Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL, 16529-16531 [E6-4786]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
proposed rule is categorically excluded,
under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:40 Mar 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Under
figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ are not
required for this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
16529
across Indian Creek, mile 4.0 in MiamiDade County, Florida. This proposed
rule will allow the bridge to remain
closed during certain periods. This
proposed temporary regulation is
needed while the bridge undergoes
rehabilitation. It will require the bridge
to open on a regulated schedule during
the rehabilitation project.
Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
May 15, 2006.
DATES:
§ 117.911 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
Little River to Savannah River.
You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909
SE 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL,
33131, who maintains the public docket
for this rulemaking. Comments and
material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and are available for inspection or
copying at the Seventh Coast Guard
District Bridge Branch, between 7:30
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
*
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ADDRESSES:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–
1(g); Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; section 117.255 also
issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102–
587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. In § 117.911, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
(b) Little River Bridge Intracoastal
Waterway mile 347.3, Horry County,
S.C. The draw of the Little River (S–20)
bridge, mile 347.3 at Horry County will
open as necessary on the hour, twenty
minutes past the hour, and forty
minutes past the hour, from 6 a.m. to 6
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. At all other times, the
bridge will open upon demand.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: March 15, 2006.
D. B. Peterman,
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–4787 Filed 3–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07–06–041]
Mr.
Michael Lieberum, Project Officer,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge
Branch, at (305) 415–6744.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking [CGD07–06–041],
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know if they reached us, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
all comments and material received
during the comment period. We may
change this proposed temporary rule in
view of them.
RIN 1625–AA09
Public Meeting
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek,
Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to the Bridge
Branch 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.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
temporarily change the operating
regulation of the 63rd Street Bridge
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\03APP1.SGM
03APP1
16530
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Background and Purpose
The existing regulations of the 63rd
Street bridge, mile 4.0, Miami-Dade
County is published in 33 CFR 117.5
and requires the span to open on signal.
On January 17, 2006, the owner of the
bridge requested that the Coast Guard
temporarily change the existing
regulations of the 63rd Street Bridge to
allow for rehabilitation in a safe and
efficient manner. The bridge closure
dates detailed below have been
staggered to allow for the movement of
navigation before and after each closure
period.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed temporary rule would
require the draw of the 63rd Street
bridge, mile 4.0 across Indian Creek,
Miami-Dade County, Florida to open as
necessary a single-leaf on the hour from
8 a.m. to 12:10 a.m. and to remain
closed from 12:11 a.m. to 7:59 a.m.
except that from July 14 to July 17,
2006, August 1 to August 4, 2006,
January 10 to January 13, 2007, and
January 29 to February 1, 2007, the
bridge will be closed to navigation.
From June 19 to June 24, July 5 to July
10, December 4 to December 9, and
December 18 to December 23, 2006 the
waterway will remain closed to
navigation except for hourly openings as
necessary between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
The bridge closure dates have been
staggered to allow for the movement of
navigation before and after each closure
period.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed temporary rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office
of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. This proposed
temporary rule would modify the
existing bridge schedule to allow for the
rehabilitation of the bridge and provide
scheduled openings for vessel traffic.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed temporary rule
would have a significant economic
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:40 Mar 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’
comprises small business, 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
temporary rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This proposed temporary rule would
affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: the owners
or operators of vessels needing to transit
from the marinas on the south of the
bridge to the Intracoastal Waterway,
persons intending to drive over the
bridge and nearby business owners.
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 proposed rule would economically
affect it.
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 temporary rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–
121), we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed temporary
rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the
rulemaking. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. 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.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed
temporary 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.
Collection of Information
This proposed temporary 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 temporary rule under that
Order and have determined that it does
not have implications for federalism.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Taking of Private Property
This proposed temporary rule would
not affect 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 temporary 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.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed temporary rule does
not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed
temporary 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
E:\FR\FM\03APP1.SGM
03APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 2006 / Proposed Rules
§ 117.T293
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 temporary rule does
not use technical standards. Therefore,
we did not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed
temporary rule under Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, which guides
the Coast Guard in complying with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f),
and have concluded that there are no
factors in this case that would limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under
section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, this proposed temporary rule
is categorically excluded, under figure
2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction,
from further environmental
documentation. Under figure 2–1,
paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, an
‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’
and a ‘‘Categorical Exclusion
Determination’’ are not required for this
proposed temporary rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g);
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1; section 117.255 also issued under
the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 Stat.
5039.
2. Add § 117.T293 to read as follows:
16:40 Mar 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
Dated: March 15, 2006.
D.B. Peterman,
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–4786 Filed 3–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05–06–014]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Georgetown Channel,
Potomac River, Washington, DC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
establish a temporary security zone on
the waters of the upper Potomac River.
This action is necessary to provide for
the security of a large number of visitors
to the annual July 4th celebration on the
National Mall in Washington, DC. The
security zone will allow for control of a
designated area of the river and
safeguard spectators and high-ranking
officials.
Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 2, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401
Hawkins Point Road, Building 70,
Waterways Management Division,
Baltimore, Maryland 21226–1791. Coast
Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways
DATES:
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Indian Creek.
(a) The draw of the 63rd Street bridge,
mile 4.0 across Indian Creek, MiamiDade County, Florida will open a singleleaf as necessary on the hour from 8
a.m. to 12:10 a.m. and will remain
closed from 12:11 a.m. to 7:59 a.m.
except that the bridge will be closed to
navigation on the following dates: July
14 to July 17, 2006; August 1 to August
4, 2006; January 10 to January 13, 2007;
and January 29 to February 1, 2007.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of
this section, from June 19 to June 24,
July 5 to July 10, December 4 to
December 9, and December 18 to
December 23, 2006 the waterway will be
closed to navigation except for hourly
openings as necessary between 8 a.m. to
6 p.m.
(c) Effective date: This temporary rule
is effective from 8 a.m. on June 19, 2006
through 6 p.m. on February 5, 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16531
Management Division, maintains the
public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and material received from
the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being
available in the docket, will become part
of this docket and will be available for
inspection or copying at Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Waterways
Management Division, between 8 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector
Baltimore, Waterways Management
Division, at telephone number (410)
576–2674 or (410) 576–2693.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (CGD05–06–014),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know that your submission reached
us, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
We may change this proposed rule in
view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Waterways
Management Division, 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 separate notice in the
Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
Due to increased awareness that
future terrorist attacks are possible,
including continued threats against U.S.
interests by Al-Queda and other terrorist
organizations, the Coast Guard as lead
federal agency for maritime homeland
security, has determined that the
Captain of the Port Baltimore must have
the means to be aware of, deter, detect,
intercept, and respond to asymmetric
threats, acts of aggression, and attacks
by terrorists on the American homeland
while still maintaining our freedoms
and sustaining the flow of commerce.
E:\FR\FM\03APP1.SGM
03APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16529-16531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4786]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-06-041]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian
Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating
regulation of the 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0 in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. This proposed rule will allow the bridge to
remain closed during certain periods. This proposed temporary
regulation is needed while the bridge undergoes rehabilitation. It will
require the bridge to open on a regulated schedule during the
rehabilitation project.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 15, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE 1st Avenue, Room 432,
Miami, FL, 33131, who maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and are available for inspection or copying
at the Seventh Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, between 7:30 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Officer,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6744.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD07-06-
041], indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know if
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed temporary rule in view
of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the Bridge Branch 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.
[[Page 16530]]
Background and Purpose
The existing regulations of the 63rd Street bridge, mile 4.0,
Miami-Dade County is published in 33 CFR 117.5 and requires the span to
open on signal.
On January 17, 2006, the owner of the bridge requested that the
Coast Guard temporarily change the existing regulations of the 63rd
Street Bridge to allow for rehabilitation in a safe and efficient
manner. The bridge closure dates detailed below have been staggered to
allow for the movement of navigation before and after each closure
period.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed temporary rule would require the draw of the 63rd
Street bridge, mile 4.0 across Indian Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida
to open as necessary a single-leaf on the hour from 8 a.m. to 12:10
a.m. and to remain closed from 12:11 a.m. to 7:59 a.m. except that from
July 14 to July 17, 2006, August 1 to August 4, 2006, January 10 to
January 13, 2007, and January 29 to February 1, 2007, the bridge will
be closed to navigation.
From June 19 to June 24, July 5 to July 10, December 4 to December
9, and December 18 to December 23, 2006 the waterway will remain closed
to navigation except for hourly openings as necessary between 8 a.m. to
6 p.m.
The bridge closure dates have been staggered to allow for the
movement of navigation before and after each closure period.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed temporary rule is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of
Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This proposed temporary rule
would modify the existing bridge schedule to allow for the
rehabilitation of the bridge and provide scheduled openings for vessel
traffic.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed temporary rule would have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The term ``small entities'' comprises small business, 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
temporary rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. This proposed temporary rule
would affect the following entities, some of which may be small
entities: the owners or operators of vessels needing to transit from
the marinas on the south of the bridge to the Intracoastal Waterway,
persons intending to drive over the bridge and nearby business owners.
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 proposed rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed temporary rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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 temporary 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
temporary 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 temporary rule will not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed temporary rule would not affect 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 temporary 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 temporary rule under Executive Order
13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
might disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed temporary rule does not have tribal implications
under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed temporary 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
[[Page 16531]]
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 temporary rule does not use technical standards.
Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed temporary rule under Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-
4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of
the Instruction. Therefore, this proposed temporary rule is
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. Under figure 2-
1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, an ``Environmental Analysis
Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are not
required for this proposed temporary rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. Add Sec. 117.T293 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.T293 Indian Creek.
(a) The draw of the 63rd Street bridge, mile 4.0 across Indian
Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida will open a single-leaf as necessary
on the hour from 8 a.m. to 12:10 a.m. and will remain closed from 12:11
a.m. to 7:59 a.m. except that the bridge will be closed to navigation
on the following dates: July 14 to July 17, 2006; August 1 to August 4,
2006; January 10 to January 13, 2007; and January 29 to February 1,
2007.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, from June 19 to
June 24, July 5 to July 10, December 4 to December 9, and December 18
to December 23, 2006 the waterway will be closed to navigation except
for hourly openings as necessary between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
(c) Effective date: This temporary rule is effective from 8 a.m. on
June 19, 2006 through 6 p.m. on February 5, 2007.
Dated: March 15, 2006.
D.B. Peterman,
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-4786 Filed 3-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P