Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Outer Clam Bay Boardwalk Bridge, Mile 0.3, Near North Naples, Collier County, FL, 66895-66897 [E6-19457]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that would only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it
is certified that this proposed rule
would not have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
by submitting a request to the Office of
the Regional Counsel, AEA–7, FAA
Eastern Region, 1 Aviation Plaza,
Jamaica, NY 11434–4809.
Communications must identify the
notice number of this NPRM. Persons
interested in being placed on a mailing
list for future NPRMs should also
request a copy of Advisory Circular No.
11–2A, which describes the application
procedure.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
for comments will be considered before
taking action on the proposed rule. The
proposal contained in this notice may
be changed in light of comments
received. All comments submitted will
be available for examination in the
Rules Docket closing both before and
after the closing date for comments. A
report summarizing each substantive
public contact with the FAA personnel
concerned with this rulemaking will be
filed in the docket.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Proposal
The FAA is considering an
amendment to Part 71 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 71) to
establish Class E–2 airspace at Griffiss
Airfield, Rome, NY. The opening of a
tower and for the protection of
Instrument Approaches makes this
action necessary. Controlled airspace
extending upward from the surface to
the base of the overlying controlled
airspace is needed to accommodate the
SIAPs. The class E–2 airspace area
would be effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance
by a notice to airmen. The effective date
and time would thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/
Facility Directory. Class E–2 airspace
designations for airspace areas
extending upward from the surface of
the earth are published in Paragraph
6002 of FAA Order 7400.9P, dated
September 1, 2006, and effective
September 16, 2006, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
71.1. The Class E–2 airspace designation
listed in this document would be
published subsequently in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation, (1)
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not
a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:07 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
66895
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07–06–237]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Outer Clam Bay Boardwalk Bridge,
Mile 0.3, Near North Naples, Collier
County, FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Proposed Amendment
ACTION:
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
change the operating regulations of the
Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile
0.3, near North Naples in Collier
County, Florida. This proposed rule
would require the draw to open on
signal, with at least 30 minutes advance
notice. This proposed action will allow
the unrestricted movement of pedestrian
traffic while not unreasonably
interfering with the movement of vessel
traffic.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
January 16, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909
SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL,
33131, who maintains the public docket
for this rulemaking. Comments and
material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and are available for inspection or
copying at the Seventh Coast Guard
District Bridge Branch, between 7:30
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Barry Dragon, Seventh Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415–
6743.
PART 71—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389).
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9P dated
September 1, 2006, and effective
September 16, 2006, is proposed to be
amended as follows:
Paragraph 6002 Class E–2 airspace areas
extending upward from the surface of the
earth.
AEA NY (D),
Griffiss Airfield [New]
Rome, NY
(Lat. 43°14′03″ N., long 75°24′42″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface to the base of the overlying controlled
airspace within a 4.5 mile radius of the
Griffis Airfield, Rome, NY, and within 2
miles each side of bearing 135°/315° from a
point at Lat 43°14.03′N, Long 75°24,42′W,
extending from the 4.5 mile radius zone, to
a point 10.5 miles NW and 105 miles SE of
the airport. The Class E–2 airspace area is
effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a notice to airmen.
The effective date and time thereafter be
continously published in the Airport/Facility
Directory.
Issued in Jamaica, New York on October
30, 2006.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, System Support Group.
[FR Doc. 06–9246 Filed 11–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking [CGD07–06–237],
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
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
66896
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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 Bridge
Branch at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one
would aid this rulemaking, we will hold
one at a time and place announced by
a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The existing regulations of the Outer
Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile 0.3,
near North Naples, at Collier County,
published in 33 CFR 117.323 require the
draw to open on signal between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., if at least one-hour advance
notice is given. Between 5 p.m. and 9
a.m., the draw will be left in the open
position.
On October 19, 2006, the officials of
Collier County requested that the Coast
Guard review the existing regulations
governing the operation of the Outer
Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, because
they contended that the regulation is not
meeting the needs of pedestrian traffic.
County records indicate that the
owner has had one request for an
opening since 1986 and the vessel did
not show up for the requested opening.
Night time vessel traffic is negligible.
The boardwalk provides access to a
recreational beachfront area 24 hours a
day and to leave the bridge in the open
position prevents beachgoers from
accessing the recreational area by foot
and golf cart between the hours of 5
p.m. and 9 a.m.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would require the
Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile
0.3, near North Naples at Collier County
to open on signal with 30 minutes
advance notice. This schedule will
allow unrestricted pedestrian and golf
cart traffic to cross to the recreation area
while providing for the reasonable
needs of navigation. Local personnel
will be available to open and close the
bridge during night time hours.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:07 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. This proposed rule
would modify the existing bridge
schedule to allow pedestrian and
vehicle traffic unrestricted access to the
recreation area while providing for the
reasonable needs of navigation.
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 business, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule would affect
the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or
operators of vessels needing to transit
through Outer Clam Bay in the vicinity
of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk
bridge, persons intending to cross over
the bridge and nearby business owners.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this proposed rule would economically
affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (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 person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
proposed rule is categorically excluded,
under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of
the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Under
figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:07 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
Exclusion Determination’’ are not
required for this proposed rule.
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. Revise § 117.323 to read as follows:
§ 117.323
Outer Clam Bay.
The draw of the Outer Clam Bay
boardwalk shall open on signal if at
least 30 minutes advance notice is
given.
Dated: October 31, 2006.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–19457 Filed 11–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 15
[ET Docket No. 04–186 and 02–380; FCC
06–156]
Unlicensed Operation in the TV
Broadcast Bands
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document asks questions
and sets forth proposals concerning the
rules that will be necessary to enable
low power devices to operate in the TV
bands without causing harmful
interference to other authorized
operations in those bands. The process
that the Commission will follow in
developing the final rules for devices in
the TV bands will allow it to develop a
thorough record on the various issues
involved. While the Commission
continues to focus on devices operating
on an unlicensed basis, it also asks
whether such devices should instead
operate on a licensed or hybrid basis.
The Commission expects to complete
this work and make final decisions in
sufficient time for industry to design
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66897
and produce new products by
completion of the DTV transition.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or
before January 31, 2007, and reply
comments must be filed on or before
March 2, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ET Docket No. 04–186 and
02–380, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web Site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: [Optional: Include the Email address only if you plan to accept
comments from the general public].
Include the docket number(s) in the
subject line of the message.
• Mail: [Optional: Include the mailing
address for paper, disk or CD–ROM
submissions needed/requested by your
Bureau or Office. Do not include the
Office of the Secretary’s mailing address
here.]
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hugh Van Tuyl, Office of Engineering
and Technology, (202) 418–7506, email: Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov, or Alan
Stillwell, Office of Engineering and
Technology, (202) 418–2925, e-mail
Alan.Stillwell@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418–
2989.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET
Docket No. 04–186 and 02–380, FCC
06–156, adopted October 12, 2006, and
released October 18, 2006. The full text
of this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference
Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The
complete text of this document also may
be purchased from the Commission’s
copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing,
Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room, CY–
B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full
text may also be downloaded at:
https://www.fcc.gov.
Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419
of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 222 (Friday, November 17, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66895-66897]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19457]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-06-237]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Outer Clam Bay Boardwalk
Bridge, Mile 0.3, Near North Naples, Collier County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulations
of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile 0.3, near North Naples in
Collier County, Florida. This proposed rule would require the draw to
open on signal, with at least 30 minutes advance notice. This proposed
action will allow the unrestricted movement of pedestrian traffic while
not unreasonably interfering with the movement of vessel traffic.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before January 16, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432,
Miami, FL, 33131, who maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and are available for inspection or copying
at the Seventh Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, between 7:30 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Barry Dragon, Seventh Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6743.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD07-06-
237], 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
[[Page 66896]]
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 Bridge Branch at the address
under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine
that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and
place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The existing regulations of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge,
mile 0.3, near North Naples, at Collier County, published in 33 CFR
117.323 require the draw to open on signal between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
if at least one-hour advance notice is given. Between 5 p.m. and 9
a.m., the draw will be left in the open position.
On October 19, 2006, the officials of Collier County requested that
the Coast Guard review the existing regulations governing the operation
of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, because they contended that the
regulation is not meeting the needs of pedestrian traffic.
County records indicate that the owner has had one request for an
opening since 1986 and the vessel did not show up for the requested
opening. Night time vessel traffic is negligible. The boardwalk
provides access to a recreational beachfront area 24 hours a day and to
leave the bridge in the open position prevents beachgoers from
accessing the recreational area by foot and golf cart between the hours
of 5 p.m. and 9 a.m.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would require the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk
bridge, mile 0.3, near North Naples at Collier County to open on signal
with 30 minutes advance notice. This schedule will allow unrestricted
pedestrian and golf cart traffic to cross to the recreation area while
providing for the reasonable needs of navigation. Local personnel will
be available to open and close the bridge during night time hours.
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. This proposed rule would modify
the existing bridge schedule to allow pedestrian and vehicle traffic
unrestricted access to the recreation area while providing for the
reasonable needs of navigation.
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 business, not-for-profit organizations that
are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators
of vessels needing to transit through Outer Clam Bay in the vicinity of
the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, persons intending to cross over
the bridge and nearby business owners. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this proposed rule would
economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (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 person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy
or action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed 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
[[Page 66897]]
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.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this proposed rule is categorically excluded,
under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, an ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are not required for this
proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
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. Revise Sec. 117.323 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.323 Outer Clam Bay.
The draw of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk shall open on signal if at
least 30 minutes advance notice is given.
Dated: October 31, 2006.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E6-19457 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
