Security Zone; Duluth Harbor, Duluth, MN, 34064-34065 [05-11666]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34064
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 112 / Monday, June 13, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
to oral communication by the
representative must first be fulfilled. In
the event of settlement at the prepenalty
stage, the claim proposed in the
prepenalty notice will be withdrawn,
the respondent will not be required to
take a written position on allegations
contained in the prepenalty notice, and
the Office of Foreign Assets Control will
make no final determination as to
whether a violation occurred. The
amount accepted in settlement of
allegations in a prepenalty notice may
vary from the civil penalty that might
finally be imposed in the event of a
formal determination of violation. In the
event no settlement is reached, the time
limit specified in paragraph (a) of this
section for written response to the
prepenalty notice will remain in effect,
unless additional time is granted by the
Office of Foreign Assets Control.
(f) Guidelines. Guidelines for the
imposition or settlement of civil
penalties by the Office of Foreign Assets
Control have been codified in the
Appendix to 31 CFR part 501, the
Reporting, Procedures and Penalties
Regulations.
(g) Representation. A representative of
the respondent may act on behalf of the
respondent, but any oral
communication with the Office of
Foreign Assets Control prior to a written
submission regarding the specific
allegations contained in the prepenalty
notice must be preceded by a written
letter of representation, unless the
prepenalty notice was served upon the
respondent in care of the representative.
I 15. Section 538.704 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 538.704 Penalty imposition or
withdrawal.
(a) No violation. If, after considering
any response to the prepenalty notice
and any relevant facts, the Director of
the Office of Foreign Assets Control
determines that there was no violation
by the respondent named in the
prepenalty notice, the Director shall
notify the respondent in writing of that
determination and of the cancellation of
the proposed monetary penalty.
(b) Violation.—(1) If, after considering
any written response to the prepenalty
notice, or default in the submission of
a written response, and any relevant
facts, the Director of the Office of
Foreign Assets Control determines that
there was a violation by the respondent
named in the prepenalty notice, the
Director is authorized to issue a written
penalty notice to the respondent of the
determination of the violation and the
imposition of the monetary penalty.
(2) The penalty notice shall inform
the respondent that payment or
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:44 Jun 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
arrangement for installment payment of
the assessed penalty must be made
within 30 days of the date of mailing of
the penalty notice by the Office of
Foreign Assets Control.
(3) The penalty notice shall inform
the respondent of the requirement to
furnish the respondent’s taxpayer
identification number pursuant to 31
U.S.C. 7701 and that such number will
be used for purposes of collecting and
reporting on any delinquent penalty
amount.
(4) The issuance of the penalty notice
finding a violation and imposing a
monetary penalty shall constitute final
agency action. The respondent has the
right to seek judicial review of that
agency action in federal district court.
Dated: April 26, 2005.
Robert W. Werner,
Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
Approved: May 9, 2005.
Juan C. Zarate,
Assistant Secretary (Terrorist Financing and
Financial Crimes), Department of the
Treasury.
[FR Doc. 05–11637 Filed 6–8–05; 3:22 pm]
BILLING CODE 4810–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD09–05–014]
RIN 2115–AA87
Security Zone; Duluth Harbor, Duluth,
MN
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary security zone
in Duluth’s inner harbor for the
Commissioning ceremony of the Coast
Guard Cutter ALDER. The security zone
is necessary to ensure the security of
dignitaries attending this ceremony on
June 10, 2005. The security zone is
intended to restrict vessels from a
portion of Duluth Harbor in Duluth,
Minnesota.
DATES: This rule is effective from 10
a.m. (local) until 3 p.m., June 10, 2005.
ADDRESSES: 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 (CGD09–05–014) and are
available for inspection or copying at
the U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety
Office Duluth, 600 South Lake Avenue,
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Canal Park, Duluth, Minnesota 55802,
between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 3:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT
Greg Schultz, U.S. Coast Guard Marine
Safety Office Duluth, at (218) 720–5285.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On May 13, 2005, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register (70 FR 25514). We
received no comments on the proposed
rule. No public hearing was requested,
and none was held. Under 5 U.S.C. 553
(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The
regulation is needed to protect
dignitaries during the event and a delay
would be contrary to the public interest.
Background and Purpose
The security zone will encompass the
waters of Duluth Harbor, within a 500
foot radius from a fixed point located at
46°46′17″ N, 92°05′26″ W. These
coordinates are based upon North
American Datum (NAD 1983).
Entry into, transit through, or
anchoring within this security zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Duluth or his
designated on-scene representative. The
designated on-scene representative will
be the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.
The Coast Guard Patrol Commander
may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
Regulatory Evaluation
This 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 security zone will only be in
effect for a few hours on the day of the
event and vessels may easily still transit
inside the Duluth Harbor.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this 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
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 112 / Monday, June 13, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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 rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will affect the following
entities: the owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit or anchor in
this portion of Duluth Harbor from 10
a.m. to 3 p.m. June 10, 2005. This
regulation will not have a significant
economic impact for the following
reasons. The regulation is only in effect
for one day of the event. The designated
area is being established to allow for
maximum use of the waterway for
commercial and recreational vessels.
The Coast Guard will inform the public
that the regulation is in effect via
Marine Information Broadcasts.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under Section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pubic Law 104–
121), we offer to assist small entities in
understanding the rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and
participate in the rulemaking process.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
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 agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the U.S. Coast Guard, call
1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
Federalism
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and
have determined that this rule does not
have implications for federalism under
that Order.
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.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:44 Jun 10, 2005
Jkt 205001
Though this proposed rule would not
result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect 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 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
The Coast Guard has analyzed this
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 create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that may disproportionately affect
children.
34065
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical
exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, we believe that
this rule should be categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. This
event establishes a safety zone, therefore
paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction
applies.
A preliminary ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ is available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the
final decision on whether the rule
should be categorically excluded 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 set out in the preamble,
the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR Part 165
as follows:
I
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulation 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. It has not been designated by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs as a
significant energy action. Therefore, it
does not require a Statement of Energy
Effects under Executive Order 13211.
Indian Tribal Governments
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.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
I
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.
I 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–014 is
added to read as follows:
§ 165.T09–014 Security Zone; Duluth
Harbor, Duluth, Minnesota.
(a) Location. The following area is
designated as a security zone: The
waters of Duluth Harbor, within a 500
foot radius from a fixed point located at
46°46′17″ N, 92°05′26″ W. These
coordinates are based upon North
American Datum (NAD 1983).
(b) Effective time and date. This
section is effective from 10 a.m. until 3
p.m. (local), on June 10, 2005.
(c) Regulations. Entry into, transit
through, or anchoring within the
security zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Duluth or the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
Dated: June 6, 2005.
H.M. Nguyen,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port Duluth.
[FR Doc. 05–11666 Filed 6–10–05; 3:31 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 112 (Monday, June 13, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34064-34065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-11666]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD09-05-014]
RIN 2115-AA87
Security Zone; Duluth Harbor, Duluth, MN
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone in
Duluth's inner harbor for the Commissioning ceremony of the Coast Guard
Cutter ALDER. The security zone is necessary to ensure the security of
dignitaries attending this ceremony on June 10, 2005. The security zone
is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of Duluth Harbor in
Duluth, Minnesota.
DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. (local) until 3 p.m., June
10, 2005.
ADDRESSES: 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 (CGD09-05-014) and are available for inspection or
copying at the U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Duluth, 600 South
Lake Avenue, Canal Park, Duluth, Minnesota 55802, between the hours of
7:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Greg Schultz, U.S. Coast Guard
Marine Safety Office Duluth, at (218) 720-5285.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On May 13, 2005, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking in
the Federal Register (70 FR 25514). We received no comments on the
proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553 (d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in
the Federal Register. The regulation is needed to protect dignitaries
during the event and a delay would be contrary to the public interest.
Background and Purpose
The security zone will encompass the waters of Duluth Harbor,
within a 500 foot radius from a fixed point located at 46[deg]46'17''
N, 92[deg]05'26'' W. These coordinates are based upon North American
Datum (NAD 1983).
Entry into, transit through, or anchoring within this security zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Duluth or
his designated on-scene representative. The designated on-scene
representative will be the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The Coast
Guard Patrol Commander may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
Regulatory Evaluation
This 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 security zone will only be in effect for a few hours on the day
of the event and vessels may easily still transit inside the Duluth
Harbor.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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
[[Page 34065]]
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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This rule will affect the following entities: the owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in this portion of
Duluth Harbor from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. June 10, 2005. This regulation
will not have a significant economic impact for the following reasons.
The regulation is only in effect for one day of the event. The
designated area is being established to allow for maximum use of the
waterway for commercial and recreational vessels. The Coast Guard will
inform the public that the regulation is in effect via Marine
Information Broadcasts.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under Section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pubic Law 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Small
businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees 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 agency's responsiveness
to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of
the U.S. Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13132, Federalism,
and have determined that this rule does not have implications for
federalism under that Order.
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 would not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect 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 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
The Coast Guard has analyzed this 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
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulation 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Indian Tribal Governments
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.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this
case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This event
establishes a safety zone, therefore paragraph (34)(g) of the
Instruction applies.
A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is available in
the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the final decision on whether the
rule should be categorically excluded 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.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR
Part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
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.
0
2. A new temporary Sec. 165.T09-014 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-014 Security Zone; Duluth Harbor, Duluth, Minnesota.
(a) Location. The following area is designated as a security zone:
The waters of Duluth Harbor, within a 500 foot radius from a fixed
point located at 46[deg]46'17'' N, 92[deg]05'26'' W. These coordinates
are based upon North American Datum (NAD 1983).
(b) Effective time and date. This section is effective from 10 a.m.
until 3 p.m. (local), on June 10, 2005.
(c) Regulations. Entry into, transit through, or anchoring within
the security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Duluth or the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.
Dated: June 6, 2005.
H.M. Nguyen,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Duluth.
[FR Doc. 05-11666 Filed 6-10-05; 3:31 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
