16754 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 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 (32)(e) of the Instruction, 

from further environmental 

documentation. Under figure 2–1, 

paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an 

‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’

and a ‘‘Categorical Exclusion 

Determination’’ are not required for this 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued 

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 

Stat. 5039. 

2. Revise § 117.579 to read as follows: 

§ 117.579 Wicomico River (North Prong). 

The draws of the Main Street and U.S. 

50 bridges, mile 22.4, Salisbury, 

Maryland shall open on signal if at least 

four hours notice is given by calling the 

telephone contact number at (410) 430–

7461. 

Dated: March 29, 2007. 

L. L. Hereth, 

Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E7–6303 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD08–07–007] 

RIN 1625–AA11 

Regulated Navigation Area; 

Mississippi River, Eighty-One Mile 

Point 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

revise the existing regulated navigation 

area (RNA) for the Lower Mississippi 

River (LMR) mile marker (MM) 233.9 

through South and South West Passes 

by establishing mandatory check-in 

procedures for vessels transiting on the 

waters of the Mississippi River between 

(MM) 167.5 LMR and 187.9 LMR. This 

proposed rule is needed to minimize the 

risk of collisions, allisions, and 

groundings occurring as a result of 

vessels meeting unanticipated traffic in 

the vicinity of 81 Mile Point, MM 178 

LMR. This proposed rule would require 

vessels, subject to the Bridge to Bridge 

Radiotelephone Act (33 United States 

Code 26) to notify Vessel Traffic Center 

Lower Mississippi River, New Orleans 

(VTC New Orleans) prior to entering or 

getting underway in this section of the 

RNA. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

June 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Marine Safety 

Unit Baton Rouge, 6041 Crestmount 

Drive, Baton Rouge, LA 70809. Marine 

Safety Unit Baton Rouge 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 Marine Safety 

Unit Baton Rouge between 7:30 a.m. and 

4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lieutenant Todd Peterson, Marine 

Safety Unit Baton Rouge, at (225) 298–

5400. 

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 [CGD08–07–007], 

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 that your submission reached 

us, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope. We will 

consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period. 

We may change this 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 Marine 

Safety Unit Baton Rouge 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 separate notice in the 

Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

From 1999 to 2006 there have been 64 

reported collisions, allisions, or 

groundings on the Lower Mississippi 

River between MM 167.5 and 187.9. 

There have been 21 allisions, 2 barge 

breakaways, 13 collisions and 28 

groundings. Of these 64 casualties, 3 

were categorized by 46 CFR 4 as serious 

marine incidents and 5 as major marine 

casualties. These casualties have 

involved all sectors of the maritime 

industry including deep draft shipping, 

towing vessels, and barge fleets and 

have occurred at high, normal and low 

water conditions. 

A waterways user group 

subcommittee of the Lower Mississippi 

River Waterway Safety Advisory 

Committee (LMRWSAC) examined 

marine casualties on the LMR in the 

vicinity of 81 Mile Point. This 

subcommittee consisted of members of 

the pilots association, towing vessel 

industry, barge fleets and the Coast 

Guard. This subcommittee reviewed the 

location and marine investigation 

associated with each casualty and 

subjectively examined river conditions 

within this RNA. This committee 

determined that existing waterways 

management tools may not be sufficient 

to safely navigate in the vicinity of 81 

Mile Point. Providing position reports to 

VTC New Orleans would allow the 

Coast Guard to track vessels in this 

proposed RNA and provide advice to 

mariners about upcoming traffic in an 

effort to eliminate meeting and 

overtaking scenarios at Eighty-One Mile 

Point. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules 16755 

Discussion of Rule 

Vessels operating within this 

proposed RNA (MM 167.5 to MM 187.9) 

would be required to provide position 

reports to VTC New Orleans at the 

following locations: 

Vessels transiting upriver would 

provide position reports at MM 167.5 

(Sunshine Bridge) and MM 173.7 

(Bringier Point Light). 

Vessels transiting downriver would 

provide position reports at MM 187.9 

(Cos-mar Light) and 183.9 (Wyandotte 

Chemical Dock Lights). 

Vessels getting underway within this 

RNA would provide position reports 

immediately before getting underway 

and at the above locations when 

heading upriver or downriver. 

Fleet tows operating within their fleet 

would not be required to report while 

within the fleet but would provide a 

position report if they left the fleet or 

moved into the channel. Position 

reports would be made on VHF Channel 

63A and would provide the name of the 

vessel, size of tow if applicable 

including number of loads and empties, 

destination, and confirm proper 

operation of their AIS if AIS is required 

under 33 CFR 164.46. At the time of the 

position report, the VTC would advise 

the mariner operating the vessel on 

upcoming traffic. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

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. We expect 

the economic impact of this proposed 

rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. 

The rule does not prohibit transit, but 

merely requires checking in with VTS 

New Orleans utilizing existing 

equipment. The impacts on routine 

navigation are expected to be minimal. 

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 proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This RNA will not have an 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because this rule will not 

obstruct the regular flow of commercial 

vessel traffic conducting business 

within the RNA. It does not require the 

purchase of additional equipment and 

instead utilizes existing VHF 

capabilities already required by other 

laws or regulations. 

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 to Marine 

Safety Unit Baton Rouge 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 proposed rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance; please contact 

LT Todd Peterson, Marine Safety Unit 

Baton Rouge at (225) 298–5400. 

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. It has not been designated by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
16756 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 

M16475.1D 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 proposed rule should be 

categorically excluded, under figure 2–

1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, 

from further environmental 

documentation. This proposed rule fits 

in paragraph (34)(g) because it is a 

regulated navigation area. A preliminary 

‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. Comments on this 

section will be considered before we 

make the final decision whether this 

rule should be categorically excluded 

from further environmental review. 

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; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1(g), 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. Amend § 165.810 by adding 

paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 165.810 Mississippi River, LA-regulated 

navigation area. 

* * * * * 

(g) Movement of vessels in the vicinity 

of Eighty-One Mile Point, Geary LA mm 

167.5–187.9 LMR. (1) Prior to 

proceeding upriver past MM 167.5, 

LMR, Sunshine Bridge, vessels shall 

contact Vessel Traffic Center (VTC) New 

Orleans on VHF Channel 63A to checkin. Vessels must provide name, 

destination, confirm proper operation of 

their automated identification system 

(AIS) if required under 33 CFR 164.46 

and, if applicable, size of tow and 

number of loaded and empty barges. At 

MM 173.7, LMR, Bringier Point Light, 

ascending vessels shall contact VTC 

New Orleans and provide a follow-on 

position check. At both check-in and 

follow-on position check VTC New 

Orleans will advise the vessel on traffic 

approaching Eighty-One Mile Point. 

(2) Prior to proceeding downriver past 

MM 187.9, LMR, COS–MAR Lights, 

vessels shall contact Vessel Traffic 

Center (VTC) New Orleans on VHF 

Channel 63A to check-in. Vessels must 

provide name, destination, confirm 

proper operation of their automated 

identification system (AIS) if required 

under 33 CFR 164.46 and, if applicable, 

size of tow and number of loaded and 

empty barges. At MM 183.9 LMR, 

Wyandotte Chemical Dock Lights, 

descending vessels shall contact VTC 

New Orleans and provide a follow-on 

position check. At both check-in and 

follow-on position check VTC New 

Orleans will advise the vessel on traffic 

approaching Eighty-One Mile Point. 

(3) All vessels getting underway 

between miles 167.5 and 187.9 must 

check-in with VTC New Orleans on 

VHF Channel 63A immediately prior to 

getting underway and must comply with 

the respective ascending and 

descending check-in and follow-on 

points listed in paragraphs (g)(1) and 

(g)(2) above. 

(4) Fleet vessels must check-in with 

VTC New Orleans if they leave their 

respective fleet or if they move into the 

main channel. Fleet vessels are not 

required to check-in if they are 

operating exclusively within their fleet. 

Dated: 23 March 2007. 

J. R. Whitehead, 

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

Eighth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E7–6305 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AU77 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for Ceanothus ophiochilus 

(Vail Lake ceanothus) and 

Fremontodendron mexicanum 

(Mexican flannelbush) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

comment period, notice of availability 

of draft economic analysis, and 

amended Required Determinations. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

reopening of the comment period on the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for two southern California plants: 

Ceanothus ophiochilus (Vail Lake 

ceanothus) and Fremontodendron 

mexicanum (Mexican flannelbush). We 

also announce the availability of the 

draft economic analysis for the 

proposed critical habitat designations 

and an amended Required 

Determinations section of the proposal. 

The draft economic analysis identifies 

potential costs will be $385,000 to 

$659,000 in undiscounted dollars over a 

20-year period as a result of the 

proposed designation of critical habitat, 

including those costs coextensive with 

listing and recovery. Discounted future 

costs are estimated to be $325,000 to 

$559,000 ($22,000 to $38,000 

annualized) at a 3 percent discount rate, 

or $272,000 to $471,000 ($26,000 to 

$44,000 annualized) at a 7 percent 

discount rate. The amended Required 

Determinations section provides our 

determination concerning compliance 

with applicable statutes and Executive 

Orders that we have deferred until the 

information from the draft economic 

analysis of this proposal was available. 

We are reopening the comment period 

to allow all interested parties to 

comment simultaneously on the 

proposed rule, the associated draft 

economic analysis, and the amended 

Required Determinations section. 

DATES: We will accept public comments 

until May 7, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

materials may be submitted to us by any 

one of the following methods: 

(1) E-mail: Please submit electronic 

comments to 

fw8cfwocomments@fws.gov. Include 

‘‘RIN 1018–AU77’’ in the subject line. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS