FR 2024-28557

The document is a temporary rule issued by the Coast Guard, which establishes a safety zone in Sandusky Bay, Ohio, near the Jackson Street Pier. This zone is intended to ensure the safety of individuals, boats, and the marine environment during a fireworks display organized by the City of Sandusky. The safety zone will be in effect for a brief one-hour period from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. on December 14, 2024. The rule restricts entry into the area unless permission is granted by the Captain of the Port of Detroit or an authorized representative.

General Summary

The rule is enacted to mitigate potential hazards resulting from the fireworks display, including the combination of potential vessel traffic, reduced visibility due to darkness, and debris from fireworks. Given these dangers, the safety zone is an essential preventive measure to minimize the risk of accidents or injuries in the designated area.

Significant Issues or Concerns

A notable concern is the absence of a period for public notice and comment, typically a standard part of regulatory processes that allows for public input. This decision is justified by the Coast Guard due to time constraints, as immediate action is needed to ensure safety. However, this bypass in procedure could be perceived as prioritizing haste over public participation.

Another concern could arise from the legal and administrative jargon inherent in the document, which may be difficult for the average reader to navigate. References to specific U.S. Code sections and intricate procedural terms can create barriers for understanding.

Additionally, the document does not address the financial implications or direct costs associated with enforcing the safety zone, leaving potential economic impact largely unexplored.

Impact on the Public

The establishment of the safety zone will help avert potential accidents, thereby prioritizing public safety. For the general public, it underscores an effort to ensure that events like fireworks displays do not compromise marine safety in Sandusky Bay. Residents and visitors can expect a safe environment to enjoy such events without the risk of maritime accidents.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For stakeholders, particularly local businesses reliant on maritime traffic, the rule could have temporary downsides. The one-hour restriction might interrupt businesses that depend on access to navigation channels in Sandusky Bay. While the Coast Guard assesses that the economic impact on small entities will not be significant, the document does not deeply explore this potential disruption or provide a detailed analysis.

Importantly, the rule provides clear instructions for vessels wishing to enter the restricted area to seek authorization, which balances safety needs with commercial interests for those needing access during the enforcement period. However, for those unfamiliar with maritime communication protocols, this procedure may not be straightforward.

Overall, the rule reflects a deliberate approach to safeguarding public and environmental safety while hosting community events, albeit with some room for improvement in terms of public communication and engagement.

The Federal Register document regarding the establishment of a temporary safety zone for the Sandusky Bay area, specifically during a fireworks display, contains a brief mention of financial implications under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. This act ensures that federal agencies assess the costs of their discretionary regulatory actions, especially those that could lead to significant spending. In this case, the document notes that the rule does not result in expenditures by state, local, tribal governments, or the private sector equal to or exceeding $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) in any given year.

Financial Implications Analysis

The mention of the $100,000,000 threshold serves as a guideline for determining whether the regulatory action could impose substantial costs that warrant further scrutiny or consideration under federal law. In this context, the document asserts that the rule establishing the safety zone does not approach this level of fiscal impact. This suggests that the anticipated costs associated with implementing or enforcing the safety zone are not considered significant enough to trigger more detailed financial reporting or analysis.

Relation to Identified Issues

Despite the rule's claim that substantial financial impacts are not expected, the document lacks specific details on potential financial effects, such as costs associated with the enforcement of the safety measures or impacts on local businesses. For instance, while covering issues faced by small entities, the document does acknowledge that small businesses might experience some disruption due to restricted waterway access. However, it concludes that these impacts are negligible without presenting supporting financial data or considerations regarding potential lost revenue for businesses that rely on open navigation.

Furthermore, the decision to implement the safety zone without prior notice and public comment, as noted in the issues, highlights a gap in public participation and transparency. This approach sidesteps a more comprehensive exploration of potential fiscal impacts, focusing instead on expediency for safety concerns.

In summary, while the document assures that the regulation does not meet the threshold to necessitate detailed fiscal analysis, it provides limited financial information or examination of less significant economic impacts that might still affect local stakeholders, particularly small businesses. Such a conclusion points to a need for improved communication and analysis of financial effects on the community, especially when regulatory actions potentially disrupt economic activities.