17456 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

substantial number of small entities. In 

making the determination as to whether 

this rule would have a significant 

economic impact, the Department relied 

upon the data and assumptions for the 

counterpart Federal regulations. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: (a) Does not have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million; 

(b) Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions; and (c) Does not 

have significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. This 

determination is based upon the 

analysis performed under various laws 

and executive orders for the counterpart 

Federal regulations. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule will not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of $100 million or more in any given 

year. This determination is based upon 

the analysis performed under various 

laws and executive orders for the 

counterpart Federal regulations. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 948 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: March 2, 2007. 

H. Vann Weaver, 

Acting Regional Director, Appalachian 

Region. 

[FR Doc. E7–6578 Filed 4–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[CGD05–07–029] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation for Marine 

Events; Roanoke River, Plymouth, 

North Carolina 

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 81⁄2 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. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 nonparticipating 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 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
17458 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 Roanoke River, 

Plymouth, North Carolina. 

(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 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD05–07–010] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Patapsco River, 

Northwest and Inner Harbors, 

Baltimore, MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish a permanent safety zone upon 

certain waters of the Patapsco River, 

Northwest Harbor, and Inner Harbor 

during the movement of the historic 

sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION, 

annually, on the Friday following Labor 

Day. This action is necessary to provide 

for the safety of life on navigable waters 

during the tow of the vessel from its 

berth at the Inner Harbor in Baltimore, 

Maryland, to a point on the Patapsco 

River near the Fort McHenry National 

Monument and Historic Shrine in 

Baltimore, Maryland, and return. This 

action will restrict vessel traffic in 

portions of the Patapsco River, 

Northwest Harbor, and Inner Harbor 

during the event. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

June 8, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander, 

U.S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 

Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, 

Waterways Management Division, 

Baltimore, Maryland, 21226–1791. Coast 

Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways 

Management Division, 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 Commander, U. 

S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 

Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, 

Waterways Management Division, 

Baltimore, Maryland, 21226–1791 

between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore, Waterways Management 

Division, at (410) 576–2674 or (410) 

576–2693. 

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 (CGD05–07–010), 

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 81⁄2 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 Coast Guard 

Sector Baltimore, Waterways 

Management Division, 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 

Each year, the USS CONSTELLATION 

Museum conducts a ‘‘turn-around’’


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL