Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 189 / Monday, October 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations FR 41909. There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this sailing regatta.
During the comment period that ended August 24, 2021, we received 0
comments.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553d3, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to the public interest because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the sailing regatta.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034
previously 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley COTP has determined that potential hazards associated with the sailing regatta to be used in this October 9 and 10, 2021 will be a safety concern for anyone within the area. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of vessels and the navigable waters in the safety zone before, during, and after the scheduled event.
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published August 4, 2021. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
This rule establishes a special local regulation from noon to 5 p.m. on October 9, 2021 and October 10, 2021.
The special local regulation will cover all navigable waters from mile marker 594 to 598 on the Ohio River. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of the sailing vessels during the regatta. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTPs representative by Sector Ohio Valley command center at 5027795422.
Those in the regulated area must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the designated representative.
V. Regulatory Analyses We developed this 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.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:13 Oct 01, 2021

Jkt 256001

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.
This rule has not been designated a significant regulatory action, under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget OMB.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the special local regulation.
This special local regulation restricts transit on a four-mile stretch of the Ohio River for five hours on two days.
Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners BNMs, Local Notices to Mariners LNMs, and Marine Safety Information Bulletins MSIBs about this special local regulation so that waterway users may plan according for this restriction on transit, and the rule allows vessel to request permission to enter the zone.
B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601612, 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 received 0 comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605b that this rule will 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 V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
Under section 213a of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 Pub. L. 104121, 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 call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees
PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

54621

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 agencys responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1
888REGFAIR 18887343247. 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.
C. 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. 35013520.
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 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 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.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 2 U.S.C. 15311538 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.
F. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 02301, Rev. 1, associated
E:FRFM04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1