Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL, 6692-6694 [E7-2345]

Download as PDF 6692 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations Energy Effects List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 We have analyzed this 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC61 with RULES Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide 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 rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph (34)(f) as it revises the duration a vessel can anchor in a Federal Anchorage Ground. A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:48 Feb 12, 2007 Jkt 211001 Anchorage grounds. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 110 as follows: I DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [CGD07–06–041] PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS RIN 1625–AA09 1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows: Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL I Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035 and 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g); and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. In § 110.155, add paragraphs (c)(5)(vi), (d)(10)(ii), (d)(11)(iii), (d)(12)(iii), and (e)(1)(iii), to read as follows: I § 110.155 Port of New York. * * * * * (c) * * * (5) * * * (vi) No vessel may occupy this anchorage for a period of time in excess of 96 hours without prior approval of the Captain of the Port. * * * * * (d) * * * (10) * * * (ii) No vessel may occupy this anchorage for a period of time in excess of 96 hours without prior approval of the Captain of the Port. (11) * * * (iii) No vessel may occupy this anchorage for a period of time in excess of 96 hours without prior approval of the Captain of the Port. (12) * * * (iii) No vessel may occupy this anchorage for a period of time in excess of 96 hours without prior approval of the Captain of the Port. * * * * * (e) * * * (1) * * * (iii) No vessel may occupy this anchorage for a period of time in excess of 96 hours without prior approval of the Captain of the Port. * * * * * Dated: January 26, 2007. Timothy S. Sullivan, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7–2454 Filed 2–12–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the operating regulations governing the 63rd Street Drawbridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0 in Miami-Dade County, Florida. This rule will allow the Drawbridge to open a single-leaf on the top of the hour from 8 a.m. to 5:59 p.m. and a double-leaf on the top of the hour between 6 p.m. and 12:10 a.m. At all other times this bridge will be closed to navigation. DATES: This rule is effective from March 15, 2007 until June 19, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket (CGD07–06–041) and are available for inspection or copying at Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, Florida 33131–3050 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Lieberum, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, telephone number 305–415–6744. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On April 3, 2006, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL in the Federal Register (71 FR 16529). We received two comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held. The NPRM proposed an effective period of 8 a.m. on June 19, 2006 through 6 p.m. on February 5, 2007. Thus, this temporary final rule is effective from March 15, 2007 until June 19, 2007 because of contractor and the City of Miami Beach requests to balance the reasonable needs of vehicles and vessels while the bridge undergoes rehabilitation. Publishing another NPRM before this temporary rule would further delay meeting the immediate E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations safety concerns needed to protect local vessel and vehicle traffic from the temporary change in drawbridge operations. Background and Purpose The existing regulation of the 63rd Street Drawbridge, Indian Creek mile 4.0, Miami-Dade County, Florida, requires the draw to open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when a request or signal to open is given. The contractor representing the bridge owner (Florida Department of Transportation) requested that this drawbridge be placed on a restricted schedule to allow for the least amount of time that this work would influence both vehicle and vessel traffic. The contractor has been working directly with the City of Miami Beach and the local marina to balance the reasonable needs of both entities. The Coast Guard had reviewed the drawbridge logs for the 63rd Street Drawbridge and determined that there were limited nighttime openings. Discussion of Comments and Changes The Coast Guard received one response to the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and one response after the closure date of the NPRM. One comment requested that this bridge be closed to navigation during the daytime hours and one comment requested an exemption to the regulation or to allow no changes to the regulation so the drawbridge would open on demand. The request to close this bridge to navigation during daytime hours was determined to be unreasonable as this drawbridge is the only access for the local vessel owners and a marina located on the south side of the bridge. The request to leave this bridge on an on-signal schedule would unreasonably delay rehabilitating this bridge. For this reason the recommendation for an onsignal request was not approved. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC61 with RULES Regulatory Evaluation This 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. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:48 Feb 12, 2007 Jkt 211001 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels needed to transit Indian Creek, persons intending to drive over the bridge, and nearby business owners. The revision to the openings schedule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, although bridge openings will be restricted, vessel traffic will still be able to transit Indian Creek pursuant to the revised opening schedule. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about the rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This rule calls 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 rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 6693 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 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 rule will 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 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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does 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 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 E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1 6694 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations § 117.T293 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, 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 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 rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows: I PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: cprice-sewell on PROD1PC61 with RULES I Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g); § 117.255 also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 Stat. 5039. 2. Add Section 117.T293 to read as follows: I VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:48 Feb 12, 2007 Jkt 211001 Indian Creek. (a) The Drawspan of the 63rd Street Drawbridge, mile 4.0 across Indian Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida will open a single-leaf on the hour from 8 a.m. to 5:59 p.m. and a double-leaf on the hour from 6 p.m. to 12:10 a.m. This Drawbridge will be closed to navigation at all other times. (b) Effective date: This temporary rule is effective until June 19, 2007. Dated: February 1, 2007. D.W. Kunkel, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7–2345 Filed 2–12–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 060216044–6044–01; I.D. 020807B] Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the Gulf of Alaska National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Temporary rule; modification of a closure; request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: NMFS is opening directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) for 48 hours. This action is necessary to fully use the A season allowance of the 2007 total allowable catch (TAC) of pollock specified for Statistical Area 610 of the GOA. DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), February 8, 2007, through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., February 10, 2007. Comments must be received at the following address no later than 4:30 p.m., A.l.t., February 23, 2007. ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Comments may be submitted by: • Mail to: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802; • Hand delivery to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, Alaska; • Fax to 907–586–7557; • E-mail to open610pollock@noaa.gov and include in the subject line of the email comment the document identifier: PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ‘‘g61plkro2’’ (E-mail comments, with or without attachments, are limited to 5 megabytes); or • Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at that site for submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Hogan, 907–586–7228. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. NMFS closed the directed fishery for pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the GOA under § 679.20(d)(1)(iii) on January 22, 2007 (72 FR 2462, January 19, 2007). The fishery was subsequently reopened on February 5, 2007 and closed on February 7, 2007. The action filed with the Office of the Federal Register on February 5, 2007, and will publish February 9, 2007. NMFS has determined that approximately 2,455 mt of pollock remain in the directed fishing allowance. Therefore, in accordance with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully utilize the A season allowance of the 2007 TAC of pollock in Statistical Area 610, NMFS is terminating the previous closure and is reopening directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the GOA. In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance will be reached after 48 hours. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the GOA effective 1200 hrs, A.l.t., February 10, 2007. Classification This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM 13FER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 13, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6692-6694]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2345]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07-06-041]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian 
Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the operating 
regulations governing the 63rd Street Drawbridge across Indian Creek, 
mile 4.0 in Miami-Dade County, Florida. This rule will allow the 
Drawbridge to open a single-leaf on the top of the hour from 8 a.m. to 
5:59 p.m. and a double-leaf on the top of the hour between 6 p.m. and 
12:10 a.m. At all other times this bridge will be closed to navigation.

DATES: This rule is effective from March 15, 2007 until June 19, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket (CGD07-06-041) and are available for inspection or 
copying at Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 1st 
Avenue, Room 432, Miami, Florida 33131-3050 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Lieberum, Seventh Coast 
Guard District, Bridge Branch, telephone number 305-415-6744.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On April 3, 2006, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 63rd Street Bridge, 
Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL in the Federal Register (71 
FR 16529). We received two comments on the proposed rule. No public 
meeting was requested, and none was held.
    The NPRM proposed an effective period of 8 a.m. on June 19, 2006 
through 6 p.m. on February 5, 2007. Thus, this temporary final rule is 
effective from March 15, 2007 until June 19, 2007 because of contractor 
and the City of Miami Beach requests to balance the reasonable needs of 
vehicles and vessels while the bridge undergoes rehabilitation. 
Publishing another NPRM before this temporary rule would further delay 
meeting the immediate

[[Page 6693]]

safety concerns needed to protect local vessel and vehicle traffic from 
the temporary change in drawbridge operations.

Background and Purpose

    The existing regulation of the 63rd Street Drawbridge, Indian Creek 
mile 4.0, Miami-Dade County, Florida, requires the draw to open 
promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when a request or signal 
to open is given.
    The contractor representing the bridge owner (Florida Department of 
Transportation) requested that this drawbridge be placed on a 
restricted schedule to allow for the least amount of time that this 
work would influence both vehicle and vessel traffic. The contractor 
has been working directly with the City of Miami Beach and the local 
marina to balance the reasonable needs of both entities. The Coast 
Guard had reviewed the drawbridge logs for the 63rd Street Drawbridge 
and determined that there were limited nighttime openings.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received one response to the notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) and one response after the closure date of the NPRM. 
One comment requested that this bridge be closed to navigation during 
the daytime hours and one comment requested an exemption to the 
regulation or to allow no changes to the regulation so the drawbridge 
would open on demand. The request to close this bridge to navigation 
during daytime hours was determined to be unreasonable as this 
drawbridge is the only access for the local vessel owners and a marina 
located on the south side of the bridge. The request to leave this 
bridge on an on-signal schedule would unreasonably delay rehabilitating 
this bridge. For this reason the recommendation for an on-signal 
request was not approved.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This 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.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which 
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels needed to 
transit Indian Creek, persons intending to drive over the bridge, and 
nearby business owners. The revision to the openings schedule would not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
although bridge openings will be restricted, vessel traffic will still 
be able to transit Indian Creek pursuant to the revised opening 
schedule.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about the rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls 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 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 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 rule will 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 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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does 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 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

[[Page 6694]]

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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 
and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, 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 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 rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
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); Sec.  117.255 also issued 
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.


0
2. Add Section 117.T293 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.T293  Indian Creek.

    (a) The Drawspan of the 63rd Street Drawbridge, mile 4.0 across 
Indian Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida will open a single-leaf on the 
hour from 8 a.m. to 5:59 p.m. and a double-leaf on the hour from 6 p.m. 
to 12:10 a.m. This Drawbridge will be closed to navigation at all other 
times.
    (b) Effective date: This temporary rule is effective until June 19, 
2007.

    Dated: February 1, 2007.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. E7-2345 Filed 2-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P