[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 96 (Thursday, May 18, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28839-28841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7532]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD05-06-049]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone: Mathews County Fireworks Event, East River, Mathews, 
VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a 1200 foot safety zone 
in the vicinity of Mathews, VA centered on position 37-23-56N/076-20-
42W on July 1, 2006 in support of the Mathews County Fireworks Event. 
This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on the East River as 
necessary to protect mariners from the hazards associated with 
fireworks displays.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 15, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, 
Sector Hampton Roads, Norfolk Federal Building, 200 Granby St., 7th 
Floor, Attn: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Norfolk, VA 23510. Sector Hampton 
Roads 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 
Norfolk Federal Building between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, 
Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads at (757) 668-5580.

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 CGD05-06-
049 and 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 plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the Commander, Sector Hampton Roads 
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

    On July 1, 2006, the Mathews County Fireworks Event will be held on 
the East River near Mathews, VA. Due to the need to protect mariners 
and spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display, 
vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted within a 1200 foot radius 
of the display.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a 1200 foot safety zone on 
specified waters of East River in position 37-23-56N/076-20-42W, in the 
vicinity of the Williams Wharf in Mathews, VA. This regulated area will 
be established in the interest of public safety during the Mathews 
County Fireworks Event and will be enforced from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. 
on July 1, 2006. General navigation in the safety zone will be 
restricted during the event. Except for participants and vessels 
authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may 
enter or remain in the regulated area.

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. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Although this regulation 
restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this rule will 
not be significant because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a 
limited duration of time and (ii) the Coast Guard will make 
notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their 
plans accordingly.

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 because the zone will only be in place for a 
limited duration of time and maritime advisories will be issued 
allowing the mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. However, this 
rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small 
entities: the owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or 
anchor in that portion of the East River from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on 
July 1, 2006.
    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.

[[Page 28840]]

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 Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, 
Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads at (757) 668-5580.
    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 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

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 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.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 
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. A preliminary 
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is 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 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 165 subpart C 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 Temporary Sec.  165.T05-049, to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T05-049  Safety Zone: Mathews County Fireworks Event, East 
River, Mathews, VA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters 
within 1200 feet of position 37-23-56N / 076-20-42W in the vicinity of 
the Williams Wharf on the East River near Mathews, VA within the 
Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.25-10.
    (b) Definition. The following definition applies to this section:
    Captain of the Port Representative: means any U.S. Coast Guard 
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the 
Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, Virginia to act on his behalf.
    (c) Regulation: (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited

[[Page 28841]]

unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his 
designated representatives.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this 
safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any 
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel 
that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty 
officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast 
Guard Ensign.
    (A) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads and the Sector Duty 
Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia can be 
contacted at telephone Number (757) 668-5555 or (757) 484-8192.
    (B) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can 
be contacted on VHF-FM 13 and 16.
    (d) Effective date: This regulation is effective from 8:45 p.m. to 
10 p.m. on July 1, 2006.

    Dated: May 2, 2006.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E6-7532 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P