Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), Sunset Beach, NC, 26038-26040 [E7-8723]
Download as PDF
26038
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
other specific subsections of the Privacy
Act.
Dated: April 27, 2007.
Lee J. Lofthus,
Assistant Attorney General for
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–8764 Filed 5–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–AW–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD05–07–026]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW),
Sunset Beach, NC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing
to change the drawbridge operating
regulations that govern the S.R. 1172
Bridge, at Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway mile 337.9, Sunset Beach,
NC. This proposal would allow the
bridge to open on the hour on signal for
pleasure vessels from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.
year round. The reason for this change
would be to improve the schedule for
both roadway and waterway users.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 22, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District,
Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA
23704–5004. The Fifth Coast Guard
District maintains the public docket for
this rulemaking. Comments and
material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth
Coast Guard District between 8 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary
Heyer, Bridge Management Specialist,
Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398–
6629.
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 CGD05–07–026,
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
a return receipt, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
submittals 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 Commander
(dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District 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 S.R. 1172 Bridge at Sunset Beach
has zero vertical clearance to vessels
when in the closed position at mean
high water.
The North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) owns and
operates this single-lane, floating steelbarge, swing-span referred to as a
pontoon drawbridge. Current
regulations set out at 33 CFR 117.821
(a)(5) require the bridge to open on
signal for commercial vessels at all
times; and on the hour on signal for
pleasure vessels between 7 a.m. and 7
p.m., April 1 to November 30, except
that on Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal
holidays, from June 1 through
September 30, the bridge shall open on
signal on the hour between 7 a.m. and
9 p.m.
NCDOT and the residents of the Town
of Sunset Beach requested a change to
the operating regulations for the S.R.
1172 Bridge in an effort to improve the
schedule for both roadway and
waterway users. The S.R. 1172 Bridge
provides the only route on and off
Sunset Beach Island. This proposal
would not change the requirement for
the bridge to open on signal at any time
for commercial vessels.
The Coast Guard reviewed the bridge
logs for 2005 and 2006 provided by
NCDOT which illustrate a small
decrease in the numbers of vessels
passing through the bridge during the
spring, summer, and fall over the past
year. Most vessels transiting the area in
the spring and fall are operated by
owners commonly referred to as
‘‘snowbirds’’. Owners of these transitory
recreational vessels are either traveling
north to south towards a warmer climate
in the fall or south to north towards a
cooler climate in the spring which can
result in frequent bridge openings due
to increased vessel numbers. During the
spring and fall months, the flow of
recreational vessels is constant.
There were approximately 10,461 and
11,429 vessel passages occurring in
2006 and 2005, respectively, over an
eight-month period (during the peak
boating season from April to November)
according to records furnished by the
NCDOT. (See Table A)
TABLE A
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEPT
OCT
NOV
DEC
392
349
386
326
317
1024
921
1234
1392
481
413
327
393
331
297
Bridge Openings for 2006
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
233
191
307
392
436
394
451
Boat Passages for 2006
273
157
463
1207
1659
1538
1486
Bridge Openings for 2005
218
VerDate Aug<31>2005
165
313
15:54 May 07, 2007
322
Jkt 211001
441
PO 00000
Frm 00053
439
Fmt 4702
474
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\08MYP1.SGM
08MYP1
26039
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
TABLE A—Continued
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEPT
OCT
NOV
DEC
1152
834
1302
2256
538
Boat Passages for 2005
294
211
532
1041
Based on the above information, we
have proposed to change the regulations
that govern the S.R. 1172 Bridge in
regards to pleasure vessels to open on
the hour on signal between 7 a.m. and
9 p.m., year-round. At all other times,
the draw shall open on demand. The
proposal will facilitate pleasure vessels
in navigating the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, while also helping to ease
vehicular traffic congestion. The bridge
will continue to open on signal at any
time for commercial vessels.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend
33 CFR 117.821, by revising paragraph
(a)(5) for pleasure vessels to read ‘‘shall
open on the hour on signal from 7 a.m.
to 9 p.m.’’
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 is
unnecessary. We reached this
conclusion based on the fact that the
proposed changes have only a minimal
impact on maritime traffic transiting the
bridge. Mariners can plan their trips in
accordance with the scheduled bridge
openings to minimize delays.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:54 May 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
1767
1438
1639
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 not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
because the rule only adds minimal
restrictions to the movement of
navigation, and mariners who plan their
transits in accordance with the
scheduled bridge openings can
minimize delay.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance; please contact Waverly W.
Gregory, Jr., Bridge Administrator, Fifth
Coast Guard District, (757) 398–6222.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not affect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
E:\FR\FM\08MYP1.SGM
08MYP1
26040
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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.
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.
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33
CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106
Stat. 5039.
§ 117.821 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
Albermarle Sound to Sunset Beach.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(5) S.R. 1172 Bridge, mile 337.9, at
Sunset Beach, NC, shall open on the
hour on signal between 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 9, 2007.
L.L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7–8723 Filed 5–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0347; FRL–8309–6]
Environment
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
2. In § 117.821, paragraph (a)(5) is
revised to read as follows:
Technical Standards
We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary
determination that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we
believe that this rule should be
categorically excluded, under figure 2–
1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction,
from further 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. However, comments on this
VerDate Aug<31>2005
section will be considered before the
final rule.
15:54 May 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
Approval And Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Iowa; Clean Air
Interstate Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a revision to the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on
August 15, 2006. This revision
addresses the requirements of EPA’s
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
promulgated on May 12, 2005, and
subsequently revised on April 28, 2006,
and December 13, 2006. EPA is
proposing to determine that the SIP
revision fully implements the CAIR
requirements for Iowa. Therefore, as a
consequence of the SIP approval, EPA
will also withdraw the CAIR Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs) concerning
SO2, NOX annual, NOX ozone season
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emissions for Iowa. The CAIR FIPs for
all States in the CAIR region were
promulgated on April 28, 2006, and
subsequently revised on December 13,
2006.
CAIR requires States to reduce
emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) that significantly
contribute to, and interfere with
maintenance of, the national ambient air
quality standards for fine particulates
and/or ozone in any downwind state.
CAIR establishes State budgets for SO2
and NOX and requires States to submit
SIP revisions that implement these
budgets in States that EPA concluded
did contribute to nonattainment in
downwind states. States have the
flexibility to choose which control
measures to adopt to achieve the
budgets, including participating in the
EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs. In the SIP revision that EPA
is proposing to approve, Iowa would
meet CAIR requirements by
participating in the EPA-administered
cap-and-trade programs addressing SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions.
Comments must be received on
or before June 7, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2007–0347, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: jay.michael@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Michael Jay, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and
Development Branch, 901 North 5th
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to: Michael Jay,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office’s
normal hours of operation. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007–
0347. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\08MYP1.SGM
08MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 8, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26038-26040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8723]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD05-07-026]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
(AIWW), Sunset Beach, NC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to change the drawbridge
operating regulations that govern the S.R. 1172 Bridge, at Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway mile 337.9, Sunset Beach, NC. This proposal would
allow the bridge to open on the hour on signal for pleasure vessels
from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. year round. The reason for this change would be
to improve the schedule for both roadway and waterway users.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 22, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431
Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-5004. The Fifth Coast Guard
District maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and
material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in
this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of
this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at
Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Heyer, Bridge Management
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398-6629.
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 CGD05-07-
026, indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like a return
receipt, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
We will consider all submittals 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 Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard
District 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 S.R. 1172 Bridge at Sunset Beach has zero vertical clearance to
vessels when in the closed position at mean high water.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) owns and
operates this single-lane, floating steel-barge, swing-span referred to
as a pontoon drawbridge. Current regulations set out at 33 CFR 117.821
(a)(5) require the bridge to open on signal for commercial vessels at
all times; and on the hour on signal for pleasure vessels between 7
a.m. and 7 p.m., April 1 to November 30, except that on Saturdays,
Sundays, and Federal holidays, from June 1 through September 30, the
bridge shall open on signal on the hour between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m.
NCDOT and the residents of the Town of Sunset Beach requested a
change to the operating regulations for the S.R. 1172 Bridge in an
effort to improve the schedule for both roadway and waterway users. The
S.R. 1172 Bridge provides the only route on and off Sunset Beach
Island. This proposal would not change the requirement for the bridge
to open on signal at any time for commercial vessels.
The Coast Guard reviewed the bridge logs for 2005 and 2006 provided
by NCDOT which illustrate a small decrease in the numbers of vessels
passing through the bridge during the spring, summer, and fall over the
past year. Most vessels transiting the area in the spring and fall are
operated by owners commonly referred to as ``snowbirds''. Owners of
these transitory recreational vessels are either traveling north to
south towards a warmer climate in the fall or south to north towards a
cooler climate in the spring which can result in frequent bridge
openings due to increased vessel numbers. During the spring and fall
months, the flow of recreational vessels is constant.
There were approximately 10,461 and 11,429 vessel passages
occurring in 2006 and 2005, respectively, over an eight-month period
(during the peak boating season from April to November) according to
records furnished by the NCDOT. (See Table A)
Table A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridge Openings for 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
233 191 307 392 436 394 451 392 349 386 326 317
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boat Passages for 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
273 157 463 1207 1659 1538 1486 1024 921 1234 1392 481
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridge Openings for 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
218 165 313 322 441 439 474 413 327 393 331 297
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26039]]
Boat Passages for 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
294 211 532 1041 1767 1438 1639 1152 834 1302 2256 538
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the above information, we have proposed to change the
regulations that govern the S.R. 1172 Bridge in regards to pleasure
vessels to open on the hour on signal between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m., year-
round. At all other times, the draw shall open on demand. The proposal
will facilitate pleasure vessels in navigating the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, while also helping to ease vehicular traffic
congestion. The bridge will continue to open on signal at any time for
commercial vessels.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.821, by revising
paragraph (a)(5) for pleasure vessels to read ``shall open on the hour
on signal from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.''
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 is unnecessary. We reached
this conclusion based on the fact that the proposed changes have only a
minimal impact on maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Mariners can
plan their trips in accordance with the scheduled bridge openings to
minimize delays.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities because the rule only adds
minimal restrictions to the movement of navigation, and mariners who
plan their transits in accordance with the scheduled bridge openings
can minimize delay.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance; please contact Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge
Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District, (757) 398-6222. 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
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
[[Page 26040]]
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.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 made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this
case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the
Instruction, from further 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. However, comments on this section will be
considered before the final rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. In Sec. 117.821, paragraph (a)(5) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 117.821 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Albermarle Sound to
Sunset Beach.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) S.R. 1172 Bridge, mile 337.9, at Sunset Beach, NC, shall open
on the hour on signal between 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.
* * * * *
Dated: April 9, 2007.
L.L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7-8723 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P