.71a, Prosthetic
Implants, which refers to replacement of
1 ‘‘Patients with osteoarthritis that is limited to
just one part of the knee may be candidates for
unicompartmental knee replacement (also called a
‘partial’ knee replacement).’’ ‘‘Unicompartmental
Knee Replacement,’’ American Academy of
Orthopedic Surgeons, Ortho Info, 1 (June 2010),
https://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=A00585
(last visited Mar. 19, 2014).
2 Id.
E:\FR\FM\16JYR1.SGM
16JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42038-42040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17483]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2015-0595]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Town of Olcott Fireworks Display; Lake Ontario,
Olcott, NY
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of Lake Ontario during the Town of Olcott
fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect
mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards associated with a
fireworks display.
DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from July 16, 2015
until September 6, 2015. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from June 25, 2015 until July 16, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2015-0595]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LTJG Amanda Garcia, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716-843-9343, email
SectorBuffaloMarineSafety@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing
the docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202-366-9826 or 1-800-647-5527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TFR Temporary Final Rule
A. Regulatory History and Information
The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. The final details for this event were
not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time
remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the
effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would
be impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it would
inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect spectators and vessels
from the hazards associated with a maritime fireworks display.
Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons
discussed in the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice
period to run would be impracticable.
B. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis and authorities for this rule are found in 33
U.S.C. 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;
and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard to establish and define
regulatory safety zones.
Between 9:30 p.m. and 11 p.m. on July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015;
August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and September 6, 2015, a fireworks
display will be held on the shoreline of Lake Ontario in Olcott, NY. It
is anticipated that numerous vessels will be in the immediate vicinity
of the launch point. The Captain of the Port Buffalo has determined
that such a launch proximate to a gathering of watercraft pose a
significant risk to public safety and property. Such hazards include
premature and accidental detonations, dangerous projectiles, and
falling or burning debris.
C. Discussion of the Final Rule
With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Buffalo has determined that this temporary safety zone is necessary to
ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the Town of Olcott
fireworks display. This zone will be enforced from 9:30 p.m. until 11
p.m. on July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015;
and September 6, 2015. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Ontario; Olcott, NY within a 1,050-foot radius of position
43[deg]20'23.6'' N. and 078[deg]43'09.5'' W. (NAD 83).
Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
D. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
[[Page 42039]]
We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and enforced for a relatively short time. Also, the
safety zone is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters.
Furthermore, the safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to
transit around it. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that
particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions,
moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone when
permitted by the Captain of the Port.
2. Impact on Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this rule on small entities. 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.
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
might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending
to transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Ontario on the evening of
July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and
September 6, 2015.
This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
safety zone would be effective, and thus subject to enforcement, for
only 90 minutes late in the day. Traffic may be allowed to pass through
the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port. The Captain of
the Port can be reached via VHF channel 16. Before the enforcement of
the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. 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 person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
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.
4. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.
7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
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.
12. Energy Effects
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
14. 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 determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under
[[Page 42040]]
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.
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
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.
0
2. Add Sec. 165.T09-0595 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-0595 Safety Zone; Town of Olcott Fireworks Display; Lake
Ontario, Olcott, NY.
(a) Location. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake Ontario;
Olcott, NY within a 1,050-foot radius of position 43[deg]20'23.6'' N.
and 078[deg]43'09.5'' W. (NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced on July
10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and
September 6, 2015 from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo
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 Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
(3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. 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 Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.
Dated: June 25, 2015.
B.W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2015-17483 Filed 7-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P