![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Safety Zone; City of Lynn, Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Nahant Bay, MA
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: May 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 86)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 26292-26294]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04my06-23]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01-06-032]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; City of Lynn, Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Nahant Bay, MA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
for the City of Lynn ``Fourth of July Fireworks'' occurring in Nahant
Bay, Massachusetts. This safety zone is necessary to protect the life
and property of the maritime public from the potential hazards
associated with a fireworks display. The safety zone would temporarily
prohibit entry into or movement within this portion of Nahant Bay
during the closure period.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 5, 2006.
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: Chief Petty Officer Paul English,
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 the rulemaking (CGD01-06-
032), 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
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 now plan to hold a public meeting; however, 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 rule proposes to establish a safety zone on the waters of
Nahant Bay within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge located at
approximate position 42[deg] 27'.686'' N, 070[deg]55'.101'' W. The
safety zone would be in effect from 8 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. EDT on July
3, 2006.
The safety zone would temporarily restrict movement within the
effected portion of Nahant Bay and is needed to protect the maritime
public from the dangers posed by a fireworks display. Marine traffic
may transit safely outside the safety zone during the effective period.
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 of this proposed rule via safety marine
information broadcasts and Local Notice to Mariners.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone in
Nahant Bay. The safety zone would be in effect from 8 p.m. until 10:30
p.m. EDT on July 3, 2006. Marine traffic may transit safely outside of
the zone in the majority of Nahant Bay during the event. This safety
zone would control vessel traffic during the fireworks display to
protect the safety of the maritime public.
Due to the limited time frame of the fireworks display, 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.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
Although this proposed rule would prevent traffic from transiting a
portion of Nahant Bay during the closure period, the effects of this
rule would not be significant for several reasons: Vessels will be
excluded from the proscribed area for only two and one half hours,
vessels will be able to transit around the zone in the unrestricted
portion or Nahant Bay during the event, and advance notifications will
be made to the local maritime community by marine information
broadcasts and Local Notice to Mariners notifying them or the
parameters and effective period of the zone.
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.
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 Nahant Bay
from 8 p.m. EDT on July 3, 2006 to 10:30 p.m. EDT on July 3, 2006.
This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
proposed rule would be in effect for only two and one half hours,
vessel traffic could pass safely around the safety zone during the
closure period, and advance notifications via safety marine
informational broadcasts and Local Notice to Mariners will be made
before and during the effective period.
[[Page 26293]]
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.
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 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 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 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.
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 rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D,
and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which
guide 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. 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 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. From 8 p.m. EDT until 10:30 p.m. EDT on July 3, 2006, add
temporary Sec. 165.T06-032 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T01-032 Safety Zone; City of Lynn Fourth of July Fireworks
Display, Nahant Bay, Massachusetts
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of Nahant Bay within a 400-yard radius of the fireworks barge
located at approximate position 42[deg]27'686'' N, 070[deg]55'101'' W.
[[Page 26294]]
(b) Effective date. This section is effective from 8 p.m. until
10:30 p.m. EDT on July 3, 2006.
(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: April 21, 2006.
J.C. O'Connor III,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, Boston,
Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. E6-6740 Filed 5-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P