29716 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Issued on June 20, 2018 under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR 1.85. 

Brandye L. Hendrickson, 

Acting Administrator, Federal Highway 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13645 Filed 6–25–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 301 

[REG–132434–17] 

RIN 1545–BO12 

Certain Non-Government Attorneys 

Not Authorized To Participate in 

Examinations of Books and Witnesses 

as a Section 6103(n) Contractor; 

Hearing 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notification of a public hearing 

on notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document provides a 

notification of public hearing on 

proposed regulations relating to section 

7602(a) of the Internal Revenue Code 

relating to administrative proceedings. 

DATES: The public hearing is being held 

on Tuesday, July 31, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. 

The IRS must receive outlines of the 

topics to be discussed at the public 

hearing by Thursday, July 19, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: The public hearing is being 

held in the IRS Auditorium, Internal 

Revenue Service Building, 1111 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20224. Due to building security 

procedures, visitors must enter at the 

Constitution Avenue entrance. In 

addition, all visitors must present a 

valid photo identification to enter the 

building. 

Send Submissions to CC:PA:LPD:PR 

(REG–132434–17), Room 5205, Internal 

Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben 

Franklin Station, Washington, DC 

20044. Submissions may be handdelivered Monday through Friday to 

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–132434–17), 

Couriers Desk, Internal Revenue 

Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20224 or sent 

electronically via the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–132434– 

17). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Concerning the proposed regulations, 

William V. Spatz (202) 317–5461; 

concerning submissions of comments, 

the hearing and/or to be placed on the 

building access list to attend the hearing 

Regina Johnson at (202) 317–6901 (not 

toll-free numbers). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

subject of the public hearing is the 

notice of proposed rulemaking (REG– 

132434–17) that was published in the 

Federal Register on Wednesday, March 

28, 2018 (83 FR 13206). 

The rules of 26 CFR 601.601(a)(3) 

apply to the hearing. Persons who wish 

to present oral comments at the hearing 

that submitted written comments by 

June 26, 2018, must submit an outline 

of the topics to be addressed and the 

amount of time to be devoted to each 

topic by Thursday, July 19, 2018. 

A period of 10 minutes is allotted to 

each person for presenting oral 

comments. After the deadline for 

receiving outlines has passed, the IRS 

will prepare an agenda containing the 

schedule of speakers. Copies of the 

agenda will be made available, free of 

charge, at the hearing or by contacting 

the Publications and Regulations Branch 

at (202) 317–6901 (not a toll-free 

number). 

Because of access restrictions, the IRS 

will not admit visitors beyond the 

immediate entrance area more than 30 

minutes before the hearing starts. For 

information about having your name 

placed on the building access list to 

attend the hearing, see the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

Martin V. Franks, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel, (Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 2018–13695 Filed 6–25–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Mine Safety and Health Administration 

30 CFR Parts 56 and 75 

[Docket No. MSHA–2018–0016] 

RIN 1219–AB91 

Safety Improvement Technologies for 

Mobile Equipment at Surface Mines, 

and for Belt Conveyors at Surface and 

Underground Mines 

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health 

Administration, Labor. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: Mining safety could be 

substantially improved by preventing 

accidents that involve mobile 

equipment at surface coal mines and 

metal and nonmetal mines and belt 

conveyors at surface and underground 

mines. The Mine Safety and Health 

Administration (MSHA) is taking a 

number of actions related to mobile 

equipment and belt conveyors to 

improve miners’ safety, including 

providing technical assistance, 

conducting awareness campaigns, and 

developing best practices and training 

materials. MSHA is also considering the 

role of engineering controls that would 

increase the use of seatbelts, enhance 

equipment operators’ ability to see all 

areas near the machine, warn equipment 

operators of potential collision hazards, 

prevent equipment operators from 

driving over a highwall or dump point, 

and help prevent entanglement hazards 

related to working near moving or reenergized belt conveyors. MSHA is 

seeking information and data on 

engineering controls that could reduce 

the risk of accidents and improve miner 

safety. MSHA is also seeking 

suggestions from stakeholders on: Best 

practices, training materials, policies 

and procedures, innovative 

technologies, and any other information 

they may have to improve safety in and 

around mobile equipment, and working 

near and around belt conveyors. 

MSHA will hold stakeholder meetings 

to provide the mining community an 

opportunity to discuss and share 

information about the issues raised in 

this notice. A separate notice 

announcing stakeholder meetings will 

be published in the Federal Register at 

a later date. 

DATES: Comments must be received or 

postmarked by midnight Eastern 

Daylight Time on December 24, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be 

identified with ‘‘RIN 1219–AB91’’ and 

may be sent to MSHA by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: zzMSHA-comments@

dol.gov. 

• Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards, 

Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th 

Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, 

Virginia 22202–5452. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: 201 12th 

Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, 

Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 

p.m. Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. Sign in at the 

receptionist’s desk on the 4th Floor East, 

Suite 4E401. 

• Fax: 202–693–9441. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include ‘‘RIN 1219–AB91’’ or ‘‘Docket 

No. MSHA 2018–0016.’’ Do not include 

personal information that you do not 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules 29717 

want publicly disclosed. MSHA will 

post all comments without change to 

http://www.regulations.gov and http://

arlweb.msha.gov/currentcomments.asp, 

including any personal information 

provided. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read comments and background 

information, go to http://

www.regulations.gov, or http://

www.msha.gov/currentcomments.asp. 

To review comments and background 

information in person go to MSHA, 

Office of Standards, Regulations, and 

Variances, 201 12th Street South, 

Arlington, Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. 

and 5:00 p.m. EDT Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. Sign in 

at the receptionist’s desk on the 4th 

Floor East, Suite 4E401. 

Email Notification: To subscribe to 

receive an email notification when 

MSHA publishes rulemaking documents 

in the Federal Register, go to https://

www.msha.gov/subscriptions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sheila A. McConnell, Director, Office of 

Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 

MSHA, at mcconnell.sheila.a@dol.gov 

(email), 202–693–9440 (voice), or 202– 

693–9441 (fax). These are not toll-free 

numbers. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Mobile Equipment at Surface Mines 

Mobile equipment used at surface 

coal mines, surface metal and nonmetal 

mines, and the surface areas of 

underground mines is a broad category 

that includes bulldozers, front end 

loaders, service trucks, skid steers, haul 

trucks, and many other types of vehicles 

and equipment. Accidents involving 

mobile equipment have historically 

accounted for a large number of the 

fatalities in mining, especially in metal 

and nonmetal mines. In 2017, for 

example, nearly 40 percent of the 28 

mining fatalities and more than 30 

percent of injuries involved mobile 

equipment. 

Since 2007, 61 miners have been 

killed in accidents involving mobile 

equipment. MSHA conducted an 

investigation of all of these accidents. 

MSHA determined that contributing 

factors in many of these accidents 

included: (1) No seatbelt, seatbelt not 

used, or inadequate seatbelts; (2) larger 

vehicles striking smaller vehicles; and 

(3) equipment operators’ difficulty in 

detecting the edges of highwalls or 

dump points, causing equipment to fall 

from substantial heights. 

Seatbelts 

MSHA has preliminarily determined 

that mobile equipment operators are 

more likely to survive rollover and 

tipping accidents when they are wearing 

a seatbelt. MSHA examined 38 fatal 

accidents that occurred since 2007 

involving mobile equipment in which 

the deceased was not wearing a seatbelt. 

MSHA determined that 35 of the victims 

(92 percent) might have survived had 

they been wearing a seatbelt. The 

Agency believes that engineering 

controls could increase the use of 

seatbelts by equipment operators. For 

example, engineering control devices 

could ensure that mobile equipment 

operators use a seatbelt by affecting 

equipment operation in the event the 

operator does not fasten the seatbelt. 

Other engineering controls could 

increase equipment seatbelt use without 

impeding or halting machine operation. 

These controls include high-visibility 

seatbelt materials and warning devices, 

such as warning lights and audible 

warning signals, that remind the 

equipment operator to fasten the 

seatbelt. Some warning signals stop after 

a period of time; others continue until 

the seatbelt is fastened. Additional 

engineering controls could promote 

seatbelt usage by making equipment 

operation impractical or uncomfortable, 

or by notifying mine management if the 

seatbelt is not used (or not used 

properly). 

Large Equipment Striking Smaller 

Equipment 

There are areas around mobile 

equipment in which the equipment 

operator cannot see other miners, 

equipment, or structures (i.e., ‘‘blind 

areas’’). Mobile equipment size and 

shape and the operator’s cab location 

can each create unique blind areas. 

Blind areas have contributed to mobile 

equipment operators driving over 

highwalls or dump points, colliding 

with other equipment, and striking 

miners. Engineering controls, such as 

collision warning systems and collision 

avoidance systems, could provide 

equipment operators with additional 

information about their surroundings 

and help reduce accidents. These 

systems could provide warnings when 

other vehicles, miners, or structures 

pose a potential collision hazard. 

Collision avoidance systems could 

provide an additional level of safety by 

activating machine controls, such as 

automatic braking, to avoid collisions. 

Autonomous mining systems may 

also have the potential to improve miner 

safety. Autonomous mining systems, 

which are controlled remotely, do not 

require an on-board operator, thereby 

removing the miner from hazardous 

situations. In addition, autonomous 

mining systems are equipped with GPS 

technology and use enhanced safety 

features, such as collision avoidance 

systems, which can indicate the location 

of other nearby equipment and miners, 

thereby reducing striking accidents and 

fatalities. 

Highwalls and Dump Points 

Since 2007, there have been 20 fatal 

accidents in surface coal and metal and 

nonmetal mines involving bulldozer 

operators and haul truck drivers who 

traveled over the edge of the highwall or 

dump point. Systems that integrate 

technologies such as GPS, radar, and 

radio frequency identification tagging 

could help equipment operators better 

identify the edges of highwalls or dump 

points. Other practices, such as ground 

markers and aerial markers, also could 

help equipment operators identify their 

locations relative to the edges of 

highwalls or dump points when 

pushing or dumping material. Devices 

that provide visual, audible, or other 

signals could also warn equipment 

operators of hazards surrounding their 

locations. 

II. Belt Conveyors at Surface and 

Underground Mines 

Since 2007, there have been 17 

fatalities related to working near or 

around belt conveyors, of which 76 

percent were related to miners 

becoming entangled in belt drives, belt 

rollers, and discharge points. Factors 

that contribute to entanglement hazards 

include inadequate or missing guards, 

inadequate or an insufficient number of 

crossovers in strategic locations, and/or 

inappropriate lock out/tag out 

procedures. Systems that can sense a 

miner’s presence in hazardous 

locations; ensure that machine guards 

are properly secured in place; and/or 

ensure machines are properly locked 

out and tagged out during maintenance 

would reduce fatalities. 

IV. Information Request 

MSHA is requesting information from 

the mining community regarding the 

types of engineering controls available, 

how to implement such engineering 

controls, and how these controls could 

be used in mobile equipment and belt 

conveyors to reduce accidents, fatalities 

and injuries. When responding— 

• Address your comments to the topic 

and question number. For example, the 

response to questions regarding 

seatbelts, Question 1, would be 

identified as ‘‘A.1’’. 

• Please provide sufficient detail in 

your responses to enable adequate 

Agency review and consideration. 

Where possible, include specific 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
29718 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

examples to support the rationale for 

your position. 

• Please identify the relevant 

information on which you rely. Include 

experiences, data models, calculations, 

studies and articles, and standard 

professional practices. 

• Please provide specific information 

on the technological and economic 

feasibility of the engineering and 

administrative controls included in this 

notice, as well as any additional 

controls or practices which you may 

suggest. 

MSHA invites comment in response 

to the questions below as well as on 

issues related specifically to the impact 

on small mines. 

A. Seatbelts 

Seat belt interlocks are engineering 

controls that prevent or otherwise affect 

equipment operation. MSHA is 

particularly interested in engineering 

controls that affect equipment operation 

when the seatbelt is not properly 

fastened. 

1. What are the advantages, 

disadvantages, and costs associated with 

a seatbelt interlock system? 

2. Are seatbelt interlock systems 

available that could be retrofitted, and if 

so, onto which types of machines and 

how? What are the costs associated with 

retrofitting machines with these 

systems? 

3. Are some types of mobile 

equipment unsuited for use with 

seatbelt interlock systems, and if so, 

which machines and why? 

4. Reliability is the ability of a system 

to perform repeatedly with the same 

result. Please provide information on 

how to determine the reliability of 

seatbelt interlock systems. 

Some engineering controls encourage 

and promote seatbelt use without 

directly preventing or affecting 

equipment operation. These engineering 

controls include audible and visual 

warning devices, such as lights and 

buzzers/bells that remind equipment 

operators to fasten their seatbelts. 

5. What are the advantages, 

disadvantages, and costs associated with 

these warning devices? 

B. Collision Warning Systems and 

Collision Avoidance Systems 

MSHA is also interested in collision 

warning systems and collision 

avoidance systems that may help 

prevent accidents by decreasing 

equipment blind areas and reducing 

collisions. These systems detect 

obstacles and provide the equipment 

operators with information about their 

location. The installation of the systems 

would likely need to be customized to 

account for variations in height, 

articulation, and other equipment 

design features. Such systems would 

likely also need to have the capability 

to adjust to mining conditions and 

environments such as road conditions, 

weather, and traffic patterns. They 

would also need to be designed and 

installed to minimize distractions such 

as nuisance alarms and unnecessary 

stops, and to be compatible with other 

technologies, such as GPS, radar, radio 

frequency identification tagging, 

electromagnetic systems, cameras, peerto-peer networks, and path prediction 

technologies. 

6. What are the advantages, 

disadvantages, and costs associated with 

collision warning systems and collision 

avoidance systems? 

7. Please provide information on how 

collision warning systems and collision 

avoidance systems can protect miners, 

e.g., warning, stopping the equipment, 

or other protection. Include your 

rationale. Include successes or failures, 

if applicable. 

8. What types of mobile equipment 

can, and should, be equipped with 

collision warning and collision 

avoidance systems? For example, 

systems that work well on haul trucks 

may not work well on other mobile 

equipment; certain types of equipment 

may be more likely to be used near 

smaller vehicles; or some types of 

equipment may have larger blind areas. 

9. Collision warning systems and 

collision avoidance systems may require 

multiple technologies that combine 

positioning/location, obstacle detection, 

path prediction, peer-to-peer 

communication, or alarm functions. 

What combination of technologies 

would be most effective in surface 

mining conditions? Please provide your 

rationale. 

10. Please describe situations, if any, 

in which it would be appropriate to use 

a collision warning system rather than 

a collision avoidance system. 

11. Please describe any differences 

between a surface coal environment and 

a surface metal and nonmetal 

environment that would influence your 

response to the questions above. 

C. Highwall and Dump Points 

Various technologies, such as GPS, 

can be used to provide equipment 

operators better information regarding 

their location in relation to the edge of 

highwalls or dump points. Other 

mechanisms, such as ground markers 

and aerial markers, also could help 

equipment operators identify their 

location when pushing or dumping 

material. 

12. Which technologies or systems 

can prevent highwall and dump point 

overtravel? Please describe the 

advantages, disadvantages, and costs 

associated with these technologies or 

systems. 

13. Many surface mines use GPS on 

equipment for tracking, dispatching, 

and positioning. How can these systems 

be used to provide equipment operators 

better information on their location with 

respect to highwall or dump points? 

14. What are the advantages, 

disadvantages, and costs associated with 

ground and aerial markers? 

D. Autonomous Mobile Equipment 

15. Please identify the types of 

autonomous mobile equipment in use at 

surface mines. 

16. Please describe the advantages 

and disadvantages associated with 

autonomous mobile equipment. 

17. Please provide information related 

to any experience with testing or 

implementing autonomous mobile 

equipment, including costs and benefits. 

E. Belt Conveyors 

18. What technologies are available 

that could provide additional 

protections from accidents related to 

working near or around belt conveyors? 

Can these technologies be used in 

surface and underground mines? 

19. Please provide information related 

to any experience with testing or 

implementing systems that sense a 

miner’s presence in hazardous 

locations; ensure that machine guards 

are properly secured in place; and/or 

ensure machines are properly locked 

out and tagged out during maintenance. 

Please also include information and 

data on the costs and benefits associated 

with these systems. 

F. Training and Technical Assistance 

20. Please provide suggestions on how 

training can increase seatbelt use and 

improve equipment operators’ 

awareness of hazards at the mine site. 

21. Please provide suggestions on how 

training can ensure that miners lock and 

tag conveyor belts before performing 

maintenance work. 

G. Benefits and Costs 

MSHA requests comment on the 

costs, benefits, and the technological 

and economic feasibility of suggested 

engineering controls to improve miners’ 

safety. Your answers to these questions 

will help MSHA evaluate options and 

determine an appropriate course of 

action. 

H. Other Information 

22. Please provide any data or 

information that may be useful to 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules 29719 

MSHA to determine non-regulatory 

initiatives the Agency should explore. 

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811, 813(h). 

David G. Zatezalo, 

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety 

and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13603 Filed 6–25–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2018–0598] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone, Swim Around Charleston; 

Charleston, SC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish a temporary moving safety 

zone during the Swim Around 

Charleston, a swimming race occurring 

on the Wando River, the Cooper River, 

Charleston Harbor, and the Ashley 

River, in Charleston, South Carolina. 

The temporary moving safety zone is 

necessary to protect swimmers, 

participant vessels, spectators, and the 

general public during the event. Persons 

and vessels would be prohibited from 

entering the safety zone unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

Charleston or a designated 

representative. We invite your 

comments on this proposed rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before July 26, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2018–0598 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this proposed 

rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant 

Justin Heck, Sector Charleston Office of 

Waterways Management, Coast Guard; 

telephone (843) 740–3184, email 

Justin.C.Heck@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

E.O. Executive Order 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

Pub. L. Public Law 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

COTP Captain of the Port 

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal 

Basis 

On April 9, 2018, Kathleen Wilson 

notified the Coast Guard that she will be 

sponsoring the Swim Around 

Charleston on September 16, 2018 and 

would impact waters of the Wando 

River, Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, 

and Ashley River, in Charleston, South 

Carolina. The legal basis for the 

proposed rule is the Coast Guard’s 

authority to establish a safety zone is 33 

U.S.C. 1231. The purpose of the 

proposed rule is to ensure safety of life 

on the navigable waters of the Wando 

River, Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, 

and Ashley River, in Charleston, South 

Carolina during Swim Around 

Charleston. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The COTP proposes to establish a 

temporary safety zone on the waters of 

the Wando River, Cooper River, 

Charleston Harbor, and Ashley River, in 

Charleston, South Carolina during Swim 

Around Charleston from 7:45 a.m. to 2 

p.m. on September 16, 2018. 

Approximately 100 swimmers are 

anticipated to participate in the race. 

Persons and vessels desiring to enter, 

transit through, anchor in, or remain 

within the regulated area may contact 

the COTP by telephone at (843) 740– 

7050, or a designated representative via 

VHF radio on channel 16, to request 

authorization. If authorization to enter, 

transit through, anchor in, or remain 

within the regulated area is granted, all 

persons and vessels receiving such 

authorization must comply with the 

instructions of the COTP or a designated 

representative. The COTP will provide 

notice of the safety zone by Local Notice 

to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners, and on-scene designated 

representatives. 

IV. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive Orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on a number of these statutes and 

Executive Orders and we discuss First 

Amendment rights of protestors. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess the costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Executive Order 13771 directs agencies 

to control regulatory costs through a 

budgeting process. This NPRM has not 

been designated a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action,’’ under Executive 

Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and 

pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 

from the requirements of Executive 

Order 13771. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on: (1) The safety zone would 

be enforced for only seven hours; (2) the 

safety zone would move with the 

participant vessels so that once the 

swimmers clear a portion of the 

waterway, the safety zone would no 

longer be enforced in that portion of the 

waterway; (3) although persons and 

vessels would not be able to enter or 

transit through the safety zone without 

authorization from the COTP or a 

designated representative, they would 

be able to operate in the surrounding 

area during the enforcement period; (4) 

persons and vessels would still be able 

to enter or transit through the safety 

zone if authorized by the COTP or a 

designated representative; and (5) the 

COTP would provide advance 

notification of the safety zone to the 

local maritime community by Local 

Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice 

to Mariners. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 

requires Federal agencies to consider 

the potential impact of regulations on 

small entities during rulemaking. 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. 

We have considered the impact of this 

proposed rule on small entities. This 

rule may affect the following entities, 

some of which may be small entities: 

The owner or operators of vessels 

intending to enter, transit through, 

anchor in, or remain within the 

regulated area during the enforcement 

period. For the reasons stated in section 

IV.A. above, this proposed rule would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS