Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Rappahannock River, Essex County, Westmoreland County, Layton, VA, 16525-16527 [E6-4788]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 2006 / Proposed Rules
or determined by the Bureau in any
other manner, including, but not limited
to, threat assessments prepared by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, court
documents, pre-sentence reports, and
similar official documents;
(7) Information relating to past
practice or attempted past practice of
the inmate to communicate messages to
others that, if not intercepted, could
cause harm to the safety, security, or
good order of the institution, the
protection of the public, or national
security; or
(8) The significance of the operational
role the inmate had (such as planning,
directing, executing, or assisting in
actual terrorist acts) or material support
role (such as training, arming,
transporting, recruiting, communicating
for, or providing safe harbor for terrorist
operators) in terrorist or terrorist-related
activities.
(c) Decision authority. If the Warden
deems it necessary, the inmate’s
communications will be limited after
approval by the Regional Director and
the Assistant Director, Correctional
Programs Division, or any of their
respective designees.
(d) Written notice. Inmates designated
for limited communication under this
subpart will receive written notice from
the Warden, or designee, which will:
(1) Explain the specific limitations
imposed and communication privileges
allowed, which should be tailored to the
particular circumstances of the inmate;
(2) Explain the reasons for the
limitations, unless providing such
information would jeopardize the safety
or security of the institution; protection
of the public; or national security; and
(3) Indicate the inmate’s ability to
challenge the decision through the
Bureau’s administrative remedy
program.
(e) Annual review. Individual inmate
limitations will be reviewed annually
from the date of imposition under the
same criteria required for the initial
determination in paragraphs (b) and (c)
of this section. A determination to
renew, modify, or remove the
limitations must be communicated to
the inmate through written notice, as
described in paragraph (d) of this
section. Failure to provide such notice
to the inmate of renewal or modification
of the limitations at least annually from
the date of imposition will result in
expiration of those limitations.
(f) Further Limitations Possible.
Inmates may incur additional
limitations on their communications as
the direct result of abusing or violating
individualized communication limits
imposed under this subpart. Further
limitations for these purposes may only
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:40 Mar 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
occur as part of a temporary disciplinary
sanction pursuant to procedures in 28
CFR part 541 or according to the
procedures in this section for initially
imposing the limitations. Unmonitored
communications with verified attorneys
and consular officers may be further
restricted only as provided in part 501
and 28 CFR part 543. Inmates may also
be subject to disciplinary action or
criminal prosecution.
[FR Doc. E6–4766 Filed 3–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05–06–024]
RIN 1625–AA08
Special Local Regulations for Marine
Events; Rappahannock River, Essex
County, Westmoreland County,
Layton, VA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a
temporary special local regulation for
‘‘2006 Rappahannock River Boaters
Association Spring and Fall Radar
Shootout’’, power boat races to be held
on the waters of the Rappahannock
River near Layton, VA. 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 Rappahannock River
during the event.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 2, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(oax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia
23704–5004, hand-deliver them to
Room 119 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 Coast
Guard Auxiliary and Recreational
Boating Safety 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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16525
a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dennis Sens, Marine Events
Coordinator, Fifth Coast Guard District,
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 (CGD05–06–024),
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 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 3 and 4, 2006; and October
7 and 8, 2006, the Rappahannock River
Boaters Association (RRBA) will
sponsor the ‘‘2006 RRBA Spring and
Fall Radar Shootout’’, on the waters of
the Rappahannock River near Layton,
Virginia. The event will consist of
approximately 35 powerboats
participating in high-speed competitive
races, traveling along a 3-mile strait line
race course. Participating boats will race
individually within the designated
course. A fleet of spectator vessels is
anticipated to gather nearby to view the
competition. Due to the need for vessel
control during 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 Rappahannock
River. The temporary special local
regulations will be enforced from 11:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on June 3 and 4, 2006;
and October 7 and 8, 2006, and will
E:\FR\FM\03APP1.SGM
03APP1
16526
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 2006 / Proposed Rules
restrict general navigation in the
regulated area during the event. Except
for participants and vessels authorized
by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
no person or vessel will be allowed to
enter or remain in the regulated area.
These regulations are needed to control
vessel traffic during the event to
enhance the safety of participants,
spectators and transiting vessels.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
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.
Although this regulation will prevent
traffic from transiting a portion of the
Rappahannock 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 will be
able to transit the regulated area
between heats, when the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do
so.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:40 Mar 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
entities. This rule will affect the
following entities, some of which may
be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
this section of the Rappahannock River
during the event.
This rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the
following reasons. This rule will be in
effect for only a short period, from 11:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on June 3 and 4, 2006;
and October 7 and 8, 2006. Although the
regulated area will apply to a 3 mile
segment of the Rappahannock River
immediately east of Layton, Virginia,
traffic may be allowed to pass through
the regulated area with the permission
of the Coast Guard patrol commander.
In the case where the patrol commander
authorizes passage through the
regulated area during the event, vessels
shall proceed at the minimum speed
necessary to maintain a safe course that
minimizes wake near the race course.
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.
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.
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.
Protection of Children
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
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
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
E:\FR\FM\03APP1.SGM
03APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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
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.
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.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
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:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:57 Mar 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
1. The authority citation for part 100
continues to read as follows:
16527
Coast Guard
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233, Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add a temporary § 100.35–T05–024
to read as follows:
§ 100.35–T05–024 Rappahannock River,
Essex County, Westmoreland County,
Layton, Virginia.
(a) Regulated area. The regulated area
is established for the waters of the
Rappahannock River, adjacent to
Layton, VA, from shoreline to shoreline,
bounded on the west by a line running
along longitude 076°58′30″ W, and
bounded on the east by a line running
along longitude 076°56′00″ W. All
coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.
(b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol
Commander means a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer of the Coast
Guard who has been designated by the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector
Hampton Roads.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel
assigned or approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads
with a commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer on board and displaying a Coast
Guard ensign.
(c) Regulations: (1) Except for persons
or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander, no person or vessel
may enter or remain in the regulated
area.
(2) The operator of any vessel in the
regulated area shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately when
directed to do so by any Official Patrol
and then proceed only as directed.
(ii) All persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the
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.
(d) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. on June 3 and 4, 2006; and 11:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 7 and 8,
2006.
Dated: March 23, 2006.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–4788 Filed 3–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07–06–011]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Little River (S–20) Bridge, Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway Mile 347.3,
Horry County, SC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
change the request to open regulation of
the Little River (S–20) Bridge across the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile
347.3 in Horry County, South Carolina.
This proposed rule will allow the
swingbridge to open as necessary on the
hour, twenty minutes past the hour and
forty minutes past the hour from 6 a.m.
through 6 p.m., Monday through Friday
except Federal holidays. At all other
times, the bridge will open upon
demand. This proposed action should
improve the movement of vehicular
traffic while not unreasonably
interfering with the movement of vessel
traffic.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 2, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909
SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL
33131, who 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 are available for inspection or
copying at the Seventh Coast Guard
District Bridge Branch, between 7:30
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Barry Dragon, Project Officer, Seventh
Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at
(305) 415–6743.
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 [CGD07–06–011],
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
E:\FR\FM\03APP1.SGM
03APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16525-16527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4788]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05-06-024]
RIN 1625-AA08
Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Rappahannock River,
Essex County, Westmoreland County, Layton, VA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a temporary special local regulation
for ``2006 Rappahannock River Boaters Association Spring and Fall Radar
Shootout'', power boat races to be held on the waters of the
Rappahannock River near Layton, VA. 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
Rappahannock River during the event.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 2, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(oax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth,
Virginia 23704-5004, hand-deliver them to Room 119 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 Coast Guard Auxiliary and
Recreational Boating Safety 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 Sens, Marine Events
Coordinator, Fifth Coast Guard District, 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-
024), 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 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 3 and 4, 2006; and October 7 and 8, 2006, the Rappahannock
River Boaters Association (RRBA) will sponsor the ``2006 RRBA Spring
and Fall Radar Shootout'', on the waters of the Rappahannock River near
Layton, Virginia. The event will consist of approximately 35 powerboats
participating in high-speed competitive races, traveling along a 3-mile
strait line race course. Participating boats will race individually
within the designated course. A fleet of spectator vessels is
anticipated to gather nearby to view the competition. Due to the need
for vessel control during 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 Rappahannock River. The
temporary special local regulations will be enforced from 11:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. on June 3 and 4, 2006; and October 7 and 8, 2006, and will
[[Page 16526]]
restrict general navigation in the regulated area during the event.
Except for participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander, no person or vessel will be allowed to enter or
remain in the regulated area. These regulations are needed to control
vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety of participants,
spectators and transiting vessels.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. 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.
Although this regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a
portion of the Rappahannock 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 will be able to transit the regulated area between
heats, when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do so.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit this section of the Rappahannock River during the
event.
This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
rule will be in effect for only a short period, from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. on June 3 and 4, 2006; and October 7 and 8, 2006. Although the
regulated area will apply to a 3 mile segment of the Rappahannock River
immediately east of Layton, Virginia, traffic may be allowed to pass
through the regulated area with the permission of the Coast Guard
patrol commander. In the case where the patrol commander authorizes
passage through the regulated area during the event, vessels shall
proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course that
minimizes wake near the race course. 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
[[Page 16527]]
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
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.
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 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 a temporary Sec. 100.35-T05-024 to read as follows:
Sec. 100.35-T05-024 Rappahannock River, Essex County, Westmoreland
County, Layton, Virginia.
(a) Regulated area. The regulated area is established for the
waters of the Rappahannock River, adjacent to Layton, VA, from
shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the west by a line running along
longitude 076[deg]58'30'' W, and bounded on the east by a line running
along longitude 076[deg]56'00'' W. All coordinates reference Datum NAD
1983.
(b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard who has been
designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads with a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
(c) Regulations: (1) Except for persons or vessels authorized by
the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or
remain in the regulated area.
(2) The operator of any vessel in the regulated area shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any
Official Patrol and then proceed only as directed.
(ii) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the 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.
(d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 11:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on June 3 and 4, 2006; and 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on
October 7 and 8, 2006.
Dated: March 23, 2006.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-4788 Filed 3-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
