Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules 9477 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

has approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(g) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2006–0283, dated September 14, 

2006; and Avions de Transport Regional 

Service Bulletins ATR42–92–0012 and 

ATR72–92–1013, both dated July 4, 2006, for 

related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

21, 2007. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–3657 Filed 3–1–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[CGD05–07–013] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulations for Marine 

Events; Western Branch, Elizabeth 

River, Portsmouth, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

temporarily change the regulations for 

the ‘‘Virginia State Hydroplane 

Championship’’ hydroplane races held 

annually on the waters of the Western 

Branch of the Elizabeth River at 

Portsmouth, Virginia. This action is 

necessary because the event will be held 

on April 21 and 22, 2007, instead of on 

April 27 and 28, 2007 as established by 

permanent regulation. This proposed 

rule is intended to restrict vessel traffic 

in portions of the Elizabeth River and is 

necessary to provide for the safety of life 

on navigable waters during the event. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

March 19, 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, or fax 

them to (757) 398–6203. The 

Inspections and Investigation 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 above 

address between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis M. Sens, Project Manager, 

Inspections and Investigations Branch, 

at (757) 398–6204. 

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 (CGD05–07–013), 

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 

listed 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 

On April 21 and 22, 2007, Virginia 

Boat Racing Association will sponsor 

the ‘‘Virginia State Hydroplane 

Championship’’ hydroplane races on the 

waters of the Western Branch of the 

Elizabeth River at Portsmouth, Virginia. 

The event will consist of approximately 

75 hydroplane powerboats conducting 

high-speed competitive races on the 

Western Branch of the Elizabeth River 

in the vicinity of Portsmouth City Park, 

Portsmouth, Virginia. A fleet of 

spectator vessels is expected to gather 

near the event site to view the 

competition. The regulation at 33 CFR 

100.525 is effective annually for this 

marine event. Paragraph (c) of Section 

100.525 establishes the enforcement 

date for the hydroplane races. This 

regulation proposes to temporarily 

change the regulation so that the event 

may be held on April 21 and 22, 2007 

instead of the fourth Friday and 

following Saturday in April. The 

Virginia Boat Racing Association who is 

the sponsor for this event still intends 

to hold this event annually, however, 

this year they have requested a change 

in the date of the event for 2007. The 

change was requested to accommodate 

participation by all hydroplane 

participants. To provide for the safety of 

participants, spectators, support and 

transiting vessels, the Coast Guard 

proposes to temporarily restrict vessel 

traffic in the event area during the 

hydroplane races. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to 

temporarily suspend the regulations at 

33 CFR 100.525 by temporarily revising 

the date of enforcement in paragraph (c) 

to reflect the event will be conducted in 

2007 on the third Saturday and Sunday 

in April, April 21 and 22, 2007. This 

proposed change is needed to 

accommodate the sponsors hydroplane 

race schedule relative to the rotation of 

weekend dates in the annual calendar. 

The special local regulations will be 

enforced from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on April 

21 and 22, 2007, and will restrict 

navigation in the regulated area during 

the hydroplane races. Except for persons 

or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard 

Patrol Commander, no person or vessel 

may enter or remain in the regulated 

area during the effective period. The 

regulated area is needed to control 

vessel traffic during the event to 

enhance the safety of participants and 

transiting vessels. 

In addition to notice in the Federal 

Register, the maritime community will 

be provided extensive advance 

notification via the Local Notice to 

Mariners, and marine information 

broadcasts so mariners can adjust their 

plans accordingly. 

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. It is not 

‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory 

policies and procedures of the 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS). 

We expect the economic impact of 

this proposed rule to be so minimal that 

a full Regulatory Evaluation under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS is unnecessary. The effect of this 

proposed action merely establishes the 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
9478 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

date on which the existing regulation 

would be in effect and would not 

impose any new restrictions on vessel 

traffic. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This proposed rule would effect 

the following entities, some of which 

might be small entities: The owners or 

operators of vessels intending to transit 

or anchor in a portion of the Western 

Branch of the Elizabeth River during the 

event. 

This proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons. This proposed 

rule would merely change the date on 

which the existing regulations would be 

enforced in the regulated area and 

would not impose any new restrictions 

on vessel traffic. 

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 the address 

listed under ADDRESSES. 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 

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 guides the 

Coast Guard in complying with the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), 

and have concluded 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, this rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(h), of the Instruction, from further 

environmental documentation. Special 

local regulations issued in conjunction 

with a regatta or marine event permit 

are specifically excluded from further 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules 9479 

analysis and documentation under that 

section. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), 

of the Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are not 

required for this rule. Comments on this 

section will be considered before we 

make the final decision on whether to 

categorically exclude this rule 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 proposes to 

temporarily amend 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; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. In § 100.525, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. 

on April 21 and 22, 2007, temporarily 

suspend paragraph (c). 

3. In § 100.525, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. 

on April 21 and 22, 2007, temporarily 

add a new paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 100.525 Western Branch, Elizabeth River, 

Portsmouth, Virginia. 

* * * * * 

(d) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. 

on April 21 and 22, 2007. A notice of 

enforcement of this section will be 

disseminated through the Fifth Coast 

Guard District Local Notice to Mariners 

announcing the specific event date and 

times. Notice will also be made via 

marine Safety Radio Broadcast on VHF–

FM marine band radio channel 22 

(157.1 MHz). 

Dated: February 15, 2007. 

Larry L. Hereth, 

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

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E7–3638 Filed 3–1–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Parts 405, 424, and 498 

[CMS–6003–P2] 

RIN 0938–AI49 

Medicare Program; Appeals of CMS or 

Contractor Determinations When a 

Provider or Supplier Fails To Meet the 

Requirements for Medicare Billing 

Privileges 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare and 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

establish an appeals process for 

providers and suppliers whose 

applications for enrollment or renewal 

of enrollment were denied. It would 

also grant providers and suppliers the 

right to a hearing by an Administrative 

Law Judge (ALJ) within the Department 

of Health and Human Services after an 

adverse decision at the reconsideration 

level when a provider or supplier’s 

Medicare enrollment application is 

denied to those situations in which the 

provider or supplier’s Medicare billing 

privileges are revoked. In addition, this 

proposed rule would grant providers 

and suppliers the right to Departmental 

Appeals Board review of an adverse ALJ 

decision. 

It would also establish timeframes for 

deciding enrollment appeals by an ALJ 

or the DAB. This proposed rule would 

also establish the use of electronic funds 

transfer (EFT) be used for all Federal 

payments to providers and suppliers. 

Finally, this proposed rule would 

implement section 936(b)(1) of the 

Medicare Prescription Drug, 

Improvement, and Modernization Act of 

2003 (MMA), which specifies the 

timeframes in which contractors must 

process all provider and supplier 

enrollment actions (initial enrollments, 

change of information actions, 

revalidations, etc.). 

DATES: To be assured consideration, 

comments must be received at one of 

the addresses provided below, no later 

than 5 p.m. on May 1, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer 

to file code CMS–6003-P2. Because of 

staff and resource limitations, we cannot 

accept comments by facsimile (FAX) 

transmission. 

You may submit comments in one of 

four ways (no duplicates, please): 

1. Electronically. You may submit 

electronic comments on specific issues 

in this regulation to http:// 

www.cms.hhs.gov/eRulemaking. Click 

on the link ‘‘Submit electronic 

comments on CMS regulations with an 

open comment period.’’ (Attachments 

should be in Microsoft Word, 

WordPerfect, or Excel; however, we 

prefer Microsoft Word.) 

2. By regular mail. You may mail 

written comments (one original and two 

copies) to the following address ONLY: 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Attention: CMS–6003–

P2, P.O. Box 8017, Baltimore, MD 

21244–1850. 

Please allow sufficient time for mailed 

comments to be received before the 

close of the comment period. 

3. By express or overnight mail. You 

may send written comments (one 

original and two copies) to the following 

address ONLY: 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Attention: CMS–6003–

P2, Mail Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. 

4. By hand or courier. If you prefer, 

you may deliver (by hand or courier) 

your written comments (one original 

and two copies) before the close of the 

comment period to one of the following 

addresses. If you intend to deliver your 

comments to the Baltimore address, 

please call telephone number (410)786–

7195 in advance to schedule your 

arrival with one of our staff members. 

Room 445–G, Hubert H. Humphrey 

Building, 200 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20201; or 7500 

Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244–1850. 

(Because access to the interior of the 

HHH Building is not readily available to 

persons without Federal Government 

identification, commenters are 

encouraged to leave their comments in 

the CMS drop slots located in the main 

lobby of the building. A stamp-in clock 

is available for persons wishing to retain 

a proof of filing by stamping in and 

retaining an extra copy of the comments 

being filed.) 

Comments mailed to the addresses 

indicated as appropriate for hand or 

courier delivery may be delayed and 

received after the comment period. 

Submission of comments on 

paperwork requirements. You may 

submit comments on this document’s 

paperwork requirements by mailing 

your comments to the addresses 

provided at the end of the ‘‘Collection 

of Information Requirements’’ section in 

this document. 

For information on viewing public 

comments, see the beginning of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL