Safety Zone; Town of Hingham Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Hingham Inner Harbor, MA, 30040-30042 [05-10421]
Download as PDF
30040
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
after the date these regulations are
published as final regulations in the
Federal Register.
*
*
*
*
*
33 CFR Part 165
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
the rulemaking (CGD01–05–042),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related materials in an unbound
format, no larger than 8.5 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know that your submission reached
us, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
We may change this proposed rule in
view of them.
[CGD01–05–042]
Public Meeting
RIN 1625–AA00
We do not plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to Sector
Boston at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one
would aid this rulemaking, we will hold
one at a time and place announced by
a later notice in the Federal Register.
Cono R. Namorato,
Acting Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05–10267 Filed 5–20–05; 2:48 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
Safety Zone; Town of Hingham Fourth
of July Fireworks Display, Hingham
Inner Harbor, MA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
establishing a temporary safety zone for
the Hingham Fourth of July Fireworks
Display in Hingham, Massachusetts.
This safety zone is necessary to protect
the life and property of the maritime
public from the potential hazards
associated with a fireworks display. The
safety zone would temporarily prohibit
entry into or movement within a portion
of Hingham Harbor during the closure
period.
Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 24, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Sector Boston
427 Commercial Street, Boston, MA.
Sector Boston maintains the public
docket for this rulemaking. Comments
and material received from the public,
as well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket CGD01–05–
042 and are available for inspection or
copying at Sector Boston, 427
Commercial Street, Boston, MA,
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chief Petty Officer Paul English, Sector
Boston, Waterways Management
Division, at (617) 223–3010.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:25 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
Background and Purpose
This rule proposes to establish a
safety zone on the waters of Hingham
Harbor within a 400-yard radius of
Button Island located at approximate
position 42°15′5″ N, 070°53′5″ W. The
safety zone would be in effect from 9
p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 2, 2005.
The rain date for the fireworks event is
from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 3,
2005.
The safety zone would temporarily
restrict movement within this portion of
Hingham Harbor and is needed to
protect the maritime public from the
potential dangers posed by a fireworks
display. Marine traffic may transit safely
outside the zone during the effective
period. The Captain of the Port does not
anticipate any negative impact on vessel
traffic due to this event. Public
notifications will be made prior to the
effective period of this proposed rule via
safety marine information broadcasts
and Local Notice to Mariners.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a
temporary safety zone in Hingham
Harbor Inner, Hingham, Massachusetts.
The safety zone would be in effect from
9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 2, 2005,
with a rain date of 9 p.m. until 10:30
p.m. on July 3, 2005. Marine traffic may
transit safely outside of the zone in the
majority of Hingham Harbor during the
event. This safety zone will control
vessel traffic during the fireworks
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
display to protect the safety of the
maritime public.
Due to the limited time frame of the
firework display, the Captain of the Port
anticipates minimal negative impact on
vessel traffic due to this event. Public
notifications will be made prior to the
effective period via local media, Local
Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office
of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
The Coast Guard expects the
economic impact of this proposed rule
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Although this rule would prevent
traffic from transiting a portion of
Marblehead Harbor during the effective
period, the effects of this rule will not
be significant for several reasons:
Vessels will be excluded from the
proscribed area for only one and one
half hours, vessels will be able to
operate in the majority of Hingham
Harbor during the effective period, and
advance notifications will be made to
the local maritime community by
marine information broadcasts and
Local Notice to Mariners.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Coast Guard
considered whether this proposed rule
would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’
comprises small businesses, not-forprofit 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.
This proposed rule would affect the
following entities, some of which may
be small entities: the owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in the effected portion of
Hingham Harbor from 9 p.m. to 10:30
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
p.m. on July 2, 2005 or during the same
hours on July 3, 2005.
This safety zone would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons: This proposed
rule would be in effect for only one and
one half hours, vessel traffic can safety
pass around the safety zone during the
effected period, and advance
notifications will be made to the local
maritime community via marine
informational broadcasts and Local
Notice to Mariners.
If you think your business,
organization, or government 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 to what
degree this rule would economically
affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would effect your small
business, organization, and government
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact Chief Petty
Officer English at the address listed
under ADDRESSES. 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.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule calls for no new
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:25 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year.
Though this proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not effect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and does not pose an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that may disproportionately affect
children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed 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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Considering Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30041
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Coast Guard
Instruction M16475.1D, which guides
the Coast Guard in complying with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f),
and have concluded that there are no
factors in this case that would limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we
believe that this rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(g) of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. A
preliminary ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. This
rule fits the category selected from
paragraph (34) (g), as it would establish
a safety zone. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the
final decision on whether to
categorically exclude this rule from
further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and record keeping
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
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; ‘‘Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1’’.
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
30042
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
2. Add temporary section 165.T01–
042 to read as follows:
§165.T01–042 Safety Zone; Town of
Hingham Fourth of July Fireworks Display,
Hingham, Massachusetts.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All waters of Hingham
Harbor within a 400-yard radius of
Button Island located at approximate
position 42°15′5″ N, 070°53′5″ W.
(b) Effective Date. This section is
effective from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on
July 2, 2005, with a rain date of 9 p.m.
until 10:30 p.m. on July 3, 2005.
(c) Regulations.
(1) In accordance with the general
regulations in 33 CFR 165.23, entry into
or movement within this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Boston.
(2) All vessel operators shall comply
with the instructions of the COTP or the
designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard
patrol personnel. On-scene Coast Guard
patrol personnel include commissioned,
warrant, and petty officers of the Coast
Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast
Guard Auxiliary, local, State, and
Federal law enforcement vessels.
Dated: May 16, 2005.
James L. McDonald,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. 05–10421 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
Written comments should
be sent to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Attn: CENWS–OD–TS–PS
(Robert M. Rawson), P.O. Box 3755,
Seattle, Washington 98124–3755, or by
e-mail to
robert.m.rawson@usace.army.mil.
ADDRESSES:
Mr.
John Post, Operations Manager, Hiram
M. Chittenden Locks, at (206) 789–2622,
Ms. Patricia Graesser, Public Affairs
Office, (206) 764–3760, or Mr. Michael
Kidby, Operations and Regulatory
Community of Practice, Directorate of
Civil Works, at (202) 761–0250.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
regulation has not been revised in over
40 years. Corrections need to be made
to reflect current situation and changes
to referenced regulations. Furthermore,
there is a need to have a public notice
and comment process in place to allow
for changes in scheduled operation. The
proposed change does not change the
present operation but adds a process to
allow for a change in schedule similar
to that on the Columbia River. Note that
the addition of this proposed schedule
provision does not negate or limit the
Corps’ existing authority to restrict or
reduce lockage operations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Administrative Requirements
Plain Language
33 CFR Part 207
In compliance with the principles in
the President’s Memorandum of June 1,
1998, (63 FR 31855) regarding plain
language, this preamble is written using
plain language. The use of ‘‘we’’ in this
notice refers the Corps. We have also
used the active voice, short sentences,
and common everyday terms except for
necessary technical terms.
RIN 0710–AA62
Paperwork Reduction Act
Navigation Regulations
This proposed action will not impose
any new information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork
Production Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to, or for, a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Corps of Engineers, Department of the
Army
AGENCY:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
DoD.
Notice of proposed rulemaking
and request for comments.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is proposing to establish a
procedure for modifying scheduled
operational hours at the Lake
Washington Ship Canal, Hiram M.
Chittenden Locks in Seattle,
Washington. This procedure would
allow the district engineer to change the
scheduled operational hours of the locks
after issuing a public notice and
providing a 30-day comment period for
any proposed change. Corrections are
also made to two citations.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before July 25, 2005.
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:25 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
Since the proposed rule does not
involve any collection of information
from the public, this action is not
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), an agency must
determine whether the regulatory action
is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to
review by OMB and the requirements of
the Executive Order. The Executive
Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as one that is likely to result in
a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, we have determined that
the proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ because it does not
meet any of these four criteria.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires an agency to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have Federalism
implications.’’ The phrase ‘‘policies that
have Federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects 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.’’
The proposed rule does not have
Federalism implications. We do not
believe that amending this regulation
will have substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between
the Federal government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. The proposed rule
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 25, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30040-30042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10421]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01-05-042]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Town of Hingham Fourth of July Fireworks Display,
Hingham Inner Harbor, MA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone
for the Hingham Fourth of July Fireworks Display in Hingham,
Massachusetts. This safety zone is necessary to protect the life and
property of the maritime public from the potential hazards associated
with a fireworks display. The safety zone would temporarily prohibit
entry into or movement within a portion of Hingham Harbor during the
closure period.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 24, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Sector Boston
427 Commercial Street, Boston, MA. Sector Boston maintains the public
docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the
public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being
available in the docket are part of docket CGD01-05-042 and are
available for inspection or copying at Sector Boston, 427 Commercial
Street, Boston, MA, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Petty Officer Paul English,
Sector Boston, Waterways Management Division, at (617) 223-3010.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for the rulemaking (CGD01-05-
042), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related materials in an unbound format, no larger than
8.5 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know that
your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in
view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Sector Boston at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
This rule proposes to establish a safety zone on the waters of
Hingham Harbor within a 400-yard radius of Button Island located at
approximate position 42[deg]15'5'' N, 070[deg]53'5'' W. The safety zone
would be in effect from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 2, 2005. The
rain date for the fireworks event is from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on
July 3, 2005.
The safety zone would temporarily restrict movement within this
portion of Hingham Harbor and is needed to protect the maritime public
from the potential dangers posed by a fireworks display. Marine traffic
may transit safely outside the zone during the effective period. The
Captain of the Port does not anticipate any negative impact on vessel
traffic due to this event. Public notifications will be made prior to
the effective period of this proposed rule via safety marine
information broadcasts and Local Notice to Mariners.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in Hingham
Harbor Inner, Hingham, Massachusetts. The safety zone would be in
effect from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 2, 2005, with a rain date
of 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 3, 2005. Marine traffic may transit
safely outside of the zone in the majority of Hingham Harbor during the
event. This safety zone will control vessel traffic during the
fireworks display to protect the safety of the maritime public.
Due to the limited time frame of the firework display, the Captain
of the Port anticipates minimal negative impact on vessel traffic due
to this event. Public notifications will be made prior to the effective
period via local media, Local Notice to Mariners and marine information
broadcasts.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant''
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory
policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Although this rule would prevent traffic from transiting a portion
of Marblehead Harbor during the effective period, the effects of this
rule will not be significant for several reasons: Vessels will be
excluded from the proscribed area for only one and one half hours,
vessels will be able to operate in the majority of Hingham Harbor
during the effective period, and advance notifications will be made to
the local maritime community by marine information broadcasts and Local
Notice to Mariners.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast
Guard considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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.
This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in the effected portion of Hingham
Harbor from 9 p.m. to 10:30
[[Page 30041]]
p.m. on July 2, 2005 or during the same hours on July 3, 2005.
This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
proposed rule would be in effect for only one and one half hours,
vessel traffic can safety pass around the safety zone during the
effected period, and advance notifications will be made to the local
maritime community via marine informational broadcasts and Local Notice
to Mariners.
If you think your business, organization, or government
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 to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would effect your small business, organization, and government
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Chief Petty Officer English at
the address listed under ADDRESSES. 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.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule calls for no new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.
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 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not
pose an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed 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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Considering Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a
significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Coast Guard
Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-
4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, from
further environmental documentation. A preliminary ``Environmental
Analysis Check List'' is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph (34)
(g), as it would establish a safety zone. Comments on this section will
be considered before we make the final decision on whether to
categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record
keeping 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
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; ``Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1''.
[[Page 30042]]
2. Add temporary section 165.T01-042 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T01-042 Safety Zone; Town of Hingham Fourth of July Fireworks
Display, Hingham, Massachusetts.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
Hingham Harbor within a 400-yard radius of Button Island located at
approximate position 42[deg]15'5'' N, 070[deg]53'5'' W.
(b) Effective Date. This section is effective from 9 p.m. until
10:30 p.m. on July 2, 2005, with a rain date of 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
on July 3, 2005.
(c) Regulations.
(1) In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR 165.23,
entry into or movement within this zone is prohibited unless authorized
by the Captain of the Port Boston.
(2) All vessel operators shall comply with the instructions of the
COTP or the designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-
scene Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and
petty officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, local, State, and Federal law enforcement vessels.
Dated: May 16, 2005.
James L. McDonald,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. 05-10421 Filed 5-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P