Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Outer Clam Bay Boardwalk Bridge, Mile 0.3, Near North Naples, Collier County, FL, 66895-66897 [E6-19457]

Download as PDF 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: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Federal Communications Commission’s Web Site: http:// 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: http://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