Safety Zone: Fireworks on the Bay Celebration, Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA, 32004-32006 [E6-8553]

Download as PDF 32004 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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 proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 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 concluded 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, this proposed rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This proposed rule creates no additional vessel traffic and thus imposes no additional burdens on the environment in Prince William Sound. It simply regulates vessels transiting in the Captain of the Port, Prince William Sound Zone for security purposes so that they may transit safely in the vicinity of the Port of Valdez and the TAPS Terminal. A draft ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ and a draft ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ (CED) are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. 61°05.38′ N, 146°37.38′ W; thence south westerly to 61°04.05′ N, 146°40.05′ W; thence southerly to 61°03.00′ N, 146°41.20′ W. (ii) This security zone encompasses all waters 200 yards either side of the Valdez Narrows Optimum Track line. (iii) Whenever a tank vessel is navigating on the Valdez Narrows Optimum Track line, the security zone is activated and subject to enforcement. All vessels forward of a tank vessel’s movement must vacate the security zone surrounding the Optimum Track line. Vessels may reenter the security zone astern of a moving vessel provided that a 200 yards separation is given, as required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section. * * * * * Dated: May 8, 2006. M.S. Gardiner, Commander, United States Coast Guard, Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Prince William Sound, Alaska. [FR Doc. E6–8544 Filed 6–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 [CCGD05–06–054] Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety measures, Vessels, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: RIN 1625–AA00 PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing the establishment of a 500-foot safety zone on the Chesapeake Bay in support of the Fireworks on the Bay Celebration. This event is will be held at First Landing State Park, Virginia Beach, VA on July 04, 2006, and if warranted due to inclement weather, July 5, 2006. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on Chesapeake Bay as necessary to protect mariners from the hazards associated with fireworks displays. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 26, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, Sector Hampton Roads, Norfolk Federal Building, 200 Granby St., 7th Floor, Attn: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Norfolk, VA 23510. Sector Hampton Roads maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. 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. Revise § 165.1710(a)(3) to read as follows: § 165.1710 Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska—security zones. (a) * * * (3) Valdez Narrows, Port Valdez, Valdez, Alaska. All waters within 200 yards of the Valdez Narrows Tanker Optimum Track line, when a tank vessel is navigating through the narrows. (i) The Valdez Narrows Optimum Track line is a line commencing at PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Safety Zone: Fireworks on the Bay Celebration, Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at the Federal Building between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads, at (757) 668–5580. 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 CGD05–06–054 and indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the United States Coast Guard 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. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS Background and Purpose On July 4, 2006, the Fireworks on the Bay Celebration will be held on the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia Beach, VA. However, if warranted due to inclement weather, this event will be postponed until July 5, 2006. Due to the need to protect mariners and spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted within 500 feet of the fireworks display. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard is establishing safety zone that encompasses all waters of Chesapeake Bay within 500 feet of position 36–55–02N/076–03–27W in the vicinity of the First Landing State Park in Virginia Beach, VA. This regulated area will be established in the interest of public safety during the Fireworks on VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 the Bay Celebration and will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. eastern time, on July 4, 2006, and if warranted due to inclement weather, July 5, 2006. General navigation in the safety zone will be restricted during the event. Except for participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Although this regulation restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this rule will not be significant because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a limited duration and (ii) the Coast Guard will make notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the zone will be in place for a limited duration of time and maritime advisories will be issued allowing the mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. However, this rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in that portion of the Chesapeake Bay from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. eastern time, on July 4, 2006 and July 5, 2006. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 32005 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 (Public Law 104– 121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads, at (757) 668–5580. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1 32006 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 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. A preliminary ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR Part 165 Subpart C as follows: (b) Definition. The following definition applies to this section: Captain of the Port Representative: Means any 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. (c) Regulation. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or the Captain of the Port Representative. (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this safety zone shall: (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. (A) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads and the Sector Duty Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia can be contacted at telephone number (757) 668–5555 or (757) 484– 8192. (B) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can be contacted on VHF–FM 13 and 16. (d) Effective date. This regulation is effective from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. eastern time, on July 4, 2006 and, if warranted due to inclement weather, July 5, 2006. Dated: May 15, 2006. Patrick B. Trapp, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads. [FR Doc. E6–8553 Filed 6–1–06; 8:45 am] PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 2. Add Temporary § 165.T05–054, to read as follows: § 165.T05–054 Safety Zone: Fireworks on the Bay Celebration, Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of the Chesapeake Bay in the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR § 3.25–10 within 500 feet of position 36–55–02N/076–03–27W in the vicinity of the First Landing State Park in Virginia Beach, VA. PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 40 CFR Parts 70 and 71 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0179; FRL–8178–1] RIN 2060–AN74 Proposed Rule Interpreting the Scope of Certain Monitoring Requirements for State and Federal Operating Permits Programs Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The purpose of this action is to request comments on a proposed interpretation of certain existing Federal air program operating permits regulations. This proposed E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32004-32006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8553]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CCGD05-06-054]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone: Fireworks on the Bay Celebration, Chesapeake Bay, 
Virginia Beach, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing the establishment of a 500-foot 
safety zone on the Chesapeake Bay in support of the Fireworks on the 
Bay Celebration. This event is will be held at First Landing State 
Park, Virginia Beach, VA on July 04, 2006, and if warranted due to 
inclement weather, July 5, 2006. This action is intended to restrict 
vessel traffic on Chesapeake Bay as necessary to protect mariners from 
the hazards associated with fireworks displays.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 26, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, 
Sector Hampton Roads, Norfolk Federal Building, 200 Granby St., 7th 
Floor, Attn: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Norfolk, VA 23510. Sector Hampton 
Roads maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.

[[Page 32005]]

Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents 
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will 
become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or 
copying at the Federal Building between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. eastern time, 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, 
Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads, at (757) 668-5580.

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-
054 and indicate the specific section of this document to which each 
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit 
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during 
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

    We do not plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the United States Coast Guard at 
the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If 
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a 
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    On July 4, 2006, the Fireworks on the Bay Celebration will be held 
on the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia Beach, VA. However, if warranted due 
to inclement weather, this event will be postponed until July 5, 2006. 
Due to the need to protect mariners and spectators from the hazards 
associated with the fireworks display, vessel traffic will be 
temporarily restricted within 500 feet of the fireworks display.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing safety zone that encompasses all 
waters of Chesapeake Bay within 500 feet of position 36-55-02N/076-03-
27W in the vicinity of the First Landing State Park in Virginia Beach, 
VA. This regulated area will be established in the interest of public 
safety during the Fireworks on the Bay Celebration and will be enforced 
from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. eastern time, on July 4, 2006, and if warranted 
due to inclement weather, July 5, 2006. General navigation in the 
safety zone will be restricted during the event. Except for 
participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol 
Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated 
area.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits 
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and 
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
    Although this regulation restricts access to the regulated area, 
the effect of this rule will not be significant because: (i) The safety 
zone will be in effect for a limited duration and (ii) the Coast Guard 
will make notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can adjust 
their plans accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because the zone will be in place for a 
limited duration of time and maritime advisories will be issued 
allowing the mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. However, this 
rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small 
entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or 
anchor in that portion of the Chesapeake Bay from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. 
eastern time, on July 4, 2006 and July 5, 2006.
    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 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, 
Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads, at (757) 668-5580.
    The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that 
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the 
Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental

[[Page 32006]]

Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.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.
    A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is available in 
the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section 
will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this 
rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental 
review.

 List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR Part 165 Subpart C as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

    2. Add Temporary Sec.  165.T05-054, to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T05-054  Safety Zone: Fireworks on the Bay Celebration, 
Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of 
the Chesapeake Bay in the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads zone as 
defined in 33 CFR Sec.  3.25-10 within 500 feet of position 36-55-02N/
076-03-27W in the vicinity of the First Landing State Park in Virginia 
Beach, VA.
    (b) Definition. The following definition applies to this section: 
Captain of the Port Representative: Means any 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.
    (c) Regulation. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into this safety zone is prohibited 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or the 
Captain of the Port Representative.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this 
safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any 
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel 
that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty 
officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast 
Guard Ensign.
    (A) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads and the Sector Duty 
Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia can be 
contacted at telephone number (757) 668-5555 or (757) 484-8192.
    (B) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can 
be contacted on VHF-FM 13 and 16.
    (d) Effective date. This regulation is effective from 9 p.m. to 10 
p.m. eastern time, on July 4, 2006 and, if warranted due to inclement 
weather, July 5, 2006.

    Dated: May 15, 2006.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E6-8553 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P