Safety Zone; Baileys Harbor Fireworks, Baileys Harbor, WI, 24196-24198 [E7-8445]

Download as PDF 24196 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB is not conditioned on M’s payment of support or meeting of any other obligation, and the agreement otherwise conforms to the substance of Form 8332. For 2009, only L may claim Child as a qualifying child because in 2008 L revokes the release of the claim in accordance with paragraph (d)(3) of this section, and the revocation takes effect in 2009, the taxable year that begins in the first calendar year after L provides written notice of the revocation to M. Example 6. The facts are the same as Example 5, except that the agreement expressly states that L agrees not to claim Child as a dependent only if M is current in the payment of support for Child at the end of the calendar year. The separation agreement does not qualify as a written declaration under paragraph (d)(1) of this section because L’s agreement not to claim Child as a dependent is conditioned on M’s payment of support. Therefore, M may not claim Child as a qualifying child in 2007 or 2009. Example 7. (i) N and P are the divorced parents of Child. Child resides with N for ten months and with P for two months in each year 2007 through 2009. In 2007, N provides a written statement to P that provides that N will not claim Child as a dependent but does not specify a year or years. P attaches the statement to P’s returns for 2007 through 2009. (ii) Because the written statement provided by N does not specify the year or years for which P may claim Child as a qualifying child, under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the written statement is not a written declaration that conforms to the substance of Form 8332. Therefore, P may not claim Child as a qualifying child in 2007 through 2009. Example 8. (i) R and S are the divorced parents of Child. Child resides solely with R. The divorce decree requires S to pay child support to R and requires R to execute a Form 8332 to release the right to claim Child as a qualifying child to S. R fails to sign a Form 8332 for 2007, and S attaches an unsigned Form 8332 to S’s return for 2007. (ii) Child is the qualifying child of R for 2007. The order in the divorce decree requiring R to execute a Form 8332 is ineffective to allocate the right to claim Child as a qualifying child to S. Furthermore, under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the unsigned Form 8332 does not conform to the substance of Form 8332. Therefore, S may not claim Child as a qualifying child in 2007. (iii) If, however, R executes a Form 8332 for 2007 and S attaches the Form 8332 to S’s return, then S may claim Child as a qualifying child for 2007 under paragraph (d)(1) of this section. (g) Effective date. This section applies to taxable years beginning after the date these regulations are published as final regulations in the Federal Register. Kevin M. Brown, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E7–8378 Filed 5–1–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830–01–P VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:45 Aug 19, 2011 Jkt 223001 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Coast Guard Public Meeting 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD09–07–014] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; Baileys Harbor Fireworks, Baileys Harbor, WI AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone on Baileys Harbor. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of Baileys Harbor during the Baileys Harbor July 5, 2007 fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with fireworks displays. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 17, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (spw), 2420 South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, WI 53207. The Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department 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 Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747– 7154. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD09–07–014], indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department 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 This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators from hazards associated with a fireworks display. Based on accidents that have occurred in other Captain of the Port zones, and the explosive hazards of fireworks, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined fireworks launches in close proximity to watercraft pose significant risk to public safety and property. The likely combination of large numbers of recreation vessels, congested waterways, darkness punctuated by bright flashes of light, alcohol use, and debris falling into the water could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities. Establishing a safety zone to control vessel movement around the location of the launch platform will help ensure the safety of persons and property at these events and help minimize the associated risks. The comment period for this rule has been abbreviated to 15 days in order to provide a full 30 day notice period after publication before the rule becomes effective. Discussion of Proposed Rule A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the setup, loading and launching of a fireworks display in conjunction with the Baileys Harbor fireworks display. The fireworks display will occur between 9 p.m. (local) and 11 p.m. (local) on July 5, 2007. The safety zone for the fireworks will encompass all waters of Lake Michigan, Baileys Harbor, within the arc of a circle with a 600-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located in position 45[deg]04’03’’ N, 087[deg]06’08’’ W (NAD 83). All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated onscene representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated onscene representative. The Captain of the E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC 02MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules Assistance for Small Entities Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB 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 is unnecessary. The Coast Guard will only use this safety zone for two hours on the date specified. This safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the harbor not affected by the zone. The Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the activation of this zone. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Baileys Harbor on Lake Michigan off Baileys Harbor, WI, between 9 p.m. (local) and 11 p.m. (local) on July 5, 2007. The safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule would be in effect for only 2 hours. Vessel traffic can safely pass around the safety zone. 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. VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:45 Aug 19, 2011 Jkt 223001 Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104– 121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747–7154. 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 the 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, PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 24197 eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC 02MYP1 24198 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide 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. This proposed rule establishes a regulated navigation area and as such is covered by this paragraph. A preliminary ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ and ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, or his designated on-scene representative. (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated onscene representative. (3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of the Captain of the Port is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-scene 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 Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-scene representative. Dated: April 17, 2007. Bruce C. Jones, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. E7–8445 Filed 5–1–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS [EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0036; FRL–8120–3] 1. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as follows: Chloroneb, Cypermethrin, Methidathion, Nitrapyrin, Oxyfluorfen, Pirimiphos-methyl, Sulfosate, Tebuthiuron, Thiabendazole, Thidiazuron, and Tribuphos; Proposed Tolerance Actions 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 § 165.T09–014 to read as follows: mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB § 165.T09–014 Safety zone; Baileys Harbor Fireworks, Baileys Harbor, WI. (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all waters of Lake Michigan, Baileys Harbor, within the arc of a circle with a 600-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located in position 45[deg]04’03’’ N, 087[deg]06’08’’ W (NAD 83). (b) Effective period. This regulation is effective from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 5, 2007. (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:45 Aug 19, 2011 Jkt 223001 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke certain tolerances for the fungicides chloroneb and thiabendazole; the herbicide sulfosate; the defoliant thidiazuron; the insecticides cypermethrin, methidathion, and pirimiphos-methyl; and the soil microbiocide nitrapyrin. Also, EPA is proposing to modify certain tolerances for the fungicides chloroneb and thiabendazole; the herbicides oxyfluorfen and tebuthiuron; the defoliants thidiazuron and tribuphos; the insecticides cypermethrin, methidathion, and pirimiphos-methyl; and the soil microbiocide nitrapyrin. In addition, EPA is proposing to establish PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 new tolerances for the fungicides chloroneb and thiabendazole; the herbicide oxyfluorfen; the defoliants thidiazuron and tribuphos; the insecticides cypermethrin, methidathion, and pirimiphos-methyl; and the soil microbiocide nitrapyrin. The regulatory actions proposed in this document are in follow-up to the Agency’s reregistration program under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and tolerance reassessment program under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(q). Comments must be received on or before July 2, 2007. DATES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0036, by one of the following methods: <bullet≤ Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. <bullet≤ Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460– 0001. <bullet≤ Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is (703) 305– 5805. Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007– 0036. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or email. The Federal regulations.gov website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e- ADDRESSES: E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC 02MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 2, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24196-24198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8445]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-07-014]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Baileys Harbor Fireworks, Baileys Harbor, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone 
on Baileys Harbor. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from a 
portion of Baileys Harbor during the Baileys Harbor July 5, 2007 
fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect 
spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with fireworks 
displays.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 17, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, 
Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (spw), 2420 South Lincoln Memorial 
Drive, Milwaukee, WI 53207. The Sector Lake Michigan Prevention 
Department 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 
Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention 
Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 
747-7154.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD09-07-
014], indicate the specific section of this document to which each 
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit 
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during 
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the Sector Lake Michigan Prevention 
Department 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

    This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of 
vessels and spectators from hazards associated with a fireworks 
display. Based on accidents that have occurred in other Captain of the 
Port zones, and the explosive hazards of fireworks, the Captain of the 
Port Lake Michigan has determined fireworks launches in close proximity 
to watercraft pose significant risk to public safety and property. The 
likely combination of large numbers of recreation vessels, congested 
waterways, darkness punctuated by bright flashes of light, alcohol use, 
and debris falling into the water could easily result in serious 
injuries or fatalities. Establishing a safety zone to control vessel 
movement around the location of the launch platform will help ensure 
the safety of persons and property at these events and help minimize 
the associated risks.
    The comment period for this rule has been abbreviated to 15 days in 
order to provide a full 30 day notice period after publication before 
the rule becomes effective.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of 
spectators and vessels during the setup, loading and launching of a 
fireworks display in conjunction with the Baileys Harbor fireworks 
display. The fireworks display will occur between 9 p.m. (local) and 11 
p.m. (local) on July 5, 2007.
    The safety zone for the fireworks will encompass all waters of Lake 
Michigan, Baileys Harbor, within the arc of a circle with a 600-foot 
radius from the fireworks launch site located in position 
45[deg]04'03'' N, 087[deg]06'08'' W (NAD 83).
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the 
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene 
representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety 
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake 
Michigan or his designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the

[[Page 24197]]

Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF 
Channel 16.

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 is unnecessary.
    The Coast Guard will only use this safety zone for two hours on the 
date specified. This safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to 
transit unrestricted to portions of the harbor not affected by the 
zone. The Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners 
from the activation of this zone.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which may be small entities: the owners and operators of vessels 
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Baileys Harbor on Lake 
Michigan off Baileys Harbor, WI, between 9 p.m. (local) and 11 p.m. 
(local) on July 5, 2007. The safety zone would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the 
following reasons. This rule would be in effect for only 2 hours. 
Vessel traffic can safely pass around the safety zone.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention 
Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 
747-7154. 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 the 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, 
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.

[[Page 24198]]

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 
5100.1, which guide 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. This proposed 
rule establishes a regulated navigation area and as such is covered by 
this paragraph.
    A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and 
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket 
where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be 
considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule 
should be categorically excluded from further environmental review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, 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 Sec.  165.T09-014 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T09-014  Safety zone; Baileys Harbor Fireworks, Baileys 
Harbor, WI.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all 
waters of Lake Michigan, Baileys Harbor, within the arc of a circle 
with a 600-foot radius from the fireworks launch site located in 
position 45[deg]04'03'' N, 087[deg]06'08'' W (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective period. This regulation is effective from 9 p.m. to 
11 p.m. on July 5, 2007.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring 
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain 
of the Port Lake Michigan, or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may 
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated 
on-scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port is 
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been 
designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-
scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a 
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or 
his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 
16.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety 
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-
scene 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 Captain of the Port Lake 
Michigan or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: April 17, 2007.
Bruce C. Jones,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
 [FR Doc. E7-8445 Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.