FR 2024-31420

Summary of the Proposal

The Coast Guard, as part of the Department of Homeland Security, has put forward a proposed rule aiming to establish a temporary moving safety zone around operations conducted by a cable laying barge (CLB) near Virginia Beach, Virginia. Cable laying and burial activities within this zone create navigational hazards that can potentially impact the safety of vessels and individuals on these waters. The proposed zone would span 1000 yards around the barge and extend up to 12 nautical miles offshore, effectively prohibiting unauthorized entry. The public is invited to submit comments on this proposal until January 29, 2025.

Key Issues and Concerns

While the intent of the proposed rule is clear—safeguarding the public from potential maritime hazards—the document lacks specific details on consequences for non-compliance or penalties for entering the safety zone without authorization. Clarifying enforcement measures would strengthen the rule’s comprehensibility and enforceability.

The document suggests minimal economic impact on small entities but provides little in the way of detailed analysis or supporting data to substantiate this claim. This lack of detailed economic impact analysis may leave some stakeholders uncertain about the rule's potential implications for their operations or businesses.

Furthermore, the enforcement period’s language and conditions for lifting restrictions are somewhat vague, creating room for interpretation about when general permissions might be granted. This may leave stakeholders without a clear understanding of when the zone's restrictions might change.

Potential Public Impact

For the general public, specifically mariners and those involved in maritime activities around Virginia Beach, this proposal could mean restricted access to certain waters for up to a year. This could impact navigation and scheduling of maritime operations. However, for the broader public, the proposal is a proactive measure to ensure marine safety and prevent accidents due to navigational hazards.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

• Maritime and Boating Community: Those operating vessels near Virginia Beach will need to navigate around the designated safety zone. The document mentions reducing impact on recreational boaters, but further specific details and assurances would be beneficial in understanding how these mitigations will be handled.

• Small Businesses and Entities: Although the document claims little economic impact, small entities might still face logistical challenges or increased operational costs due to necessary rerouting or delay.

• Regulatory and Environmental Stakeholders: The involvement of multiple statutes and executive orders suggests that this proposal aligns with broader policy objectives, though the document could benefit from a more detailed explanation of how these legislative frameworks apply specifically to this proposal.

In conclusion, while the proposed safety zone has clear intentions to protect life and property, the accompanying document leaves room for improvement in detailing enforcement procedures, potential economic impacts, and implications for small businesses. Public commentary during the review period could address these issues and provide further clarity.

The document discusses the proposal by the Coast Guard to establish a temporary moving safety zone around a cable laying barge near Virginia Beach, Virginia. This proposed rule is designed to ensure the safety of life on navigable waters during cable laying operations. While the document mainly addresses safety, it does touch on financial implications, notably in relation to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

Financial References and Implications

A significant financial reference in the proposal is related to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, which requires Federal agencies to evaluate actions that might lead to certain expenditures. Specifically, the Act considers implications if a rule could result in expenditures totaling $100,000,000 or more in any single year by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector.

The Coast Guard mentions this threshold to clarify that the proposed safety zone will not result in such substantial expenditures. However, the document does not detail how this conclusion was reached. This leaves potential gaps regarding how the economic impacts, especially on small entities, were measured or what specific analyses were performed to determine this financial estimate.

Given the issues identified in the document, one might observe that the mention of $100,000,000 serves to assuage concerns about significant financial burdens. Nonetheless, the lack of in-depth analysis or supporting data—particularly in assessing the economic impact on small businesses—could be seen as an area requiring further elaboration. A more comprehensive explanation could aid in understanding whether smaller entities affected by the safety zone's implementation might shoulder any financial consequences, albeit not reaching the Act's mentioned threshold.

Overall, while the document suggests that the proposed rule does not meet the financial impact threshold requiring detailed scrutiny under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, providing additional clarity and data would enhance the transparency of these financial assessments.