Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VA, 28631-28633 [E7-9838]

Download as PDF 28631 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM’s should contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application procedure. The Proposal The FAA is proposing to amend Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish a low altitude RNAV route, designated T–209, in the vicinity of Augusta, GA. The route would extend between the Colliers, SC, very high frequency omnidirectional range/ tactical air navigation (VORTAC) aid and the EHEJO, GA, navigation fix (located on Federal airway V–154). T– 209 would provide a more direct route for north and southbound traffic and would also establish a published route that ensures clearance from the Bulldog A MOA to assist aircraft navigating around the MOA. This route would enhance the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace for north and southbound IFR aircraft in the vicinity of Augusta, GA. T–209 EHEJO, GA to Colliers, SC [New] EHEJO, GA ..................................................... NASDE, GA ................................................... YASLU, GA ................................................... JAMITA, GA .................................................. Colliers, SC .................................................... * * * * * Issued in Washington, DC, on May 14, 2007. Edith V. Parish, Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. [FR Doc. E7–9773 Filed 5–21–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [CGD05–07–043] jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS RIN 1625–AA08 Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VA Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish special local regulations VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:18 May 21, 2007 Jkt 211001 Low altitude RNAV routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order 7400.9P, dated September 1, 2006 and effective September 15, 2006, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The low altitude RNAV route listed in this document would be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Fix .................................................................. WP ................................................................. WP ................................................................. WP ................................................................. VORTAC ........................................................ Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Proposed Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9P, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated September 1, 2006, and effective September 15, 2006, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6011 Contiguous United States Area Navigation Routes. * (Lat. (Lat. (Lat. (Lat. (Lat. during the ‘‘East Coast Boat Racing Club power boat race’’, a marine event to be held over the waters of the Chesapeake Bay adjacent to Cape Charles, Virginia. 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 on the Chesapeake Bay in the vicinity of Cape Charles Beach, Cape Charles, Virginia during the event. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 21, 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 Inspections and Investigations Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from PO 00000 List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 * * 32°23′26″ 32°32′54″ 32°49′42″ 33°06′41″ 33°42′26″ N., N., N., N., N., * long. long. long. long. long. * 82°05′12″ 82°06′26″ 81°56′52″ 82°00′27″ 82°09′43″ W.) W.) W.) W.) W.) 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, Fifth Coast Guard District, 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 (CGD05–07–043), 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 E:\FR\FM\22MYP1.SGM 22MYP1 28632 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Background and Purpose On August 4, 2007, the East Coast Boat Racing Club of New Jersey will sponsor a power boat race, on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, Virginia. The event will consist of approximately 20 New Jersey Speed Garveys and Jersey Speed Skiffs conducting high-speed competitive races along an oval race course in close proximity to Cape Charles Beach, Cape Charles, Virginia. A fleet of spectator vessels is expected 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 Piankatank River. The temporary special local regulations will be effective from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on August 4, 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. jlentini on PROD1PC65 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:18 May 21, 2007 Jkt 211001 We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the Chesapeake Bay 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 proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in this portion of the Chesapeake Bay adjacent to Cape Charles Beach 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. 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. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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, E:\FR\FM\22MYP1.SGM 22MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules Environment 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. jlentini on PROD1PC65 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 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:18 May 21, 2007 Jkt 211001 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–REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 2. Add a temporary § 100.35–T05–043 to read as follows: § 100.35–T05–043 Charles, Virginia. Chesapeake Bay, Cape (a) Definitions. (1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard who has been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector 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 East Coast Boat Racing Club power boat race under the auspices of a Marine Event Permit issued to the event sponsor and PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 28633 approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads. (4) Regulated area includes the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, along the shoreline adjacent to Cape Charles, Virginia, to and including waters up to 300 yards offshore, parallel with the Cape Charles Beach shoreline in this area. The area is bounded on the south by a line running northwesterly from the Cape Charles shoreline at latitude 37°16′.2″ North, longitude 076°01′28.5″ West, to a point offshore approximately 300 yards at latitude 37°16′3.4″ North, longitude 076°01′36.6″ West, and bounded on the north by a line running northwesterly from the Cape Charles shoreline at latitude 37°16′26.2″ North, longitude 076°01′14″ West, to a point offshore approximately 300 yards at latitude 37°16″28.9″ North, longitude 076°01′24.1″ West. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983. (b) Special local regulations. (1) Except for event participants and persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area. (2) The operator of any vessel in the regulated area shall: (i) Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any Official Patrol. (ii) Proceed as directed by any Official Patrol. (iii) When authorized to transit the regulated area, all vessels shall proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course that minimizes wake near the race course. (c) Effective period. This section will be enforced from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on August 4, 2007. If the race is postponed due to weather, then the temporary special local regulations will be enforced during the same time period the next day, August 5, 2007. Dated: May 11, 2007. Larry L. Hereth, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7–9838 Filed 5–21–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P E:\FR\FM\22MYP1.SGM 22MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 22, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28631-28633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9838]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[CGD05-07-043]
RIN 1625-AA08


Special Local Regulations for Marine Events; Chesapeake Bay, Cape 
Charles, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish special local 
regulations during the ``East Coast Boat Racing Club power boat race'', 
a marine event to be held over the waters of the Chesapeake Bay 
adjacent to Cape Charles, Virginia. 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 on the 
Chesapeake Bay in the vicinity of Cape Charles Beach, Cape Charles, 
Virginia during the event.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 21, 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 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, Fifth 
Coast Guard District, 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 (CGD05-07-
043), 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

[[Page 28632]]

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 rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by 
a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    On August 4, 2007, the East Coast Boat Racing Club of New Jersey 
will sponsor a power boat race, on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, 
Cape Charles, Virginia. The event will consist of approximately 20 New 
Jersey Speed Garveys and Jersey Speed Skiffs conducting high-speed 
competitive races along an oval race course in close proximity to Cape 
Charles Beach, Cape Charles, Virginia. A fleet of spectator vessels is 
expected 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 Piankatank River. The temporary 
special local regulations will be effective from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m. on August 4, 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.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. Although this 
regulation will prevent traffic from transiting a portion of the 
Chesapeake Bay 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 proposed rule would affect the following 
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or 
operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in this portion of 
the Chesapeake Bay adjacent to Cape Charles Beach 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. 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. 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,

[[Page 28633]]

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-REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES

    1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Add a temporary Sec.  100.35-T05-043 to read as follows:


Sec.  100.35-T05-043  Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, Virginia.

    (a) Definitions. (1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a 
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard who has been 
designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector 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 East 
Coast Boat Racing Club power boat race under the auspices of a Marine 
Event Permit issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander, 
Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads.
    (4) Regulated area includes the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, along 
the shoreline adjacent to Cape Charles, Virginia, to and including 
waters up to 300 yards offshore, parallel with the Cape Charles Beach 
shoreline in this area. The area is bounded on the south by a line 
running northwesterly from the Cape Charles shoreline at latitude 
37[deg]16'.2'' North, longitude 076[deg]01'28.5'' West, to a point 
offshore approximately 300 yards at latitude 37[deg]16'3.4'' North, 
longitude 076[deg]01'36.6'' West, and bounded on the north by a line 
running northwesterly from the Cape Charles shoreline at latitude 
37[deg]16'26.2'' North, longitude 076[deg]01'14'' West, to a point 
offshore approximately 300 yards at latitude 37[deg]16''28.9'' North, 
longitude 076[deg]01'24.1'' West. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 
1983.
    (b) Special local regulations. (1) Except for event participants 
and persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, 
no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the regulated area shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any 
Official Patrol.
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any Official Patrol.
    (iii) When authorized to transit the regulated area, all vessels 
shall proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course 
that minimizes wake near the race course.
    (c) Effective period. This section will be enforced from 11:30 a.m. 
to 4:30 p.m. on August 4, 2007. If the race is postponed due to 
weather, then the temporary special local regulations will be enforced 
during the same time period the next day, August 5, 2007.

    Dated: May 11, 2007.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
 [FR Doc. E7-9838 Filed 5-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P