Safety and Security Zones; Tall Ships Celebration 2006, Great Lakes, Cleveland, OH, Bay City, MI, Green Bay, WI, Sturgeon Bay, WI, Chicago, IL, 31999-32002 [E6-8610]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the Administrative Record. IV. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review This rule is exempt from review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS Executive Order 13132—Federalism This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be ‘‘in accordance with’’ the requirements of SMCRA, and section 503(a)(7) requires that State programs contain rules and regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects 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. The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State regulatory program and does not involve a Federal regulation involving Indian lands. Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect The Supply, Distribution, Or Use Of Energy On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required. National Environmental Policy Act This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 31999 substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the analysis performed under various laws and executive orders for the counterpart Federal regulations. Unfunded Mandates This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the analysis performed under various laws and executive orders for the counterpart Federal regulations. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948 Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining. Dated: May 11, 2006. H. Vann Weaver, Acting Regional Director, Appalachian Region. [FR Doc. E6–8620 Filed 6–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–05–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD09–06–032] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety and Security Zones; Tall Ships Celebration 2006, Great Lakes, Cleveland, OH, Bay City, MI, Green Bay, WI, Sturgeon Bay, WI, Chicago, IL Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1 32000 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish safety and security zones around Tall Ships visiting the Great Lakes during Tall Ships Celebration 2006. These safety and security zones will provide for the regulation of vessel traffic in the vicinity of Tall Ships in the navigable waters of the United States. The Coast Guard is taking this action to safeguard participants and spectators from the safety hazards associated with the limited maneuverability of these tall ships and to ensure public safety during Tall Ships events. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 22, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Ninth Coast Guard District (dpw–1), 1240 E. 9th Street, Room 2069, Cleveland, OH 44199. The Ninth Coast Guard District Waterways Planning and Development Section (dpw–1) 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 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR K. Phillips, Waterways Planning and Development Section, Prevention Department Ninth Coast Guard District, Cleveland, OH at (216) 902–6045. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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 [CGD09–06–032], 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. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to The Ninth Coast Guard District Waterways Planning and Development Section at VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 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. Background and Purpose During the Tall Ships Celebration 2006, Tall Ships will be participating in parades and then mooring in the harbors of Cleveland, OH, Bay City, MI, Green Bay, WI, Sturgeon Bay, WI, and Chicago, IL. Safety and security zones will be established around Tall Ships participating in these events on 12:01 a.m. (local time) July 10, 2006 and terminate on 12:01 a.m. (local time) August 23, 2006. These safety and security zones are necessary to protect the public from the hazards associated with limited maneuverability of tall sailing ships and to protect the Tall Ships from potential harm. Due to the high profile nature and extensive publicity associated with this event, each Captain of the Port (COTP) expects a large number of spectators in confined areas adjacent to and on Lake Erie, Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, Green Bay and Lake Michigan. Therefore, the Coast Guard is proposing to implement a safety and security zone around each ship to ensure the safety of both participants and spectators in these areas. The combination of large numbers of recreational boaters, congested waterways, boaters crossing commercially transited waterways and low maneuverability of the Tall Ships could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities. Discussion of Proposed Rule Upon the navigable waters of the United States, no vessel or person is allowed within 100 yards of a Tall Ship that is underway or at anchor, unless authorized by the cognizant Captain of the Port or on-scene official patrol. When within a Tall Ship safety and security zone vessels must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course and must proceed as directed by the on-scene official patrol. Even if operating within a Tall Ship safety and security zone pursuant to permission from the on-scene official patrol, no vessel or person is allowed within 25 yards of a Tall Ship. In addition, upon the navigable waters of the United States, no vessel or person is allowed within 25 yards of any Tall Ship that is moored. When conditions permit, vessels constrained by their navigational draft or restricted in their ability to maneuver may be allowed by the on-scene official patrol to pass within 100 yards of a tall PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ship in order to ensure a safe passage in accordance with the Navigational Rules. When conditions permit, vessels that must transit via a navigable channel or waterway may be allowed by the onscene patrol to pass within 100 yards of an anchored Tall Ship or within 25 yards of a moored Tall Ship with minimal delay consistent with security. 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 and security zones and the minimal time and limited area from which vessels will be restricted. Vessels may transit through the safety zone with permission from the official on-scene patrol. 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 would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the safety and security zones. These safety and security zones will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The zones are relatively small and vessels may transit through the safety zone with permission from the official on-scene patrol. E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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 small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact CDR K. Phillips, Waterways Planning and Development Section, Ninth Coast Guard District, Cleveland, OH at (216) 902–6045. 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). cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 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 effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 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 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 32001 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 the rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 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. A new temporary § 165.T09–032 is added read as follows: § 165.T09–032 Safety and Security Zone; Huntington Cleveland Harbor Fest, Tall Ship Festival, Green Bay, Wisconsin, Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin, Tall Ships Chicago 2006, Tall Ship Celebration, Saginaw River, Bay City, MI. (a) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section: E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1 cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 32002 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules Navigation Rules means the Navigation Rules, International and Inland (See, 1972 COLREGS and 33 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.). Official Patrol means those persons designated by Captain of the Port Buffalo, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie and Lake Michigan to monitor a Tall Ship safety and security zone, permit entry into the zone, give legally enforceable orders to persons or vessels within the zone and take other actions authorized by the cognizant Captain of the Port. Persons authorized in paragraph (i) to enforce this section are designated as the Official Patrol. Public Vessel means vessels owned, chartered, or operated by the United States, or by a State or political subdivision thereof. Tall Ship means any sailing vessel participating in the 2006 Tall Ships Challenge in the Great Lakes. The following vessels are participating in the 2006 Tall Ships Challenge: Sailing Vessel (S/V) Appledore IV, S/V Denis Sullivan, S/V Appledore V, S/V Friends Good Will, S/V Highlander Sea, S/V Niagara, S/V Madeline, S/V Nina, S/V Picton Castle, S/V Pathfinder, S/V Playfiar, S/V Providence, S/V Pride of Baltimore, S/V St. Lawrence II, S/V Red Witch, S/V Royaliste, S/V Windy, S/V Unicorn, and S/V Windy II. (b) Safety and Security zone. The following areas are safety and security zones: all navigable waters of United States located in the Ninth Coast Guard District within a 100 yard radius of any Tall Ship sailing vessel. (c) Effective Period. This section is effective from 12:01 a.m. (local) on Wednesday July 11th, 2006 through 12:01 a.m. (local) on August, 10th 2006. (d) Regulations. When within a Tall Ship safety and security zone all vessels must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course and must proceed as directed by the onscene official patrol. No vessel or person is allowed within 25 yards of a Tall Ship that is underway, at anchor, or moored, unless authorized by the cognizant Captain of the Port, his designated representative, or on-scene official patrol. (e) Navigation Rules. The Navigation Rules shall apply at all times within a Tall Ships security and safety zone. (f) To request authorization to operate within 25 yards of a large passenger vessel that is underway or at anchor, contact the on-scene official patrol on VHF–FM channel 16. (g) When conditions permit, the onscene official patrol should: (1) Permit vessels constrained by their navigational draft or restricted in their ability to maneuver to pass within 25 VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 yards of a Tall Ship in order to ensure a safe passage in accordance with the Navigation Rules; and (2) Permit vessels that must transit via a navigable channel or waterway to pass within 25 yards of a Tall Ship that is anchored or moored with minimal delay consistent with safety and security. (h) When a Tall Ship approaches within 25 yards of any vessel that is moored or anchored, the stationary vessel must stay moored or anchored while it remains within the Tall Ship’s safety and security zone unless it is either ordered by, or given permission by Captain of the Port Buffalo, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie or Lake Michigan, his designated representative, or the onscene official patrol to do otherwise. (i) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer may enforce the rules in this section. (j) Exemption. Public vessels as defined in paragraph (a) of this section are exempt from complying with paragraphs (b), (d), (f), (g), and (h) of this section. (k) Waiver. Captain of the Port Buffalo, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie and Lake Michigan, may, within their respective Captain of the Port zones, waive any of the requirements of this section for any vessel or class of vessels upon finding that a vessel or class of vessels, operational conditions or other circumstances are such that application of this section is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of port security, safety or environmental safety. Dated: May 23, 2006. T.W. Sparks, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E6–8610 Filed 6–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [COTP Prince William Sound 02–012] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zones; Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, AK Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to revise its regulation entitled Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska— security zones. This change would include more accurate position information for the boundaries of tank PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 vessels navigating on the Valdez Narrows Optimum Track Line, and establish when the Valdez Narrows Tanker Optimum Track line is activated and subject to enforcement. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before July 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: 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 Marine Safety Office Valdez, 105 Clifton, Valdez, AK 99686 between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Duane Lemmon, Chief, Maritime Homeland Security Department, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Valdez, Alaska, (907) 835–7262. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory History The Coast Guard is taking this action to revise 33 CFR 165.1710(a)(3)(71 FR 2154, January 13, 2006) entitled Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska—security zones. This revision would include more accurate position information for the boundaries of tank vessels navigating on the Valdez Narrows Optimum Track Line, and establish when the Valdez Narrows Tanker Optimum Track line is activated and subject to enforcement. On November 7, 2001, we published three temporary final rules in the Federal Register (66 FR 56208, 56210, 56212) that created security zones effective through June 1, 2002. The section numbers and titles for these zones are— § 165.T17–003—Security zone; TransAlaska Pipeline Valdez Terminal Complex, Valdez, Alaska, § 165.T17–004—Security zone; Port Valdez, and § 165.T17–005—Security zones; Captain of the Port Zone, Prince William Sound, Alaska. Then on June 4, 2002, we published a temporary final rule (67 FR 38389) that established security zones to replace these security zones. That rule created temporary § 165.T17–009, entitled ‘‘Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska—security zone’’. Then on July 31, 2002, we published a temporary final rule (67 FR 49582) that established security zones to extend the temporary security zones that would have expired. This extension was to allow for the completion of a noticeand-comment rulemaking to create permanent security zones to replace the temporary zones. E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM 02JNP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31999-32002]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8610]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-06-032]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety and Security Zones; Tall Ships Celebration 2006, Great 
Lakes, Cleveland, OH, Bay City, MI, Green Bay, WI, Sturgeon Bay, WI, 
Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

[[Page 32000]]

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish safety and security 
zones around Tall Ships visiting the Great Lakes during Tall Ships 
Celebration 2006. These safety and security zones will provide for the 
regulation of vessel traffic in the vicinity of Tall Ships in the 
navigable waters of the United States. The Coast Guard is taking this 
action to safeguard participants and spectators from the safety hazards 
associated with the limited maneuverability of these tall ships and to 
ensure public safety during Tall Ships events.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 22, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Ninth Coast 
Guard District (dpw-1), 1240 E. 9th Street, Room 2069, Cleveland, OH 
44199. The Ninth Coast Guard District Waterways Planning and 
Development Section (dpw-1) 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 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR K. Phillips, Waterways Planning 
and Development Section, Prevention Department Ninth Coast Guard 
District, Cleveland, OH at (216) 902-6045.

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-
032], 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 The Ninth Coast Guard District 
Waterways Planning and Development Section 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.

Background and Purpose

    During the Tall Ships Celebration 2006, Tall Ships will be 
participating in parades and then mooring in the harbors of Cleveland, 
OH, Bay City, MI, Green Bay, WI, Sturgeon Bay, WI, and Chicago, IL. 
Safety and security zones will be established around Tall Ships 
participating in these events on 12:01 a.m. (local time) July 10, 2006 
and terminate on 12:01 a.m. (local time) August 23, 2006.
    These safety and security zones are necessary to protect the public 
from the hazards associated with limited maneuverability of tall 
sailing ships and to protect the Tall Ships from potential harm. Due to 
the high profile nature and extensive publicity associated with this 
event, each Captain of the Port (COTP) expects a large number of 
spectators in confined areas adjacent to and on Lake Erie, Saginaw Bay, 
Lake Huron, Green Bay and Lake Michigan. Therefore, the Coast Guard is 
proposing to implement a safety and security zone around each ship to 
ensure the safety of both participants and spectators in these areas. 
The combination of large numbers of recreational boaters, congested 
waterways, boaters crossing commercially transited waterways and low 
maneuverability of the Tall Ships could easily result in serious 
injuries or fatalities.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Upon the navigable waters of the United States, no vessel or person 
is allowed within 100 yards of a Tall Ship that is underway or at 
anchor, unless authorized by the cognizant Captain of the Port or on-
scene official patrol. When within a Tall Ship safety and security zone 
vessels must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe 
course and must proceed as directed by the on-scene official patrol. 
Even if operating within a Tall Ship safety and security zone pursuant 
to permission from the on-scene official patrol, no vessel or person is 
allowed within 25 yards of a Tall Ship. In addition, upon the navigable 
waters of the United States, no vessel or person is allowed within 25 
yards of any Tall Ship that is moored.
    When conditions permit, vessels constrained by their navigational 
draft or restricted in their ability to maneuver may be allowed by the 
on-scene official patrol to pass within 100 yards of a tall ship in 
order to ensure a safe passage in accordance with the Navigational 
Rules.
    When conditions permit, vessels that must transit via a navigable 
channel or waterway may be allowed by the on-scene patrol to pass 
within 100 yards of an anchored Tall Ship or within 25 yards of a 
moored Tall Ship with minimal delay consistent with security.

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 and security zones and the minimal time and limited area from 
which vessels will be restricted. Vessels may transit through the 
safety zone with permission from the official on-scene patrol.

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 would affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels 
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the safety and security 
zones.
    These safety and security zones will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the 
following reasons: The zones are relatively small and vessels may 
transit through the safety zone with permission from the official on-
scene patrol.

[[Page 32001]]

    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 small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please contact CDR K. Phillips, 
Waterways Planning and Development Section, Ninth Coast Guard District, 
Cleveland, OH at (216) 902-6045. 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 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 
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.
    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 the 
rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental 
review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping 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. A new temporary Sec.  165.T09-032 is added read as follows:


Sec.  165.T09-032  Safety and Security Zone; Huntington Cleveland 
Harbor Fest, Tall Ship Festival, Green Bay, Wisconsin, Sturgeon Bay, 
Wisconsin, Tall Ships Chicago 2006, Tall Ship Celebration, Saginaw 
River, Bay City, MI.

    (a) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:

[[Page 32002]]

    Navigation Rules means the Navigation Rules, International and 
Inland (See, 1972 COLREGS and 33 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.).
    Official Patrol means those persons designated by Captain of the 
Port Buffalo, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie and Lake Michigan to monitor a 
Tall Ship safety and security zone, permit entry into the zone, give 
legally enforceable orders to persons or vessels within the zone and 
take other actions authorized by the cognizant Captain of the Port. 
Persons authorized in paragraph (i) to enforce this section are 
designated as the Official Patrol.
    Public Vessel means vessels owned, chartered, or operated by the 
United States, or by a State or political subdivision thereof.
    Tall Ship means any sailing vessel participating in the 2006 Tall 
Ships Challenge in the Great Lakes. The following vessels are 
participating in the 2006 Tall Ships Challenge: Sailing Vessel (S/V) 
Appledore IV, S/V Denis Sullivan, S/V Appledore V, S/V Friends Good 
Will, S/V Highlander Sea, S/V Niagara, S/V Madeline, S/V Nina, S/V 
Picton Castle, S/V Pathfinder, S/V Playfiar, S/V Providence, S/V Pride 
of Baltimore, S/V St. Lawrence II, S/V Red Witch, S/V Royaliste, S/V 
Windy, S/V Unicorn, and S/V Windy II.
    (b) Safety and Security zone. The following areas are safety and 
security zones: all navigable waters of United States located in the 
Ninth Coast Guard District within a 100 yard radius of any Tall Ship 
sailing vessel.
    (c) Effective Period. This section is effective from 12:01 a.m. 
(local) on Wednesday July 11th, 2006 through 12:01 a.m. (local) on 
August, 10th 2006.
    (d) Regulations. When within a Tall Ship safety and security zone 
all vessels must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a 
safe course and must proceed as directed by the on-scene official 
patrol. No vessel or person is allowed within 25 yards of a Tall Ship 
that is underway, at anchor, or moored, unless authorized by the 
cognizant Captain of the Port, his designated representative, or on-
scene official patrol.
    (e) Navigation Rules. The Navigation Rules shall apply at all times 
within a Tall Ships security and safety zone.
    (f) To request authorization to operate within 25 yards of a large 
passenger vessel that is underway or at anchor, contact the on-scene 
official patrol on VHF-FM channel 16.
    (g) When conditions permit, the on-scene official patrol should:
    (1) Permit vessels constrained by their navigational draft or 
restricted in their ability to maneuver to pass within 25 yards of a 
Tall Ship in order to ensure a safe passage in accordance with the 
Navigation Rules; and
    (2) Permit vessels that must transit via a navigable channel or 
waterway to pass within 25 yards of a Tall Ship that is anchored or 
moored with minimal delay consistent with safety and security.
    (h) When a Tall Ship approaches within 25 yards of any vessel that 
is moored or anchored, the stationary vessel must stay moored or 
anchored while it remains within the Tall Ship's safety and security 
zone unless it is either ordered by, or given permission by Captain of 
the Port Buffalo, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie or Lake Michigan, his 
designated representative, or the on-scene official patrol to do 
otherwise.
    (i) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty 
officer may enforce the rules in this section.
    (j) Exemption. Public vessels as defined in paragraph (a) of this 
section are exempt from complying with paragraphs (b), (d), (f), (g), 
and (h) of this section.
    (k) Waiver. Captain of the Port Buffalo, Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie 
and Lake Michigan, may, within their respective Captain of the Port 
zones, waive any of the requirements of this section for any vessel or 
class of vessels upon finding that a vessel or class of vessels, 
operational conditions or other circumstances are such that application 
of this section is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of port 
security, safety or environmental safety.

    Dated: May 23, 2006.
T.W. Sparks,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Ninth Coast Guard 
District.
 [FR Doc. E6-8610 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P