Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
See the "Public Participation and Request for Comments" portion of the
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted without change to
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online (via
To submit your comment online, go to
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8½ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change the rule based on your comments.
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a request for one using one of the four methods specified under
On May 11, 2011, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Special Local Regulation; Partnership in Education Dragon Boat Race, Maumee River Toledo, OH in the
Each year, an organized racing event takes place on the Maumee River in which participants paddle Hong Kong
As suggested above, this proposed rule is intended to ensure safety of the public and vessels during the Dragon Boat Races. This proposed rule will become effective 30 days after the final rule is published in the
This Special Local Regulation will encompass all navigable waters of the United States on the Maumee River, Toledo, OH, bound by a line extending from a point on land just north of the Cherry Street Bridge at position 41°39′5.27″ N; 083°31′34.01″ W straight across the river along the Cherry Street bridge to position 41°39′12.83″ N; 083°31′42.58″ W and a line extending from a point of land just south of International Park at position41°38′ 46.62″ N; 083°31′50.54″ W straight across the river to the shore adjacent to the Owens Corning building at position 41°38′47.37″ N; 083°32′2.05″ W. These coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
The Captain of the Port will notify the affected segments of the public of the enforcement of this Special Local Regulation by all appropriate means. Means of notification may include publication of Notice of Enforcement (NOE) in the
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes or executive orders.
This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this proposed 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 Special Local Regulation will be relatively small and be enforced for a relatively short time. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may still transit through the area when permitted by the Captain of the Port.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule will affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the portion of the Maumee River discussed above annually on the third or fourth Saturday of July from 6:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m.
This proposed Special Local Regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This rule will be enforced for approximately twelve hours the day of its effective period. In addition, on-scene representatives will allow vessels to transit along the Western side of the river at a slow no wake speed. The race committee will stop the races for any oncoming commercial traffic.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
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 proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact LTJG Benjamin Nessia, Response Department, MSU Toledo, Coast Guard; telephone (419) 418-6040, email
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
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 proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
This proposed rule would 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.
This proposed rule will meet 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 have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.
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.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
We have analyzed this proposed 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 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 the establishment of a Special Local Regulation and is therefore categorically excluded under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction. During the annual permitting process for this Dragon Boat Race event an environmental analysis will be conducted, and thus, no preliminary environmental analysis checklist or Categorical Exclusion Determination (CED) will be required for this rulemaking action. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.
Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR Part 100 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:
33 U.S.C. 1233.
2. Add § 100.921 to read as follows:
(1) In accordance with the general regulations in section § 100.901 of this part, vessels transiting within the regulated area shall travel at a no-wake speed and remain vigilant for vessels participating in the event. Additionally, vessels shall yield right-of-way for event participants and event safety craft and shall follow directions given by the Coast Guard's on-scene representative or by event representatives during the event.
(2) The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port, Sector Detroit is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector Detroit to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative of the Captain of the Port, Sector Detroit will be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port, Sector Detroit or his designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.