Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily amend the regulations governing the operation of the N.E. 14th Street Bridge across the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 1055.0, Pompano, Broward County, Florida. This proposed temporary rule provides for solely single-leaf bridge operations between May and June 2006. From July through September 2006, we propose this bridge operate on a single-leaf schedule unless four hour notice is provided for double-leaf openings.
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before March 27, 2006.
You may mail comments and related material to Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 1st Ave, Suite 432, Miami, FL 33131-3050. Commander (dpb) maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in the preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at the Bridge Branch, Seventh Coast Guard District, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Manager, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 305-415-6743.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental 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 [CGD07-05-162], indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed temporary rule in view of them.
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, Seventh 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
PCL Civil Constructors, Inc. on behalf of the Florida Department of Transportation has requested the Coast Guard temporarily change the existing regulations governing the operation of the N.E. 14th Street Bridge across the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway by allowing single-leaf operation during bridge rehabilitation. The N.E. 14th Street Bridge is located on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 1055.0, Pompano, Florida. The current regulation governing the operation of the N.E. 14th Street Bridge is published in 33 CFR 117.261(cc) and requires the bridge to open on signal except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., the draw need open only on the quarter-hour and three-quarter hour.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating regulations of the N.E. 14th Street Bridge from May 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006 so that the bridge will operate a single-leaf twice an hour from May 1, 2006 through July 1, 2006. From July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2006, the bridge will operate a single-leaf twice an hour unless four hour notice is given for double-leaf openings.
This proposed temporary 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 temporary rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary, because the rule will allow for bridge openings during the repairs to this bridge and all closure times will be published with adequate time for mariners to plan accordingly.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed temporary 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 temporary rule would not have a significant economic impact on a Start Printed Page 9301substantial number of small entities, because the regulations provide for restricted bridge openings and will provide for the reasonable needs of navigation.
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 temporary 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 in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that have questions or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed temporary rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
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 temporary rule under that Order and 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 temporary rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed temporary 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 temporary 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 temporary 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 temporary 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.
We have analyzed this proposed temporary 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 temporary rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
We have analyzed this proposed temporary rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 temporary 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.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117End List of Subjects
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:Start Part
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:
2. From 7 a.m. on May 1, 2006, through 6 p.m. on September 30, 2006, suspend paragraph 117.261(cc) and add paragraph (uu) to read as follows:
(uu) N.E. 14th Street bridge, mile 1055.0 at Pompano. The draw shall open a single-leaf on the quarter-hour and three-quarter hour from May 1, 2006 through July 1, 2006. From July 1, 2006 through September 30, 2006 the draw shall open double leaf upon four hours advance notification to the bridge Start Printed Page 9302tender on VHF channel 16 or the bridge rehabilitation contractor at 772-201-3745. Otherwise, the draw shall open a single leaf on the quarter-hour and three-quarter hour.
Dated: January 9, 2006.
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 06-1669 Filed 2-22-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P