81 FR 36490 - Safety Zone; Fourth of July Fireworks North Charleston, SC

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 109 (June 7, 2016)

Page Range		36490-36492
FR Document		2016-13322

The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone in the navigable waters of Charleston, SC. This safety zone is necessary to protect the public from hazards associated with launching fireworks over navigable waters of the United States. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36490-36492]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13322]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0346]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Fourth of July Fireworks North Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
in the navigable waters of Charleston, SC. This safety zone is
necessary to protect the public from hazards associated with launching
fireworks over navigable waters of the United States. This proposed
rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety
zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston 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 June 22, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0346 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://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 Lieutenant John Downing, Sector
Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone (843)
740-3184, email John.Z.Downing@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
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

On April 18, 2016, the City of North Charleston notified the Coast
Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 9 p.m. to 10
p.m. on July 4, 2016. The fireworks are to be launched from a barge
along the bank of the Cooper River at River Front Park in North
Charleston, SC. Hazards from firework displays include accidental
discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers
or other debris. The Captain of the Port Charleston (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 500-
yard radius of the barge.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels
and the navigable waters within a 500-yard radius of the fireworks
barge before, during, and after the scheduled event.

[[Page 36491]]

The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 8:45 p.m. to
10:15 p.m. on July 4, 2016. The safety zone would cover all navigable
waters within 500 yards of the barge located at River Front Park on the
Cooper River. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety
of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the
scheduled 9 p.m. to 10 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.

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 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. 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.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
would be able to safely transit around this safety zone which would
impact a small designated area of the Cooper River for 1 hour during
the evening when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast
Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine
channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek
permission to enter the zone.

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 Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, 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 1 hour that would prohibit entry within 500 yards of the
fireworks barge. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant
Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist
and Categorical Exclusion Determination are 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.

[[Page 36492]]

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 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 http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://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 http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site'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 proposes
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: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a temporary Sec. 165.T07-0346 under the undesignated center
heading Seventh Coast Guard District to read as follows:

Sec. 165.T07-0346 Safety Zone; Fourth of July Fireworks North
Charleston, SC.

(a) This rule establishes a safety zone on all Cooper River waters
within a 500 yard radius of barge, from which fireworks will be
launched.
(b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated
areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston
or a designated representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, or
remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the Port
Charleston by telephone at 843-740-7050, or a designated representative
via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization
to enter, transit through, or remain within the regulated area is
granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston
or a designated representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
(d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced on July 4, 2016
from 8:45 p.m. until 10:15 p.m.

Dated: May 31, 2016.
G.L. Tomasulo,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2016-13322 Filed 6-6-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 36491

The Coast Guard proposes this businesses, not-for-profit organizations a substantial direct effect on one or
rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. that are independently owned and more Indian tribes, on the relationship
1231. operated and are not dominant in their between the Federal Government and
fields, and governmental jurisdictions Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
with populations of less than 50,000. power and responsibilities between the
The COTP proposes to establish a The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. Federal Government and Indian tribes.
safety zone from 8:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not If you believe this proposed rule has
on July 4, 2016. The safety zone would have a significant economic impact on implications for federalism or Indian
cover all navigable waters within 500 a substantial number of small entities. tribes, please contact the person listed
yards of the barge located at River Front While some owners or operators of in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Park on the Cooper River. The duration vessels intending to transit the safety CONTACT section.
of the zone is intended to ensure the zone may be small entities, for the
safety of vessels and these navigable reasons stated in section IV.A above this E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
waters before, during, and after the proposed rule would not have a The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
scheduled 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. fireworks significant economic impact on any of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
display. No vessel or person would be vessel owner or operator. Federal agencies to assess the effects of
permitted to enter the safety zone If you think that your business, their discretionary regulatory actions. In
without obtaining permission from the organization, or governmental particular, the Act addresses actions
COTP or a designated representative. jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity that may result in the expenditure by a
The regulatory text we are proposing and that this rule would have a State, local, or tribal government, in the
appears at the end of this document. significant economic impact on it, aggregate, or by the private sector of
please submit a comment (see $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
IV. Regulatory Analyses ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it more in any one year. Though this
We developed this proposed rule after qualifies and how and to what degree proposed rule would not result in such
considering numerous statutes and this rule would economically affect it. an expenditure, we do discuss the
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Under section 213(a) of the Small effects of this rule elsewhere in this
Below we summarize our analyses Business Regulatory Enforcement preamble.
based on a number of these statutes and Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
Executive orders and we discuss First we want to assist small entities in F. Environment
Amendment rights of protestors. understanding this proposed rule. If the
We have analyzed this proposed rule
rule would affect your small business,
A. Regulatory Planning and Review under Department of Homeland
organization, or governmental
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 Security Management Directive 023–01
jurisdiction and you have questions
direct agencies to assess the costs and and Commandant Instruction
concerning its provisions or options for
benefits of available regulatory M16475.lD, which guide the Coast
compliance, please contact the person
alternatives and, if regulation is Guard in complying with the National
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
necessary, to select regulatory Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will
approaches that maximize net benefits. U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a
not retaliate against small entities that
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the preliminary determination that this
question or complain about this
importance of quantifying both costs action is one of a category of actions that
proposed rule or any policy or action of
and benefits, of reducing costs, of do not individually or cumulatively
the Coast Guard.
harmonizing rules, and of promoting have a significant effect on the human
flexibility. This NPRM has not been C. Collection of Information environment. This proposed rule
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory This proposed rule would not call for involves a safety zone lasting 1 hour
action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. a new collection of information under that would prohibit entry within 500
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 yards of the fireworks barge. Normally
reviewed by the Office of Management (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). such actions are categorically excluded
and Budget. from further review under paragraph
This regulatory action determination D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of Commandant
is based on the size, location, duration, Governments Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary
and time-of-day of the safety zone. A rule has implications for federalism environmental analysis checklist and
Vessel traffic would be able to safely under Executive Order 13132, Categorical Exclusion Determination are
transit around this safety zone which Federalism, if it has a substantial direct available in the docket where indicated
would impact a small designated area of effect on the States, on the relationship under ADDRESSES. We seek any
the Cooper River for 1 hour during the between the national government and comments or information that may lead
evening when vessel traffic is normally the States, or on the distribution of to the discovery of a significant
low. Moreover, the Coast Guard would power and responsibilities among the environmental impact from this
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via various levels of government. We have proposed rule.
VHF–FM marine channel 16 about the analyzed this proposed rule under that G. Protest Activities
zone, and the rule would allow vessels Order and have determined that it is
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

to seek permission to enter the zone. consistent with the fundamental The Coast Guard respects the First
federalism principles and preemption Amendment rights of protesters.
B. Impact on Small Entities requirements described in Executive Protesters are asked to contact the
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of Order 13132. person listed in the FOR FURTHER
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, Also, this proposed rule does not have INFORMATION CONTACT section to
requires Federal agencies to consider tribal implications under Executive coordinate protest activities so that your
the potential impact of regulations on Order 13175, Consultation and message can be received without
small entities during rulemaking. The Coordination with Indian Tribal jeopardizing the safety or security of
term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small Governments, because it would not have people, places, or vessels.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM 07JNP1

Document Created: 2018-02-08 07:32:02
Document Modified: 2018-02-08 07:32:02

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Dates		Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 22, 2016.
Contact		If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant John Downing, Sector Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone (843) 740-3184, email [email protected]
FR Citation		81 FR 36490
RIN Number		1625-AA00
CFR Associated		Harbors; Marine Safety; Navigation (water); Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Security Measures and Waterways

81 FR 36490 - Safety Zone; Fourth of July Fireworks North Charleston, SC

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 109 (June 7, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard