Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River, Detroit, MI, 25624-25627 [E8-10238]
Download as PDF
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
25624
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
any implications these circumstances
may have for a Section 811 rule.
• Consider the following scenario: a
supplier provides a particular type or
formulation of product that cannot be
obtained from other suppliers (not due
to monopolization by the supplier). This
particular product is needed in certain
areas, and is not easily substituted for
by other suppliers’ products. The
Commission seeks comment on whether
the following practice would constitute
a manipulative device or contrivance: if
the supplier sold some of its product to
certain areas but not to other areas, at
a loss or for a profit that is not as great
as it would likely have made in the area
where it did not sell. In answering this
question, commenters are encouraged to
address whether their answers depend
on the supplier’s knowledge or
motivation(s), such as that the supplier
(1) might have had contractual
arrangements elsewhere; (2) might have
anticipated developing more business
elsewhere; (3) might have anticipated
that prices in the particular areas might
go up, making the rest of its supply sold
in those areas more profitable; or (4)
might have taken the foregoing steps for
the express purpose of causing the
prices in those areas to go up.
Commenters are also encouraged to
address whether their answers depend
on how difficult it is to substitute for or
do without the product, and, if so, what
constitutes an unreasonable degree of
difficulty.
• As noted above, market
manipulation by certain firms (Enron
and others) is often cited as a significant
cause of the substantial disruptions in
Western electricity and natural gas
markets in 2000 and 2001. The
Commission seeks comment on the
extent to which such activities,
including but not limited to the
activities described above, may provide
guidance as to what may constitute the
use of a manipulative or deceptive
device or contrivance, in connection
with the purchase or sale of crude oil,
gasoline, or petroleum distillates at
wholesale.
• In light of the electricity market
characteristics identified by the FERC
Staff Report, and the physical
peculiarities of electricity storage and
distribution, the Commission seeks
comment on how relevant this
experience may be to wholesale
petroleum markets, and on whether
(and if so to what extent) this
experience can inform the
Commission’s approach to
distinguishing manipulative or
deceptive devices or contrivances from
legitimate business practices.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
• Does Subtitle B of the EISA impose
any disparate impact on small
businesses? If so, how may this
disparate impact be minimized?
• Describe and, where feasible,
estimate the number of small entities to
which Subtitle B applies.
VII. Conclusion
The Commission will proceed from
this ANPR to a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. The evaluation of
comments submitted in response to this
ANPR will comprise part of the
Commission’s rulemaking process.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–10102 Filed 5–6–08: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–S
COAST GUARD
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0314]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit
River, Detroit, MI
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
establishing a temporary safety zone on
the Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan.
This Zone is intended to restrict vessels
from portions of the Detroit River during
the Red Bull Air Race. This temporary
safety zone is necessary to protect
spectators and vessels from the hazards
associated with air races.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
May 22, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2008–0314 to the Docket
Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of the
following methods:
(1) Online: https://www.regulation.gov.
(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on
the Ground Floor of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202–366–9329.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(4) Fax: 202–493–2251.
LT
Jeff Ahlgren, Waterways Management,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110
Mount Elliot Ave., Detroit, MI 48207,
(313) 568–9580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation (DOT)
to use the Docket Management Facility.
Please see DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’
paragraph below.
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–0314),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you
include your name, mailing address,
and an e-mail address or other contact
information in the body of your
document to ensure that you can be
identified as the submitter. This also
allows us to contact you in the event
further information is needed or if there
are questions. For example, if we cannot
read your submission due to technical
difficulties and you cannot be
contacted; your submission may not be
considered. You may submit your
comments and material by electronic
means, mail, fax, or delivery to the
Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES; but please
submit your comments and material by
only one means. If you submit them by
mail or delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit them by
mail and would like to know that they
reached the Facility, 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.
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time,
click on ‘‘Search for Dockets,’’ and enter
the docket number for this rulemaking
(USCG–2008–0218) in the Docket ID
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Detroit 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.
The safety zone will encompass all
navigable waters of the United States on
the Detroit River, Detroit, MI, bound by
a line extending from a point on land
southwest of Joe Louis Arena at position
42°19.4′ N; 083°3.3′ W, northeast along
the Detroit shoreline to a point on land
at position 42°20.0′ N; 083°1.2′ W,
southeast to the international border
with Canada at position 42°19.8′ N;
083°1.0′ W, southwest along the
international border to position 42°19.2′
N; 083°3.3′ W, and northwest to the
point of origin at position 42°19.4′ N;
083°3.3′ W. (DATUM: NAD 83).
The Captain of the Port will cause
notice of enforcement of the safety zone
established by this section to be made
by all appropriate means to the affected
segments of the public. Such means of
notification will include, but is not
limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners
and Local Notice to Mariners. Likewise,
the Windsor Port Authority intends to
restrict vessel movement on the
Canadian side of the Detroit River. The
exclusionary area on the Canadian side
will be aligned with the east and west
borders of the U.S. safety zone and will
extend to the shoreline along Windsor,
ON. The Captain of the Port will issue
a broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying
the public when enforcement of the
safety zone is terminated.
Background and Purpose
This temporary safety zone is
necessary to ensure the safety of vessels
and the public from hazards associated
with an air race. The Captain of the Port
Detroit has determined air races in close
proximity to watercraft and
infrastructure pose significant risk to
public safety and property. The likely
combination of large numbers of
recreation vessels, airplanes traveling at
high speeds and performing aerial
acrobatics, and large numbers of
spectators in close proximity on the
water could easily result in serious
injuries or fatalities. Establishing a
safety zone around the location of the
race course will help ensure the safety
of persons and property at these events
and help minimize the associated risks.
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.
This determination is based on the
minimal time that vessels will be
restricted from the zone and the zone is
an area where the Coast Guard expects
insignificant adverse impact to mariners
from the zones’ activation.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to
ensure safety of the public and vessels
during the setup, course familiarization,
time trials and race in conjunction with
the Red Bull Air Race. The air race and
associated set-up and removal will
occur between 9 a.m., May 29, 2008 and
6 p.m., June 1, 2008. The safety zone
will be enforced from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
on May 29, 2008 through May 31, 2008,
and from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on June 1,
2008.
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.
box, and click enter. You may also visit
the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12–140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
C. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of all comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review the
Department of Transportation’s Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477), or you may visit https://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25625
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 or anchor in
the above portion of the Detroit River
between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on May 29,
2008 through June 1, 2008.
This safety zone 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 approximately six hours
each day of the race. Additionally, small
entities such as passenger vessels, have
been involved in the planning stages for
this event and have had ample time to
make alternate arrangements with
regards to mooring positions and
business operations during the hours
this safety zone will be in place.
Furthermore, local sailing and yacht
clubs will be notified prior to the event
by Coast Guard Station Belle Isle with
information on what to expect during
the event with the intention of
minimizing interruptions in their
normal business practices. In the event
that this temporary safety zone affects
shipping, commercial vessels may
request permission from the Captain of
the Port Detroit to transit through the
safety zone. The Coast Guard will give
notice to the public via a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners that the regulation is
in effect. Additionally, the COTP will
suspend enforcement of the safety zone
if the event for which the zone is
established ends earlier than the
expected time.
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 LT Jeff
Ahlgren, Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110 Mount
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
25626
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Elliot Ave., Detroit MI, 48207; (313)568–
9580. 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 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.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
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
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty
rights of Native American Tribes.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed
to working with Tribal Governments to
implement local policies and to mitigate
tribal concerns. We have determined
that these regulations and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible.
We have also determined that this
Proposed Rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.
Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have
questions concerning the provisions of
this Proposed Rule or options for
compliance are encouraged to contact
the point of contact listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have 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)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. This
event establishes a safety zone, therefore
paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction
applies.
A preliminary ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ is available in
the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the
final decision on whether this proposed
rule should be categorically excluded
from further environmental review. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, and
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Section 165.T09–0314 is added to
read as follows:
§ 165.T09–0314 Safety Zone; Red Bull Air
Race, Detroit River, Detroit, MI.
(a) Location. The following area is a
temporary safety zone: all U.S. waters of
the Detroit River, Detroit, MI, bound by
a line extending from a point on land
southwest of Joe Louis Arena at position
42°19.4′ N; 083°3.3′ W, northeast along
the Detroit shoreline to a point on land
at position 42°20.0′ N; 083°1.2′ W,
southeast to the international boarder
with Canada at position 42°19.8′ N;
083°1.0′ W, southwest along the
international border to position 42°19.2′
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
N; 083°3.3′ W, and northwest to the
point of origin at position 42°19.4′ N;
083°3.3′ W. (DATUM: NAD 83).
(b) Effective Period. This regulation is
effective from 9 a.m. on May 29, 2008
through 6 p.m. on June 1, 2008. The
safety zone will be enforced daily from
9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on May 29, 2008
through May 31, 2008, and from 9 a.m.
to 6 p.m. on June 1, 2008.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Detroit, or his
designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Detroit or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port is any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer who has been designated by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.
The on-scene representative of the
Captain of the Port will be aboard either
a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary
vessel. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on scene representative may
be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Detroit
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so.
Vessel operators given permission to
enter or operate in the safety zone must
comply with all directions given to
them by the Captain of the Port or his
on-scene representative.
Dated: April 23, 2008.
P.W. Brennan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. E8–10238 Filed 5–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. RM 2007–11]
Definition of Cable System
Copyright Office, Library of
Congress.
ACTION: Termination of rulemaking
proceeding.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Copyright Office
previously sought comment on issues
associated with the definition of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
term ‘‘cable system’’ under the
Copyright Act as well as on the National
Cable and Telecommunications
Association’s request for the creation of
subscriber groups for the purposes of
eliminating the ‘‘phantom signal’’
phenomenon. After reviewing the
record in this proceeding, the Copyright
Office finds that it lacks the statutory
authority to adopt rules sought by the
cable industry. The Copyright Office,
however, clarifies regulatory policy
regarding the application of the 3.75%
fee to phantom signals. This proceeding
is terminated.
Ben
Golant, Assistant General Counsel, and
Tanya M. Sandros, General Counsel,
Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400,
Washington, DC 20024. Telephone:
(202) 707–8380. Telefax: (202) 707–
8366.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Section
111 of the Copyright Act (‘‘Act’’), title
17 of the United States Code (‘‘Section
111’’), provides cable systems with a
statutory license to retransmit a
performance or display of a work
embodied in a primary transmission
made by a television or radio station
licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission (‘‘FCC’’).
Cable systems that retransmit broadcast
signals in accordance with the
provisions governing the statutory
license set forth in Section 111 are
required to pay royalty fees to the
Copyright Office. Payments made under
the cable statutory license are remitted
semi–annually to the Copyright Office
which invests the royalties in United
States Treasury securities pending
distribution of these funds to those
copyright owners who are entitled to
receive a share of the fees.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
In 2007, the Copyright Office
published a Notice of Inquiry (‘‘NOI’’)
seeking comment on issues associated
with the definition of the term ‘‘cable
system’’ under the Copyright Act and
the Copyright Office’s implementing
rules. The Copyright Office also sought
comment on the National Cable and
Telecommunications Association’s
(‘‘NCTA’’) request for the creation of
subscriber groups for the purposes of
eliminating the ‘‘phantom signal’’
phenomenon. 72 FR 70529 (Dec. 12,
2007). The purpose of the NOI was to
solicit input on, and address possible
solutions to, the complex issues
presented when only a subset of a cable
system’s subscriber base receive a
particular distant signal.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25627
II. Background
Section 111(f) of the Copyright Act
defines a ‘‘cable system’’ as:
‘‘a facility, located in any State, Territory,
Trust Territory, or Possession, that in whole
or in part receives signals transmitted or
programs broadcast by one or more television
broadcast stations licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission, and makes
secondary transmissions of such signals or
programs by wires, cables, microwave, or
other communications channels to
subscribing members of the public who pay
for such service. For purposes of determining
the royalty fee under subsection (d)(1)[of
Section 111], two or more cable systems in
contiguous communities under common
ownership or control or operating from one
headend shall be considered one system.’’ 17
U.S.C. 111(f).
In implementing the cable statutory
license provisions of the Copyright Act,
the Copyright Office adopted a
definition of the term ‘‘cable system’’
that replicated the statutory provision.
The Copyright Office, however,
separated the text of the provision into
two parts in order to clarify that a cable
system can be defined in either of two
ways for the purpose of calculating
royalty fees. Thus, the regulatory
definition provides that ‘‘two or more
facilities are considered as one
individual cable system if the facilities
are either: (1) in contiguous
communities under common ownership
or control or (2) operating from one
headend.’’ 37 CFR 201.17(b)(2). The
Copyright Office stated that its
interpretation of the statutory ‘‘cable
system’’ definition was consistent with
Congress’s goal of avoiding the
‘‘artificial fragmentation’’ of systems (a
large system purposefully broken up
into smaller systems) and the
consequent reduction in royalty
payments to copyright owners. See
Compulsory License for Cable Systems,
43 FR 958 (Jan. 5, 1978).
The Copyright Office has, in the past,
recognized certain practical problems
associated with the definition when
cable systems merge. For example, in
1997, the Copyright Office stated that
‘‘[s]o long as there is a subsidy in the
rates for the smaller cable systems, there
will be an incentive for cable systems to
structure themselves to qualify as a
small system.’’ See A Review of the
Copyright Licensing Regimes Covering
Retransmission of Broadcast Signals
(‘‘1997 Report’’) (Aug. 1, 1997) at 45.
The Copyright Office further stated that
although Section 111(f) has worked well
to avoid artificial fragmentation, ‘‘it has
had the result of raising the royalty rates
some cable systems pay when they
merge. This happens because, if the two
systems have different distant signal
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 7, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25624-25627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-10238]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COAST GUARD
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0314]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River, Detroit, MI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a temporary safety zone
on the Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan. This Zone is intended to
restrict vessels from portions of the Detroit River during the Red Bull
Air Race. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect spectators
and vessels from the hazards associated with air races.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 22, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2008-0314 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
(1) Online: https://www.regulation.gov.
(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
(4) Fax: 202-493-2251.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Jeff Ahlgren, Waterways Management,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110 Mount Elliot Ave., Detroit, MI
48207, (313) 568-9580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0314), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you include your name, mailing address, and
an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your
document to ensure that you can be identified as the submitter. This
also allows us to contact you in the event further information is
needed or if there are questions. For example, if we cannot read your
submission due to technical difficulties and you cannot be contacted;
your submission may not be considered. You may submit your comments and
material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket
Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit
your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by
mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/
2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you
submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the
Facility, 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.
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and enter the docket number
for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0218) in the Docket ID
[[Page 25625]]
box, and click enter. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility
in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
C. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit https://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit 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
This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
vessels and the public from hazards associated with an air race. The
Captain of the Port Detroit has determined air races in close proximity
to watercraft and infrastructure pose significant risk to public safety
and property. The likely combination of large numbers of recreation
vessels, airplanes traveling at high speeds and performing aerial
acrobatics, and large numbers of spectators in close proximity on the
water could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities.
Establishing a safety zone around the location of the race course will
help ensure the safety of persons and property at these events and help
minimize the associated risks.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to ensure safety of the public and
vessels during the setup, course familiarization, time trials and race
in conjunction with the Red Bull Air Race. The air race and associated
set-up and removal will occur between 9 a.m., May 29, 2008 and 6 p.m.,
June 1, 2008. The safety zone will be enforced from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on
May 29, 2008 through May 31, 2008, and from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on June 1,
2008.
The safety zone will encompass all navigable waters of the United
States on the Detroit River, Detroit, MI, bound by a line extending
from a point on land southwest of Joe Louis Arena at position
42[deg]19.4' N; 083[deg]3.3' W, northeast along the Detroit shoreline
to a point on land at position 42[deg]20.0' N; 083[deg]1.2' W,
southeast to the international border with Canada at position
42[deg]19.8' N; 083[deg]1.0' W, southwest along the international
border to position 42[deg]19.2' N; 083[deg]3.3' W, and northwest to the
point of origin at position 42[deg]19.4' N; 083[deg]3.3' W. (DATUM: NAD
83).
The Captain of the Port will cause notice of enforcement of the
safety zone established by this section to be made by all appropriate
means to the affected segments of the public. Such means of
notification will include, but is not limited to, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners. Likewise, the Windsor Port
Authority intends to restrict vessel movement on the Canadian side of
the Detroit River. The exclusionary area on the Canadian side will be
aligned with the east and west borders of the U.S. safety zone and will
extend to the shoreline along Windsor, ON. The Captain of the Port will
issue a broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public when
enforcement of the safety zone is terminated.
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.
This determination is based on the minimal time that vessels will
be restricted from the zone and the zone is an area where the Coast
Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the zones'
activation.
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
or anchor in the above portion of the Detroit River between 9 a.m. and
6 p.m. on May 29, 2008 through June 1, 2008.
This safety zone 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 approximately six hours each day of the
race. Additionally, small entities such as passenger vessels, have been
involved in the planning stages for this event and have had ample time
to make alternate arrangements with regards to mooring positions and
business operations during the hours this safety zone will be in place.
Furthermore, local sailing and yacht clubs will be notified prior to
the event by Coast Guard Station Belle Isle with information on what to
expect during the event with the intention of minimizing interruptions
in their normal business practices. In the event that this temporary
safety zone affects shipping, commercial vessels may request permission
from the Captain of the Port Detroit to transit through the safety
zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to the public via a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners that the regulation is in effect. Additionally, the
COTP will suspend enforcement of the safety zone if the event for which
the zone is established ends earlier than the expected time.
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 LT Jeff Ahlgren, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110 Mount
[[Page 25626]]
Elliot Ave., Detroit MI, 48207; (313)568-9580. 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
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
The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American
Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal
Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal
concerns. We have determined that these regulations and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this
Proposed Rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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. Nevertheless, Indian
Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this Proposed
Rule or options for compliance are encouraged to contact the point of
contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
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)(g), of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This event
establishes a safety zone, therefore paragraph (34)(g) of the
Instruction applies.
A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be
considered before we make the final decision on whether this proposed
rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental
review. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Section 165.T09-0314 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T09-0314 Safety Zone; Red Bull Air Race, Detroit River,
Detroit, MI.
(a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all
U.S. waters of the Detroit River, Detroit, MI, bound by a line
extending from a point on land southwest of Joe Louis Arena at position
42[deg]19.4' N; 083[deg]3.3' W, northeast along the Detroit shoreline
to a point on land at position 42[deg]20.0' N; 083[deg]1.2' W,
southeast to the international boarder with Canada at position
42[deg]19.8' N; 083[deg]1.0' W, southwest along the international
border to position 42[deg]19.2'
[[Page 25627]]
N; 083[deg]3.3' W, and northwest to the point of origin at position
42[deg]19.4' N; 083[deg]3.3' W. (DATUM: NAD 83).
(b) Effective Period. This regulation is effective from 9 a.m. on
May 29, 2008 through 6 p.m. on June 1, 2008. The safety zone will be
enforced daily from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on May 29, 2008 through May 31,
2008, and from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on June 1, 2008.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Detroit, or his designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated on-
scene representative.
(3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been
designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-
scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or
his designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so.
Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port or his on-scene representative.
Dated: April 23, 2008.
P.W. Brennan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. E8-10238 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P