Special Local Regulation for Marine Events; Nanticoke River, Sharptown, MD, 15095-15097 [E6-4377]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2) of 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.
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
fact that the State submittal which is the
subject of this rule is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal
regulation was not considered a major
rule.
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 fact that the State submittal, which
is the subject of this rule, is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for
which an analysis was prepared and a
determination made that the Federal
regulation did not impose an unfunded
mandate.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
Dated: March 6, 2006.
Allen D. Klein,
Director, Western Region.
[FR Doc. E6–4360 Filed 3–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05–06–020]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
RIN 1625–AA08
Special Local Regulation for Marine
Events; Nanticoke River, Sharptown,
MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:28 Mar 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
temporary special local regulations
during the ‘‘Bo Bowman Memorial—
Sharptown Regatta’’, a marine event to
be held on the waters of the Nanticoke
River near Sharptown, Maryland. 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 the Nanticoke River during the
event.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
April 26, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(oax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia
23704–5004. The 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 Fifth Coast Guard District
office between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dennis Sens, Project Manager, Auxiliary
and Recreational Boating Safety 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 (CGD05–06–020),
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 Coast
Guard 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15095
Background and Purpose
On June 17 and 18, 2006, the Carolina
Virginia Racing Association will
sponsor the ‘‘Bo Bowman Memorial—
Sharptown Regatta’’, on the waters of
the Nanticoke River at Sharptown,
Maryland. The event will consist of
approximately 100 hydroplanes and
runabouts conducting high-speed
competitive races on the waters of the
Nanticoke River between the Maryland
S.R. 313 Highway Bridge and Nanticoke
River Light 43 (LLN 24175). A fleet of
spectator vessels normally gathers
nearby to view the competition. Due to
the need for vessel control before,
during and after the event, vessel traffic
will be temporarily restricted to provide
for the safety of participants, spectators
and transiting vessels.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish
temporary special local regulations on
specified waters of the Nanticoke River
near Sharptown, Maryland. The
regulated area includes the waters of the
Nanticoke River between the Maryland
S.R. 313 Highway Bridge and Nanticoke
River Light 43 (LLN 24175). The
temporary special local regulations will
be enforced from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.
on June 17 and 18, 2006, and will
restrict general navigation in the
regulated area during the power boat
race. 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 enforcement period. The
Patrol Commander may allow nonparticipating vessels to transit the
regulated area between races, when it is
safe to do so. This regulated area is
needed to control vessel traffic before,
during and after 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. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. Although this
E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM
27MRP1
15096
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
regulation will prevent traffic from
transiting a portion of the Nanticoke
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 notifications that will be made
to the maritime community via the
Local Notice to Mariners, marine
information broadcasts, 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 may 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. This rule would affect 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 Nanticoke
River during the event.
This rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the
following reasons. This rule would be in
effect for only a limited period. Vessel
traffic may transit the regulated area
between heats, when the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do
so. 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:28 Mar 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM
27MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 58 / Monday, March 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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, from further
environmental documentation. Special
local regulations issued in conjunction
with a regatta or marine parade permit
are specifically excluded from further
analysis and documentation under that
section.
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 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
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. Add temporary § 100.35–T05–020
to read as follows:
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
§ 100.35–T05–020
Sharptown, MD.
Dated: March 14, 2006.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–4377 Filed 3–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
Nanticoke River,
(a) 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
Baltimore.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel
assigned or approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
on board and displaying a Coast Guard
ensign.
(3) Participant includes all vessels
participating in the Bo Bowman
Memorial—Sharptown Regatta under
the auspices of the Marine Event Permit
issued to the event sponsor and
approved by Commander, Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore.
(b) Regulated area includes all waters
of the Nanticoke River, near Sharptown,
Maryland, between Maryland S.R. 313
Highway Bridge and Nanticoke River
Light 43 (LLN 24175), bounded by a line
VerDate Aug<31>2005
drawn between the following points:
southeasterly from latitude 38°32′46″ N.,
longitude 075°43′14″ W.; to latitude
38°32′42″ N., longitude 075°43′09″ W.;
thence northeasterly to latitude
38°33′04″ N., longitude 075°42′39″ W.;
thence northwesterly to latitude
38°33′09″ N., longitude 075°42′44″ W.;
thence southwesterly to latitude
38°32′46’’ N., longitude 075°43′14″ W.
All coordinates reference Datum NAD
1983.
(c) Special local regulations. (1)
Except for event participants and
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.
(iii) When authorized to transit the
regulated area, all vessels shall proceed
at the minimum speed necessary to
maintain a safe course that minimizes
wake near the race course.
(c) Effective period. This section will
be effective from 9:30 a.m. on June 17,
to 6:30 p.m. on June 18, 2006.
(d) Enforcement period. It is expected
that this section will be enforced from
9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on June 17 and
18, 2006.
18:28 Mar 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. PTO–T–2005–0014]
RIN 0651–AB56
Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark
Trial and Appeal Board Rules
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) is reopening
the comment period for proposed
changes to certain rules affecting
practice before the Trademark Trial and
Appeal Board that were published in
the Federal Register January 17, 2006.
Interested members of the public are
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15097
invited to submit written comments on
these proposed changes by the new
deadline for comments.
The comment period for the
proposed rule published at 71 FR 2498,
January 17, 2006, originally set to close
on March 20, 2006, is reopened from
March 27, 2006, until May 4, 2006 (45
days beyond the original deadline).
DATES:
Written comments may be
sent by e-mail to
AB56Comments@uspto.gov, or by mail
addressed to Trademark Trial and
Appeal Board, P.O. Box 1451,
Alexandria, Virginia 22313–1451,
marked to the attention of Gerard F.
Rogers. Comments may also be sent by
electronic mail message over the
Internet via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal. See https://www.regulations.gov
for additional instructions on using this
option.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gerard F. Rogers, Administrative
Trademark Judge, Trademark Trial and
Appeal Board, by telephone at (571)
272–4299, or by e-mail addressed to
Gerard.Rogers@uspto.gov, or by
facsimile transmission marked to his
attention and sent to (571) 273–0059.
A notice
of proposed rule making to amend
certain rules governing practice before
the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
was published in the Federal Register
on January 17, 2006 (71 FR 2498). A
number of comments made in response
to that notice suggested that an
extension of the comment period would
be helpful; and some of these
recommended a public hearing. In
addition, the Trademark Public
Advisory Committee has recommended
to the USPTO an extension and a
hearing. The USPTO has decided to
reopen the comment period
(announcement of an extension not
being possible before the scheduled
close of the comment period on March
20, 2006). The USPTO has also decided,
however, that written comments are
preferred over oral comments and
therefore will not schedule a public
hearing. Any comments submitted after
the close of the original comment period
on March 20, 2006, but prior to the date
of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register will be considered. All
comments submitted between January
17, 2006 and May 4, 2006, will be
considered. All comments will be
posted for public viewing on the
Internet via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM
27MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 58 (Monday, March 27, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15095-15097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4377]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05-06-020]
RIN 1625-AA08
Special Local Regulation for Marine Events; Nanticoke River,
Sharptown, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes temporary special local regulations
during the ``Bo Bowman Memorial--Sharptown Regatta'', a marine event to
be held on the waters of the Nanticoke River near Sharptown, Maryland.
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 the Nanticoke River during the event.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before April 26, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(oax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth,
Virginia 23704-5004. The 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 Fifth Coast Guard District
office between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Sens, Project Manager,
Auxiliary and Recreational Boating Safety 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 (CGD05-06-
020), 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 Coast Guard 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
On June 17 and 18, 2006, the Carolina Virginia Racing Association
will sponsor the ``Bo Bowman Memorial--Sharptown Regatta'', on the
waters of the Nanticoke River at Sharptown, Maryland. The event will
consist of approximately 100 hydroplanes and runabouts conducting high-
speed competitive races on the waters of the Nanticoke River between
the Maryland S.R. 313 Highway Bridge and Nanticoke River Light 43 (LLN
24175). A fleet of spectator vessels normally gathers nearby to view
the competition. Due to the need for vessel control before, during and
after the event, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted to
provide for the safety of participants, spectators and transiting
vessels.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish temporary special local
regulations on specified waters of the Nanticoke River near Sharptown,
Maryland. The regulated area includes the waters of the Nanticoke River
between the Maryland S.R. 313 Highway Bridge and Nanticoke River Light
43 (LLN 24175). The temporary special local regulations will be
enforced from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on June 17 and 18, 2006, and will
restrict general navigation in the regulated area during the power boat
race. 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 enforcement period. The Patrol Commander may
allow non-participating vessels to transit the regulated area between
races, when it is safe to do so. This regulated area is needed to
control vessel traffic before, during and after 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. It is not ``significant''
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures
of DHS is unnecessary. Although this
[[Page 15096]]
regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the
Nanticoke 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 notifications that will be
made to the maritime community via the Local Notice to Mariners, marine
information broadcasts, 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 may
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. This rule would affect 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
Nanticoke River during the event.
This rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
rule would be in effect for only a limited period. Vessel traffic may
transit the regulated area between heats, when the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander deems it is safe to do so. 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 (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, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
[[Page 15097]]
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, from further environmental documentation. Special local
regulations issued in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade
permit are specifically excluded from further analysis and
documentation under that section.
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 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 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. Add temporary Sec. 100.35-T05-020 to read as follows:
Sec. 100.35-T05-020 Nanticoke River, Sharptown, MD.
(a) 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 Baltimore.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
(3) Participant includes all vessels participating in the Bo Bowman
Memorial--Sharptown Regatta under the auspices of the Marine Event
Permit issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander, Coast
Guard Sector Baltimore.
(b) Regulated area includes all waters of the Nanticoke River, near
Sharptown, Maryland, between Maryland S.R. 313 Highway Bridge and
Nanticoke River Light 43 (LLN 24175), bounded by a line drawn between
the following points: southeasterly from latitude 38[deg]32'46'' N.,
longitude 075[deg]43'14'' W.; to latitude 38[deg]32'42'' N., longitude
075[deg]43'09'' W.; thence northeasterly to latitude 38[deg]33'04'' N.,
longitude 075[deg]42'39'' W.; thence northwesterly to latitude
38[deg]33'09'' N., longitude 075[deg]42'44'' W.; thence southwesterly
to latitude 38[deg]32'46'' N., longitude 075[deg]43'14'' W. All
coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.
(c) Special local regulations. (1) Except for event participants
and 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.
(iii) When authorized to transit the regulated area, all vessels
shall proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course
that minimizes wake near the race course.
(c) Effective period. This section will be effective from 9:30 a.m.
on June 17, to 6:30 p.m. on June 18, 2006.
(d) Enforcement period. It is expected that this section will be
enforced from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on June 17 and 18, 2006.
Dated: March 14, 2006.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-4377 Filed 3-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
