Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chincoteague Channel, Chincoteague, VA, 19150-19152 [E6-5521]

Download as PDF 19150 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules effective September 15, 2005, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6007 Offshore Airspace Areas * * * * * Control 1234L [Amended] That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within 8 miles west and 6 miles east of the 360°(T)/350°(M) bearing from the St. Paul Island Airport to 14 miles north of the St. Paul Airport, and within 6 miles west and 8 miles east of the 172°(T)/162°(M) bearing from the St. Paul Island Airport to 15 miles south of the St. Paul Island Airport, and that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 73-mile radius of the St. Paul Island Airport, and the airspace extending upward from 1,200 MSL within a 72.8-mile radius of Chignik Airport, AK; and that airspace extending upward from 2,000 feet above the surface within an area bounded by a line beginning at lat. 58°06′57″ N., long. 160°00′00″ W., south along long. 160°00′00″ W. until it intersects the Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center boundary; thence southwest, northwest, north, and northeast along the Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center boundary to lat. 62°35′00″ N., long. 175°00′00″ W.; to lat. 59°59′57″ N., long. 168°00′08″ W.; to lat. 57°45′57″ N., long. 161°46′08″ W.; to the point of beginning. * * * * * Issued in Washington, DC, on April 6, 2006. Edith V. Parish, Manager, Airspace and Rules. [FR Doc. E6–5523 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [CGD05–06–002] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chincoteague Channel, Chincoteague, VA Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern the operation of the SR 175 Bridge, at mile 3.5, at Chincoteague, Virginia. The proposal would allow the bridge to open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and every hour and a half from 6 a.m. to midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., on the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July, the draw need not be opened. The proposed change would reduce vehicular traffic congestion to VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:29 Apr 12, 2006 Jkt 208001 increase public safety and to extend the structural and operational integrity of the movable span while still balancing the needs of marine and vehicular traffic. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander (obr), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704–5004. The Fifth Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Commander (obr), Fifth Coast Guard District between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Heyer, Bridge Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398– 6629. 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, CGD05–06–002, 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 a return receipt, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all submittals 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 Commander (obr), Fifth Coast Guard District 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 The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) owns and operates this swing-type bridge. The current regulation allows the SR 175 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Bridge to open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and on the hour from 6 a.m. to midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last Wednesday and Thursday in July of every year, the draw need not open. The Chincoteague Town Council has requested a change to the existing regulations for the SR 175 Bridge. This proposal is an effort to further reduce traffic congestion for public safety by reducing the number of drawbridge openings; and to extend the structural and operational integrity of the movable span while balancing the needs of mariners and vehicular traffic transiting in and around this seaside resort area. The SR 175 highway is also the principle arterial route that serves as the major evacuation highway in the event of emergencies or tidal flooding. On June 28, 2004, we published a notice of temporary deviation from the regulations and request for comments entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chincoteague Channel, VA’’ in the Federal Register (69 FR 36011). The temporary deviation was in operation to test an alternate drawbridge operation schedule for 90 days and solicit comments from the public. From July 2, 2004 through September 29, 2004, the draw of the bridge opened every two hours on the even hour from 6 a.m. to Midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., on the last Wednesday and Thursday, the draw need not be opened. At all other times, the draw need not open. The Coast Guard received six letters and four petitions commenting on the provisions of the temporary deviation. Several comments from residents of the Town of Chincoteague favored the twohour opening schedule. The commercial vessel owners favored a less restrictive hourly opening schedule. On December 30, 2004, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chincoteague Channel, Chincoteague, VA’’ in the Federal Register (69 FR 78373). The NPRM allowed hourly openings of the draw year-round from 6 a.m. to Midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July of every year, the draw need not be opened. At all other times, the draw need not open. We received six comments on the NPRM. Five comments were from Chincoteague Island residents and the other comment was from Coast Guard (CG) Group Eastern Shore. All favored an hourly opening schedule year round and CG Eastern Shore also suggested the bridge E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM 13APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m. On April 18, 2005, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Chincoteague Channel, Chincoteague, VA’’ in the Federal Register (70 FR 20051). The final rule required the draw to open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and on the hour from 6 a.m. to midnight, except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July of every year, the draw need not be opened. In October 2005, the Chincoteague Town Council adopted a resolution that requested a change in the scheduled openings of the bridge. The resolution details the Town’s concerns based on the following factors: the number of openings have actually increased since the last modification; the boats north of the bridge frequently sail and return one-at-a-time; due to inconsistencies in the openings, the Town has received many motorists’ complaints; and openings on the even hours as needed will not significantly impact the boaters. This proposed change is being requested to make the operation of the SR 175 Bridge more efficient. It will reduce vehicular traffic congestion to increase public safety and to extend the structural and operational integrity of the movable span while still balancing the needs of marine and vehicular traffic. hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.1005 by inserting a new provision to require the draw to open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and limit the required openings of the draw year-round to every one and a half hours from 6 a.m. to midnight, with a closure period from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July of every year. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. We reached this VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:29 Apr 12, 2006 Jkt 208001 conclusion based on the fact that the proposed changes have only a minimal impact on maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Mariners can plan their trips in accordance with the scheduled bridge openings to minimize delays. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the rule only adds minimal restrictions to the movement of navigation, and mariners who plan their transits in accordance with the scheduled bridge openings can minimize delay. 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 (Public Law 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 Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District, (757) 398–6222. 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.). PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 19151 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 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 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 rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 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. E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM 13APP1 19152 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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 hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS 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 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 the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. Regulations For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:29 Apr 12, 2006 Jkt 208001 PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 Stat. 5039. 2. Section 117.1005 is revised to read as follows: § 117.1005 Chincoteague Channel. The draw of the SR 175 Bridge, mile 3.5, at Chincoteague shall open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and every one and a half hours from 6 a.m. to midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July, the draw need not be opened. Dated: March 31, 2006. Larry L. Hereth, Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E6–5521 Filed 4–12–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD05–06–034] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zone; Potomac River, Washington Channel, Washington, DC Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security zone in certain waters of Washington Channel on the Potomac River off Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, DC during the May 25, 2006, U.S. Coast Guard Commandant’s Change of Command ceremony. The security zone is necessary to provide for the security and safety of life and property of event participants, spectators and mariners on U.S. navigable waters during the event. Entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland, or designated representative. 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, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Waterways Management Division, Baltimore, Maryland 21226–1791. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways 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 (CGD05–06–034), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not 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 later notice in the Federal Register. Background and Purpose The ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as continued threats by al Qaeda and other similar organizations to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide, have made it prudent for U.S. ports and waterways to be on a higher state of alert. Due to increased awareness that future terrorist attacks are possible, the Coast Guard as lead federal agency for maritime homeland security, has determined that the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM 13APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19150-19152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5521]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD05-06-002]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chincoteague Channel, 
Chincoteague, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern 
the operation of the SR 175 Bridge, at mile 3.5, at Chincoteague, 
Virginia. The proposal would allow the bridge to open on demand from 
midnight to 6 a.m., and every hour and a half from 6 a.m. to midnight; 
except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., on the last consecutive Wednesday and 
Thursday in July, the draw need not be opened. The proposed change 
would reduce vehicular traffic congestion to increase public safety and 
to extend the structural and operational integrity of the movable span 
while still balancing the needs of marine and vehicular traffic.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 30, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander 
(obr), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-5004. The Fifth Coast Guard 
District maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and 
material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in 
this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of 
this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at 
Commander (obr), Fifth Coast Guard District between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Heyer, Bridge Management 
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398-6629.

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-
002, 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 a return 
receipt, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. 
We will consider all submittals 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 Commander (obr), Fifth Coast Guard 
District 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

    The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) owns and operates 
this swing-type bridge. The current regulation allows the SR 175 Bridge 
to open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and on the hour from 6 a.m. 
to midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last Wednesday and 
Thursday in July of every year, the draw need not open.
    The Chincoteague Town Council has requested a change to the 
existing regulations for the SR 175 Bridge. This proposal is an effort 
to further reduce traffic congestion for public safety by reducing the 
number of drawbridge openings; and to extend the structural and 
operational integrity of the movable span while balancing the needs of 
mariners and vehicular traffic transiting in and around this seaside 
resort area. The SR 175 highway is also the principle arterial route 
that serves as the major evacuation highway in the event of emergencies 
or tidal flooding.
    On June 28, 2004, we published a notice of temporary deviation from 
the regulations and request for comments entitled ``Drawbridge 
Operation Regulations; Chincoteague Channel, VA'' in the Federal 
Register (69 FR 36011). The temporary deviation was in operation to 
test an alternate drawbridge operation schedule for 90 days and solicit 
comments from the public. From July 2, 2004 through September 29, 2004, 
the draw of the bridge opened every two hours on the even hour from 6 
a.m. to Midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., on the last Wednesday 
and Thursday, the draw need not be opened. At all other times, the draw 
need not open.
    The Coast Guard received six letters and four petitions commenting 
on the provisions of the temporary deviation. Several comments from 
residents of the Town of Chincoteague favored the two-hour opening 
schedule. The commercial vessel owners favored a less restrictive 
hourly opening schedule.
    On December 30, 2004, the Coast Guard published a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 
Chincoteague Channel, Chincoteague, VA'' in the Federal Register (69 FR 
78373).
    The NPRM allowed hourly openings of the draw year-round from 6 a.m. 
to Midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive 
Wednesday and Thursday in July of every year, the draw need not be 
opened. At all other times, the draw need not open. We received six 
comments on the NPRM. Five comments were from Chincoteague Island 
residents and the other comment was from Coast Guard (CG) Group Eastern 
Shore. All favored an hourly opening schedule year round and CG Eastern 
Shore also suggested the bridge

[[Page 19151]]

open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m.
    On April 18, 2005, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled 
``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Chincoteague Channel, Chincoteague, 
VA'' in the Federal Register (70 FR 20051). The final rule required the 
draw to open on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and on the hour from 6 
a.m. to midnight, except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive 
Wednesday and Thursday in July of every year, the draw need not be 
opened.
    In October 2005, the Chincoteague Town Council adopted a resolution 
that requested a change in the scheduled openings of the bridge. The 
resolution details the Town's concerns based on the following factors: 
the number of openings have actually increased since the last 
modification; the boats north of the bridge frequently sail and return 
one-at-a-time; due to inconsistencies in the openings, the Town has 
received many motorists' complaints; and openings on the even hours as 
needed will not significantly impact the boaters.
    This proposed change is being requested to make the operation of 
the SR 175 Bridge more efficient. It will reduce vehicular traffic 
congestion to increase public safety and to extend the structural and 
operational integrity of the movable span while still balancing the 
needs of marine and vehicular traffic.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.1005 by inserting a 
new provision to require the draw to open on demand from midnight to 6 
a.m., and limit the required openings of the draw year-round to every 
one and a half hours from 6 a.m. to midnight, with a closure period 
from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in 
July of every year.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits 
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and 
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. We reached this conclusion based 
on the fact that the proposed changes have only a minimal impact on 
maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Mariners can plan their trips 
in accordance with the scheduled bridge openings to minimize delays.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. This proposed rule would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
because the rule only adds minimal restrictions to the movement of 
navigation, and mariners who plan their transits in accordance with the 
scheduled bridge openings can minimize delay.
    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 (Public Law 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 Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge 
Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District, (757) 398-6222. 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 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 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 rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive 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.

[[Page 19152]]

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 
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 the Instruction, from further environmental 
documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

    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; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued 
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.

    2. Section 117.1005 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  117.1005  Chincoteague Channel.

    The draw of the SR 175 Bridge, mile 3.5, at Chincoteague shall open 
on demand from midnight to 6 a.m., and every one and a half hours from 
6 a.m. to midnight; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last 
consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July, the draw need not be 
opened.

    Dated: March 31, 2006.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard 
District.
 [FR Doc. E6-5521 Filed 4-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P