[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 72 (Monday, April 16, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18931-18933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7177]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD1-07-008]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone: Beverly Homecoming Fireworks, Beverly, MA.

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone 
for the Town of Beverly Homecoming Fireworks in Beverly, Massachusetts 
currently scheduled to occur on August 5, 2007 temporarily closing all 
navigable waters of Beverly Harbor within a five hundred (500) yard 
radius of the fireworks launch barge located at approximate position 
42[deg] 32.650 N, 070[deg] 51.980 W. The safety zone is needed to 
protect the maritime public from the potential hazards posed by a 
fireworks display. The safety zone will prohibit entry into or movement 
within this portion of Beverly Harbor during its effective period.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 16, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Sector Boston 
427 Commercial Street, Boston, MA. Sector 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 this docket and will be 
available for inspection or copying at Sector Boston, 427 Commercial 
Street, Boston, MA between the hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petty Officer Joseph Yonker, Sector 
Boston, Waterways Management Division, at (617) 223-5007.

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 (CGD01-07-
008), 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 materials in an unbound format, no larger than 
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
that your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope. We may change this proposed rule in 
view of them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may, however 
submit a request for a meeting by writing to Sector Boston 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 proposed rule establishes a safety zone on the navigable 
waters of Beverly Harbor within a five hundred (500) yard radius of the 
fireworks launch barge located at approximate position 42[deg] 32.650 
N, 070[deg] 51.980 W. The safety zone would be in effect from 8:30 p.m. 
EDT until 11:30 p.m. EDT on August 5, 2007.
    This safety zone would temporarily prohibit entry into or movement 
within the effected portion of Beverly Harbor and is needed to protect 
the maritime public from the potential dangers posed by a fireworks 
display.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone in a 
portion of Beverly Harbor. The safety zone would be in effect from 8:30 
p.m. EDT until 11:30 p.m. EDT on August 5, 2007. Marine traffic may 
transit safely outside of the safety zone during the event thereby 
allowing navigation of Beverly Harbor except for the portion delineated 
by this rule. This safety zone will control vessel traffic during the 
fireworks event to protect the safety of the maritime public.
    Due to the limited time frame of the firework display and because 
the zone leaves the majority of Beverly Harbor open for navigation, the 
Captain of the Port anticipates minimal negative impact on vessel 
traffic due to this event. Public notifications will be made prior to 
the effective period via local notice to mariners and marine 
information broadcasts.

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 is unnecessary.
    Although this rule would prevent vessel traffic from transiting a 
portion of Beverly Harbor during the fireworks event, the effect of 
this regulation would not be significant for several reasons: vessels 
will be excluded from the proscribed area for only three hours, vessels 
will be able to operate in the majority of Beverly Harbor during this 
time period; and advance notifications will be made to the local 
maritime community by marine information broadcasts and Local Notice to 
Mariners.

[[Page 18932]]

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 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 or operators of vessels 
intending to transit or anchor in the effected portion of Beverly 
Harbor from 8:30 p.m. EDT on August 5, 2007 until 11:30 p.m. EDT on 
August 5, 2007.
    This safety zone would 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 
period; the effective period is limited in duration, and advance 
notifications via safety marine informational broadcast and local 
notice to mariners will be made to the local maritime community.
    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 (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 Petty Officer Joseph Yonker at 
the address listed under ADDRESSES. 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 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 affect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This 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 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 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 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 
M16475.1D and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 
5100.1, 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 2.B.2 of 
the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule is categorically 
excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, from 
further environmental documentation. This rule fits the category 
selected from paragraph (34)(g), as it would establish a safety zone. A 
preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is available in the 
docket where indicated under

[[Page 18933]]

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, 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, 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.T07-008 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T07-008  Safety Zone: Beverly Homecoming Fireworks--Beverly, 
Massachusetts.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone:
    All navigable waters of Beverly Harbor within a 500 yard radius of 
the fireworks launch barge located at approximate position 42[deg] 
32.650 N, 070[deg] 51.980 W.
    (b) Effective Date. This section is effective from 8:30 p.m. EDT on 
August 5, 2007 until 11:30 p.m. EDT on August 5, 2007.
    (c) Definitions. (1) As used in this section, designated 
representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast 
Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard 
vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or 
assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP).
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
section 165.23 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Boston or the 
designated representative.
    (2) All vessel operators shall comply with the instructions of the 
COTP or the designated representative.

    Dated: April 5, 2007.
J.L. McDonald,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. E7-7177 Filed 4-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P