Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Rappahannock River, Essex County, Westmoreland County, Layton, VA, 18170-18172 [E7-6778]

Download as PDF 18170 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules imposes other onerous legal notice provisions in the case of a dispute. (4) The creditor demands unreasonable notice from the covered borrower as a condition for legal action. (5) The creditor uses a check or other method of access to a deposit, savings, or other financial account maintained by the covered borrower, or uses the title of a vehicle as security for the obligation, except that, in connection with a consumer credit transaction with an MAPR consistent with § 232.4(b): (i) The creditor may require an electronic fund transfer to repay a consumer credit transaction, unless otherwise prohibited by Regulation E (Electronic Fund Transfers) 12 CFR Part 205; (ii) The creditor may require direct deposit of the consumer’s salary as a condition of eligibility for consumer credit, unless otherwise prohibited by law; or (iii) The creditor may, if not otherwise prohibited by applicable law, take a security interest in funds deposited after the extension of credit in an account established in connection with the consumer credit transaction. (6) The creditor requires as a condition for the extension of consumer credit that the covered borrower establish an allotment to repay the obligation. (7) The covered borrower is prohibited from prepaying the consumer credit or is charged a penalty fee for prepaying all or part of the consumer credit. (b) For purposes of this section, an assignee may not engage in any transaction or take any action that would be prohibited for the creditor. cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS § 232.9 Penalties and remedies. (a) Misdemeanor. A creditor or assignee who knowingly violates 10 U.S.C. 987 as implemented by this part shall be fined as provided in title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. (b) Preservation of other remedies. The remedies and rights provided under 10 U.S.C. 987 as implemented by this part are in addition to and do not preclude any remedy otherwise available under law to the person claiming relief under the statute, including any award for consequential damages and punitive damages. (c) Contract void. Any credit agreement, promissory note, or other contract with a covered borrower which fails to comply with 10 U.S.C. 987 as implemented by this regulation or which contains one or more provisions prohibited under 10 U.S.C. 987 as VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:48 Apr 10, 2007 Jkt 211001 implemented by this regulation is void from the inception of the contract. (d) Arbitration. Notwithstanding 9 U.S.C. 2, or any other Federal or State law, rule, or regulation, no agreement to arbitrate any dispute involving the extension of consumer credit involving a covered borrower pursuant to this part shall be enforceable against any covered borrower, or any person who was a covered borrower when the agreement was made. § 232.10 Servicemembers Civil Relief Act protections unaffected. Nothing in this part may be construed to limit or otherwise affect the applicability of Section 207 and any other provisions of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 527). § 232.11 Effective date and transition. Applicable consumer credit—This part shall only apply to consumer credit that is extended to a covered borrower and consummated on or after October 1, 2007. Dated: April 5, 2007. L.M. Bynum, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DOD. [FR Doc. 07–1780 Filed 4–6–07; 12:20 pm] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [CGD05–07–017] 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 ‘‘2007 Rappahannock River Boaters Association Spring 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 May 11, 2007. PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 Coast Guard 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, Marine Events Coordinator, Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398–6204. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: 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 (CGD05–07–017), 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 30, 2007, the Rappahannock River Boaters Association (RRBA) will sponsor the ‘‘2006 RRBA Spring 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 E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM 11APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 30 2007, and will 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. cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:48 Apr 10, 2007 Jkt 211001 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 30, 2007. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 18171 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 E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM 11APP1 18172 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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. 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. 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. 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: cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS 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 M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:48 Apr 10, 2007 Jkt 211001 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 § 100.35–T05–017 to read as follows: § 100.35–T05–017 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. As used in this section (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. PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on June 30, 2007. Dated: March 26, 2007. Larry L. Hereth, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7–6778 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD05–07–033] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone: Big Timber Creek, Westville, NJ Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary Safety Zone during the ‘‘Westville Parade of Lights’’, an event to be held June 30, 2007. This Safety Zone is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is intended to temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the regulated area within Big Timber Creek. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay, One Washington Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147–4335, hand-deliver them to the same address between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, or fax them to (215) 271–4903. The Sector Delaware Bay, Waterways Management Branch, 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: Nicole Brophy, Project Manager, Waterways Management Branch, at (215) 271–4889. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting E:\FR\FM\11APP1.SGM 11APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 11, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18170-18172]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6778]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[CGD05-07-017]
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 ``2007 Rappahannock River Boaters Association Spring 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 May 11, 2007.

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 Coast Guard 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, 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 (CGD05-07-
017), 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 30, 2007, the Rappahannock River Boaters Association (RRBA) 
will sponsor the ``2006 RRBA Spring 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

[[Page 18171]]

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 30 2007, and will 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 30, 2007. 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

[[Page 18172]]

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 
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this 
case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should 
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (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-T05-017 to read as follows:


Sec.  100.35-T05-017  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[min]30[sec] W., and bounded on the east by a line 
running along longitude 076[deg]56[min]00[sec] W. All coordinates 
reference Datum NAD 1983.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section (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 30, 2007.

    Dated: March 26, 2007.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7-6778 Filed 4-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P