Safety Zone; Live-Fire Gun Exercise, Southeast of Ocean City, MD, Atlantic Ocean, 27431-27434 [E6-7205]

Download as PDF 27431 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules Federal Register’s Web page at http:// www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Regional Air Traffic Division, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue 14, Anchorage, AK 99513. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS The Proposal The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify the Norton Sound Low Offshore Airspace Area, AK, by lowering the floor to 1,200 feet MSL within a 30-mile radius of two geographic points near the Shishmaref Airport, AK. Additionally, this action proposes lowering the controlled airspace floor to 700 feet MSL within a 25-mile radius of the Nome Airport and to 1,200 feet MSL within a 77.4-mile radius of the Nome VORTAC. The purpose of this proposal is to establish controlled airspace to support IFR operations at the Nome and Shishmaref Airports, Alaska. Additional controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet and 1,200 feet MSL above the surface in international airspace would be created by this action. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 May 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 ICAO Considerations As part of this proposal relates to navigable airspace outside the United States, this notice is submitted in accordance with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) International Standards and Recommended Practices. The application of International Standards and Recommended Practices by the FAA, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Airspace & Rules, in areas outside the United States domestic airspace, is governed by the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Specifically, the FAA is governed by Article 12 and Annex 11, which pertain to the establishment of necessary air navigational facilities and services to promote the safe, orderly, and expeditious flow of civil air traffic. The purpose of Article 12 and Annex 11 is to ensure that civil aircraft operations on international air routes are performed under uniform conditions. The International Standards and Recommended Practices in Annex 11 apply to airspace under the jurisdiction of a contracting state, derived from ICAO. Annex 11 provisions apply when air traffic services are provided and a contracting state accepts the responsibility of providing air traffic services over high seas or in airspace of undetermined sovereignty. A contracting state accepting this responsibility may apply the International Standards and Recommended Practices that are consistent with standards and practices utilized in its domestic jurisdiction. In accordance with Article 3 of the Convention, state-owned aircraft are exempt from the Standards and Recommended Practices of Annex 11. The United States is a contracting state to the Convention. Article 3(d) of the Convention provides that participating state aircraft will be operated in international airspace with due regard for the safety of civil aircraft. Since this action involves, in part, the designation of navigable airspace outside the United States, the Administrator is consulting with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense in accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 10854. PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9N, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated September 1, 2005, and effective September 15, 2005, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6007 Offshore Airspace Areas. * * * * * Norton Sound Low, AK [Amended] That airspace extending upward from 700 feet MSL within a 25-mile radius of the Nome Airport; and that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet MSL within a 45mile radius of Deering Airport, AK, within a 35-mile radius of lat. 60°21′17″ N., long. 165°04′01″ W., within a 30-mile radius of lat. 66°09′58″ N., long. 166°30′03″ W., within a 30-mile radius of lat. 66°19′55″ N., long. 165°40′32″ W. and within a 77.4-mile radius of the Nome VORTAC; and airspace extending upward from 14,500 feet MSL within an area bounded by a line beginning at lat. 59°59′57″ N., long. 168°00′08″ W.; to lat. 62°35′00″ N., long. 175°00′00″ W.; to lat. 65°00′00″ N., long. 168°58′23″ W.; to lat. 68°00′00″ N., long. 168°58′23″ W.; to a point 12 miles offshore at lat. 68°00′00″ N.; thence by a line 12 miles from and parallel to the shoreline to lat. 56°42′59″ N., long. 160°00′00″ W.; to lat. 58°06′57″ N., long. 160°00′00″ W.; to lat. 57°45′57″ N., long. 161°46′08″ W.; to the point of beginning. * * * * * Issued in Washington, DC, on May 5, 2006. Edith V. Parish, Manager, Airspace and Rules. [FR Doc. E6–7155 Filed 5–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 [COTP Hampton Roads 06–046] Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). RIN 1625–AA00 The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: Safety Zone; Live-Fire Gun Exercise, Southeast of Ocean City, MD, Atlantic Ocean AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ACTION: E:\FR\FM\11MYP1.SGM Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. 11MYP1 27432 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a safety zone on June 19, 20 and 21, 2006 from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. for a live-fire gun exercise approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on the Atlantic Ocean as necessary to protect mariners from the hazards associated with gunnery exercise. Entry into this Coast Guard safety zone would be prohibited, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or a designated representative. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 12, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to the Norfolk Federal Building, 200 Granby Street, Suite 700, Norfolk, Virginia 23510. Sector Hampton Roads 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 Field Office Eastern Shore between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Bill Clark, Waterways Division, Sector Hampton Roads, (757) 668–5581. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking CGD05–06–046, 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 your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed 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. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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 Hampton Roads 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 May 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 a separate notice in the Federal Register. Regulatory Information The Coast Guard is proposing to establish this safety zone to conduct training essential to carrying out Coast Guard missions relating to military operations and national security. Accordingly, this proposed safety zone falls within the military function exception to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). Notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and an effective date of 30 days after publication under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) are not required for this rulemaking. However, we have determined that it would be beneficial to accept public comments on this proposed rule. Therefore, we will be accepting comments until June 12, 2006. By issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking and accepting public comments, the Coast Guard does not waive its use of the military-function exception to notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). Background and Purpose This rule is necessary to protect the public from the hazards associated with gunnery exercises. When established, this zone will provide the Coast Guard adequate coverage of the area affected by small arms fire. No other related rules have been issued in relation this proposed rule. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on June 19, 20 and 21, 2006 from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. on specified waters of the Atlantic Ocean, approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD. The regulated area will consist of a circular zone, four nautical miles in radius, centered on position 38–13.0 N/074– 58.0 W. This safety zone will be enforced when gunnery exercises are being conducted by Coast Guard vessels. All vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted from transiting through this area while the safety zone is in effect unless otherwise authorized by the Captain of the Port’s designated representative. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this regulation restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this rule will not be significant as the safety zone will be in effect for a limited duration of time and the Coast Guard will provide the public adequate notification via maritime advisories and local notice to mariners in order for mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to transit in that portion of the Atlantic Ocean while the regulated area is in affect. The safety zone will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because: (i) The zone will only be in place for a limited duration of time; (ii) mariners will be allowed to transit through at the discretion of the Captain of the Port’s designated representative; and (iii) maritime advisories will be issued allowing mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 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 proposed rule would affect your E:\FR\FM\11MYP1.SGM 11MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact LTJG Brian Sullivan, Sector Field Office Eastern Shore, (757) 336–2859. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This 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. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 May 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 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 governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ‘‘tribal implication’’ under the 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.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 27433 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. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T06–046 to read as follows: § 165.T06–046 Safety zone; live-fire gun exercise Southeast of Ocean City, MD, Atlantic Ocean. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of the Atlantic Ocean, from surface to bottom, within a 4 nautical mile radius of position 38– 13.0 N/074–58.0 W, approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD., which lies within the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.25–10. (b) Definitions. (1) ‘‘Designated representative’’ means a U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, Virginia to act on his behalf and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), Hampton Roads, in the enforcement of the safety zone. (2) [Reserved] (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in § 165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP, Hampton Roads, or the COTP’s designated representative. (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must E:\FR\FM\11MYP1.SGM 11MYP1 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

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 91 (Thursday, May 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27431-27434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7205]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP Hampton Roads 06-046]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Live-Fire Gun Exercise, Southeast of Ocean City, MD, 
Atlantic Ocean

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

[[Page 27432]]

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a safety zone on June 
19, 20 and 21, 2006 from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. for a live-fire gun exercise 
approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD. This action 
is intended to restrict vessel traffic on the Atlantic Ocean as 
necessary to protect mariners from the hazards associated with gunnery 
exercise. Entry into this Coast Guard safety zone would be prohibited, 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or a designated 
representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 12, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to the Norfolk 
Federal Building, 200 Granby Street, Suite 700, Norfolk, Virginia 
23510. Sector Hampton Roads 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 Field Office Eastern Shore between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Bill Clark, Waterways Division, 
Sector Hampton Roads, (757) 668-5581.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking CGD05-06-
046, 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 your submission 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 Hampton Roads 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 separate notice in the Federal Register.

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is proposing to establish this safety zone to 
conduct training essential to carrying out Coast Guard missions 
relating to military operations and national security. Accordingly, 
this proposed safety zone falls within the military function exception 
to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). Notice 
and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and an effective date of 
30 days after publication under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) are not required for 
this rulemaking.
    However, we have determined that it would be beneficial to accept 
public comments on this proposed rule. Therefore, we will be accepting 
comments until June 12, 2006. By issuing this notice of proposed 
rulemaking and accepting public comments, the Coast Guard does not 
waive its use of the military-function exception to notice and comment 
rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

Background and Purpose

    This rule is necessary to protect the public from the hazards 
associated with gunnery exercises. When established, this zone will 
provide the Coast Guard adequate coverage of the area affected by small 
arms fire. No other related rules have been issued in relation this 
proposed rule.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on June 19, 20 and 
21, 2006 from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. on specified waters of the Atlantic 
Ocean, approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD. The 
regulated area will consist of a circular zone, four nautical miles in 
radius, centered on position 38-13.0 N/074-58.0 W. This safety zone 
will be enforced when gunnery exercises are being conducted by Coast 
Guard vessels. All vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted from 
transiting through this area while the safety zone is in effect unless 
otherwise authorized by the Captain of the Port's designated 
representative.

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.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this 
regulation restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this 
rule will not be significant as the safety zone will be in effect for a 
limited duration of time and the Coast Guard will provide the public 
adequate notification via maritime advisories and local notice to 
mariners in order for mariners to adjust their plans accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. This proposed rule will affect the following 
entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators 
of vessels intending to transit in that portion of the Atlantic Ocean 
while the regulated area is in affect. The safety zone will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because: 
(i) The zone will only be in place for a limited duration of time; (ii) 
mariners will be allowed to transit through at the discretion of the 
Captain of the Port's designated representative; and (iii) maritime 
advisories will be issued allowing mariners to adjust their plans 
accordingly.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), 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 
proposed rule would affect your

[[Page 27433]]

small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have 
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please 
contact LTJG Brian Sullivan, Sector Field Office Eastern Shore, (757) 
336-2859. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities 
that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of 
the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule 
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications 
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This 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 
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal 
implication'' under the 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.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this 
case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should 
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the 
Instruction, from further environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. 
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add Sec.  165.T06-046 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T06-046  Safety zone; live-fire gun exercise Southeast of 
Ocean City, MD, Atlantic Ocean.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of 
the Atlantic Ocean, from surface to bottom, within a 4 nautical mile 
radius of position 38-13.0 N/074-58.0 W, approximately 9 nautical miles 
southeast of Ocean City, MD., which lies within the Captain of the 
Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.25-10.
    (b) Definitions. (1) ``Designated representative'' means a U.S. 
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been 
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, Virginia to act 
on his behalf and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or 
assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), Hampton Roads, in the 
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in Sec.  165.23, 
entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP, Hampton Roads, or the COTP's 
designated representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may 
be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety 
zone must

[[Page 27434]]

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