Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD, 37019-37021 [E6-10251]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Parts 35 and 37
[Docket Nos. RM05–25–000 and RM05–17–
000]
Preventing Undue Discrimination and
Preference in Transmission Service
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Correction.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document corrects a
paragraph formatting and numbering
error in a notice of proposed rulemaking
that the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission published in the Federal
Register on June 6, 2006. That action
proposed amendments to Commission
Order Nos. 888 and 889.
DATES: Effective Date: June 6, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David D. Withnell, Office of the General
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at (202) 502–8421.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR
Document 06–4904, published on June
6, 2006 (71 FR 32636) make the
following correction:
On page 32695, in column 3,
paragraph nos. 395 and 396 should be
merged into one paragraph and
designated no. 395. Paragraph no. 397
becomes 396 and the subsequent
paragraph numbers are corrected
accordingly. (The corrected sequence
runs from the renumbered paragraph no.
396 to the last paragraph in the
preamble, which will be paragraph no.
499.)
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–10146 Filed 6–28–06; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY: This document corrects a
notice of proposed rulemaking by crossreference to temporary regulations
(REG–111578–06) that was published in
the Federal Register on Thursday, June
1, 2006 (71 FR 31128). The document
contains temporary regulations
concerning the application of section
199 of the Internal Revenue Code,
which provides a deduction for income
attributable to domestic production
activities, to certain transactions
involving computer software.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Handleman or Lauren Ross Taylor, (202)
622–3040 (not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The notice of proposed rulemaking by
cross-reference to temporary regulations
(REG–111578–06) that is the subject of
this correction is under section 199 of
the Internal Revenue Code.
Need for Correction
As published, REG–111578–06
contains an error that may prove to be
misleading and is in need of
clarification.
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the notice of proposed
rulemaking by cross-reference to
temporary regulations (REG–111578–
06), that was the subject of FR Doc. 06–
4827, is corrected as follows:
On page 31129, column 1, in the
signature block, the language ‘‘Mark E.
Mathews,’’ is corrected to read ‘‘Mark E.
Matthews, ’’.
Guy R. Traynor,
Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch,
Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief
Counsel (Procedure and Administration).
[FR Doc. E6–10250 Filed 6–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Coast Guard
Internal Revenue Service
33 CFR Part 100
26 CFR Part 1
[CGD05–06–064]
[REG–111578–06]
RIN 1625–AA08
RIN 1545–BF56
Special Local Regulations for Marine
Events; Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City,
MD
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Computer Software Under Section
199(c)(5)(B); Correction
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed
rulemaking by cross-reference to
temporary regulations.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:10 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
establish special local regulations
during the ‘‘Ocean City Maryland
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37019
Offshore Challenge’’, a power boat race
to be held on the waters of the Atlantic
Ocean adjacent to the shoreline at
Ocean City, MD. 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
regulated area during the power boat
race.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
July 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpi), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia
23704–5004, hand-deliver them to
Room 415 at the same address between
9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays, or fax
them to (757) 391–8149. The
Inspections and Investigations 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, Project Manager,
Inspections and Investigations Branch,
at (757) 398–6204.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (CGD05–06–064),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know they reached us, please enclose
a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change
this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to the address
listed under ADDRESSES explaining why
one would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
37020
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time
and place announced by a later notice
in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On September 10, 2006, the Offshore
Performance Association, Inc. will
conduct the ‘‘Ocean City Maryland
Offshore Challenge’’, on the waters of
the Atlantic Ocean along the shoreline
near Ocean City, MD. The event will
consist of approximately 40 V-hull and
twin-hull inboard hydroplanes racing in
heats counter-clockwise around an oval
race 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 would 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 Atlantic Ocean
adjacent to Ocean City, MD. The
regulated area includes a section of the
Atlantic Ocean approximately two miles
long, and one half mile wide, the course
is approximately 300 yards offshore and
runs parallel with the Ocean City,
Maryland shoreline. The southern
boundary of the regulated area is
adjacent to and due east of 5th Street
and the northern boundary of the area
is adjacent to and due east of 43rd Street
at Ocean City, Maryland. The temporary
special local regulations would be
enforced from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on
September 10, 2006, and would restrict
general navigation in the regulated area
during the power boat race. The Coast
Guard, at its discretion, when practical
would allow the passage of vessels
when races are not taking place. Except
for participants and vessels authorized
by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
no person or vessel would be allowed to
enter or remain in the regulated area
during the enforcement period. These
regulations are needed to control vessel
traffic during the event to enhance the
safety of participants, spectators and
transiting vessels.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:10 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 proposed regulation
would prevent traffic from transiting a
small segment of the Atlantic Ocean
near Ocean City, MD during the event,
the effect of this regulation will not be
significant due to the limited duration
that the regulated area would be
enforced. Extensive advance
notifications would be made to the
maritime community via Local Notice to
Mariners, marine information
broadcasts, area newspapers and local
radio stations, so mariners can adjust
their plans accordingly.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule would affect
the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
this section of the Atlantic Ocean during
the event.
This proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons. This proposed
rule would be in effect for only a limited
period. Although the regulated area
would apply to waters of the Atlantic
Ocean near the Ocean City, Maryland
shoreline, traffic would 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 would be required to
proceed at the minimum speed
necessary to maintain a safe course that
minimizes wake near the race course.
Before the enforcement period, we
would issue maritime advisories so
mariners can adjust their plans
accordingly.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
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.
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:10 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD and Department of
Homeland Security Management
Directive 5100.1, which guides the
Coast Guard in complying with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f),
and have concluded that there are no
factors in this case that would limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under
section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, this rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(h), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Special
local regulations issued in conjunction
with a regatta or marine 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’’ 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37021
2. From 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on
September 10, 2006, add a temporary
§ 100.35–T05–064 to read as follows:
§ 100.35–T05–064
City, MD.
Atlantic Ocean, Ocean
(a) Regulated area. The regulated area
is established for the waters of the
Atlantic Ocean bounded by a line drawn
from a position along the shoreline near
Ocean City, MD at latitude 38°22′01″ N.,
longitude 075°03′56″ W., thence easterly
to latitude 38°21′50″ N., longitude
075°03′28″ W., thence southwesterly to
latitude 38°20′10″ N., longitude
075°04′08″ W., thence westerly to a
position near the shoreline at latitude
38°20′15″ N., longitude 075°04′38″ W.,
thence northerly along the shoreline to
the point of origin. 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.
(3) Participant includes all vessels
participating in the Ocean City,
Maryland Offshore Challenge under the
auspices of the Marine Event Permit
issued to the event sponsor and
approved by Commander, Coast Guard
Sector Hampton Roads.
(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 must stop the vessel
immediately when directed to do so by
any Official Patrol and then proceed
only as directed.
(3) All persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the
Official Patrol.
(4) 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 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
on September 10, 2006.
Dated: June 16, 2006.
L.L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–10251 Filed 6–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 125 (Thursday, June 29, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37019-37021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10251]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD05-06-064]
RIN 1625-AA08
Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Atlantic Ocean,
Ocean City, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish special local
regulations during the ``Ocean City Maryland Offshore Challenge'', a
power boat race to be held on the waters of the Atlantic Ocean adjacent
to the shoreline at Ocean City, MD. 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
regulated area during the power boat race.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before July 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpi), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth,
Virginia 23704-5004, hand-deliver them to Room 415 at the same address
between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays, or fax them to (757) 391-8149. The Inspections and
Investigations 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, Project Manager,
Inspections and Investigations Branch, at (757) 398-6204.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD05-06-
064), 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 address listed under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would
aid this
[[Page 37020]]
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On September 10, 2006, the Offshore Performance Association, Inc.
will conduct the ``Ocean City Maryland Offshore Challenge'', on the
waters of the Atlantic Ocean along the shoreline near Ocean City, MD.
The event will consist of approximately 40 V-hull and twin-hull inboard
hydroplanes racing in heats counter-clockwise around an oval race
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 would 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 Atlantic Ocean adjacent to Ocean
City, MD. The regulated area includes a section of the Atlantic Ocean
approximately two miles long, and one half mile wide, the course is
approximately 300 yards offshore and runs parallel with the Ocean City,
Maryland shoreline. The southern boundary of the regulated area is
adjacent to and due east of 5th Street and the northern boundary of the
area is adjacent to and due east of 43rd Street at Ocean City,
Maryland. The temporary special local regulations would be enforced
from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on September 10, 2006, and would restrict
general navigation in the regulated area during the power boat race.
The Coast Guard, at its discretion, when practical would allow the
passage of vessels when races are not taking place. Except for
participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, no person or vessel would be allowed to enter or remain in
the regulated area during the enforcement period. 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 proposed regulation would prevent traffic from
transiting a small segment of the Atlantic Ocean near Ocean City, MD
during the event, the effect of this regulation will not be significant
due to the limited duration that the regulated area would be enforced.
Extensive advance notifications would be made to the maritime community
via Local Notice to Mariners, marine information broadcasts, area
newspapers and local radio stations, so mariners can adjust their plans
accordingly.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit this section of the Atlantic
Ocean during the event.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
proposed rule would be in effect for only a limited period. Although
the regulated area would apply to waters of the Atlantic Ocean near the
Ocean City, Maryland shoreline, traffic would 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 would be
required to proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe
course that minimizes wake near the race course. Before the enforcement
period, we would 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.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
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.
[[Page 37021]]
Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive
5100.1, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Special local regulations issued in
conjunction with a regatta or marine 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'' 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. From 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on September 10, 2006, add a temporary
Sec. 100.35-T05-064 to read as follows:
Sec. 100.35-T05-064 Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, MD.
(a) Regulated area. The regulated area is established for the
waters of the Atlantic Ocean bounded by a line drawn from a position
along the shoreline near Ocean City, MD at latitude 38[deg]22'01'' N.,
longitude 075[deg]03'56'' W., thence easterly to latitude
38[deg]21'50'' N., longitude 075[deg]03'28'' W., thence southwesterly
to latitude 38[deg]20'10'' N., longitude 075[deg]04'08'' W., thence
westerly to a position near the shoreline at latitude 38[deg]20'15''
N., longitude 075[deg]04'38'' W., thence northerly along the shoreline
to the point of origin. 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.
(3) Participant includes all vessels participating in the Ocean
City, Maryland Offshore Challenge under the auspices of the Marine
Event Permit issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads.
(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 must stop the
vessel immediately when directed to do so by any Official Patrol and
then proceed only as directed.
(3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Official Patrol.
(4) 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 10 a.m.
to 4 p.m. on September 10, 2006.
Dated: June 16, 2006.
L.L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-10251 Filed 6-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P