[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 57 (Monday, March 25, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13585-13587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-7002]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD01-02-024]
RIN 2115-AA97


Safety Zone: Beverly Homecoming Fireworks--Beverly, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone 
for the Beverly Homecoming Fireworks on August 11, 2002 in Beverly, MA. 
The safety zone would temporarily close all waters of Beverly Harbor in 
a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge located at position 
42 deg.32'36" N, 070 deg.51'50" W. The safety zone would prohibit entry 
into or movement within this portion of Beverly Harbor during the 
closure period.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 1, 2002.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Marine Safety 
Office Boston, 455 Commercial Street, Boston, MA. Marine Safety Office 
Boston 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 the 
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety 
Office Boston between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Petty Officer Michael Popovich, 
Marine Safety Office Boston, Waterways Safety and Response Division, at 
(617) 223-3000.

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 (CGD01-02-
024), indicate the specific section of this document to which each 
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit 
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
your comments 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 plan to hold a public meeting. However, you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to Marine Safety Office Boston at the 
address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we 
determine that a public meeting would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 
one at a time and place announced by a separate notice in the Federal 
Register.

Background and Purpose

    This proposed regulation would establish a safety zone in Beverly 
Harbor within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge located at 
position 42 deg.32'36" N, 070 deg.51'50" W. The safety zone would be in 
effect from 8 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on August 11, 2002.
    The zone would restrict movement within this portion of Beverly 
Harbor and is needed to protect the maritime public from the dangers 
posed by a fireworks display. Marine traffic may transit safely outside 
of the safety zone during the effective periods. The Captain of the 
Port does not anticipate any negative impact on vessel traffic due to 
this event. Public notifications will be made prior to the effective 
period via safety marine information broadcasts and local notice to 
mariners.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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. It is not significant under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040, 
February 26, 1979).
    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule 
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e 
of the

[[Page 13586]]

regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
    Although this proposed regulation will prevent traffic from 
transiting a portion of Beverly Harbor during the effective periods, 
the affects of this regulation will not be significant for several 
reasons: The minimal time that vessels will be restricted from the 
area, vessels may safely transit outside of the safety zone, and 
advance notifications which will be made to the local maritime 
community by safety marine information broadcasts and local notice to 
mariners.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast 
Guard 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 rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels 
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Beverly Harbor on August 
11, 2002. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: 
Vessel traffic can safely pass outside of the safety zone during the 
effective periods, the periods are limited in duration, and advance 
notifications which will be made to the local maritime community by 
safety marine information broadcasts and local notice to mariners.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule 
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment 
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to 
what degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Chief Petty Officer Michael 
Popovich at the address listed under ADDRESSES.

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

    The Coast Guard analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 
13132 and has determined that this rule does not have implications for 
federalism under that Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded 
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State, 
local, or tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs 
without the Federal Government's having first provided the funds to pay 
those costs. This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Execute Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    The Coast Guard 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 
does not pose an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that 
may 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. We 
invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal 
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal 
implication'' under the Order.

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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this 
proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, (34)(g), of 
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, this proposed rule is categorically 
excluded from further environmental documentation. A ``Categorical 
Exclusion Determination'' is 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 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. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

    2. Add temporary Sec. 165.T01-024 to read as follows:


Sec. 165.T01-024  Safety Zone: Beverly Homecoming Fireworks--Beverly, 
Massachusetts.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of 
Beverly Harbor in a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge located at 
position 42 deg.32'36" N, 070 deg.51'50" W.

[[Page 13587]]

    (b) Effective date. This section is effective from 8 p.m. until 
10:30 p.m. on August 11, 2002.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone will 
be prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Boston.
    (2) All vessel operators shall comply with the instructions of the 
COTP or the designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-
scene Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and 
petty officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard 
Auxiliary, local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels.

    Dated: March 1, 2002.
B.M. Salerno,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. 02-7002 Filed 3-22-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U