Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Duwamish Waterway, Seattle, WA, 29871-29873 [E6-7868]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year.
Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
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
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.
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.
Protection of Children
Environment
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.
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 made a preliminary determination
that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical
exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, we believe that
this rule should be categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(32)(e) of the Instruction, from further
environment documentation because
this action relates to the promulgation of
operating regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. Under figure 2–1,
paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, an
‘‘Environmental Analysis Checklist’’ is
not required for this rule. Comments on
this section will be considered before
we make the final decision on whether
to categorically exclude this rule from
further environmental review.
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
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
This 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
17:03 May 23, 2006
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. In § 117.795, redesignate suspended
paragraph (b), and paragraphs (c) and
(d) as paragraphs (c), (d) and (e)
respectively, suspend newly designated
paragraph (c), and add a new paragraph
(b) to read as follows:
§ 117.795 Jamaica Bay and Connecting
Waterways.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The draw of the Beach Channel
railroad bridge shall open on signal;
except that, the draw need not open for
the passage of vessel traffic, 6:45 a.m. to
8:20 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 6:45 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 4, 2006
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–7861 Filed 5–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
Indian Tribal Governments
VerDate Aug<31>2005
29871
Jkt 208001
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD13–06–015]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Duwamish Waterway, Seattle, WA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
temporarily change the operating
regulations for the First Avenue South
dual drawbridges across the Duwamish
Waterway, mile 2.5, at Seattle,
Washington. The proposed change
would enable the bridge owner to keep
the bridges closed during night hours
for a period longer than 60 days. This
would facilitate painting the structure
while properly containing debris and
paint.
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
29872
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 23, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpw), 13th Coast Guard District, 915
Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174–
1067 where the public docket for this
rulemaking is maintained. Comments
and material received from the public,
as well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at the Aids to Navigation and
Waterways Management Branch
between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Austin Pratt, Chief Bridge Section, (206)
220–7282.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
barges, and floating construction
equipment.
The operating regulations currently in
effect for these drawbridges at 33 Code
of Federal Regulations 117.1041 provide
that the spans need not open for the
passage of vessels from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m.
and from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. Monday
through Friday, except for Federal
holidays. The draws shall open at any
time for a vessel of 5,000 gross tons and
over, a vessel towing such a vessel or en
route to take in tow a vessel of that size.
The proposed temporary rule would
enable the bridge owner to paint the
structure after preparing the surfaces of
the steel truss beneath the roadway. All
of this work must be accomplished
within a containment system that
permits no material to fall into the
waterway. This containment system
would have to be modified for drawspan
openings.
Request for Comments
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed closed period is from 9
p.m. to 5 a.m. Sunday through Friday
from July 15 to September 30, 2006.
This operating scheme was authorized
last year for the same purpose and
generated no objections or complaints
from waterway users.
Our previous analysis indicated that
most vessel operators would not be
inconvenienced by the hours of
temporary closure. This conclusion
seems to have been borne out as no
complaints were received during the
previous season of work. Others would
receive enough notice to plan trips at
other hours. Vessel traffic includes
tugboats, barges, derrick barges,
sailboats and motorized recreational
boats including large yachts. The
majority of vessels pass through the
dual bascule spans during hours other
than those proposed.
First Avenue South is a heavily
traveled commuter arterial that serves
Boeing Company plants and other
industrial facilities in south Seattle. The
dual bascule spans need not open for
the passage of vessels from 6 a.m. to 9
a.m. and from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Monday
through Friday. Vessels of 5000 gross
tons or more are exempted from these
closed periods. However, vessels of this
size infrequently ply this reach of the
waterway. The dual spans open an
average of four times a day.
DATES:
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 [CGD13–06–015],
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 the Aids to
Navigation and Waterways Management
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.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Background and Purpose
The dual First Avenue South bascule
bridges provide 32 feet of vertical
clearance above mean high water for the
central 100 feet of horizontal distance in
the channel spans. When the drawspans
are open there is unlimited vertical
clearance for the central 120 feet of the
spans. An adjacent, parallel bascule
bridge was constructed and completed
in 1999. Drawbridge openings are
provided for recreational vessels, large
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 May 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
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. Most vessels will
be able to plan transits to avoid the
closed periods. Most commercial vessel
owners have indicated that they can
tolerate the proposed hours by working
around them. Saturdays will enjoy
normal operations, lessening
inconvenience to sailboats.
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 may affect some
recreational sailboat owners insofar as
they must return by 9 p.m. or wait until
5 a.m. to regain moorage above the
drawbridges. We expect these to be few
in number.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact Austin Pratt,
Chief, Bridge Section, at (206) 220–
7282.
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:51 May 23, 2006
Jkt 208001
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
Information and Regulatory Affairs has
not designated this as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
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. There
are no expected environmental
consequences of the proposed action
that would require further analysis and
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. From 9 p.m. July 15 to 5 a.m.
September 30, 2006, in § 117.1041,
suspend paragraph (a)(1) and add a new
paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
§ 117.1041
*
Duwamish Waterway.
*
*
(a) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00028
*
Fmt 4702
*
Sfmt 4702
29873
(3) From Monday through Friday,
except all Federal holidays but
Columbus Day, the draws of the First
Avenue South Bridges, mile 2.5, need
not be opened for the passage of vessels
from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3 p.m.
to 6 p.m., except during these hours.
The draws shall open at any time for a
vessel of 5000 gross tons and over, a
vessel towing a vessel 5000 gross tons
and over, and a vessel proceeding to
pick up for towing a vessel of 5000 gross
tons and over. From July 15 to
September 30, 2006, Sunday through
Monday, the draws need not be opened
for the passage of any vessels from 9
p.m. to 5 a.m.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 11, 2006.
R.C. Parker,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Acting District
Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–7868 Filed 5–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD09–06–019]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone, Mackinac Bridge and
Straits of Mackinac, Mackinaw City, MI
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing
to establish a permanent security zone
approximately one quarter mile on each
side of the Mackinac Bridge in the
Straits of Mackinac near Mackinaw City,
MI. This security zone will place
navigational and operational restrictions
on all vessels transiting through the
Straits area, under and around the
Mackinac Bridge, located between
Mackinaw City, MI. and St. Ignace, MI.
This rule will be in effect Labor Day of
each year; 6 a.m. to 11:59 p.m.
DATES: Comments and related materials
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 23, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to the Commander,
Sector Sault Ste. Marie, 337 Water
Street, Sault Ste. Marie, MI 49738–9501.
Sector Sault Ste. Marie 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
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 24, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29871-29873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7868]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD13-06-015]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Duwamish Waterway, Seattle, WA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating
regulations for the First Avenue South dual drawbridges across the
Duwamish Waterway, mile 2.5, at Seattle, Washington. The proposed
change would enable the bridge owner to keep the bridges closed during
night hours for a period longer than 60 days. This would facilitate
painting the structure while properly containing debris and paint.
[[Page 29872]]
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 23, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpw), 13th Coast Guard District, 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174-
1067 where the public docket for this rulemaking is maintained.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at the Aids to Navigation and Waterways Management Branch
between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Austin Pratt, Chief Bridge Section,
(206) 220-7282.
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 [CGD13-06-
015], 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
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the Aids to Navigation and
Waterways Management 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.
Background and Purpose
The dual First Avenue South bascule bridges provide 32 feet of
vertical clearance above mean high water for the central 100 feet of
horizontal distance in the channel spans. When the drawspans are open
there is unlimited vertical clearance for the central 120 feet of the
spans. An adjacent, parallel bascule bridge was constructed and
completed in 1999. Drawbridge openings are provided for recreational
vessels, large barges, and floating construction equipment.
The operating regulations currently in effect for these drawbridges
at 33 Code of Federal Regulations 117.1041 provide that the spans need
not open for the passage of vessels from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3
p.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, except for Federal holidays. The
draws shall open at any time for a vessel of 5,000 gross tons and over,
a vessel towing such a vessel or en route to take in tow a vessel of
that size.
The proposed temporary rule would enable the bridge owner to paint
the structure after preparing the surfaces of the steel truss beneath
the roadway. All of this work must be accomplished within a containment
system that permits no material to fall into the waterway. This
containment system would have to be modified for drawspan openings.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed closed period is from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. Sunday through
Friday from July 15 to September 30, 2006. This operating scheme was
authorized last year for the same purpose and generated no objections
or complaints from waterway users.
Our previous analysis indicated that most vessel operators would
not be inconvenienced by the hours of temporary closure. This
conclusion seems to have been borne out as no complaints were received
during the previous season of work. Others would receive enough notice
to plan trips at other hours. Vessel traffic includes tugboats, barges,
derrick barges, sailboats and motorized recreational boats including
large yachts. The majority of vessels pass through the dual bascule
spans during hours other than those proposed.
First Avenue South is a heavily traveled commuter arterial that
serves Boeing Company plants and other industrial facilities in south
Seattle. The dual bascule spans need not open for the passage of
vessels from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through
Friday. Vessels of 5000 gross tons or more are exempted from these
closed periods. However, vessels of this size infrequently ply this
reach of the waterway. The dual spans open an average of four times a
day.
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.
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. Most vessels will be able to plan
transits to avoid the closed periods. Most commercial vessel owners
have indicated that they can tolerate the proposed hours by working
around them. Saturdays will enjoy normal operations, lessening
inconvenience to sailboats.
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 may affect some recreational sailboat
owners insofar as they must return by 9 p.m. or wait until 5 a.m. to
regain moorage above the drawbridges. We expect these to be few in
number.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge
Section, at (206) 220-7282.
[[Page 29873]]
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.
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 Information and Regulatory Affairs has
not designated this as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does
not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
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. There are no expected environmental
consequences of the proposed action that would require further analysis
and 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. From 9 p.m. July 15 to 5 a.m. September 30, 2006, in Sec.
117.1041, suspend paragraph (a)(1) and add a new paragraph (a)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 117.1041 Duwamish Waterway.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(3) From Monday through Friday, except all Federal holidays but
Columbus Day, the draws of the First Avenue South Bridges, mile 2.5,
need not be opened for the passage of vessels from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and
from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m., except during these hours. The draws shall open
at any time for a vessel of 5000 gross tons and over, a vessel towing a
vessel 5000 gross tons and over, and a vessel proceeding to pick up for
towing a vessel of 5000 gross tons and over. From July 15 to September
30, 2006, Sunday through Monday, the draws need not be opened for the
passage of any vessels from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.
* * * * *
Dated: May 11, 2006.
R.C. Parker,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Acting District Commander, Thirteenth Coast
Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-7868 Filed 5-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P