[Federal Register: June 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 37554-37555]
[DOCID:fr30jn06-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER06-758-000, ER06-758-001]

Chambers Cogeneration, Limited Partnership; Notice of Issuance of
Order

June 23, 2006.
    Chambers Cogeneration Limited Partnership (Chambers Cogen) filed an
application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate
schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale
of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates.
Chambers Cogen also requested waivers of various Commission
regulations. In particular, Chambers Cogen requested that the
Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Chambers Cogen.
    On June 21, 2006, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by
Chambers Cogen should file a motion to intervene or protest with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,

in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is July 21, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Chambers Cogen is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations
or liabilities as a guarantor, endorser, surety, or otherwise in
respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance
or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes
of Chambers Cogen, compatible with the public interest, and is
reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Chamber Cogen's issuances of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-10297 Filed 6-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 18, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48394]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22525]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2015-6359; Special Conditions No. 25-633-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-
2A13 Airplanes; Airplane Electronic-System Security Protection From
Unauthorized Internal Access

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects an error that appeared in Docket No.
FAA-2015-6359, Special Conditions No. 25-633-SC, which was published in
the Federal Register on August 22, 2016. The error is an incorrect word
in the title of the final special conditions document.

DATES: The effective date of this correction is October 18, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Varun Khanna, FAA, Airplane and Flight
Crew Interface, AIR-671, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 22, 2016, the Federal Register published a document
designated as Docket No. FAA-2015-6359, Final Special Conditions No.
25-633-SC (81 FR 56474). The document issued special conditions
pertaining to system security to protect against unauthorized access to
digital systems architecture composed of several connected data
networks that will have the capability to allow connectivity of the
passenger-service computer systems to the airplane critical systems and
data networks. As published, the document contained an error in the
title of the special conditions document, stating ``Authorized'' where
``Unauthorized'' is correct.

Correction

    In the final special conditions document (FR Doc. 2016-19994),
published on August 22, 2016 (81 FR 56474), make the following
correction.
    On page 56474, first column, the special conditions title is
corrected to read:
    Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-
2A13 Airplanes; Airplane Electronic-System Security Protection from
Unauthorized Internal Access

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 12, 2017.
Victor Wicklund,
Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-22525 Filed 10-17-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 69644-69646]
[DOCID:fr19no08-83]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650; FRL-8386-4]

Petition for Rulemaking Requesting EPA Regulate Nanoscale Silver
Products as Pesticides; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice makes available for public review and comment a
petition for rulemaking and collateral relief filed by the
International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA) and others. In
general, the petition requests that the Agency classify nanoscale
silver as a pesticide, require formal pesticide registration of all
products containing nanoscale silver, analyze the potential human
health and environmental risks of nanoscale silver, take regulatory
actions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) against existing products that contain nanoscale silver, and
take other regulatory actions under FIFRA as appropriate for nanoscale
silver products. The Agency has determined that the petition raises
issues that potentially affect private and public sector stakeholders.
Through this notice, EPA is asking for public comment on the petition.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 20, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0650. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,

is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in
hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available
either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if
only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm.
S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nathanael R. Martin, Field and
External Affairs Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a
business engaged in the manufacturing of pesticides and other
agricultural chemicals. Potentially affected entities may include, but
are not limited to:
     Pesticide and other agricultural chemical manufacturing
(NAICS 325320), e.g., businesses engaged in the manufacture of
pesticides.
     Antimicrobial pesticides (NAICS 32561)
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, please contact Betty Shackleford, Associate Director,
Antimicrobials Division of the Office of Pesticide Programs at (703)
308-6411 or via email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Summary of the Petition

    The following entities are listed as petitioners in the ``Petition
for Rulemaking Requesting EPA Regulate Nano-Silver Products as
Pesticides'':
    1. International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA)
    2. Center for Food Safety (CFS)
    3. Beyond Pesticides
    4. Friends of the Earth (FOE)
    5. Greenpeace
    6. Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration
    7. Center for Environmental Health (CEH)
    8. Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC)
    9. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP)
    10. Clean Production Action (CPA)
    11. Food & Water Watch
    12. Loka Institute
    13. Center for the Study of Responsive Law (CSRL)
    14. Consumers Union
    The petitioners note the rapid increase in the number of products
containing manufactured or engineered nanoscale materials. They further
point out that scientists have identified that nanoscale materials can
have fundamentally different properties from the non-nanoscale or bulk
forms of the same compounds, and that these unique properties may pose
new environmental and human health risks. Additionally, the petitioners
review EPA's procedural history with respect to nanotechnology and
conclude that the Agency has not provided adequate regulatory oversight
for this emerging technology.
    Due to the rapid commercialization of nanotechnology, potential
environmental and health concerns, and perceived lack of regulatory
oversight, the petitioners request that the EPA undertake the following
actions:
    1. Classify nanoscale silver as a pesticide and require
manufacturers to register nanoscale silver products as pesticides
pursuant to Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Acts (FIFRA).
Furthermore, in reference to nanoscale silver, petitioners request that
EPA clarify that pesticidal intent and public health claims can be both
implicit and explicit, and that manufacturers cannot avoid pesticide
classification (and registration under FIFRA) simply by stripping their
products of labeling.
    2. Determine that nanoscale pesticides, such as nanoscale silver
pesticides, are new pesticidal substances that require new pesticide
registration under FIFRA, with accompanying toxicity testing and risk
assessment specific to nanoscale materials.
    3. Assess the potential human health and environmental risks of
nanoscale silver pursuant to EPA's statutory obligations under FIFRA,
the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), the Endangered Species Act
(ESA), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The
petitioners recommend that EPA analyze existing scientific studies on
the environmental health and safety of nanoscale silver; assess the
potential impacts of nanoscale silver on children and infants; ensure
the protection of threatened and endangered species in connection with
any EPA actions involving nanoscale silver; and assess the environment
impacts of any Agency actions involving nanoscale silver, including
completing a programmatic environmental impact statement.
    4. Take immediate statutory and regulatory action to prohibit the
sale of nanoscale silver products, classifying

these products as illegal pesticide products with unapproved health
benefit claims. In this regard, the petition claims that the nanoscale
silver products currently on the market are in clear violation of
FIFRA. The petition recommends that EPA pursue enforcement actions
against and issue enforcement penalties to those manufacturers and/or
distributors currently selling nanoscale silver products.

III. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Through this notice, the Agency is making the petition submitted by
ICTA et al. available for review and is asking for public comment on
the same. Any public comment received on this petition before the
issuance of this notice will be reviewed and listed in the electronic
docket. Following the review of the petition and any comments received
in response to this notice, EPA will decide how best to respond to the
petition. The petition is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov. To locate this information on the homepage
of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the OPP
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0650. Once the search has located the
docket, clicking on ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents
in the docket related to the petition.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, pesticides and pests, nanotechnology.

    Dated: November 5, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-27204 Filed 11-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


Page 1 of 3 Carol Stangel 01/ 30/ 2004 10: 43 AM To: britt@ cetos. org, cbaker@ gowanco. com, cwbrickey@ aol. com, pbright@ abcbirds. org, screscenzi@ steptoe. com, lelworth@ agcenter. org, ccqc1946@ pacbell. net, Ted. Head@ us. nufarm. com, Skellner@ cpsa. org, glibman@ att. net, lori@ yurok. com, therese. murtagh@ usda. gov, perreault. peg@ epa. gov, pquinn@ theaccordgroup. com, rosenberg@ pestworld. org, rutzs@ doacs. state. fl. us, TroyS@ peta. org, julie. spagnoli. b@ bayer. com, nefcon@ aol. com, warren@ cpda. com, jvroom@ croplifeamerica. org, rmcallister@ croplifeamerica. org, wichterman@ lcmcd. org, eolson@ nrdc. org cc: Jay Ellenberger/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Susan Lewis/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Vivian Prunier/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Richard Dumas/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Margie Fehrenbach/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA Subject: Agenda for PPDC Registration Review Workgroup Meeting Dear Workgroup Member,

We hope you will be able to attend the PPDC Registration Review Workgroup meeting on Monday, February 2, 2004, from 1: 00 pm to 5: 00 pm, in the Fishbowl ( Room 1110), Crystal Mall 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia.

Teleconferencing Teleconferencing is available for Workgroup members who are unable to come to the meeting. The call in number is 1 866 587 0111, and the meeting number is * 1378434* ( please enter the * key before and after the number).

Agenda I. Welcome and Introductions ... Jay Ellenberger and Susan Lewis, EPA II. Review of Minutes from Last Conference Call ... Vivian Prunier, EPA III. Discussion of Five Issues ( see further information below)

What action( s) initiate a pesticide's registration review? Early submission of information. Cost of the registration review program. Benefits of the program. What is a registration review decision? Page 2 of 3 IV. Next Steps Five Issues for Discussion 1. What action( s) initiates a pesticide's registration review? Before expending resources in a pesticide's registration review, the Agency would want to know whether registrants intend to support the pesticide and each of its uses. Other stakeholders might want to know this as well. The Agency is seeking advice on options for getting this type of information up front in a way that is efficient for both the Agency and the public.

Please identify options for initiating a registration review and present the pros and cons of each.

2. Early submission of test data and other information to support a pesticide's registration review. The Agency wants to receive pertinent information early in the registration review process in order to avoid redoing its risk assessments. Such rework delays completion of the pesticide's review and ties up scarce resources.

Please identify issues that registrants and other stakeholders might have regarding " voluntary" submission of test data or other pertinent information.

Please discuss possible approaches to overcome any identified barriers or concerns.

3. Cost of the Registration Review Program. The Agency's initial assessment of the economic impact of the registration review program must accompany the proposed procedural regulations for registration review. These analyses are required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act , as well as other legislation and Executive Orders.

There are a range of options for this program, so the Agency would estimate the costs associated with each in order to make an informed decision.

Please discuss the nature and range of costs that registrants and other stakeholders might incur when this program is implemented.

4. Benefits of the program. What are the benefits of implementing a registration review program and who receives these benefits? There are a range of options for this program, so the Agency would estimate the benefits associated with each in order to make an informed decision.

5. What is a registration review decision? In a pesticide's registration review, the Agency would determine whether a pesticide meets the requirements for registration under FIFRA section 3( c)( 5). Additionally, FIFRA section 3( g)( 2)( A) stipulates that EPA shall use its authority under FIFRA section 3( c)( 2)( B) to require submission of data when such data are necessary for registration review. The workgroup has discussed a number of possible scenarios that might Page 3 of 3 represent the completion of registration review. Identify possible options along with their pros and cons.

Thank you for your continued participation in the PPDC Registration Review Workgroup.

Carol Stangel Communications Officer Special Review and Reregistration Division Office of Pesticide Programs US EPA Phone: 703 308 8007 Fax: 703 308 8005 Email: stangel. carol@ epa. gov


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 12, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17557-17560]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07376]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2016-1086]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Chesapeake Bay, Between Sandy Point and
Kent Island, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing special local regulations for
certain waters of the Chesapeake Bay. This action is necessary to
provide for the safety of life on the navigable waters located between
Sandy Point, Anne Arundel County, MD and Kent Island, Queen Anne's
County, MD, during a paddling event on April 29, 2017. This rulemaking
will prohibit persons and vessels from entering the regulated area
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital
Region or Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7 a.m. on April 29, 2017 through 1
p.m. on April 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being

available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-1086 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ronald Houck, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-
National Capital Region, MD; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On December 13, 2016, ABC Events, Inc. of Arnold, MD notified the
Coast Guard that it will be conducting the Bay Bridge Paddle from 7:30
a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on April 29, 2017. The event will be located
adjacent to Sandy Point State Park at Annapolis, MD, and under and
between the north and south bridges that comprise the William P. Lane,
Jr. (US-50/301) Memorial Bridges, located between Sandy Point, Anne
Arundel County, MD and Kent Island, Queen Anne's County, MD. On
February 14, 2017, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``Special Local Regulation; Chesapeake Bay,
Between Sandy Point and Kent Island, MD'' in the Federal Register (82
FR 10555). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments
on our proposed regulatory action related to this paddle race. During
the comment period that ended March 16, 2017, we received 2 comments.
No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register, because allowing a 30-day period
with respect to this rule would be impracticable due to the date of the
event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1233. The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region has determined that
potential hazards associated with the paddle race on April 29, 2017
will be a safety concern for anyone intending to operate within certain
waters of the Chesapeake Bay between Sandy Point and Kent Island, MD.
The purpose of this rule is to protect event participants, spectators
and transiting vessels on certain waters of the Chesapeake Bay before,
during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received 2 comments on the NPRM published on
February 14, 2017. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this
rule from the text previously proposed in the NPRM.
    Comments were received from the Baltimore Port Alliance Executive
Steering Committee, they stated that the proposed regulated area for
this event would block commercial vessel access to and from the Port of
Baltimore for five hours, and that any restrictions on vessel traffic
in or out of the port could result in a significant economic hardship
for port stakeholders by disrupting committed ship schedules.
Additionally, the committee recommended re-routing the paddle race
course in a manner that would not block the main shipping channel or to
change the date of the paddle race to coincide with the annual Great
Chesapeake Bay Swim event a month later, so that only one blockage of
the main shipping channel would occur.
    The Coast Guard agrees that waterway restrictions, when necessary,
should be as limited in scope and duration. For this event, sufficient
notice has been provided for persons to schedule, coordinate and adjust
their ship schedules. The Coast Guard will work with the port
stakeholders to carefully monitor potential impacts to commercial
vessel movements in the vicinity of the marine event area. It is
impractical to conduct the events concurrently; as the two marine
events are significantly different. The safety of paddlecraft
participants and swimmers both numbering in the hundreds would be
negatively impacted by occupying the same navigable waters. The event
schedule for the Great Chesapeake Bay Swim is dependent upon tidal
current predictions; the possibility exists, should both events be
conducted on the same day, waterway restrictions would last for a
significantly longer period of time having a greater impact on waterway
users.
    Comments were received from an amateur paddler, supporting the
manner the proposed regulation for this event would be enforced. The
paddler indicated the regulation showed prudent judgment and was
carefully considered by the Coast Guard, would enhance safety to event
participants while minimizing restrictions on mariners and would allow
continued recreational access to the Chesapeake Bay by the public.
    The Coast Guard strives to ensure equitable use of federal
waterways like the Chesapeake Bay. During this event the Coast Guard
will only enforce the regulated area during the enforcement period.
    This rule establishes special local regulations from 7 a.m. to 1
p.m. on April 29, 2017, and, if necessary due to inclement weather,
from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. on April 30, 2017. The regulated area will
include all navigable waters of the Chesapeake Bay, adjacent to the
shoreline at Sandy Point State Park and between and adjacent to the
spans of the William P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridges, from shoreline to
shoreline, bounded to the north by a line drawn from the western
shoreline at latitude 39[deg]01'05.23'' N., longitude
076[deg]23'47.93'' W.; thence eastward to latitude 39[deg]01'02.08''
N., longitude 076[deg]22'58.38'' W.; thence southward to latitude
38[deg]59'57.02'' N., longitude 076[deg]23'02.79'' W.; thence eastward
and parallel and 500 yards north of the north bridge span to eastern
shoreline at latitude 38[deg]59'13.70'' N., longitude
076[deg]19'58.40'' W.; and bounded to the south by a line drawn
parallel and 500 yards south of the south bridge span that originates
from the western shoreline at latitude 39[deg]00'17.08'' N., longitude
076[deg]24'28.36'' W.; thence southward to latitude 38[deg]59'38.36''
N., longitude 076[deg]23'59.67'' W.; thence eastward to latitude
38[deg]59'26.93'' N., longitude 076[deg]23'25.53'' W.; thence eastward
to the eastern shoreline at latitude 38[deg]58'40.32'' N., longitude
076[deg]20'10.45'' W., located between Sandy Point and Kent Island, MD.
The duration of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of
vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the event,
currently scheduled to being at 7:30 a.m. and last until 12:30 p.m.
Except for Bay Bridge Paddle participants, no vessel or person will be
permitted to enter the regulated area without obtaining permission from
the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or designated Coast Guard
Patrol Commander.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss
First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 13563
(``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies to
assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and,
if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity.
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs''), directs agencies to reduce regulation
and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new
regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for
elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
not reviewed it.
    As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is
exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's
Memorandum titled ``Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the
Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (February 2, 2017).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size and
duration of the regulated area, which would impact a small designated
area of the Chesapeake Bay for 6 hours. The Coast Guard will issue a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the
status of the regulated area. Moreover, the rule will allow vessels to
seek permission to enter the regulated area, and vessel traffic will be
able to safely transit the regulated area once the COTP or designated
Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems it safe to do so.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    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 rule. 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 person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). 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.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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. If you believe this rule has
implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves implementation of regulations within 33 CFR part 100
applicable to organized marine events on the navigable waters of the
United States that could negatively impact the safety of waterway users
and shore side activities in the event area lasting for 6 hours. The
category of water activities includes but is not limited to sail boat
regattas, boat parades, power boat racing, swimming events, crew
racing, canoe and sail board racing. Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of
Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

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 amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.501T05-1086 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.501T05-1086  Special Local Regulation; Chesapeake Bay,
between Sandy Point and Kent Island, MD.

    (a) Regulated area. The following location is a regulated area: All
navigable waters of the Chesapeake Bay, adjacent to the shoreline at
Sandy Point State Park and between and adjacent to the spans of the
William P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridges, from shoreline to shoreline,
bounded to the north by a line drawn from the western shoreline at
latitude 39[deg]01'05.23'' N., longitude 076[deg]23'47.93'' W.; thence
eastward to latitude 39[deg]01'02.08'' N., longitude 076[deg]22'58.38''
W.; thence southward to latitude 38[deg]59'57.02'' N., longitude
076[deg]23'02.79'' W.; thence eastward and parallel and 500 yards north
of the north bridge span to eastern shoreline at latitude
38[deg]59'13.70'' N., longitude 076[deg]19'58.40'' W.; and bounded to
the south by a line drawn parallel and 500 yards south of the south
bridge span that originates from the western shoreline at latitude
39[deg]00'17.08'' N., longitude 076[deg]24'28.36'' W.; thence southward
to latitude 38[deg]59'38.36'' N., longitude 076[deg]23'59.67'' W.;
thence eastward to latitude 38[deg]59'26.93'' N., longitude
076[deg]23'25.53'' W.; thence eastward to the eastern shoreline at
latitude 38[deg]58'40.32'' N., longitude 076[deg]20'10.45'' W., located
between Sandy Point and Kent Island, MD. All coordinates reference
Datum NAD 1983.
    (b) Definitions. (1) Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital
Region means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National
Capital Region or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty
officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port to act on
his behalf.
    (2) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been designated by the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.
    (3) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast
Guard ensign.
    (4) Participant means all persons and vessels participating in the
Bay Bridge Paddle event under the auspices of the Marine Event Permit
issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander, Coast Guard
Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.
    (c) Special local regulations. (1) The COTP or Coast Guard Patrol
Commander may forbid and control the movement of all vessels and
persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When
hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the
regulated area shall immediately comply with the directions given.
Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the area, citation for
failure to comply, or both. The Coast Guard Patrol Commander may
terminate the event, or the operation of any support vessel
participating in the event, at any time it is deemed necessary for the
protection of life or property.
    (2) Except for participants and vessels already at berth, all
persons and vessels within the regulated area at the time it is
implemented are to depart the regulated area.
    (3) Persons and vessels desiring to transit, moor, or anchor within
the regulated area must first obtain authorization from the Captain of
the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or Coast Guard Patrol
Commander. Prior to the enforcement period, to seek permission to
transit, moor, or anchor within the area, the Captain of the Port
Maryland-National Capital Region can be contacted at telephone number
410-576-2693 or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
During the enforcement period, to seek permission to transit, moor, or
anchor within the area, the Coast Guard Patrol Commander can be
contacted on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) for
direction.
    (4) The Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement
of the regulated area by other Federal, State, and local agencies. The
Coast Guard Patrol Commander and official patrol vessels enforcing this
regulated area can be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16
(156.8 MHz) and channel 22A (157.1 MHz).
    (5) The Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard
District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information
broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event date
and times.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 7 a.m.
to 1 p.m. on April 29, 2017, and, if necessary due to inclement
weather, from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. on April 30, 2017.

    Dated: April 7, 2017.
Lonnie P. Harrison, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-07376 Filed 4-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P