Safety Zone; TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo, Milwaukee, WI, 27434-27436 [06-4393]

Download as PDF 27434 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules contact the COTP or the COTP’s representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. (d) Enforcement and suspension of enforcement of certain safety zones. (1) The safety zone in paragraph (a) of this section will be enforced only when a Coast Guard vessel is operating in the safety zone for the purpose of conducting gunnery exercises. (2) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, will provide notice of the enforcement of the safety zones listed in paragraph (a) of this section and notice of suspension of enforcement by the means appropriate to affect the widest publicity, including broadcast notice to mariners and publication in the local notice to mariners. (e) Effective period. This section is effective from 7 a.m. on June 19, 2006 until 3 p.m. on June 21, 2006. Dated: April 26, 2006. Patrick B. Trapp, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads. [FR Doc. E6–7205 Filed 5–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 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 Sector Lake Michigan between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. (local), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Warrant Officer Brad Hinken, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, at (414) 747–7154. 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 (CGD09–06–025), 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 that 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 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD09–06–025] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo, Milwaukee, WI Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to implement a temporary safety zone for the TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo. This safety zone is necessary to safeguard vessels and spectators from hazards associated with air shows. This proposed rule is intended to restrict vessel traffic from a portion of Lake Michigan and Milwaukee Harbor. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (CGD09–06–025), 2420 South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53207. Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department maintains the public docket VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 May 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to Sector Lake Michigan 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 safety zone is necessary to protect the public from the hazards associated with air shows. Due to the high profile nature and extensive publicity associated with this event, the Captain of the Port (COTP) expects a significantly large number of spectators in confined areas adjacent to and on Lake Michigan. As such, the COTP is proposing to implement a safety zone to ensure the safety of both participants and spectators in these areas. The combination of large numbers of inexperienced recreational boaters, congested waterways, boaters crossing commercially transited waterways, and low flying aircraft could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard is proposing a safety zone on the waters of Lake Michigan near Sheboygan, Wisconsin. The safety zone will include all waters within the following coordinates: starting at 41°01.606′ N, 087°53.041′ W; then northeast to 43°03.335′ N, 087°51.679′ W; then northwest to 43°03.583′ N, 087°52.265′ W; then going southwest to 43°01.856′ N, 087°53.632′ W; then returning back to point of origin. The Coast Guard will notify the public in advance by way of the Ninth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners, the Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and, for those who request it from Sector Lake Michigan, by facsimile (fax). 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. This determination is based upon the size and location of the safety zone within the waterway. Recreational vessels may transit through the safety zone with permission from the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated on-scene patrol commander. 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 safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: the safety zone E:\FR\FM\11MYP1.SGM 11MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules would be enforced for only a few hours per day on each day of the event and vessel traffic can safely pass outside of the proposed safety zone during the event. Before the effective period, we would issue maritime advisories widely available to users of the lake. If you think 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. 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. Assistance for Small Entities 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. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Sector Lake Michigan (see ADDRESSES). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed 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. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 May 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 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. 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. We invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal government, even if that impact may not constitute a ‘‘tribal implication ’’ under that Order. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 27435 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)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. 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 to categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5, Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170. 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–025 is added to read as follows: E:\FR\FM\11MYP1.SGM 11MYP1 27436 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS § 165.T09–025 Safety Zone; TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo Milwaukee, Wisconsin. (a) Location. The following area is a Safety Zone: All waters within the following coordinates: starting at 43°01.606′ N, 087°53.041′ W; then northeast to 43°03.335′ N, 087°51.679′ W; then northwest to 43°03.583′ N, 087°52.265′ W; then going southwest to 43°01.856′ N, 087°53.632′ W; then returning back to point of origin. These coordinates are based upon North American Datum 1983. (b) Effective Dates and Times. This safety zone is effective from 1 p.m. (local) on July 14, 2006 through 5 p.m. on July 17, 2006. This safety zone will be enforced between the hours of 1 p.m. (local) to 5 p.m. (local) on July 14 through 17, 2006. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or the on scene Patrol Commander may terminate this event at anytime. (c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is subject to the following requirements: (1) This safety zone is closed to all marine traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port or his duly appointed representative. (2) The ‘‘duly appointed representative’’ of the Captain of the Port is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, to act on his behalf. The representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the Safety Zone shall contact the Captain of the Port or his representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the Safety Zone shall comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port or his representative. (4) The Captain of the Port may be contacted by telephone via the Sector Lake Michigan Operations Center at (414) 747–7182 during working hours. Vessels assisting in the enforcement of the Safety Zone may be contacted on VHF–FM channels 16 or 23A. Vessel operators may determine the restrictions in effect for the safety zone by coming alongside a vessel patrolling the perimeter of the Safety Zone. (5) Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan will issue a Marine Safety Information Broadcast Notice to Mariners to notify the maritime community of the Safety Zone and restriction imposed. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 May 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 Dated: April 26, 2006. S.P. LaRochelle, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. 06–4393 Filed 5–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–M POSTAL RATE COMMISSION 39 CFR Part 3001 [Order No. 1464; Docket No. R2006–1] Postal Rate and Fee Changes Postal Rate Commission. Notice and order in omnibus rate filing. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: This document informs the public that the United States Postal Service has filed a request for a decision on proposed changes in essentially all domestic postage rate and fee changes, along with proposed classification changes. It identifies several procedural steps the Commission has taken in response to the filing. The request reflects a system-wide average increase of 8.5 percent; however, there are limited (and in some instances, significant) exceptions. DATES: 1. May 31, 2006: deadline for interventions, answers to motion for waiver and for protective conditions. 2. June 5, 2006: Deadline for answer to motion for waiver of rules regarding certain library references, and answer to motion concerning Forever Stamp. 3. June 7, 2006: Deadline for statements identifying topics for prehearing conference. 4. June 16, 2006: Prehearing conference. ADDRESSES: File notices of intervention and other documents electronically via the Commission’s Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharman, General Counsel, 202–789–6820. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction Public notice. This order provides notice to the public that on May 3, 2006, the United States Postal Service (Postal Service or Service) filed a formal Request with the Postal Rate Commission (Commission) for a recommended decision on proposed changes in domestic postage rates, fees and classifications.1 The Request was 1 Request of the United States Postal Service for a Recommended Decision on Changes in Rates of Postage and Fees for Postal Services, May 3, 2006 (Request). PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 accompanied by several contemporaneous notices and motions. The Service filed the Request pursuant to chapter 36 of title 39, United States Code, based on its determination that such changes would be in the public interest and in accordance with policies of that title. The filing of the Request triggers a statutory process mandated by 39 U.S.C. 3624. This process involves an opportunity for public hearings on the Service’s proposals. It also requires issuance of the Commission’s recommended decision within 10 months of the date of the Service’s filing. II. Establishment of Formal Docket Establishment of formal docket. The Commission hereby institutes a proceeding under 39 U.S.C. 3622 and 3623, designated as Docket No. R2006– 1, Postal Rate and Fee Changes, to consider the instant Request. In the course of consideration, participants may propose alternatives to the Service’s proposals, the Commission may propose certain classification changes, and the Service may revise, supplement, or amend its filing. The Commission’s review of the Request, including any revisions or alternatives (including full or partial settlement proposals), may result in recommendations that differ from proposed rates, fees and classification changes. This notice apprises the public of the Service’s Request, of the overall magnitude and scope of the Request, and of the institution of a formal proceeding. It does not address or review all aspects of the filing, which is comprehensive and complex; therefore, interested persons are urged to carefully review the filing to determine its impact on aspects of postal rates, fees and classifications that may be of interest to them. Availability; Web site posting. The Commission has posted the Service’s Request and most related or supporting material on its Web site at http:// www.prc.gov. Additional Postal Service filings in this case and participants’ submissions also will be posted on the Web site, if provided in electronic format or amenable to conversion, and not subject to a valid protective order. Information on how to use the Commission’s Web site is available online or by contacting the Commission’s Webmaster via telephone at 202–789–6873 or via electronic mail at prc-webmaster@prc.gov. The Service’s Request and related documents are also available for public inspection in the Commission’s docket E:\FR\FM\11MYP1.SGM 11MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 91 (Thursday, May 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27434-27436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4393]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-06-025]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo, Milwaukee, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to implement a temporary safety zone 
for the TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo. This safety zone is necessary to 
safeguard vessels and spectators from hazards associated with air 
shows. This proposed rule is intended to restrict vessel traffic from a 
portion of Lake Michigan and Milwaukee Harbor.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 24, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, 
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (CGD09-06-025), 2420 South 
Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53207. Sector Lake 
Michigan Prevention Department 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 Sector Lake Michigan between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. (local), 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Warrant Officer Brad Hinken, 
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, at (414) 747-7154.

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 (CGD09-06-
025), 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 
that 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 Sector Lake Michigan 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 safety zone is necessary to protect the public from the 
hazards associated with air shows. Due to the high profile nature and 
extensive publicity associated with this event, the Captain of the Port 
(COTP) expects a significantly large number of spectators in confined 
areas adjacent to and on Lake Michigan. As such, the COTP is proposing 
to implement a safety zone to ensure the safety of both participants 
and spectators in these areas.
    The combination of large numbers of inexperienced recreational 
boaters, congested waterways, boaters crossing commercially transited 
waterways, and low flying aircraft could easily result in serious 
injuries or fatalities.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is proposing a safety zone on the waters of Lake 
Michigan near Sheboygan, Wisconsin. The safety zone will include all 
waters within the following coordinates: starting at 41[deg]01.606' N, 
087[deg]53.041' W; then northeast to 43[deg]03.335' N, 087[deg]51.679' 
W; then northwest to 43[deg]03.583' N, 087[deg]52.265' W; then going 
southwest to 43[deg]01.856' N, 087[deg]53.632' W; then returning back 
to point of origin. The Coast Guard will notify the public in advance 
by way of the Ninth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners, the 
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and, for those who request it from Sector 
Lake Michigan, by facsimile (fax).

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.
    This determination is based upon the size and location of the 
safety zone within the waterway. Recreational vessels may transit 
through the safety zone with permission from the Captain of the Port 
Lake Michigan or his designated on-scene patrol commander.

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 safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: the 
safety zone

[[Page 27435]]

would be enforced for only a few hours per day on each day of the event 
and vessel traffic can safely pass outside of the proposed safety zone 
during the event. Before the effective period, we would issue maritime 
advisories widely available to users of the lake.
    If you think 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), 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 Sector Lake Michigan (see 
ADDRESSES). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities 
that question or complain about this proposed 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 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. We 
invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal 
government, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal 
implication '' under that Order.

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)(g), of the 
Instruction, from further environmental documentation.
    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 to 
categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

    1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5, Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.

    2. A new temporary Sec.  165.T09-025 is added to read as follows:

[[Page 27436]]

Sec.  165.T09-025  Safety Zone; TCF Bank Milwaukee Air Expo Milwaukee, 
Wisconsin.

    (a) Location. The following area is a Safety Zone: All waters 
within the following coordinates: starting at 43[deg]01.606' N, 
087[deg]53.041' W; then northeast to 43[deg]03.335' N, 087[deg]51.679' 
W; then northwest to 43[deg]03.583' N, 087[deg]52.265' W; then going 
southwest to 43[deg]01.856' N, 087[deg]53.632' W; then returning back 
to point of origin. These coordinates are based upon North American 
Datum 1983.
    (b) Effective Dates and Times. This safety zone is effective from 1 
p.m. (local) on July 14, 2006 through 5 p.m. on July 17, 2006. This 
safety zone will be enforced between the hours of 1 p.m. (local) to 5 
p.m. (local) on July 14 through 17, 2006. The Captain of the Port Lake 
Michigan or the on scene Patrol Commander may terminate this event at 
anytime.
    (c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 
section 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is subject to the 
following requirements:
    (1) This safety zone is closed to all marine traffic, except as may 
be permitted by the Captain of the Port or his duly appointed 
representative.
    (2) The ``duly appointed representative'' of the Captain of the 
Port is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has 
been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, to act on his 
behalf. The representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard 
either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the Safety 
Zone shall contact the Captain of the Port or his representative to 
obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter 
or operate in the Safety Zone shall comply with all directions given to 
them by the Captain of the Port or his representative.
    (4) The Captain of the Port may be contacted by telephone via the 
Sector Lake Michigan Operations Center at (414) 747-7182 during working 
hours. Vessels assisting in the enforcement of the Safety Zone may be 
contacted on VHF-FM channels 16 or 23A. Vessel operators may determine 
the restrictions in effect for the safety zone by coming alongside a 
vessel patrolling the perimeter of the Safety Zone.
    (5) Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan will issue a Marine Safety 
Information Broadcast Notice to Mariners to notify the maritime 
community of the Safety Zone and restriction imposed.

    Dated: April 26, 2006.
S.P. LaRochelle,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 06-4393 Filed 5-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-M