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