Safety Zone; Town of Marblehead Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Marblehead Harbor, MA, 18256-18258 [E6-5263]

Download as PDF 18256 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules extend, by 12 months, the date for operators to comply with the fire penetration resistance requirements of thermal/acoustic insulation used in transport category airplanes manufactured after September 2, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Gardlin, FAA, Airframe and Cabin Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2136, facsimile (425) 227–1149, e-mail: jeff.gardlin@faa.gov. Correction In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking FR Doc. E6–4791, published on April 3, 2006 (71 FR 16678), make the following correction: 1. On page 16678, in column 1 in the heading section, beginning on line 4, remove ‘‘Amendment No. 121–323’’ and insert ‘‘Notice No. 06–05’’. Issued in Washington, DC, on April 6, 2006. Ida M. Klepper, Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E6–5330 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD1–06–001] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; Town of Marblehead Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Marblehead Harbor, MA Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone for the Town of Marblehead Fourth of July Fireworks. 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 this portion of Marblehead Harbor during the closure period. Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 11, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Sector Boston 427 Commercial Street, Boston, MA. DATES: VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:25 Apr 10, 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 the rulemaking (CGD01–06–001), 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 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. Coast Guard ACTION: 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 CGD01–06– 001 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) 223–5007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background and Purpose This rule proposes to establish a safety zone on the waters of Marblehead Harbor within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge located at approximate position 42° 30′548″ N., 70°50′098″ W. The safety zone would be in effect from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006. The rain date for the fireworks event is from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 5, 2006. The safety zone would temporarily restrict movement within this effected portion of Marblehead Harbor and is needed to protect the maritime public from the dangers posed by a fireworks display. Marine traffic may transit safely outside the safety zone during the effective period. The Captain of the Port does not anticipate any negative impact on vessel traffic due to this event. Public PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 Marblehead Harbor, Marblehead, Massachusetts. The safety zone would be in effect from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006, with a rain date of 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 5, 2006. Marine traffic may transit safely outside of the safety zone in the majority of Marblehead 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 fireworks 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 proposed 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, 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 E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM 11APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Chief Petty Officer Paul 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. hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 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 Marblehead Harbor from 8:30 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006 to 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006 or during the same hours on July 5. 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 safely pass around the safety zone during the effected period, and advance notification via safety marine informational broadcast and Local Notice to Mariners will be made before and during the effective period. 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. Protection of Children 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:25 Apr 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 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 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. 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 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 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, PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 18257 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 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 made a preliminary determination 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 should be categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph (34)(g), as it would establish a safety zone. 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 this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM 11APP1 18258 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules requirements, Security measures, Waterways. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 165 as follows: 40 CFR Part 52 PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District and South Coast Air Quality Management District 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.T06–001, to read as follows: § 165.T01–006 Safety Zone; Town of Marblehead Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Marblehead, Massachusetts. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of Marblehead Harbor within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge located at approximate position 42°30′548″ N., 70°50′098″ W. (b) Effective date. This rule is effective from July 4, 2006 at 8:30 p.m. until July 5, 2006 at 10 p.m. e.d.t. This rule will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006, unless it rains, in which case it will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 5, 2006. (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of this part, 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: March 30, 2006. James L. McDonald, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts. [FR Doc. E6–5263 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am] hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS BILLING CODE 4910–15–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:25 Apr 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 [EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0171; FRL–8053–1] Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern particulate matter (PM–10) emissions from open burning and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from gasoline storage and transfer. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by May 11, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2006–0171, by one of the following methods: ∑ Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions. ∑ E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. ∑ Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at WWW.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This proposal addresses the following local rules: SJVUAPCD Rule 4103 and SCAQMD Rule 461. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are approving these local rules in a direct final action without prior proposal because we believe these SIP revisions are not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final action. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: March 7, 2006. Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 06–3402 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM 11APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18256-18258]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5263]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD1-06-001]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Town of Marblehead Fourth of July Fireworks Display, 
Marblehead Harbor, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone 
for the Town of Marblehead Fourth of July Fireworks. 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 
this portion of Marblehead Harbor during the closure period.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 11, 2006.

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 CGD01-06-001 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) 223-5007.

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 (CGD01-06-
001), 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 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 
Marblehead Harbor within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge 
located at approximate position 42[deg] 30'548'' N., 70[deg]50'098'' W. 
The safety zone would be in effect from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. 
on July 4, 2006. The rain date for the fireworks event is from 8:30 
p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 5, 2006.
    The safety zone would temporarily restrict movement within this 
effected portion of Marblehead Harbor and is needed to protect the 
maritime public from the dangers posed by a fireworks display. Marine 
traffic may transit safely outside the safety 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 
Marblehead Harbor, Marblehead, Massachusetts. The safety zone would be 
in effect from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006, with a 
rain date of 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 5, 2006. Marine 
traffic may transit safely outside of the safety zone in the majority 
of Marblehead 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 fireworks 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 proposed 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, 
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

[[Page 18257]]

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 Marblehead 
Harbor from 8:30 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006 to 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 
4, 2006 or during the same hours on July 5.
    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 safely pass around the safety zone during the 
effected period, and advance notification via safety marine 
informational broadcast and Local Notice to Mariners will be made 
before and during the effective period.
    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.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Chief Petty Officer Paul 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 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 
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 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 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 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 made a preliminary determination 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 should be 
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the 
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule fits 
the category selected from paragraph (34)(g), as it would establish a 
safety zone. 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 this rule should be categorically excluded from further 
environmental review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping

[[Page 18258]]

requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR 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.T06-001, to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T01-006  Safety Zone; Town of Marblehead Fourth of July 
Fireworks Display, Marblehead, Massachusetts.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of 
Marblehead Harbor within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge 
located at approximate position 42[deg]30[min]548[sec] N., 
70[deg]50[min]098[sec] W.
    (b) Effective date. This rule is effective from July 4, 2006 at 
8:30 p.m. until July 5, 2006 at 10 p.m. e.d.t. This rule will be 
enforced from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. e.d.t. on July 4, 2006, unless it 
rains, in which case it will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. until 10 p.m. 
e.d.t. on July 5, 2006.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
section 165.23 of this part, 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: March 30, 2006.
James L. McDonald,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
 [FR Doc. E6-5263 Filed 4-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P