Safety Zone; AASCIF Fireworks Display, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH, 27210-27212 [2019-12228]
Download as PDF
27210
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Proposed Rules
88 and later denied. The petitioner
suggests that granting the petition will
remove unnecessary burden from
licensees who store major radioactive
components on their sites during plant
operations because they cannot use
decommissioning funds for disposal of
these components. Storing these
components on site results in costs to
build and maintain storage structures
and to monitor for releases and
exposures. The petitioner observes that
the removal and disposal of components
during operations could be considered
as activities that would be part of the
decommissioning process; therefore,
decommissioning funds could be used
for disposal of the components before
permanent cessation of operations, in
cases where excess funds can be shown
to exist. The petitioner also observes
that onsite storage of major radioactive
components leads to unnecessary
regulatory burdens for their
maintenance and monitoring, including
a potential for worker exposure.
4. Are there other innovative financial
approaches that could be considered by
the NRC or a licensee for dispositioning
major radioactive components while a
nuclear power plant is operating, while
still ensuring that sufficient funds will
be available for decommissioning?
Provide an explanation for your
response.
V. Conclusion
The NRC has determined that the
petition meets the threshold sufficiency
requirements for docketing a petition for
rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.803. The
NRC is examining the issues raised in
PRM–50–119 to determine whether they
should be considered in rulemaking.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day
of June, 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019–12342 Filed 6–11–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Request for Comment
The NRC is requesting public
comment on the following specific
questions:
1. Licensees currently may use their
own internal operating funds to dispose
of major radioactive components (e.g.,
steam generators) during plant
operation, or they may choose to wait
until decommissioning begins to use
funds set aside for decommissioning.
What advantages or disadvantages do
you see to either approach, which are
available under the current regulations?
Provide an explanation for your
response.
2. Should the NRC revise its
regulations to allow a licensee the
option to use funds set aside for
radiological decommissioning
(decommissioning trust fund) to dispose
of major radioactive components (e.g.,
steam generators) while the nuclear
power plant is still operating? Provide
an explanation for your response.
3. What criteria should the NRC
consider for a licensee to be able to use
the decommissioning trust fund early
for large component disposal? For
example, the NRC could require a
licensee to provide a site-specific
decommissioning cost estimate at the
time of a request for early access to
funds. The NRC also could require
annual reports that funds in the
decommissioning trust will be adequate
to meet the decommissioning cost
estimate. Would such criteria be
sufficient to ensure that adequate
decommissioning funds will be
available during decommissioning?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jun 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2019–0396]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; AASCIF Fireworks
Display, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to establish a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of Lake Erie during the
AASCIF Fireworks display. This action
is necessary to provide for the safety of
life on these navigable waters near the
Great Lakes Science Center, Cleveland,
OH, during a fireworks display on July
21, 2019. This proposed rulemaking
would prohibit persons and vessels
from being in the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo or a designated representative.
We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before July 12, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2019–0396 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email LT Ryan
Junod, Chief of Waterways Management,
U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit
Cleveland; telephone 216–937–0124,
email Ryan.S.Junod@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On March 4, 2019, the American
Association of State Compensation
Insurance Funds notified the Coast
Guard that it will be conducting a
fireworks display from 9:30 p.m.
through 9:35 p.m. on July 21, 2019. The
fireworks are to be launched from land
at position 41°30′26″ N and 81°42′11″ W
near Cleveland, OH. Hazards from
firework displays include accidental
discharge of fireworks, dangerous
projectiles, and falling hot embers or
other debris. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo (COTP) has determined that
potential hazards associated with the
fireworks to be used in this display
would be a safety concern for anyone
within a 350-foot radius of the fireworks
launch site.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
ensure the safety of vessels and the
navigable waters within a 350-foot
radius of position 41°30′26″ N and
81°42′11″ W before, during, and after
the scheduled event. The Coast Guard is
proposing this rulemaking under
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously
33 U.S.C. 1231).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a
safety zone from 9:15 p.m. through 9:50
p.m. on July 21, 2019. The safety zone
would cover all navigable waters within
350 feet of position 41°30′26″ N and
81°42′11″ W near Lake Erie, Cleveland,
OH. The duration of the zone is
intended to ensure the safety of vessels
and these navigable waters before,
during, and after the scheduled 9:30
p.m. through 9:35 p.m. fireworks
display. No vessel or person would be
permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the
COTP or a designated representative.
The regulatory text we are proposing
appears at the end of this document.
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Proposed Rules
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and
Executive orders and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13771 directs agencies
to control regulatory costs through a
budgeting process. This NPRM has not
been designated a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and
pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive
Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination
is based on the conclusion that this rule
is not a significant regulatory action. 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 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 COTP.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to consider
the potential impact of regulations on
small entities during rulemaking. The
term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small
businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and
operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions
with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the safety
zone may be small entities, for the
reasons stated in section IV.A above,
this proposed rule would not have a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jun 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule. If the
rule would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will
not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of
the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for
a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Governments
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this proposed rule under that
Order and have determined that it is
consistent with the fundamental
federalism principles and preemption
requirements described in Executive
Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it 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.
If you believe this proposed rule has
implications for federalism or Indian
tribes, please contact the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
27211
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023–01 and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST
5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a
preliminary determination that this
action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human
environment. This proposed rule
involves a safety zone lasting less than
1 hour that would prohibit entry within
350 feet of a fireworks display.
Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph L[60] in Table 3–1 of U.S.
Coast Guard Environmental Planning
Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A
preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
27212
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Dated: June 5, 2019.
Joseph S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
[FR Doc. 2019–12228 Filed 6–11–19; 8:45 am]
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T09–0396 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T09–0396 Safety Zone; AASCIF
Fireworks Display; Lake Erie, Cleveland,
OH.
(a) Location. The safety zone will
encompass all waters of Lake Erie;
Cleveland, OH contained within a 350foot radius of: 41°30′26″ N, 81°42′11″ W.
(b) Enforcement Period. This
regulation will be enforced from 9:15
p.m. through 9:50 p.m. on July 21, 2019.
(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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jun 11, 2019
Jkt 247001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0072; FRL–9995–13–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Sulfur
Dioxide
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Buffalo or a 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 a 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 an on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Buffalo or an 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.
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, visit https://
www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
request submitted by the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
(IEPA) on February 6, 2018 to revise the
Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP)
under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the
2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). IEPA is specifically
requesting EPA approval to amend
Illinois’ SIP for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS to
account for two variances recently
granted by the Illinois Pollution Control
Board (IPCB) to Calpine Corporation
(Calpine) and Exelon Generation, LLC
(Exelon).
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before July 12, 2019.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2018–0072 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.,
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source
Program Manager, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061,
acevedo.francisco@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section is arranged as follows:
ADDRESSES:
I. What is the background for this action?
II. What changes have been made as part of
the SIP revision?
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s
submittal?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this
action?
On June 22, 2010, EPA promulgated a
new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS of 75
parts per billion (ppb), which is met at
an ambient air quality monitoring site
when the 3-year average of the annual
99th percentile of 1-hour daily
maximum concentrations does not
exceed 75 ppb, as determined in
accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR
E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM
12JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27210-27212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12228]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2019-0396]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; AASCIF Fireworks Display, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety
zone for certain waters of Lake Erie during the AASCIF Fireworks
display. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on
these navigable waters near the Great Lakes Science Center, Cleveland,
OH, during a fireworks display on July 21, 2019. This proposed
rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety
zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or a
designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before July 12, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0396 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email LT Ryan Junod, Chief of Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Cleveland; telephone
216-937-0124, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
On March 4, 2019, the American Association of State Compensation
Insurance Funds notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a
fireworks display from 9:30 p.m. through 9:35 p.m. on July 21, 2019.
The fireworks are to be launched from land at position 41[deg]30'26'' N
and 81[deg]42'11'' W near Cleveland, OH. Hazards from firework displays
include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and
falling hot embers or other debris. The Captain of the Port Buffalo
(COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the
fireworks to be used in this display would be a safety concern for
anyone within a 350-foot radius of the fireworks launch site.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels
and the navigable waters within a 350-foot radius of position
41[deg]30'26'' N and 81[deg]42'11'' W before, during, and after the
scheduled event. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone from 9:15 p.m.
through 9:50 p.m. on July 21, 2019. The safety zone would cover all
navigable waters within 350 feet of position 41[deg]30'26'' N and
81[deg]42'11'' W near Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH. The duration of the
zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable
waters before, during, and after the scheduled 9:30 p.m. through 9:35
p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter
the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears
at the end of this document.
[[Page 27211]]
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the conclusion
that this rule is not a significant regulatory action. 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 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 COTP.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it 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. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety
zone lasting less than 1 hour that would prohibit entry within 350 feet
of a fireworks display. Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L[60] in Table 3-1 of U.S.
Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A
preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this
[[Page 27212]]
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 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.T09-0396 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-0396 Safety Zone; AASCIF Fireworks Display; Lake Erie,
Cleveland, OH.
(a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Erie; Cleveland, OH contained within a 350-foot radius of:
41[deg]30'26'' N, 81[deg]42'11'' W.
(b) Enforcement Period. This regulation will be enforced from 9:15
p.m. through 9:50 p.m. on July 21, 2019.
(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 Buffalo or a
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 a 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 an on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or an 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 5, 2019.
Joseph S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2019-12228 Filed 6-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P