[Federal Register: June 7, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 109)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32839-32840]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07jn06-16]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Charleston 06-003]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Cooper River, Hog Island Channel, Charleston SC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing one of two duplicate temporary
rules that establish safety zones on the navigable waters of Hog Island
Reach on the Cooper River, for demolition of the Grace Memorial and
Silas Pearman Bridges and associated recovery operations.
DATES: This rule is effective June 7, 2006.
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 [COTP Charleston 06-003] and are available for
inspection or copying at Coast Guard Sector Charleston (WWM), 196 Tradd
Street, Charleston, South Carolina 29401 between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Warrant Officer James J. McHugh,
Sector Charleston Office of Waterways Management, at (843) 724-7647.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 19, 2006, we published a
temporary final rule that created a temporary safety zone around the
Grace Memorial and Silas Pearman Bridges on Hog Island Reach. (71 FR
3005) This safety zone includes all waters within the area bounded by
the following coordinates: 32[deg]48.566' N, 079[deg]55.211' W to
32[deg]48.389' N, 079[deg]54.256' W to 32[deg]47.824' N,
079[deg]54.401' W thence to 32[deg]47.994' N, 079[deg]55.359' W.
Due to an administrative error, we published a second temporary
safety zone for this location on May 25, 2006, at 71 FR 30062. This
second temporary final rule has the same section number and establishes
a safety zone at the same coordinates as the temporary final rule that
published in January; however it has a different effective date and a
slightly different title.
In order to avoid confusion and maintain the January effective date
of the safe zone, we are removing the second temporary rule that
published on May 25, 2006, at 71 FR 30062 and is entitled ``Safety
Zone; Cooper River, Hog Island Channel, Charleston, SC.''
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. This rule is not a significant regulatory
action because it removes a second temporary final rule has the same
section number and establishes a safety zone at the same coordinates as
the temporary final rule that published in January.
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, because it removes one of two duplicate temporary rules that
establish safety zones on the navigable waters of Hog Island Reach on
the Cooper River, for demolition of the Grace Memorial and Silas
Pearman Bridges and associated recovery operations.
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 effect 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
[[Page 32840]]
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant
rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that may 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 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
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)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental
documentation. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction,
an ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' are not required for this rule, because this rule
removes a duplicate temporary rule from the Code of Federal
Regulations.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165, subpart C as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
Sec. 165.T07-003 [Removed]
0
2. Remove Sec. 165.T07-003 entitled ``Safety Zone, Hog Island Channel,
Grace Memorial and Silas Pearman Bridges, Charleston, SC.''
Dated: May 31, 2006.
Stefan G. Venckus,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States
Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. E6-8853 Filed 6-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P