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 https://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 https://
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