Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 22809 

records when the purposes underlying 

the exemption are valid and necessary 

to protect the contents of the records. 

This rule is being published as a 

direct final rule as the Department of 

Defense does not expect to receive any 

adverse comments, and so a proposed 

rule is unnecessary. 

DATES: The rule will be effective on July 

5, 2011 unless comments are received 

that would result in a contrary 

determination. Comments will be 

accepted on or before June 24, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Jody Sinkler at (703) 767–5045. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Direct Final Rule and Significant 

Adverse Comments 

DoD has determined this rulemaking 

meets the criteria for a direct final rule 

because it involves nonsubstantive 

changes dealing with DoD’s 

management of its Privacy Progams. 

DoD expects no opposition to the 

changes and no significant adverse 

comments. However, if DoD receives a 

significant adverse comment, the 

Department will withdraw this direct 

final rule by publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register. A significant adverse 

comment is one that explains: (1) Why 

the direct final rule is inappropriate, 

including challenges to the rule’s 

underlying premise or approach; or 

(2) why the direct final rule will be 

ineffective or unacceptable without a 

change. In determining whether a 

comment necessitates withdrawal of 

this direct final rule, DoD will consider 

whether it warrants a substantive 

response in a notice and comment 

process. 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

are not significant rules. The rules do 

not (1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy; a sector of the economy; 

productivity; competition; jobs; the 

environment; public health or safety; or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities; (2) Create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another Agency; (3) Materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs, or 

the rights and obligations of recipients 

thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in these Executive orders. 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

do not have significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

because they are concerned only with 

the administration of Privacy Act 

systems of records within the 

Department of Defense. 

Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

impose no additional information 

collection requirements on the public 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

Section 202, Public Law 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rulemaking for the Department of 

Defense does not involve a Federal 

mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

and that such rulemaking will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

do not have federalism implications. 

The rules do not have substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the National Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 323 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 323—DEFENSE LOGISTICS 

AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

part 323 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 

(5 U.S.C. 552a). 

■ 2. In Appendix H to part 323, add 

paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

Appendix H to Part 323—DLA 

Exemption Rules 

* * * * * 

g. ID: S510.30 

1. System name: Freedom of Information 

Act/Privacy Act Requests and Administrative 

Appeal Records. 

2. Exemption: During the processing of a 

Freedom of Information Act request, exempt 

materials from other systems of records may 

in turn become part of the case record in this 

system. To the extent that copies of exempt 

records from those ‘‘other’’ systems of records 

are entered into this system, the Defense 

Logistics Agency claims the same exemptions 

for the records from those ‘‘other’’ systems 

that are entered into this system, as claimed 

for the original primary system of which they 

are a part. 

3. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(2), 

(k)(3), (k)(4), (k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7). 

4. Reasons: Records are only exempt from 

pertinent provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a to the 

extent such provisions have been identified 

and an exemption claimed for the original 

record and the purposes underlying the 

exemption for the original record still pertain 

to the record which is now contained in this 

system of records. In general, the exemptions 

were claimed in order to protect properly 

classified information relating to national 

defense and foreign policy, to avoid 

interference during the conduct of criminal, 

civil, or administrative actions or 

investigations, to ensure protective services 

provided the President and others are not 

compromised, to protect the identity of 

confidential sources incident to Federal 

employment, military service, contract, and 

security clearance determinations, to 

preserve the confidentiality and integrity of 

Federal testing materials, and to safeguard 

evaluation materials used for military 

promotions when furnished by a confidential 

source. The exemption rule for the original 

records will identify the specific reasons why 

the records are exempt from specific 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a. 

Dated: April 8, 2011. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9748 Filed 4–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0196] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Bay Ferry II Maritime 

Security Exercise; San Francisco Bay, 

San Francisco, CA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone on 

the navigable waters of the San 

Francisco Bay in support of the Bay 

Ferry II Maritime Security Exercise, a 

multi-agency exercise that tests the 

proficiency of teams called upon in real 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
22810 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

life emergency situations onboard 

ferries or other vessels in the San 

Francisco Bay. The temporary safety 

zone is necessary to provide for the 

safety of the public and those 

participating in the exercise, many of 

whom will be traveling at high speeds 

while interfacing with law enforcement 

responders. Persons and vessels are 

prohibited from entering into, transiting 

through, or anchoring within the 

temporary safety zone unless authorized 

by the Captain of the Port or the Captain 

of the Port’s designated representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 5:50 

a.m. until 12:10 p.m. on April 28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2011– 

0196 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting 

the Advanced Docket Search option on 

the right side of the screen, inserting 

USCG–2011–0196 in the Docket ID box, 

pressing Enter, and then clicking on the 

item in the Docket ID column. They are 

also available for inspection or copying 

at two locations: The Docket 

Management Facility (M–30), U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Junior 

Grade Allison A. Natcher, Waterways 

Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector 

San Francisco, Coast Guard; telephone 

415–399–7442, e-mail D11-PFMarineEvents@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because it was 

impracticable since the logistical details 

of the operations were not presented to 

the Coast Guard in enough time to draft 

and publish an NPRM. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Any delay in the effective date 

of this rule would expose the public to 

the dangers posed when conducting a 

live practical exercise with a multiagency underway response by United 

States Coast Guard, regional law 

enforcement, including SWAT and 

special tactics units, and fire 

department marine units. 

Background and Purpose 

The California Maritime Academy has 

requested that the Coast Guard enforce 

a temporary safety zone for operations 

during the Bay Ferry II Maritime 

Security Exercise from 5:50 a.m. until 

12:10 p.m. on April 28, 2011. The Bay 

Ferry II Maritime Security Exercise is a 

multi-agency exercise that tests the 

proficiency of teams called upon in real 

life emergency situations onboard 

ferries or other vessels in the San 

Francisco Bay. The temporary safety 

zone will encompass General Anchorage 

5 between the North and South 

Shipping Channels to the west and 

Southampton Shoal Channel to the east 

in San Francisco Bay. The temporary 

safety zone is needed to protect exercise 

participants and provide for the safety 

of the passenger ferry operators, first 

responders, their crews, and the public 

during the full scale security exercise 

from accidents or other causes of a 

similar nature. 

Discussion of Rule 

The Coast Guard is establishing a 

temporary safety zone that will be 

enforced on April 28, 2011 from 5:50 

a.m. until 12:10 p.m. The limits of the 

safety zone include the navigable waters 

of General Anchorage 5 between the 

North and South Shipping Channels to 

the west and Southampton Shoals 

Channel to the east in San Francisco 

Bay. The safety zone will be located at 

approximately 37°54′ N and 122°26′10′′ 

W; 37°54′ N and 122°25′30′′ W; 

37°56′30′′ N and 122°26′30′′ W; and 

37°56′30′′ N and 122°25′50′′ W (NAD 

83). 

The temporary safety zone is 

necessary to protect the public from 

exercise participants and provide for the 

safety of the United States Coast Guard, 

passenger ferry operators, first 

responders, and their crews during the 

full scale security exercise from 

accidents or other causes of a similar 

nature. Persons and vessels will be 

prohibited from entering into, transiting 

through, or anchoring within the 

temporary safety zone unless authorized 

by the Captain of the Port, or the 

Captain of the Port’s designated 

representative. 

The temporary safety zone will be 

enforced by Coast Guard patrol craft and 

San Francisco Harbor Police as 

authorized by the Captain of the Port. 

See 33 CFR 6.04–11, Assistance of Other 

Agencies. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This 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. 

Although this regulation will restrict 

access to the area, the effect of this rule 

will not be significant because: (1) The 

safety zone will be in effect for a limited 

period of time; (2) the Coast Guard will 

give advance notification via maritime 

advisories so mariners can adjust their 

plans accordingly, and (3) the size of the 

zone is at the minimum necessary to 

provide adequate protection for the 

United States Coast Guard, passenger 

ferry operators, first responders, their 

crews, and the public. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this 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 rule will affect the following 

entities, some of which may be small 

entities: The owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit or anchor in 

General Anchorage 5 in the San 

Francisco Bay between 5:50 a.m. and 

12:10 p.m. on April 28, 2011. 

The temporary safety zone will not 

have a significant economic impact on 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 22811 

a substantial number of small entities 

for the following reasons. Vessel traffic 

can pass safely around the zone. Before 

the effective period, the Coast Guard 

will issue local notice to mariners 

(LNM) and broadcast notice to mariners 

(BNM) alerts via VHF–FM marine 

channel 16 before the safety zone is 

enforced. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we offer to assist small entities in 

understanding the rule so that they can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 

1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 

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 calls 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 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 rule will not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will 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 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 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 create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This 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 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 rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this 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 concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule 

involves the establishment of a 

temporary safety zone. 

An environmental analysis checklist 

and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

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 amends 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, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T11–407 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T11–407 Safety Zone; Bay Ferry II 

Maritime Security Exercise; San Francisco 

Bay, San Francisco, CA. 

(a) Location. The limits of this safety 

zone include the navigable waters 

within General Anchorage 5 at 

positions: 37°54′ N and 122°26′10′′ W; 

37°54′ N and 122°25′30′′ W; 37°56′30′′ N 

and 122°26′30′′ W; and 37°56′30′′ N and 

122°25′50′′ W (NAD 83). 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
22812 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(b) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from 5:50 a.m. through 

12:10 p.m. on April 28, 2011. If the 

operation concludes prior to the 

scheduled termination time, the Captain 

of the Port will cease enforcement of the 

safety zones and will announce that fact 

via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definition applies to these sections: 

designated representative means any 

commissioned, warrant, and petty 

officers of the Coast Guard on board 

Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, 

and local, state, and Federal law 

enforcement vessels who have been 

authorized to act on the behalf of the 

Captain of the Port. 

(d) Regulations. (1) In accordance 

with 33 CFR Part 165 Subpart C, entry 

into, transit through or anchoring within 

this safety zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port of 

San Francisco or the Captain of the 

Port’s designated on-scene 

representative. 

(2) Mariners requesting permission to 

transit through the safety zone may 

request authorization to do so from the 

Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The 

PATCOM may be contacted on VHF–FM 

Channel 16. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the 

designated representative. 

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

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel shall proceed as 

directed. 

(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies. 

Dated: April 11, 2011. 

Cynthia L. Stowe, 

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

Port, San Francisco. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9891 Filed 4–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0201] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Sea World Fireworks; 

Mission Bay, San Diego, CA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone on 

the specified navigable waters of 

Mission Bay in support of the Sea World 

Fireworks. This safety zone is necessary 

to provide for the safety of the 

participants, crew, spectators, 

participating vessels, and other vessels 

and users of the waterway. Persons and 

vessels are prohibited from entering 

into, transiting through, or anchoring 

within this safety zone unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port, or 

his designated representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR 

from April 25, 2011 through 10:15 p.m. 

on December 31, 2011. This rule is 

effective with actual notice for the 

purposes of enforcement from 8:45 p.m. 

on April 2, 2011 through 10:15 p.m. on 

December 31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2011– 

0201 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2011–0201 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They 

are also available for inspection or 

copying at the Docket Management 

Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Cody 

McLaughlin, Waterways Management, 

U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; 

telephone (619) 278–7233, e-mail 

Cody.C.McLaughlin@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing the docket, 

call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because 

standard notice procedures are 

impracticable. Immediate action is 

necessary to ensure the safety of vessels, 

spectators, participants, and others in 

the vicinity of the marine event on the 

dates and times this rule will be in 

effect. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. Delaying the effective date 

would be impracticable, because 

immediate action is needed to ensure 

the public’s safety. 

Basis and Purpose 

Sea World is sponsoring the Sea 

World Fireworks, which will include a 

fireworks presentation from a barge in 

Mission Bay. Fireworks displays are 

scheduled to occur on various dates 

between April 2 and December 31, 2011. 

This temporary safety zone is necessary 

to provide for the safety of the crew, 

spectators, participants, and other 

vessels and users of the waterway. 

Discussion of Rule 

The Coast Guard is establishing a 

temporary safety zone in support of Sea 

World Fireworks. It will be enforced 

from 8:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m. on 

evenings with a fireworks show. 

Fireworks shows are currently 

scheduled for the following dates in 

2011: April 2, 9, 16 and 23; May 28, 29 

and 30; June 4 and 5, 11 and 12; June 

16 through August 21; August 26, 27, 

and 28; September 3, 4, and 5; 

November 18; and December 9 and 31. 

If this schedule changes the Coast Guard 

will announce the changes via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners no less 

than 24 hours before the event. The 

safety zone will cover a 600 foot radius 

surrounding the fireworks barge in 

approximate position 32°46′03′′ N, 

117°13′11′′ W. The safety zone is 

necessary to provide for the safety of the 

crew, spectators, participants, and other 

vessels and users of the waterway. 

When this temporary safety zone is 

being enforced, persons and vessels are 

prohibited from entering into, transiting 

through, or anchoring within this safety 

zone unless authorized by the Captain 

of the Port, or his designated 

representative. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 


jdjones on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES