Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bayou Lafourche, LA, 54946-54948 [E6-15561]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
54946
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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 117.465(a) is revised to
read as follows:
§ 117.465
Lafourche Bayou.
(a) The draws of the following bridges
shall open on signal; except that, from
August 15 through May 31, the draw
need not open for the passage of vessels
Monday through Friday except Federal
holidays from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.; from
2 p.m. to 4 p.m.; and from 4:30 p.m. to
5:30 p.m.:
(1) SR 308 (Golden Meadow) Bridge,
mile 23.9, at Golden Meadow
(2) Galliano Pontoon Bridge, mile
27.8, at Galliano
(3) SR 308 (South Lafourche (Tarpon))
Bridge, mile 30.6, at Galliano
(4) Cote Blanche Pontoon Bridge, mile
33.9, at Cutoff
(5) Cutoff Vertical Lift Bridge, mile
36.3, at Cutoff
(6) SR 310 (Larose Pontoon) Bridge,
mile 39.1, at Larose
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: September 10, 2006.
Joel R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–15558 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD08–06–034]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Bayou Lafourche, LA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
change the regulations governing the
draw of the Valentine Pontoon Bridge
across Bayou Lafourche, mile 44.7, in
Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. The
regulation will allow for the bridge to be
unmanned and remain closed during
hours of infrequent traffic with an
advance notification requirement to
open the bridge.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
November 20, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Sep 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
(dpb), Eighth Coast Guard District, 500
Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana
70130–3310. The Commander, Eighth
Coast Guard District, Bridge
Administration Branch 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 the Bridge
Administration office between 7 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Frank, Bridge Administration
Branch, telephone 504–671–2128.
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 [CGD08–06–034],
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. You may submit a request for
a meeting by writing to Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge
Administration 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 U.S. Coast Guard, at the request
of the Lafourche Parish Council,
proposes to modify the existing
operating schedules of the Valentine
Pontoon Bridge across Bayou Lafourche,
mile 44.7, in Lafourche Parish,
Louisiana. The majority of the bridge’s
openings occur between the hours of 6
a.m. and 6 p.m. The bridge owner
proposes to continue to open the bridge
on signal during these hours and to
open the bridge on signal if at least four
hours advance notification is given
between the hours of 6 p.m. and 6 a.m.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Presently, the draw of the bridge opens
on signal for the passage of traffic.
Several large shipyards are located on
Bayou Lafourche upstream of the bridge.
The Lafourche Parish Council has
contacted these facilities and has
received letters of no objection to the
proposed changes. A recent review of
the bridge tender logs indicates that
approximately 700 vessels transited
through the bridge over the past year.
Approximately 80% of the vessels
transiting though the bridge site did so
between the hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m.
Additionally, it would appear that the
majority of the night time openings for
the bridge are for trawl vessels and they
appear to increase during the months of
May and August. Many of the trawl
vessels appear to transit in clusters and
pass through the bridge site on the same
bridge opening. Presently, it is unclear
as to whether or not a four-hour advance
notification will place an undue burden
on the vessel owners; however, the
regulation will be written so that the
bridge will be required to open on signal
during the advance notification period if
a temporary surge in water traffic
occurs.
Traffic counts were not included as
part of the submittal from the bridge
owner as the request is to reduce the
requirement of having a bridge tender at
the bridge 24 hours a day due to the
limited number of vessel openings that
occur during the hours of 6 p.m. to 6
a.m.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would modify the
existing regulations in 33 CFR 117.465.
The modification to the regulations will
require the bridge owner to open the
bridge on signal from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m.
daily for the passage of vessels. At all
other times, the bridge will open for
signal for the passage of vessels if at
least four hours advance notification is
given. This modification will allow the
bridge owner to reduce their
requirements to have a bridge tender at
the bridge site at all times. The SR 3220
bridge, mile 49.2, at Lockport, is
required to open on signal for the
passage of vessels; except that from 6
p.m. to 10 a.m., the bridge draw shall
open on signal if at least four hours
advance notification is given. As the
next bridge upstream from the Valentine
Bridge already has a more restrictive
regulation established, the new
regulation will only directly affect those
individuals whose vessels or facilities
are located within this five mile stretch
of the waterway. The two largest
commercial facilities have already
submitted letters of no objection to the
proposed changes.
E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM
20SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Included in the regulation will be a
clause similar to that which is included
on the SR 3220 bridge that requires the
bridge owner to open the bridge in less
than four hours for an emergency and to
open the bridge on signal if a temporary
surge in water traffic occurs.
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 is
unnecessary.
Prior to proposing this rule, the Coast
Guard analyzed the bridge usage records
and determined that requiring four
hours notice during off peak periods
would have minimal impact on
commercial vessel traffic. This proposed
rule allows vessels ample opportunity to
transit this waterway during the day and
with minimal advanced notification at
all other times.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
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 affect
the following entities: the owners and
operators of vessels needing to transit
the bridges during the requested closure
periods.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this proposed 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Sep 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 the Eighth
Coast Guard District Bridge
Administration Branch at the address
above. 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 proposed 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54947
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This proposed 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 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.
E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM
20SEP1
54948
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 20, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Environment
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
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, we
believe that this rule should be
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 Determination Check
List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical Exclusion
Determination’’ are not required for this
rule. However, comments on this
section still be considered before the
final rule.
Copyright Office
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
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 § 117.465, paragraphs (b), (c), (d),
(e), and (f) are redesignated paragraphs
(c), (d), (e), (f) and (g). A new paragraph
(b) is added to read as follows:
Lafourche Bayou.
*
*
*
*
(b) The draw of the Valentine bridge,
mile 44.7 at Valentine, shall open on
signal; except that, from 6 p.m. to 6
a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at
least four hours advance notification is
given. During the advance notification
period, the draw shall open on less than
four hours notice for an emergency and
shall open on demand should a
temporary surge in water traffic occur.
*
*
*
*
*
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
*
Dated: September 10, 2006.
Joel R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–15561 Filed 9–19–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Sep 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
[Docket No. RM 2005–5]
Retransmission of Digital Broadcast
Signals Pursuant to the Cable
Statutory License
Copyright Office, Library of
Congress.
ACTION: Notice of Inquiry.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is
seeking comment on copyright issues
associated with the secondary
transmission of digital television
broadcast signals by cable operators
under the Copyright Act.
DATES: Written comments are due
November 6, 2006. Reply comments are
due December 4, 2006. September 20,
2006.
If hand delivered by a
private party, an original and five copies
of a comment or reply comment should
be brought to Library of Congress, U.S.
Copyright Office, 2221 S. Clark Street,
11th Floor, Arlington, VA. 22202,
between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. The
envelope should be addressed as
follows: Office of the General Counsel,
U.S. Copyright Office.
If delivered by a commercial courier,
an original and five copies of a comment
or reply comment must be delivered to
the Congressional Courier Acceptance
Site (‘‘CCAS’’) located at 2nd and D
Streets, NE, Washington, D.C. between
8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. The envelope
should be addressed as follows: Office
of the General Counsel, U.S. Copyright
Office, LM 430, James Madison
Building, 101 Independence Avenue,
SE, Washington, DC. Please note that
CCAS will not accept delivery by means
of overnight delivery services such as
Federal Express, United Parcel Service
or DHL.
If sent by mail (including overnight
delivery using U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail), an original and five
copies of a comment or reply comment
should be addressed to U.S. Copyright
Office, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box
70400, Southwest Station, Washington,
DC 20024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Golant, Senior Attorney, and Tanya M.
Sandros, Associate General Counsel,
Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400,
Southwest Station, Washington, DC
20024. Telephone: (202) 707–8380.
Telefax: (202) 707–8366.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
111 of the Copyright Act (‘‘Act’’), title
ADDRESSES:
Bridges.
§ 117.465
37 CFR Part 201
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17 of the United States Code (‘‘Section
111’’) provides cable systems with a
statutory license to retransmit a
performance or display of a work
embodied in a primary transmission
made by a television station licensed by
the Federal Communications
Commission (‘‘FCC’’). Cable systems
that retransmit broadcast signals in
accordance with the provisions
governing the statutory license set forth
in Section 111 are required to pay
royalty fees to the Copyright Office.
Payments made under the cable
statutory license are remitted semi–
annually to the Copyright Office which
invests the royalties in United States
Treasury securities pending distribution
of these funds to those copyright owners
who are entitled to receive a share of the
fees.
The Motion Picture Association of
America, Inc. (‘‘MPAA’’), its member
companies and other producers and/or
distributors of movies, series and
specials broadcast by television stations
(‘‘Program Suppliers’’) and the Office of
the Commissioner of Baseball, the
National Basketball Association, the
National Football League, the National
Collegiate Athletic Association, the
National Hockey League and the
Women’s National Basketball
Association (‘‘Joint Sports Claimants’’ or
‘‘JSC’’) (collectively, ‘‘Copyright
Owners’’) have requested that the
Copyright Office commence a
rulemaking to clarify the applicability of
existing Copyright Office rules to the
retransmission of digital broadcast
signals under the statutory license set
forth in Section 111 of the Copyright
Act.
The regulatory actions requested by
Copyright Owners are properly within
the authority of the Copyright Office. 17
U.S.C.111(d) and 702. However, the
retransmission of digital broadcast
signals under Section 111 raises many
issues, some of which require further
elucidation before amending Section
201.17 of title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (‘‘CFR’’ or ‘‘Section
201.17’’) and the associated cable
Statement of Account forms (‘‘SOAs’’).
We therefore initiate this Notice of
Inquiry (‘‘NOI’’) to address the matters
raised by the Copyright Owners’
Petition for Rulemaking1and to seek
comment on other possible changes to
the Copyright Office’s existing rules and
cable SOA forms.
1 The petition and the attachments may be viewed
on the Copyright Office website at: https://
copyright.gov/docs/cable/digitalsignals.pdf and
https://copyright.gov/docs/cable/digitalsignalsattachments.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM
20SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 20, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54946-54948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15561]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD08-06-034]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bayou Lafourche, LA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations governing
the draw of the Valentine Pontoon Bridge across Bayou Lafourche, mile
44.7, in Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. The regulation will allow for the
bridge to be unmanned and remain closed during hours of infrequent
traffic with an advance notification requirement to open the bridge.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before November 20, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpb), Eighth Coast Guard District, 500 Poydras Street, New Orleans,
Louisiana 70130-3310. The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District,
Bridge Administration Branch 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 the Bridge Administration office between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Frank, Bridge Administration
Branch, telephone 504-671-2128.
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 [CGD08-06-
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
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. You may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
District, Bridge Administration 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 U.S. Coast Guard, at the request of the Lafourche Parish
Council, proposes to modify the existing operating schedules of the
Valentine Pontoon Bridge across Bayou Lafourche, mile 44.7, in
Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. The majority of the bridge's openings
occur between the hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. The bridge owner proposes
to continue to open the bridge on signal during these hours and to open
the bridge on signal if at least four hours advance notification is
given between the hours of 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. Presently, the draw of the
bridge opens on signal for the passage of traffic.
Several large shipyards are located on Bayou Lafourche upstream of
the bridge. The Lafourche Parish Council has contacted these facilities
and has received letters of no objection to the proposed changes. A
recent review of the bridge tender logs indicates that approximately
700 vessels transited through the bridge over the past year.
Approximately 80% of the vessels transiting though the bridge site did
so between the hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Additionally, it would appear
that the majority of the night time openings for the bridge are for
trawl vessels and they appear to increase during the months of May and
August. Many of the trawl vessels appear to transit in clusters and
pass through the bridge site on the same bridge opening. Presently, it
is unclear as to whether or not a four-hour advance notification will
place an undue burden on the vessel owners; however, the regulation
will be written so that the bridge will be required to open on signal
during the advance notification period if a temporary surge in water
traffic occurs.
Traffic counts were not included as part of the submittal from the
bridge owner as the request is to reduce the requirement of having a
bridge tender at the bridge 24 hours a day due to the limited number of
vessel openings that occur during the hours of 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would modify the existing regulations in 33 CFR
117.465. The modification to the regulations will require the bridge
owner to open the bridge on signal from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. daily for
the passage of vessels. At all other times, the bridge will open for
signal for the passage of vessels if at least four hours advance
notification is given. This modification will allow the bridge owner to
reduce their requirements to have a bridge tender at the bridge site at
all times. The SR 3220 bridge, mile 49.2, at Lockport, is required to
open on signal for the passage of vessels; except that from 6 p.m. to
10 a.m., the bridge draw shall open on signal if at least four hours
advance notification is given. As the next bridge upstream from the
Valentine Bridge already has a more restrictive regulation established,
the new regulation will only directly affect those individuals whose
vessels or facilities are located within this five mile stretch of the
waterway. The two largest commercial facilities have already submitted
letters of no objection to the proposed changes.
[[Page 54947]]
Included in the regulation will be a clause similar to that which
is included on the SR 3220 bridge that requires the bridge owner to
open the bridge in less than four hours for an emergency and to open
the bridge on signal if a temporary surge in water traffic occurs.
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 is unnecessary.
Prior to proposing this rule, the Coast Guard analyzed the bridge
usage records and determined that requiring four hours notice during
off peak periods would have minimal impact on commercial vessel
traffic. This proposed rule allows vessels ample opportunity to transit
this waterway during the day and with minimal advanced notification at
all other times.
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 affect the following
entities: the owners and operators of vessels needing to transit the
bridges during the requested closure periods.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 (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 the Eighth Coast Guard District
Bridge Administration Branch at the address above. 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 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.
[[Page 54948]]
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, we believe that this rule should be
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
Determination Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' are not required for this rule. However, comments on
this section still be considered before the final 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; 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 Sec. 117.465, paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) are
redesignated paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g). A new paragraph (b)
is added to read as follows:
Sec. 117.465 Lafourche Bayou.
* * * * *
(b) The draw of the Valentine bridge, mile 44.7 at Valentine, shall
open on signal; except that, from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draw shall open
on signal if at least four hours advance notification is given. During
the advance notification period, the draw shall open on less than four
hours notice for an emergency and shall open on demand should a
temporary surge in water traffic occur.
* * * * *
Dated: September 10, 2006.
Joel R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-15561 Filed 9-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
