Safety Zone; Yorktown Day Celebration Evening Fireworks, York River, Yorktown, VA, 50009-50011 [E6-14062]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 164 / Thursday, August 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
IRS and Treasury Department
participated in their development.
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read, in part, as
follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *.
Par. 2. Paragraph (b) of § 1.1363–1 is
amended as follows:
1. Paragraph (b) is revised.
2. Paragraph (d) is amended by
removing the language ‘‘This section
applies’’ and adding the language ‘‘This
section (except for paragraph (b)(2) of
this section) applies’’ in its place.
3. The paragraph heading for (d) is
revised.
4. A sentence is added at the end of
paragraph (d).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
§ 1.1363–1 Effect of election on
corporation.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Computation of corporate taxable
income—(1) In general. The taxable
income of an S corporation is computed
as described in section 1363(b).
(2) Treatment of banks. Section
1363(b) (concerning computation of an
S corporation’s taxable income) does not
affect an S corporation’s status as a bank
within the meaning of section 581, and
it does not prevent the application to
such an S corporation bank of any
special rule applicable to banks under
the Internal Revenue Code, such as
sections 582(c) and 291(a)(3) and
(e)(1)(B). See § 1.1361–4(a)(3) regarding
application under subchapter S of the
special rules applicable to banks.
Further, section 1363(b)(4) causes
section 291 to apply to an S corporation
if the S corporation (or any predecessor)
was a C corporation for any of the three
immediately preceding taxable years,
but section 1363(b)(4) does not prevent
section 291 from applying to an S
corporation to which section 291
otherwise applies.
(3) Example. The following example
illustrates the application of this
paragraph (b)(2):
preceding taxable years. During the current
taxable year, X sold debt instrument DI at a
loss. At the time of the sale, X’s holding
period in DI was more than one year and, but
for section 582(c), the loss on the sale of DI
would be capital. During the same taxable
year, X held debt instrument QD, which it
acquired after August 7, 1986. QD is a
qualified tax-exempt obligation within the
meaning of section 265(b)(3)(B).
(ii) X is described in section 581, and
section 1363(b) does not affect X’s status
under section 581. Accordingly, X qualifies
as a bank within the meaning of section 581.
Also, section 1363(b) does not prevent any
special rule applicable to banks under the
Internal Revenue Code from applying to X.
Thus, section 582(c), which is a special rule
applicable to banks, imposes ordinary
character on the loss that X recognized from
the sale of debt instrument DI.
(iii) Because QD is a qualified tax-exempt
obligation that was acquired after August 7,
1986, section 265(b)(3)(A) causes QD to be
treated for purposes of section 291(e)(1)(B) as
having been acquired on that date. For that
reason, if section 291(e)(1)(B) applies to X, a
portion of the interest expense that X incurs
during the taxable year is interest on
indebtedness incurred or continued to
purchase or carry qualified tax-exempt
obligations and thus is a financial institution
preference item. Section 291(a)(3) and
(e)(1)(B) is a special rule applicable to banks,
and thus section 1363(b) does not prevent
section 291(a)(3) and (e)(1)(B) from applying
to X unless some other authority prevents
that result.
(iv) Section 1363(b)(4) does not prevent
section 291 from applying in situations in
which section 291 otherwise applies.
Therefore, section 1363(b)(4) does not
prevent section 291(a)(3) and (e)(1)(B) from
applying to X. It is irrelevant that neither X
nor any predecessor of X was a C corporation
for any of the three immediately preceding
taxable years. X’s status as a bank under
section 581 causes section 291(a)(3) and
(e)(1)(B) to apply.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Effective dates. * * * Paragraph
(b)(2) of this section applies to taxable
years of corporations beginning on or
after August 24, 2006.
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E6–14004 Filed 8–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
Example. (i) Facts. X is described in
section 581 and is an S corporation. Neither
X nor any of X’s predecessors was a C
corporation for any of the three immediately
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Aug 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50009
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CCGD05–06–079]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Yorktown Day
Celebration Evening Fireworks, York
River, Yorktown, VA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
establish a 1200 foot safety zone in the
vicinity of National Park Service Beach
at Yorktown, VA on October 19, 2006 in
support of the Yorktown Day
Celebration Evening Fireworks. This
action is intended to restrict vessel
traffic on York River 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
September 24, 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.
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 Norfolk
Federal Building between 9 a.m. and 2
p.m., 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 (CGD05–06–079),
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 your submission reached us,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
50010
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 164 / Thursday, August 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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
Commander, 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 later notice
in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On October 19, 2006, the Yorktown
Day Celebration Evening Fireworks will
be held at the National Park Service
Beach at Yorktown, VA. Due to the need
to protect mariners and spectators from
the hazards associated with fireworks
displays, vessel traffic will be
temporarily restricted within a 1200 foot
radius of the display.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a
1200 foot safety zone on specified
waters of York River at the National
Park Service Beach at Yorktown, VA.
This regulated area will be established
in the interest of public safety during
the Yorktown Day Celebration Evening
Fireworks and will be enforced from 8
p.m. to 9 p.m. on October 19, 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.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
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 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 the safety
zone will be in effect for a limited
duration of time and the Coast Guard
will make notifications via maritime
advisories so mariners can adjust their
plans accordingly.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Aug 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 only 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 York River from 8 p.m. to
9 p.m. on October 19, 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 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact 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
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 164 / Thursday, August 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
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 recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Aug 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 temporary § 165.T05–079, to
read as follows:
§ 165.T05–079 Safety Zone; Yorktown Day
Celebration Evening Fireworks, York River,
Yorktown, VA.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All waters on the York
River, from surface to bottom, within
1200 feet of the National Park Service
Beach in Yorktown, VA.
(b) Definitions. Designated
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) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or
his designated representative.
(2) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone must
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,
and the operators of any vessels in the
immediate vicinity of this safety zone,
must comply with all directions given to
them by any commissioned, warrant or
petty officer on shore or on board a
vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast
Guard Ensign.
(3) 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.
(4) The designated representatives
enforcing the safety zone can be
contacted on VHF–FM 13 and 16.
(d) Effective date. This regulation is
effective from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. on
October 19, 2006.
Dated: August 11, 2006.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E6–14062 Filed 8–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50011
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Parts 7, 12, and 39
[FAR Case 2005–041; Docket 2006–0020;
Sequence 7]
RIN 9000–AK57
Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR
Case 2005–041, Internet Protocol
Version 6 (IPv6)
Department of Defense (DoD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCIES:
SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency
Acquisition Council and the Defense
Acquisition Regulations Council
(Councils) are proposing to amend the
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to
require Internet Protocol Version 6
(IPv6) capable products be included in
information technology procurements to
the maximum extent practicable.
DATES: Interested parties should submit
written comments to the FAR
Secretariat on or before October 23,
2006 to be considered in the
formulation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by FAR case 2005–041 by any
of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Search for this
document at the ‘‘Federal Acquisition
Regulation’’ agency and review the
‘‘Document Title’’ column; click on the
Document ID number. Click on ‘‘add
comments’’.
You may also search for any
document using the ‘‘Advanced search/
document search’’ tab, selecting from
the agency field ‘‘Federal Acquisition
Regulation’’, and typing the FAR case
number in the keyword field.
• Fax: 202–501–4067.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
(VIR), 1800 F Street, NW, Room 4035,
ATTN: Laurieann Duarte, Washington,
DC 20405.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite FAR case 2005–041 in all
correspondence related to this case. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal and/or business confidential
information provided.
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 164 (Thursday, August 24, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50009-50011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14062]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CCGD05-06-079]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Yorktown Day Celebration Evening Fireworks, York
River, Yorktown, VA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a 1200 foot safety zone
in the vicinity of National Park Service Beach at Yorktown, VA on
October 19, 2006 in support of the Yorktown Day Celebration Evening
Fireworks. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on York
River 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 September 24, 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. 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
Norfolk Federal Building between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., 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-
079), 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
your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
[[Page 50010]]
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 Commander, 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 later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On October 19, 2006, the Yorktown Day Celebration Evening Fireworks
will be held at the National Park Service Beach at Yorktown, VA. Due to
the need to protect mariners and spectators from the hazards associated
with fireworks displays, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted
within a 1200 foot radius of the display.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a 1200 foot safety zone on
specified waters of York River at the National Park Service Beach at
Yorktown, VA. This regulated area will be established in the interest
of public safety during the Yorktown Day Celebration Evening Fireworks
and will be enforced from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. on October 19, 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.
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 the safety zone will be in effect for a
limited duration of time and 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 only 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 York River from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. on
October 19, 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 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact 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 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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
[[Page 50011]]
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
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 temporary Sec. 165.T05-079, to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T05-079 Safety Zone; Yorktown Day Celebration Evening
Fireworks, York River, Yorktown, VA.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters on
the York River, from surface to bottom, within 1200 feet of the
National Park Service Beach in Yorktown, VA.
(b) Definitions. Designated 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) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated
representative.
(2) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must 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, and the operators of any vessels in the
immediate vicinity of this safety zone, must comply with all directions
given to them by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or
on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
(3) 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.
(4) The designated representatives enforcing the safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM 13 and 16.
(d) Effective date. This regulation is effective from 8 p.m. to 9
p.m. on October 19, 2006.
Dated: August 11, 2006.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E6-14062 Filed 8-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P