33 C.F.R. § 334.3

Special policies

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. The general regulatory policies stated in 33 CFR part 320 will be followed as appropriate. In addition, danger zone and restricted area regulations shall provide for public access to the area to the maximum extent practicable.

(b) Food fishing industry. The authority to prescribe danger zone and restricted area regulations must be exercised so as not to unreasonably interfere with or restrict the food fishing industry. Whenever the proposed establishment of a danger zone or restricted area may affect fishing operations, the District Engineer will consult with the Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior and the Regional Director, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

(c) Temporary, occasional or intermittent use. If the use of the water area is desired for a short period of time, not to exceed thirty days in duration, and that planned operations can be conducted safely without imposing unreasonable restrictions on navigation, and without promulgating restricted area regulations in accordance with the regulations in this section, applicants may be informed that formal regulations are not required. Activities of this type shall not reoccur more often than biennially (every other year), unless danger zone/restricted area rules are promulgated under this part. Proper notices for mariners requesting that vessels avoid the area will be issued by the Agency requesting such use of the water area, or if appropriate, by the District Engineer, to all known interested persons. Copies will also be sent to appropriate State agencies, the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC 20590, and Director, Defense Mapping Agency, Hydrographic Center, Washington, DC 20390, ATTN: Code NS 12. Notification to all parties and Agencies shall be made at least two weeks prior to the planned event, or earlier, if required for distribution of Local Notice to Mariners by the Coast Guard.

[58 FR 37607, July 12, 1993]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 2000–2004 · leading case: United States v. Zenon, 285 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D.P.R. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Zenon, 285 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D.P.R. 2003). · cites it 5× “33 C.F.R. § 334.3 (b) (2001). The above-quoted provision is virtually identical to the “food fishing proviso” discussed above, and which was only contained in 33 U.”

United States v. Zenón-Rodríguez, 289 F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2002). · cites it 9× “Third, they argue that under 33 C.F.R. § 334.3 (c) 3 they were entitled to at least two weeks’ advance notice of the military exercise and the prohibition from entering the danger zone on October 4, 2001.”

United States v. Zenón-Encarnación, 387 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2004). · cites it 5× “§ 3 , since 33 C.F.R. § 334.3 (b) contains a food fishing proviso substantially identical to that in 33 U.”

United States v. De Jesus, 108 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D.P.R. 2000). · cites it 2× “See 33 C.F.R. § 334.3 (c). 3 Defendant is mistaken in his reading of the applicable regulations.”

United States v. Zenon, 182 F. Supp. 2d 211 (D.P.R. 2002). · cites it 2× “Defendants further submit that the Navy did not adhere to the alleged requirement that notice be given at least two weeks in advance of activation of a temporary danger zone in accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 334.3 (c) (2001). Docket Document No.”

— 33 C.F.R. § 334.3(b) — 1 case

United States v. Zenón-Encarnación, 387 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2004). “§ 3 , since 33 C.F.R. § 334.3 (b) contains a food fishing proviso substantially identical to that in 33 U.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.