Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Coast Guard 

          - 33 CFR Part 100 
          - [CGD05-07-029] 
          - RIN 1625-AA08 

# AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

# SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard proposes to establish special local regulations during the “Plymouth Drag Boat Race Series”, a series of power boat races to be held on the waters of the Roanoke River, Plymouth, North Carolina. These special local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic in portions of the Roanoke River adjacent to Plymouth, North Carolina during the power boat race. 

# DATES:

Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 9, 2007. 

# ADDRESSES:

                        You may mail comments and related material to Commander (dpi), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia, 23704-5004, hand deliver them to room 415 at the same address between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, fax them to (757) 391-8149, or e-mail them to                         *Dennis.M.Sens@uscg.mil*. The Inspections and Investigations Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, 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 the Federal Building, Fifth Coast Guard District between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        CWO Christopher Humphrey, Prevention Department, Sector North Carolina, at (252) 247-4525 or via e-mail to                         *Christopher.D.Humphrey@uscg.mil*.                     

# 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 [CCGD05-07-029], 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 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. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to 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 

The Outboard Drag Boat Association will be sponsoring a series of seven (7) power boat racing events titled the “Plymouth Drag Boat Race”. The power boat races will be held on the following dates: June 24, July 22, August 11, 12, 19, September 30 and October 21, 2007. The races will be held on the Roanoke River immediately adjacent to Plymouth, North Carolina. The power boat races will consist of approximately (30) vessels conducting high speed straight line runs along the river and parallel with the shoreline. A fleet of spectator vessels are expected to gather near the event site to view the competition. To provide for the safety of participants, spectators and other transiting vessels, the Coast Guard will temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the event area during the power boat races. 

## Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to establish special local regulations on specified waters of the Roanoke River, in the vicinity of Plymouth, NC. The regulated area includes a section of the Roanoke River approximately one mile long and bounded in width by each shoreline, immediately adjacent to Plymouth, NC. The effect of this regulation would be to restrict general navigation in the regulated area during the drag boat races. This special local regulation will be enforced from 10 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. on June 24, July 22, August 11, 12, 19, September 30 and October 21, 2007. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area. Non-participating vessels will be allowed to transit the regulated area between races, when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander determines it is safe to do so. This regulation is needed to control vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety of participants, spectators and transiting vessels. 

## 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.                           ( print page 17457)    

We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the Roanoke River during the event, the effect of this regulation will not be significant due to the limited duration that the regulated area will be in effect and the extensive advance notification that will be made to the maritime community via marine information broadcast, local radio stations and area newspapers so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Additionally, the regulated area has been narrowly tailored to impose the least impact on general navigation yet provide the level of safety deemed necessary. Vessel traffic will be able to transit the regulated area between heats, when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do so. 

## 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: owners or operators of vessels intending to transit this section of the Roanoke River from 10 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. on June 24, July 22, August 11, 12, 19, September 30 and October 21, 2007. This proposed rule would not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. Although the regulated area will apply to a one mile segment of the Roanoke River, traffic may be allowed to pass through the regulated area with the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. In the case where the Patrol Commander authorizes passage through the regulated area during the event, vessels shall proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course that minimizes wake near the race course. The Patrol Commander will allow non-participating vessels to transit the area between races. Before the enforcement period, we will issue maritime advisories so mariners can 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 (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 affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact U.S. Coast Guard Sector North Carolina, listed at the beginning of this rule. 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 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 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 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                           ( print page 17458)                        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 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)(h), of the instruction, an “Environmental Analysis Check List” is not required for this rule. 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 100

      - Marine safety
      - Navigation (water)
      - Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
      - Waterways

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR Part 100 as follows: 

# PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 

1. The authority citation for Part 100 continues to read as follows: 

Authority:33 U.S.C. 1233.   

2. Add temporary § 100.35-T05-029 to read as follows: 

§ 100.35-T05-029 

                            (a)                             *Regulated area.*                             The regulated area includes all waters of Roanoke River commencing at the north river bank at latitude 350°52′20″ N, longitude 0760°44′47″ W, thence a line 180 degrees due south across the river to the shoreline thence west along the shoreline to a position located at latitude 35°51′43″ N, longitude 076°43′45″ W, thence 000 degrees due north across the river to the shoreline thence east along the shoreline to the point of origin. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.                         

                            (b)                             *Definitions.*                             (1)                             *Coast Guard Patrol Commander*                             means a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard who has been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina.                         

                            (2)                             *Official Patrol*                             means any vessel assigned or approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.                         

                            (c)                             *Special local regulations.*                             (1) Except for persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area.                         

(2) The operator of any vessel in the regulated area shall: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any Official Patrol. 

(ii) Proceed as directed by any official patrol. 

                            (d)                             *Enforcement period.*                             This section will be enforced from 10 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. on June 24, July 22, August 11, 12, 19, September 30 and October 21, 2007.                         

Dated: March 20, 2007. 

Larry L. Hereth, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 07-1621 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P