Safety Zone: Fireworks Display, Morehead City Harbor, Morehead City, NC, 14434-14436 [E6-4097]
Download as PDF
14434
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(c) Regulations. Entry into, transit
through or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port Buffalo 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.
Dated: February 28, 2006.
S.J. Ferguson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. E6–4098 Filed 3–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05–05–016]
Safety Zone: Fireworks Display,
Morehead City Harbor, Morehead City,
NC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes the
establishment of a 1000 foot safety zone
around a fireworks display for the Pepsi
Americas’ Sail 2006 occurring on July 4,
2006, on the Morehead City Harbor,
Morehead City, NC. This action is
intended to restrict vessel traffic on the
Morehead City Harbor. This safety zone
is necessary to protect mariners from the
hazards associated with fireworks
displays.
Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
April 17, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander,
Sector North Carolina, 2301 East Fort
Macon Road, Atlantic Beach, NC 28512.
Sector North Carolina 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, will become part
of this docket and will be available for
inspection or copying at the Federal
Building Fifth Coast Guard District
between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
CWO Christopher Humphrey,
Prevention Department, Sector North
Carolina, at (252) 247–4525.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:33 Mar 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
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
this rulemaking CGD05–05–016,
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 material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know they 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 now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to Commander,
Sector North Carolina 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.
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).
We expect 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
regulation restricts access to the
regulated area, the effect of this rule will
not be significant because: (i) The COTP
may authorize access to the safety zone;
(ii) the safety zone will be in effect for
a limited duration; and (iii) the Coast
Guard will make notifications via
maritime advisories so mariners can
adjust their plans accordingly.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a
safety zone on specified waters of the
Morehead City Harbor. The regulated
area will consist of a 1000-ft safety zone
around a fireworks display from the
northern shore of Brandt Island for the
Pepsi Americas’ Sail 2006, in Morehead
City, NC. The safety zone will be
enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
on July 4, 2006. General navigation in
the safety zone will be restricted during
the event. Except for participants and
vessels authorized by the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander, no person or vessel
may enter or remain in the regulated
area.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have 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 rule will affect the following
entities, some of which may be small
entities: the owners and operators of
vessels intending to transit or anchor in
that portion of the Morehead City
Harbor 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on July
4, 2006. The safety zone will not have
a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities, because the
zone will only be in place for a few
hours and maritime advisories will be
issued, so the mariners can adjust their
plans accordingly. If you think that your
business, organization, or governmental
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 and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
RIN 1625–AA00
ACTION:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
Background and Purpose
On July 4, 2006, the Pepsi Americas’
Sail 2006 fireworks display will be held
on the Morehead City Harbor in
Morehead City, NC. Spectators will be
observing from both the shore and from
vessels. Due to the need of protection of
mariners and spectators from the
hazards associated with the fireworks
display, vessel traffic will be
temporarily restricted.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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 affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact CWO
Christopher Humphrey, Preventing
Department, Sector North Carolina, at
(252) 247–4525. 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 would call 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 would 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 would 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.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
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,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:33 Mar 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might 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 would 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
Concerning 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 Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14435
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)(h), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Under
figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), of the
Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ is not required for this rule.
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 recordkeeping
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.
2. Add Temporary § 165.T05–016, to
read as follows:
§ 165.T05–016 Safety Zone: Morehead City
Harbor, Morehead City, NC.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All waters within 1000 feet
of the fireworks display at Brandt
Island, Morehead City, NC in the
Captain of the Port, Sector North
Carolina zone as defined in 33 CFR
3.25–20.
(b) Definition. Captain of the Port:
Means any U.S. Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
who has been authorized by the Captain
of the Port, Sector North Carolina to act
on his behalf.
(c) Regulation. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in 165.23 of this
part, entry into this zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port, Sector North Carolina, NC, or his
designated representatives.
(2) The operator of any vessel in the
immediate vicinity of this safety zone
shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon
being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
14436
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules
on board a vessel displaying a U.S.
Coast Guard Ensign.
(ii) Proceed as directed by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
on board a vessel displaying a U.S.
Coast Guard Ensign.
(3) The Captain of the Port, Sector
North Carolina and the Commander at
the Prevention Department, Morehead
City, North Carolina can be contacted at
telephone Number (252) 247–4570 or
(252) 247–4520.
(4) The Coast Guard Vessels enforcing
the safety zone can be contacted on
VHF–FM 13 and 16.
(d) Effective date. This regulation is
effective from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July
4, 2006.
Dated: March 8, 2006.
William D. Lee,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Sector North Carolina.
[FR Doc. E6–4097 Filed 3–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0124; FRL–8040–7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a request from the Indiana Department
of Environmental Management (IDEM)
to revise the Indiana State
Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision
consists of the repeal of 326 IAC 6–1,
and its replacement by new articles 326
IAC 6.5 and 326 IAC 6.8. 326 IAC 6.5
contains particulate matter emission
limitations for sources in all counties in
Indiana, with the exception of Lake
County. Sources in Lake County are
addressed in 326 IAC 6.8. The revision
does not change any control
requirements or any other provisions in
326 IAC 6–1.
In the final rules section of this
Federal Register, EPA is approving the
SIP revision as a direct final rule
without prior proposal, because EPA
views this as a noncontroversial
revision and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If we do not receive any adverse
comments in response to these direct
final and proposed rules, we do not
contemplate taking any further action in
relation to this proposed rule. If EPA
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:33 Mar 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
receives adverse comments, we will
withdraw the direct final rule and will
respond to all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before April 21, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–
2006–0124 by one of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: https://
docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. RME, EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA’s preferred method for
receiving comments. Once in the
system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then key
in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
Fax: (312) 886–5824.
Mail: You may send written
comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief,
Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
Hand delivery: Deliver your
comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief,
Criteria Pollutant Section (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office’s normal
hours of operation. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
RME ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0124.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through RME, regulations.gov,
or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and
the Federal regulations.gov Web site are
‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to EPA without going through RME or
regulations.gov, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit
an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to section I(B)
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the RME
index at https://www.epa.gov/rmepub/.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or
in hard copy at Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
(Please telephone Jonathan Nichols at
(312) 353–7942 before visiting the
Region 5 Office.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jonathan Nichols, Life Scientist, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), USEPA, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 353–7942.
Nichols.jonathan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My
Comments for EPA?
II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
III. Where Can I Find More Information
About This Proposal and the
Corresponding Direct Final Rule?
I. General Information
A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI
to EPA through RME, regulations.gov or
e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be
CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark
the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD–ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14434-14436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4097]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05-05-016]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone: Fireworks Display, Morehead City Harbor, Morehead
City, NC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes the establishment of a 1000 foot
safety zone around a fireworks display for the Pepsi Americas' Sail
2006 occurring on July 4, 2006, on the Morehead City Harbor, Morehead
City, NC. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on the
Morehead City Harbor. This safety zone is necessary to protect mariners
from the hazards associated with fireworks displays.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before April 17, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander,
Sector North Carolina, 2301 East Fort Macon Road, Atlantic Beach, NC
28512. Sector North Carolina 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,
will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at the Federal Building Fifth Coast Guard District between 9
a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Christopher Humphrey, Prevention
Department, Sector North Carolina, at (252) 247-4525.
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 this rulemaking CGD05-05-
016, 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 material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they 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 now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Commander, Sector North Carolina 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
On July 4, 2006, the Pepsi Americas' Sail 2006 fireworks display
will be held on the Morehead City Harbor in Morehead City, NC.
Spectators will be observing from both the shore and from vessels. Due
to the need of protection of mariners and spectators from the hazards
associated with the fireworks display, vessel traffic will be
temporarily restricted.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on specified waters
of the Morehead City Harbor. The regulated area will consist of a 1000-
ft safety zone around a fireworks display from the northern shore of
Brandt Island for the Pepsi Americas' Sail 2006, in Morehead City, NC.
The safety zone will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on July
4, 2006. General navigation in the safety zone will be restricted
during the event. Except for participants and vessels authorized by the
Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain
in the regulated area.
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).
We expect 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 regulation
restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this rule will
not be significant because: (i) The COTP may authorize access to the
safety zone; (ii) the safety zone will be in effect for a limited
duration; and (iii) the Coast Guard will make notifications via
maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
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 rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: the owners and operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in that portion of the Morehead City Harbor 8:30 p.m.
to 10:30 p.m. on July 4, 2006. The safety zone will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, because
the zone will only be in place for a few hours and maritime advisories
will be issued, so the mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. If
you think that your business, organization, or governmental
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 and 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),
[[Page 14435]]
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 affect your small business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact CWO
Christopher Humphrey, Preventing Department, Sector North Carolina, at
(252) 247-4525. 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 would call 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 would 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 would 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 would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
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 would 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 Concerning 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 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 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)(h), of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. Under figure 2-
1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, an ``Environmental Analysis
Check List'' is not required for this rule. 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
recordkeeping 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.
2. Add Temporary Sec. 165.T05-016, to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T05-016 Safety Zone: Morehead City Harbor, Morehead City,
NC.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters
within 1000 feet of the fireworks display at Brandt Island, Morehead
City, NC in the Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina zone as
defined in 33 CFR 3.25-20.
(b) Definition. Captain of the Port: Means any U.S. Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the
Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina to act on his behalf.
(c) Regulation. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina, NC, or
his designated representatives.
(2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this
safety zone shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
[[Page 14436]]
on board a vessel displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
(ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
(3) The Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina and the
Commander at the Prevention Department, Morehead City, North Carolina
can be contacted at telephone Number (252) 247-4570 or (252) 247-4520.
(4) The Coast Guard Vessels enforcing the safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM 13 and 16.
(d) Effective date. This regulation is effective from 8 p.m. to 11
p.m. on July 4, 2006.
Dated: March 8, 2006.
William D. Lee,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina.
[FR Doc. E6-4097 Filed 3-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P