[Federal Register: May 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 102)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 30656-30658]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27my05-25]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01-05-044]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Yankee Homecoming Fireworks, Newburyport, MA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone
for the Yankee Homecoming Fireworks in Newburyport, Massachusetts. The
safety zone is necessary to protect the life and property of the
maritime public from the potential hazards posed by a fireworks
display. The safety zone would temporarily prohibit entry into or
movement within this portion of the Merrimack River during its
effective period.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 27, 2005.
[[Page 30657]]
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 are part of docket CGD01-05-044 and are
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: Chief Petty Officer Paul English,
Sector Boston, Waterways Management Division, at (617) 223-3010.
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 the rulemaking (CGD01-05-
044), 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
8.5 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 plan to hold a public meeting. But you may 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 would establish a safety zone on the waters of
the Merrimack River Bay within a two hundred yard radius of Cashman
Park located at approximate position 42[deg]48.58'' N, 070[deg]52.41''
W. The safety zone would be in effect from 8:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
on August 6, 2005.
This safety zone is necessary to protect the life and property of
the maritime public from the dangers posed by this fireworks display.
It would protect the public by temporarily prohibiting entry into or
movement within this portion of the Merrimack River.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone in a
portion of the Merrimack River. The temporary safety zone would be in
effect from 8:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. EDT on August 6, 2005. Marine
traffic may transit safely outside of the safety zone during the event
thereby allowing navigation of the Merrimack River 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.
Given the limited time frame of the firework display and because
the zone leaves the majority of the Merrimack River 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 media, 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).
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 regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Although this regulation prevents vessel traffic from transiting
into a portion of the Merrimack River during this event, the effect of
this regulation will not be significant for several reasons: Vessels
will be excluded from the area of the safety zone for only two hours;
vessels will be able to operate in the majority of the Merrimack River
during this time period; and advance notifications will be made to the
local maritime community by 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 will
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 the Merrimack
River from 8:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. EDT August 6, 2005.
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 period is limited in duration, and advance notification via
safety marine informational broadcast and local notice to mariners.
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 effect 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 effect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Chief Petty Officer Paul English
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
[[Page 30658]]
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 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 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 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 Considering 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 Coast Guard
Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-
4370f), and have concluded 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. A preliminary ``Environmental
Analysis Check List'' is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph (34)(g),
as it would establish a safety zone. Comments on this section will be
considered before we make the final decision on whether to
categorically exclude this rule 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 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 temporary Sec. 165.T01-044 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T01-044 Safety Zone; Yankee Homecoming Fireworks,
Newburyport, Massachusetts.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
the Merrimack River within a 200 yard radius of Cashman Park, at
approximate position 42[deg]48.58'' N, 070[deg]52.41'' W.
(b) Effective date. This section is effective from 8:30 p.m. until
10:30 p.m. EDT on August 6, 2005.
(c) 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.
(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: May 16, 2005.
James L. McDonald,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. 05-10595 Filed 5-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P