Security Zone; 2010 Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Moving Vessels, Puget Sound, WA, 45055-45057 [2010-18945]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 147 / Monday, August 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations determination are subject to the EAR (See 15 CFR 734.3). (c) * * * (4) Advisory opinions are limited in scope to BIS’s interpretation of EAR provisions. Advisory opinions differ from commodity classifications in that advisory opinions are not limited to the interpretation of provisions contained in the Commerce Control List. Advisory opinions may not be relied upon or cited as evidence that the U.S. Government has determined that the items described in the advisory opinion are not subject to the export control jurisdiction of another agency of the U.S. Government (See 15 CFR 734.3). * * * * * Dated: July 23, 2010. Kevin J. Wolf, Assistant Secretary for Export Administration. [FR Doc. 2010–18735 Filed 7–30–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 0709 and are available online by going to https://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–2010–0709 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They are also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call or e-mail LTJG Ian Hanna, Sector Seattle, Waterways Management Division, US Coast Guard; telephone 206–217–6045, e-mail Ian.S.Hanna@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2010–0709] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zone; 2010 Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Moving Vessels, Puget Sound, WA Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The U.S. Coast Guard is establishing temporary moving security zones surrounding the HMCS NANAIMO (NCSM 702), HMCS EDMONTON (NCSM 703), and the HMCS BRANDON (NCSM 710) which include all waters within 100 yards from the vessels while underway in the Puget Sound Captain of the Port (COTP) Area of Responsibility (AOR). These security zones are necessary to help ensure the security of the vessels from sabotage or other subversive acts during Seafair Fleet Week and will do so by prohibiting any person or vessel from entering or remaining in the security zones unless authorized by the COTP, Puget Sound or Designated Representative. erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. until 11:59 p.m. on August 4, 2010 unless canceled sooner by the COTP. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG–2010– DATES: VerDate Mar<15>2010 12:40 Jul 30, 2010 Jkt 220001 The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because publishing an NPRM would be impracticable due to the inherent compromise to security resulting from advertising in advance locations of naval vessels, both foreign and domestic. 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 because immediate action is necessary to ensure security of visiting foreign vessels in the 2010 Seattle Seafair Fleet Week event. Basis and Purpose Seattle’s Seafair Fleet Week is an annual event which brings a variety of foreign military vessels to Seattle. The event draws large crowds and a number of vessels that are under inherent security risks due to their military functions. This rule is necessary to ensure the security of visiting foreign military vessels not covered under the Naval Vessel Protection Zone (NVPZ), PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 45055 and provides similar security measures while these vessels are transiting Puget Sound. Discussion of Rule The temporary security zones established by this rule will prohibit any person or vessel from entering or remaining within 100 yards of the HMCS NANAIMO (NCSM 702), HMCS EDMONTON (NCSM 703), and the HMCS BRANDON (NCSM 710) while underway in the Puget Sound COTP AOR unless authorized by the COTP, Puget Sound, or Designated Representative. The security zones will be enforced by Coast Guard personnel. The COTP may also be assisted in the enforcement of the zones by other federal, state, or local agencies. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. Regulatory Planning and Review This 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. The Coast Guard bases this finding on the fact that the security zones will be in place for a limited period of time and vessel traffic will be able to transit around the security zones. Maritime traffic may also request permission to transit through the zones from the COTP, Puget Sound or Designated Representative. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities; the owners and operators of E:\FR\FM\02AUR1.SGM 02AUR1 45056 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 147 / Monday, August 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations vessels intending to operate in the waters covered by the security zones while they are in effect. The rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, however, because the security zones will be in place for a limited period of time and maritime traffic will still be able to transit around the security zones. Maritime traffic may also request permission to transit though the zones from the COTP, Puget Sound or Designated Representative. more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 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 the rule so that they can 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). 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. 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. 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). erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES 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 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 (adjusted for inflation) or VerDate Mar<15>2010 12:40 Jul 30, 2010 Jkt 220001 Taking of Private Property This rule will not cause 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 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have concluded this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of temporary security zones. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. ■ For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFT 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, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T13–157 to read as follows: ■ § 165.T13–157 Security Zone; 2010 Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Moving Vessels, Puget Sound, Washington (a) Location. The following areas are security zones: All waters encompassed within 100 yards surrounding the HMCS NANAIMO (NCSM 702), HMCS EDMONTON (NCSM 703), and the E:\FR\FM\02AUR1.SGM 02AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 147 / Monday, August 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations HMCS BRANDON (NCSM 710) while underway in the Puget Sound COTP Area of Responsibility (AOR). (b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart D, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the security zones without the permission of the COTP or Designated Representative. See 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart D, for additional requirements. The COTP may be assisted by other federal, state or local agencies with the enforcement of the security zones. (c) Authorization. All vessel operators who desire to enter the security zones must obtain permission from the COTP or Designated Representative by contacting either the on-scene Coast Guard patrol craft on VHF 13 or Ch 16. Requests must include the reason why movement within the security zones is necessary. Vessel operators granted permission to enter the security zones will be escorted by the on-scene Coast Guard patrol craft until they are outside of the security zones. (d) Enforcement Period. This rule is effective from 8 a.m. until 11:59 p.m. on August 4, 2010 unless canceled sooner by the COTP. Dated: July 22, 2010. S.W. Bornemann, Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound. [FR Doc. 2010–18945 Filed 7–30–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2010–0530; FRL–9183–9] Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Submitted Reasonable Further Progress and Attainment Demonstrations for New York Portions of New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island and Poughkeepsie 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment areas for Transportation Conformity Purposes; NY Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of Adequacy. erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES AGENCY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets for volatile organic compound (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the submitted reasonable further progress state implementation plan for the New SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 12:40 Jul 30, 2010 Jkt 220001 York portions of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT 8hour ozone nonattainment area, as well as the submitted reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration state implementation plans for the Poughkeepsie, New York 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The transportation conformity rule requires that the EPA conduct a public process and make an affirmative decision on the adequacy of these budgets before they can be used by metropolitan planning organizations in conformity determinations. As a result of our finding, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (excluding Putnam County) must use the submitted 2008 8-hour ozone budgets for future transportation conformity determinations, and the Orange County Transportation Council, the Poughkeepsie-Dutchess Transportation Council and the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (Putnam County only) must use the submitted 2008 and 2009 8-hour ozone budgets for future transportation conformity determinations. DATES: This finding is effective August 17, 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melanie Zeman, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency— Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4022, zeman.melanie@epa.gov. The finding and the response to comments will be available at EPA’s conformity Web site: https:// www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/adequacy.htm. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 8, 2008, New York State submitted reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration state implementation plans to EPA for its portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT and Poughkeepsie, New York, 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas. The purpose of the New York State submittal was to demonstrate both of the areas progress toward attaining the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard. The submittal included motor vehicle emissions budgets (‘‘budgets’’) for 2008 and 2009 for the Poughkeepsie 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and 2008 budgets for the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area for use by the State’s metropolitan planning organizations in making transportation conformity PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 45057 determinations. On June 12, 2008, and June 2, 2008, respectively, the availability of the New York portion of the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY–NJ–CT 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and the Poughkeepsie, New York 8-hour ozone nonattainment area transportation conformity budgets were posted on EPA’s Web site for the purpose of soliciting public comments. The adequacy public comment period closed for the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT area budgets on July 14, 2008, and EPA received no public comments. The public comment period closed for the Poughkeepsie, New York area budgets on July 2, 2008. EPA’s response to comments received during this period is posted on the EPA adequacy Web site listed below. Today’s notice is simply an announcement of a finding that EPA has already made. EPA Region 2 sent a letter to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation on June 21, 2010. The findings letter states that the 2008 motor vehicle emissions budgets in New York’s SIP submissions for both the New York portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NY– NJ–CT and Poughkeepsie, New York 8hour ozone nonattainment areas are adequate because they are consistent with the required rate of progress plan. With regard to the 2009 motor vehicle emissions budgets, the findings letter states that for the Poughkeepsie, New York 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, these budgets are adequate for transportation conformity purposes because they are consistent with the plan’s demonstration of attainment. EPA’s finding will also be announced on EPA’s conformity Web site: https:// www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/adequacy.htm. For informational purposes, EPA notes that on April 4, 2008, New York submitted to EPA a request for a voluntary reclassification of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT 8-hour ozone nonattainment area from ‘‘moderate’’ to ‘‘serious’’ pursuant to section 181(b)(3) of the Act. Related to this request, New York provided EPA with 2011 and 2012 motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA is continuing to review New York’s request for a voluntary reclassification of the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY–NJ–CT 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and therefore is not taking action on the 2011 or 2012 budgets at this time. EPA would take action on these budgets at the same time E:\FR\FM\02AUR1.SGM 02AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 147 (Monday, August 2, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45055-45057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18945]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0709]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zone; 2010 Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Moving Vessels, 
Puget Sound, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Coast Guard is establishing temporary moving security 
zones surrounding the HMCS NANAIMO (NCSM 702), HMCS EDMONTON (NCSM 
703), and the HMCS BRANDON (NCSM 710) which include all waters within 
100 yards from the vessels while underway in the Puget Sound Captain of 
the Port (COTP) Area of Responsibility (AOR). These security zones are 
necessary to help ensure the security of the vessels from sabotage or 
other subversive acts during Seafair Fleet Week and will do so by 
prohibiting any person or vessel from entering or remaining in the 
security zones unless authorized by the COTP, Puget Sound or Designated 
Representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. until 11:59 p.m. on August 4, 
2010 unless canceled sooner by the COTP.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0709 and are available online 
by going to https://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0709 in the 
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available 
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), 
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room 
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
temporary rule, call or e-mail LTJG Ian Hanna, Sector Seattle, 
Waterways Management Division, US Coast Guard; telephone 206-217-6045, 
e-mail Ian.S.Hanna@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the 
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, 
telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior 
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This 
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those 
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public 
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
with respect to this rule because publishing an NPRM would be 
impracticable due to the inherent compromise to security resulting from 
advertising in advance locations of naval vessels, both foreign and 
domestic.
    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 because immediate action is 
necessary to ensure security of visiting foreign vessels in the 2010 
Seattle Seafair Fleet Week event.

Basis and Purpose

    Seattle's Seafair Fleet Week is an annual event which brings a 
variety of foreign military vessels to Seattle. The event draws large 
crowds and a number of vessels that are under inherent security risks 
due to their military functions. This rule is necessary to ensure the 
security of visiting foreign military vessels not covered under the 
Naval Vessel Protection Zone (NVPZ), and provides similar security 
measures while these vessels are transiting Puget Sound.

Discussion of Rule

    The temporary security zones established by this rule will prohibit 
any person or vessel from entering or remaining within 100 yards of the 
HMCS NANAIMO (NCSM 702), HMCS EDMONTON (NCSM 703), and the HMCS BRANDON 
(NCSM 710) while underway in the Puget Sound COTP AOR unless authorized 
by the COTP, Puget Sound, or Designated Representative. The security 
zones will be enforced by Coast Guard personnel. The COTP may also be 
assisted in the enforcement of the zones by other federal, state, or 
local agencies.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This 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.
    The Coast Guard bases this finding on the fact that the security 
zones will be in place for a limited period of time and vessel traffic 
will be able to transit around the security zones. Maritime traffic may 
also request permission to transit through the zones from the COTP, 
Puget Sound or Designated Representative.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be 
small entities; the owners and operators of

[[Page 45056]]

vessels intending to operate in the waters covered by the security 
zones while they are in effect. The rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, however, 
because the security zones will be in place for a limited period of 
time and maritime traffic will still be able to transit around the 
security zones. Maritime traffic may also request permission to transit 
though the zones from the COTP, Puget Sound or Designated 
Representative.

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 the rule so that they can 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). 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 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 would either preempt State law or impose 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 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in 
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause 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 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or 
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This 
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of 
the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of temporary 
security zones. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical 
exclusion will be available in the docket where indicated under 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 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 
CFT 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, 3306, 
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. 
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Add Sec.  165.T13-157 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T13-157  Security Zone; 2010 Seattle Seafair Fleet Week 
Moving Vessels, Puget Sound, Washington

    (a) Location. The following areas are security zones: All waters 
encompassed within 100 yards surrounding the HMCS NANAIMO (NCSM 702), 
HMCS EDMONTON (NCSM 703), and the

[[Page 45057]]

HMCS BRANDON (NCSM 710) while underway in the Puget Sound COTP Area of 
Responsibility (AOR).
    (b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 33 
CFR Part 165, Subpart D, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the 
security zones without the permission of the COTP or Designated 
Representative. See 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart D, for additional 
requirements. The COTP may be assisted by other federal, state or local 
agencies with the enforcement of the security zones.
    (c) Authorization. All vessel operators who desire to enter the 
security zones must obtain permission from the COTP or Designated 
Representative by contacting either the on-scene Coast Guard patrol 
craft on VHF 13 or Ch 16. Requests must include the reason why movement 
within the security zones is necessary. Vessel operators granted 
permission to enter the security zones will be escorted by the on-scene 
Coast Guard patrol craft until they are outside of the security zones.
    (d) Enforcement Period. This rule is effective from 8 a.m. until 
11:59 p.m. on August 4, 2010 unless canceled sooner by the COTP.

    Dated: July 22, 2010.
S.W. Bornemann,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2010-18945 Filed 7-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.