18674 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, 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 this action is one of a category of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule is 

categorically excluded, under figure 2– 

1, paragraph (34)(g), of this instruction. 

The special local regulation is necessary 

to provide for the safety of the general 

public and event participants from 

potential hazards associated with 

vessels present on or transiting upon 

this waterway. We seek any comments 

or information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

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, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Add a temporary § 165–T05–0168 

to read as follows: 

165.T05–0168 Safety Zone: Big Rock Blue 

Marlin Air Show, Bogue Sound, Morehead 

City, NC. 

(a) Regulated Area. The following area 

is a safety zone: Specified waters of the 

Captain of the Port Sector North 

Carolina, as defined in 33 CFR 3.25–20, 

in the navigable waters of Bogue Sound 

within an area bound by a line drawn 

from the following points: Latitude 

34°43′09.9′′ N, longitude 076°45′54.9′′ 

W; thence east to latitude 34°43′09.75′′ 

N, longitude 076°44′34.16′′ W; thence 

south to latitude 34°42′52.64′′ N, 

longitude 076°44′32.55′′ W; thence west 

to latitude 34°42′50.7′′ N, longitude 

076°45′48.5′′ W; thence to the point of 

origin, located approximately 400 yards 

south of the shoreline of Morehead City. 

(b) Definition: For the purposes of this 

section, Captain of the Port means the 

Commander, Sector North Carolina. 

Representative means any U.S. Coast 

Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty 

officer who has been authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Sector North 

Carolina to act on his behalf. 

(c) Regulations: (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in 165.23 of this 

part, entry into this zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port, Sector North Carolina 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. 

(3) The Captain of the Port, Sector 

North Carolina can be reached through 

the Sector Duty Officer at Sector North 

Carolina in Atlantic Beach, North 

Carolina at telephone number (252) 

247–4570. 

(4) The Coast Guard Representatives 

enforcing the safety zone can be 

contacted on VHF–FM marine band 

radio channel 13 (165.65 MHz) and 

channel 16 (156.8 MHz). 

(d) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from 7 p.m. until 8 

p.m. on June 11, 2011. 

Dated: March 23, 2011. 

Anthony Popiel, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port North Carolina. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7994 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0803] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zones; Sector Southeastern 

New England Captain of the Port Zone 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a 

permanent regulation that would create 

security zones around cruise ships in 

the Southeastern New England Captain 

of the Port (COTP) Zone. These security 

zones are nearly identical to security 

zones currently put in place by a 

temporary final rule. The proposed rule 

would create a 100-yard radius security 

zone encompassing all navigable waters 

around any cruise ship anchored or 

moored and 200-yard radius security 

zone encompassing all navigable waters 

around any cruise ship underway that is 

being escorted by Coast Guard or law 

enforcement agencies assisting the Coast 

Guard. These zones are needed to 

protect cruise ships and the public from 

destruction, loss, or injury from 

sabotage, subversive acts, or other 

malicious acts of a similar nature. 

Persons or vessels may not enter these 

security zones without permission of 

the COTP or a COTP designated 

representative. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before May 5, 2011. Requests for 

public meetings must be received by the 

Coast Guard on or before April 12, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2010–0803 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18675 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these methods. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Chief, 

Waterways Management Division, Coast 

Guard Sector Southeastern New 

England, at 401–435–2351, or 

Edward.G.LeBlanc@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2010–0803), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online (via http:// 

www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or 

mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a phone number in the body 

of your document so that we can contact 

you if we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu 

select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert 

‘‘USCG–2010–0803’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the 

balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. 

If you submit your comments by mail or 

hand delivery, submit them in an 

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 

11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit 

comments by mail and would like to 

know that they reached the Facility, 

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period and may 

change the rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010– 

0803’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. You may also visit the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation to use 

the Docket Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting 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. 

Basis and Purpose 

The legal basis for this rule is 33 

U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 

701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 

CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1, which 

collectively authorizes the Coast Guard 

to define Security Zones. The Coast 

Guard’s maritime security mission 

includes the requirement to protect 

cruise ships from destruction, loss, or 

injury from sabotage, subversive acts, or 

other malicious acts of a similar nature. 

Protecting these vessels from potential 

threats or harm while transiting, or 

while moored, at any berth, or at anchor 

in the waters of Southeastern New 

England COTP Zone is necessary to 

safeguard cruise ships and the general 

public. The Coast Guard proposes a 

permanent regulation that would create 

security zones for specified navigable 

waters around certain cruise ships in 

the Southeastern New England Captain 

of the Port Zone. On September 22, 

2010, the COTP issued a temporary final 

rule that created nearly identical 

security zones in 33 CFR 165.T01–0864. 

See Security Zone: Passenger Vessels, 

Southeastern New England Captain of 

the Port Zone, 75 FR 63714, October 18, 

2010. In a rule published March 31, 

2011 (FR Doc. 2011–7640), temporary 

§ 165.T01–0864 was extended in effect 

through October 1, 2011. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to establish 

100-yard radius security zones 

encompassing all navigable waters 

around cruise ships that are moored, at 

any berth or at anchor within the 

Southeastern New England COTP Zone. 

This notice of proposed rulemaking also 

proposes to establish 200-yard radius 

moving security zones encompassing all 

navigable waters around escorted cruise 

ships while underway in the navigable 

waters within the Southeastern New 

England COTP zone. We propose to 

define a ‘‘cruise ship’’ as a passenger 

vessel (as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(22)) 

that is authorized to carry more than 

400 passengers for hire and is 200 feet 

or more in length. This definition of 

‘‘cruise ship’’ will include ferries (as 

defined in 46 CFR 2.10–25) that are 

authorized to carry more than 400 

passengers for hire and are 200 feet or 

more in length. This proposed zone 

would be activated and subject to 

enforcement at all times a cruise ship is 

underway, anchored or moored within 

the navigable waters of the United 

States in the Southeastern New England 

COTP Zone. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

18676 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This proposed rule would not be a 

significant regulatory action under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

would 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. These 

proposed security zones would be 

activated and enforced only when a 

cruise ship is transiting, anchored, or 

moored within the Southeastern New 

England COTP zone. Persons and/or 

vessels may enter a security zone if they 

obtain permission from the Coast Guard 

COTP, Southeastern New England. 

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. These proposed security zones 

would be enforced only when a vessel 

is transiting within the Southeastern 

New England COTP zone (a routine 

transit is usually two hours or less), and 

only when enforced by Coast Guard law 

enforcement personnel. Persons and/or 

vessels with may enter a security zone 

if they obtain permission from the Coast 

Guard COTP, Southeastern New 

England. 

This proposed rule may affect the 

following entities, some of which might 

be small entities: The owners or 

operators of vessels intending to operate 

or transit within the security zones 

when a cruise ship is transiting, 

anchored or moored. 

These proposed security zones would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

for the following reasons. These 

proposed security zones are temporary, 

and would be enforced only either when 

a vessel is transiting within the 

Southeastern New England COTP zone 

(a routine transit is usually two hours or 

less) or anchored or moored in the Zone. 

Persons and/or vessels may enter a 

security zone if they obtain permission 

from the Coast Guard COTP, 

Southeastern New England. 

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 Mr. Edward 

G. LeBlanc, Chief, Waterways 

Management Division, Coast Guard 

Sector Southeastern New England, at 

401–435–2351, or 

Edward.G.LeBlanc@uscg.mil. The Coast 

Guard will not retaliate against small 

entities that question or complain about 

this proposed 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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 cause 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 proposed 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 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18677 

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 

in accordance with Department of 

Homeland Security Management 

Directive 023–01 and Commandant 

Instruction M16475.lD, 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 this action is one of 

a category of actions which the Coast 

Guard concluded do not normally have 

individual or cumulative significant 

effects on the human environment. 

Since the proposed action involves 

establishment of security zones, the 

applicable categorical exclusion is 

found in Figure 2–1, paragraph 34(g) of 

the Commandant Instruction. An 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this preliminary 

determination is available in the docket 

where indicated under ADDRESSES. We 

seek any comments or information that 

may lead to the discovery of a 

significant environmental impact from 

this proposed rule. 

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. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 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 § 165.123 to read as follows: 

§ 165.123 Cruise Ships, Sector 

Southeastern New England Captain of the 

Port (COTP) Zone. 

(a) Location. The following areas are 

security zones: All navigable waters 

within the Southeastern New England 

Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, 

extending from the surface to the sea 

floor: 

(1) Within a 200-yard radius of any 

cruise ship that is underway and is 

under escort of U.S. Coast Guard law 

enforcement personnel or designated 

representative, or 

(2) Within a 100-yard radius of any 

cruise ship that is anchored, at any 

berth or moored. 

(b) Definitions. For the purposes of 

this section— 

‘‘Cruise ship’’ means a passenger 

vessel as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(22), 

that is authorized to carry more than 

400 passengers and is 200 or more feet 

in length. A cruise ship under this 

section will also include ferries as 

defined in 46 CFR 2.10–25 that are 

authorized to carry more than 400 

passengers and are 200 feet or more in 

length. 

‘‘Designated representative’’ means 

any Coast Guard commissioned, 

warrant, or petty officer who has been 

designated by the COTP to act on the 

COTP’s behalf. The designated 

representative may be on a Coast Guard 

vessel, or onboard federal, state, or a 

local agency vessel that is authorized to 

act in support of the Coast Guard. 

‘‘Southeastern New England COTP 

Zone’’ is as defined in 33 CFR 3.05–20. 

(c) Enforcement. The security zones 

described in this section will be 

activated and enforced upon entry of 

any cruise ship into the navigable 

waters of the United States (see 33 CFR 

2.36(a) to include the 12 NM territorial 

sea) in the Southeastern New England 

COTP zone. This zone will remain 

activated at all times while a cruise ship 

is within the navigable waters of the 

United States in the Sector Southeastern 

New England COTP Zone. In addition, 

the Coast Guard may broadcast the area 

designated as a security zone for the 

duration of the enforcement period via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(d) Regulations. (1) In accordance 

with the general regulations in 33 CFR 

part 165, subpart D, no person or vessel 

may enter or move within the security 

zones created by this section unless 

granted permission to do so by the 

COTP Southeastern New England or the 

designated representative. 

(2) All persons and vessels granted 

permission to enter a security zone must 

comply with the instructions of the 

COTP or the designated representative. 

Emergency response vessels are 

authorized to move within the zone, but 

must abide by the restrictions imposed 

by the COTP or the designated 

representative. 

(3) No person may swim upon or 

below the surface of the water within 

the boundaries of these security zones 

unless previously authorized by the 

COTP or his designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast 

Guard vessel or the designated 

representative, by siren, radio, flashing 

light or other means, the operator of the 

vessel shall proceed as directed. 

(5) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the security zone shall 

contact the COTP or the designated 

representative via VHF channel 16 or 

508–457–3211 (Sector Southeastern 

New England command center) to 

obtain permission to do so. 

Dated: March 23, 2011. 

V.B. Gifford, Jr., 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Southeastern New England. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8003 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

45 CFR Parts 1355, 1356 and 1357 

Federal Monitoring of Child and Family 

Service Programs; Request for Public 

Comment and Consultation Meetings 

AGENCY: Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), Administration 

for Children and Families (ACF), 

Administration on Children, Youth and 

Families (ACYF), Children’s Bureau 

(CB) 

ACTION: Request for public comment and 

consultation meetings. 

SUMMARY: The Children’s Bureau is 

interested in improving the process by 

which we review title IV–B and IV–E 

plan requirements. CB currently reviews 

a State’s compliance through Child and 

Family Service Reviews (CFSRs). 

Following two rounds of CFSRs in every 

State and the passage of several 

amendments to Federal child welfare 

laws since the CFSRs began, we believe 

it is time to reassess how CB reviews 

title IV–B and IV–E programs through 

the CFSR and identify enhancements 

and system improvements we could 

make. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted to the office listed in the 

ADDRESSES section below on or before 

May 20, 2011. Please see 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

additional details on consultation 

meetings. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS