![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Safety Zone; Live-Fire Gun Exercise, Southeast of Ocean City, MD, Atlantic Ocean
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: May 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 91)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27431-27434]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11my06-12]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Hampton Roads 06-046]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Live-Fire Gun Exercise, Southeast of Ocean City, MD,
Atlantic Ocean
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 27432]]
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a safety zone on June
19, 20 and 21, 2006 from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. for a live-fire gun exercise
approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD. This action
is intended to restrict vessel traffic on the Atlantic Ocean as necessary
to protect mariners from the hazards associated with gunnery exercise.
Entry into this Coast Guard safety zone would be prohibited, unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 12, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to the Norfolk
Federal Building, 200 Granby Street, Suite 700, Norfolk, Virginia
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 Sector Field Office Eastern Shore between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Bill Clark, Waterways Division,
Sector Hampton Roads, (757) 668-5581.
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-
046, 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
that your submission 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. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to 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 separate notice in the Federal Register.
Regulatory Information
The Coast Guard is proposing to establish this safety zone to
conduct training essential to carrying out Coast Guard missions
relating to military operations and national security. Accordingly,
this proposed safety zone falls within the military function exception
to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). Notice
and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and an effective date of
30 days after publication under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) are not required for
this rulemaking.
However, we have determined that it would be beneficial to accept
public comments on this proposed rule. Therefore, we will be accepting
comments until June 12, 2006. By issuing this notice of proposed
rulemaking and accepting public comments, the Coast Guard does not
waive its use of the military-function exception to notice and comment
rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
Background and Purpose
This rule is necessary to protect the public from the hazards
associated with gunnery exercises. When established, this zone will
provide the Coast Guard adequate coverage of the area affected by small
arms fire. No other related rules have been issued in relation this
proposed rule.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on June 19, 20 and
21, 2006 from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. on specified waters of the Atlantic
Ocean, approximately 9 nautical miles southeast of Ocean City, MD. The
regulated area will consist of a circular zone, four nautical miles in
radius, centered on position 38-13.0 N/074-58.0 W. This safety zone
will be enforced when gunnery exercises are being conducted by Coast
Guard vessels. All vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted from
transiting through this area while the safety zone is in effect unless
otherwise authorized by the Captain of the Port's designated
representative.
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
regulation restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this
rule will not be significant as the safety zone will be in effect for a
limited duration of time and the Coast Guard will provide the public
adequate notification via maritime advisories and local notice to
mariners in order for mariners to 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. This proposed rule will affect the following
entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators
of vessels intending to transit in that portion of the Atlantic Ocean
while the regulated area is in affect. The safety zone will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because:
(i) The zone will only be in place for a limited duration of time; (ii)
mariners will be allowed to transit through at the discretion of the
Captain of the Port's designated representative; and (iii) maritime
advisories will be issued allowing mariners to adjust their plans
accordingly.
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
proposed rule would affect your
[[Page 27433]]
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact LTJG Brian Sullivan, Sector Field Office Eastern Shore, (757)
336-2859. 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 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 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. 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. 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.
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, 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 Sec. 165.T06-046 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T06-046 Safety zone; live-fire gun exercise Southeast of
Ocean City, MD, Atlantic Ocean.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
the Atlantic Ocean, from surface to bottom, within a 4 nautical mile
radius of position 38-13.0 N/074-58.0 W, approximately 9 nautical miles
southeast of Ocean City, MD., which lies within the Captain of the
Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.25-10.
(b) Definitions. (1) ``Designated representative'' means a 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 and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), Hampton Roads, in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
(2) [Reserved]
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in Sec. 165.23,
entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP, Hampton Roads, or the COTP's
designated representative.
(2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
(3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must
[[Page 27434]]
contact the COTP or the COTP's representative to obtain permission to
do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP
or the COTP's designated representative.
(d) Enforcement and suspension of enforcement of certain safety
zones. (1) The safety zone in paragraph (a) of this section will be
enforced only when a Coast Guard vessel is operating in the safety zone
for the purpose of conducting gunnery exercises.
(2) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, will provide notice of
the enforcement of the safety zones listed in paragraph (a) of this
section and notice of suspension of enforcement by the means
appropriate to affect the widest publicity, including broadcast notice
to mariners and publication in the local notice to mariners.
(e) Effective period. This section is effective from 7 a.m. on June
19, 2006 until 3 p.m. on June 21, 2006.
Dated: April 26, 2006.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E6-7205 Filed 5-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P