Safety Zone; Kealakekua Bay, HI, 67057-67059 [E6-19557]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 223 / Monday, November 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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.
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.
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 rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: all waters in the Cocheco
River, from surface to bottom, between
the Upper and Lower Narrows within
100 yards of any and all blasting
operations. All vessels are restricted
from entering this area.
(b) Effective Period. This section is
effective from 8 a.m. Eastern Standard
Time (EST) on November 15, 2006 until
4 p.m. EST on December 30, 2006.
(c) Definitions. (1) Designated
representative means a Coast Guard
Patrol Commander, including a Coast
Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other
officer operating a Coast Guard vessel
and a Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of
the Port (COTP).
(2) [Reserved]
(d) Regulations. (1) In accordance
with the general regulations in § 165.23
of this part, entry into or movement
within this zone by any person or vessel
is prohibited unless authorized by the
COTP, Northern New England or the
COTP’s designated representative.
(2) The safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the COTP or the COTP’s
designated representative.
(3) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone must
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in
the safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the COTP or
the COTP’s designated representative.
Environment
We have analyzed this 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
rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of the
Instruction, from further environmental
documentation. A final ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and a final
‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’
will be available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
I For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
2. Add temporary § 165.T01–131 to
read as follows:
I
§ 165.T01–131 Safety Zone; Cocheco River
Dredging Project, Cocheco River, NH.
Dated: November 7, 2006.
Stephen P. Garrity,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Northern New England.
[FR Doc. E6–19561 Filed 11–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
19:12 Nov 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Honolulu 06–007]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Kealakekua Bay, HI
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone in
Kealakekua Bay on the Island of Hawaii.
This zone is established at the request
of the Hawaii County Civil Defense due
to mudslides and falling rocks. These
falling rocks present a hazard to users of
Kealakekua Bay. Entry of persons or
vessels into this temporary safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port (COTP).
DATES: This rule is effective from 10
a.m. (HST) on October 25, 2006 until 12
a.m. (HST) on April 18, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket COTP
Honolulu 06–007 and are available for
inspection or copying at Coast Guard
Sector Honolulu, 433 Ala Moana Blvd,
Honolulu, HI between 7 a.m. and 3:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant (Junior Grade) Quincey
Adams, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Honolulu at (808) 842–2600.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing an NPRM. This zone
is established due to reports of
mudslides and falling rocks in
Kealakekua Bay causing an immediate
danger to the public. Publishing an
NPRM and delaying the effective date
would be contrary to the public safety.
For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The
COTP finds this good cause to be the
immediate need for a safety zone to
protect the public.
Background and Purpose
On October 15, 2006, a 6.7-magnitude
earthquake occurred at 7:08 am (HST)
with an epicenter approximately 10
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
67057
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
67058
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 223 / Monday, November 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
miles NNW of Kailua-Kona Bay on the
island of Hawaii. The Hawaii County
Civil Defense requested a safety zone
after initial damage assessment reports
of mudslides and falling rocks in
Kealakekua Bay. In response, COTP
Honolulu established a preliminary
safety zone in Kealakekua Bay from the
shore line to a line drawn from the
lighthouse on Ka’awaloa Cove to the
Hikiau Heiau landmark on Napo’opo’o
Beach. As part of the ongoing damage
assessments, the State of Hawaii has
requested that the safety zone be
reduced in size. The COTP will publish
a final rule in the Federal Register to
cancel this zone prior to its expiration
date if future damage assessments
indicate that the danger to the public
from falling rocks and debris no longer
exists.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Discussion of Rule
This temporary safety zone is effective
from 10 a.m. (HST) on October 25, 2006
until 12 a.m. on April 18, 2007 unless
cancelled earlier by the Captain of the
Port. It is located in the waters of
Hawaii Island’s Kealakekua Bay
between the shore and a line drawn
from the Captain Cook Monument to the
Hikiau Heiau landmark on Napo’opo’o
Beach, from the surface of the water to
the ocean floor.
The general regulations governing
safety zones contained in 33 CFR 165.23
apply. Entry into, transit through or
anchoring within this zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port or a designated representative
thereof. The Captain of the Port will
cause notice of the enforcement of the
safety zone described in this section to
be made by broadcast notice to
mariners. Any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer,
and any other Captain of the Port
representative permitted by law, may
enforce the zone. The Captain of the
Port may waive any of the requirements
of this rule for any person, vessel, or
class of vessel upon finding that
application of the safety zone is
unnecessary or impractical for the
purpose of maritime security. Vessels or
persons violating this rule are subject to
the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under § 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs
and benefits under § 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:12 Nov 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
The Coast Guard expects the
economic impact of this rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
This expectation is based on the limited
duration of the zone and the limited
geographic area affected by it.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule will 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 rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We
expect that there will be little or no
impact to small entities due to the
narrowly tailored scope of this safety
zone.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we offer to assist small entities in
understanding this rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking
process.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls 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
either preempts State law or imposes a
substantial direct cost of compliance on
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
them. We have analyzed this 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 rule will not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This 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 rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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 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
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 223 / Monday, November 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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 is 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 rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this 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 limit the use of a
categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore,
under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of
the Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, this rule is categorically
excluded from further environmental
documentation. An ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination (CED)’’ are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Safety zone; Kealakekua
(a) Location. The following area, in
U.S. navigable waters within the
Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone (See
33 CFR 3.70–10), from the surface of the
water to the ocean floor, is a safety zone:
All waters of Kealakekua Bay from the
shore to a line drawn from the Captain
Cook Monument to the Hikiau Heiau
landmark on Napo’opo’o Beach.
(b) Effective dates. This safety zone is
effective from 10 a.m. (HST) on October
25, 2006 until 12 a.m. (HST) on April
18, 2007.
(c) Regulations. The general
regulations governing safety zones
contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply. Entry
into, transit through, or anchoring
within this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or
a designated representative thereof.
(d) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer,
and any other Captain of the Port
representative permitted by law, may
enforce this temporary safety zone.
(e) Waiver. The Captain of the Port
may waive any of the requirements of
this rule for any person, vessel, or class
of vessel upon finding that application
of the safety zone is unnecessary or
impractical for the purpose of maritime
security.
(f) Penalties. Vessels or persons
violating this rule are subject to the
penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
Dated: October 25, 2006.
V.B. Atkins,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Honolulu.
[FR Doc. E6–19557 Filed 11–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
RIN 2900–AM13
Phase-In of Full Concurrent Receipt of
Military Retired Pay and Veterans
Disability Compensation for Certain
Military Retirees
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.
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
I
Jkt 211001
§ 165.T14–149
Bay, HI.
38 CFR Part 3
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
19:12 Nov 17, 2006
2. Add a new § 165.T14–149 to read
as follows:
I
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
I For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) is amending its regulations
concerning concurrent receipt of
military retired pay and veterans’
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
67059
disability compensation. This final rule
implements section 641 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108–136). This law
permits certain veterans who are
entitled to military retired pay and are
receiving disability compensation for a
service-connected disability (or a
combination of service-connected
disabilities) rated at 50 percent or higher
to receive disability compensation as
well as their military retired pay. The
intended effect of the regulation is to
clearly state who is eligible for
concurrent receipt of disability
compensation and military retired pay,
who must waive military retired pay to
receive disability compensation, and
how to file such a waiver.
DATES: Effective Date: This amendment
is effective November 20, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maya Ferrandino, Consultant,
Regulations Staff (211D), Compensation
and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration, Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273–7211.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 7,
2005, VA published in the Federal
Register (70 FR 39213) a proposal to
revise VA’s rules concerning concurrent
receipt of military retired pay and
veterans’ disability compensation.
Interested persons were invited to
submit written comments on or before
September 6, 2005. We received
comments from six members of the
public. Subsequently, on January 6,
2006, Congress further amended section
1414 of title 10, United States Code, by
enacting section 663 of Public Law 109–
163, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2006. This Notice
first explains why we have made
changes based on the comments to the
July 7, 2005, notice of proposed
rulemaking, and then explains changes
necessitated by section 663 of Public
Law 109–163.
Comments to July 7, 2005, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking
Three commenters stated support for
concurrent receipt. These commenters
did not suggest any changes to the
proposed rule, and we make no change
based on these comments.
Two commenters questioned the 20year service requirement for the
program, and why those who are
medically retired from the military, with
less than 20 years of service, have to
give up their retired pay in order to
receive disability compensation. Title
10 U.S.C. 1414(b)(2) clearly precludes
persons medically retired with less than
20 years of service from concurrently
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 223 (Monday, November 20, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67057-67059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19557]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Honolulu 06-007]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Kealakekua Bay, HI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in
Kealakekua Bay on the Island of Hawaii. This zone is established at the
request of the Hawaii County Civil Defense due to mudslides and falling
rocks. These falling rocks present a hazard to users of Kealakekua Bay.
Entry of persons or vessels into this temporary safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP).
DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. (HST) on October 25, 2006
until 12 a.m. (HST) on April 18, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket COTP Honolulu 06-007 and are available
for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Sector Honolulu, 433 Ala Moana
Blvd, Honolulu, HI between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (Junior Grade) Quincey
Adams, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu at (808) 842-2600.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. This zone is established due
to reports of mudslides and falling rocks in Kealakekua Bay causing an
immediate danger to the public. Publishing an NPRM and delaying the
effective date would be contrary to the public safety. For the same
reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The COTP finds this good cause to
be the immediate need for a safety zone to protect the public.
Background and Purpose
On October 15, 2006, a 6.7-magnitude earthquake occurred at 7:08 am
(HST) with an epicenter approximately 10
[[Page 67058]]
miles NNW of Kailua-Kona Bay on the island of Hawaii. The Hawaii County
Civil Defense requested a safety zone after initial damage assessment
reports of mudslides and falling rocks in Kealakekua Bay. In response,
COTP Honolulu established a preliminary safety zone in Kealakekua Bay
from the shore line to a line drawn from the lighthouse on Ka'awaloa
Cove to the Hikiau Heiau landmark on Napo'opo'o Beach. As part of the
ongoing damage assessments, the State of Hawaii has requested that the
safety zone be reduced in size. The COTP will publish a final rule in
the Federal Register to cancel this zone prior to its expiration date
if future damage assessments indicate that the danger to the public
from falling rocks and debris no longer exists.
Discussion of Rule
This temporary safety zone is effective from 10 a.m. (HST) on
October 25, 2006 until 12 a.m. on April 18, 2007 unless cancelled
earlier by the Captain of the Port. It is located in the waters of
Hawaii Island's Kealakekua Bay between the shore and a line drawn from
the Captain Cook Monument to the Hikiau Heiau landmark on Napo'opo'o
Beach, from the surface of the water to the ocean floor.
The general regulations governing safety zones contained in 33 CFR
165.23 apply. Entry into, transit through or anchoring within this zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or a
designated representative thereof. The Captain of the Port will cause
notice of the enforcement of the safety zone described in this section
to be made by broadcast notice to mariners. Any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other Captain of the
Port representative permitted by law, may enforce the zone. The Captain
of the Port may waive any of the requirements of this rule for any
person, vessel, or class of vessel upon finding that application of the
safety zone is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of maritime
security. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject to the
penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Sec.
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under Sec.
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).
The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This expectation is based on the
limited duration of the zone and the limited geographic area affected
by it.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. We expect that there will be little or no impact to small
entities due to the narrowly tailored scope of this safety zone.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls 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 either preempts State law or imposes a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this 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 rule will not result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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 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
[[Page 67059]]
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 is 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this 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 limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. An ``Environmental Analysis Check List''
and ``Categorical Exclusion Determination (CED)'' are available in the
docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
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.
0
2. Add a new Sec. 165.T14-149 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T14-149 Safety zone; Kealakekua Bay, HI.
(a) Location. The following area, in U.S. navigable waters within
the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-10), from the
surface of the water to the ocean floor, is a safety zone: All waters
of Kealakekua Bay from the shore to a line drawn from the Captain Cook
Monument to the Hikiau Heiau landmark on Napo'opo'o Beach.
(b) Effective dates. This safety zone is effective from 10 a.m.
(HST) on October 25, 2006 until 12 a.m. (HST) on April 18, 2007.
(c) Regulations. The general regulations governing safety zones
contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply. Entry into, transit through, or
anchoring within this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port or a designated representative thereof.
(d) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative permitted by
law, may enforce this temporary safety zone.
(e) Waiver. The Captain of the Port may waive any of the
requirements of this rule for any person, vessel, or class of vessel
upon finding that application of the safety zone is unnecessary or
impractical for the purpose of maritime security.
(f) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject
to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
Dated: October 25, 2006.
V.B. Atkins,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Honolulu.
[FR Doc. E6-19557 Filed 11-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P