76600 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 245 / Thursday, December 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

otherwise occur would likely be passed 

on to consumers in the form of higher 

prices. 

The agency has determined under 21 

CFR 25.30(k) that this action is of a type 

that does not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. Therefore, 

neither an environmental assessment 

nor an environmental impact statement 

is required. 

This final rule contains no collections 

of information. Therefore, clearance by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 is not required. 

FDA has examined the impacts of the 

final rule under Executive Order 12866 

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), and the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public 

Law 104–4). Executive Order 12866 

directs agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, when regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity). The agency 

believes that this final rule is not a 

significant regulatory action under the 

Executive order. 

The establishment of a uniform 

compliance date does not in itself lead 

to costs or benefits. We will assess the 

costs and benefits of the uniform 

compliance date in the regulatory 

impact analyses of the labeling rules 

that take effect at that date. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

requires agencies to analyze regulatory 

options that would minimize any 

significant economic impact of a rule on 

small entities. Because the final rule 

does not impose compliance costs on 

small entities, the agency certifies that 

the final rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Section 202(a) of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 

that agencies prepare a written 

statement, which includes an 

assessment of anticipated costs and 

benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that 

includes any Federal mandate that may 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 

or more (adjusted annually for inflation) 

in any one year.’’ The current threshold 

after adjustment for inflation is $115 

million, using the most current (2003) 

Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross 

Domestic Product. FDA does not expect 

this final rule to result in any 1-year 

expenditure that would meet or exceed 

this amount. 

FDA has analyzed this final rule in 

accordance with the principles set forth 

in Executive Order 13132. FDA has 

determined that the rule does not 

contain policies that have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the National 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Accordingly, the 

agency has concluded that the rule does 

not contain policies that have 

federalism implications as defined in 

the Executive order and, consequently, 

a federalism summary impact statement 

is not required. 

This action is not intended to change 

existing requirements for compliance 

dates contained in final rules published 

before January 1, 2007. Therefore, all 

final FDA regulations published in the 

Federal Register before January 1, 2007, 

will still go into effect on the date stated 

in the respective final rule. 

The agency generally encourages 

industry to comply with new labeling 

regulations as quickly as feasible, 

however. Thus, when industry members 

voluntarily change their labels, it is 

appropriate that they incorporate any 

new requirements that have been 

published as final regulations up to that 

time. 

In rulemaking that began with 

publication of a proposal on April 15, 

1996 (61 FR 16422), and ended with a 

final rule on December 24, 1996, FDA 

provided notice and an opportunity for 

comment on the practice of establishing 

uniform compliance dates by issuance 

of a final rule announcing the date. 

Receiving no comments objecting to this 

practice, FDA finds any further 

rulemaking unnecessary for 

establishment of the uniform 

compliance date. Nonetheless, under 21 

CFR 10.40(e) (1), FDA is providing an 

opportunity for comment on whether 

this uniform compliance date should be 

modified or revoked. 

Interested persons may submit to the 

Division of Dockets Management (see 

ADDRESSES), written or electronic 

comments regarding this document. 

Submit a single copy of electronic 

comments or two paper copies of any 

mailed comments, except that 

individuals may submit one paper copy. 

Comments are to be identified with the 

docket number found in brackets in the 

heading of this document. Received 

comments may be seen in the Division 

of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 

The new uniform compliance date 

will apply only to final FDA food 

labeling regulations that require changes 

in the labeling of food products and that 

publish after January 1, 2007, and before 

December 31, 2008. Those regulations 

will specifically identify January 1, 

2010, as their compliance date. All food 

products subject to the January 1, 2010, 

compliance date must comply with the 

appropriate regulations when initially 

introduced into interstate commerce on 

or after January 1, 2010. If any food 

labeling regulation involves special 

circumstances that justify a compliance 

date other than January 1, 2010, the 

agency will determine for that 

regulation an appropriate compliance 

date, which will be specified when the 

final regulation is published. 

Dated: December 13, 2006. 

Jeffrey Shuren, 

Assistant Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. E6–21902 Filed 12–20–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Indian Health Service 

25 CFR Part 900 

Contracts Under the Indian SelfDetermination and Education 

Assistance Act; Change of Address for 

the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals 

AGENCY: Indian Health Service, HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; change of address. 

The Indian Health Service is revising 

its regulations governing contracts 

under the Indian Self-Determination 

and Education Assistance Act to reflect 

a change of address due to a move for 

the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals 

(CBCA). 

DATES: This rule change is effective 

December 21, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hankie Ortiz, Director, Division of 

Regulatory Affairs, Records Access, and 

Policy Liaison, Indian Health Service, 

801 Thompson Avenue, Suite 450, 

Rockville, Maryland 20852, Telephone 

(301) 443–1116. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Regulations promulgated by the 

Indian Health Service to govern the 

administration of contracts under the 

Indian Self-Determination and 

Education Assistance Act reference an 

address for the Interior Board of 

Contract Appeals (IBCA). Effective 

January 6, 2007, the Interior Board of 

Contract Appeals will be consolidated 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 245 / Thursday, December 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 76601 

into the Civilian Board of Contract 

Appeals (CBCA). See 71 FR 65825 (Nov. 

9, 2006). This action reflects the change 

in name and provides the CBCA’s new 

street address. 

II. Procedural Requirements 

A. Determination To Issue Final Rule 

Effective in Less than 30 Days 

IHS has determined that the public 

notice and comment provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 

553(b) do not apply to this rulemaking. 

The changes being made relate solely to 

matters of agency organization, 

procedure and practice. They therefore 

satisfy the exemption from notice and 

comment in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). 

B. Review Under Procedural Statutes 

and Executive Orders 

IHS has reviewed this rule under the 

following statutes and Executive Orders 

governing rulemaking procedures: The 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.; the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.; the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq.; the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.; 

Executive Order 12630 (Takings); 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review); Executive Order 

12988 (Civil Justice Reform); Executive 

Order 13132 (Federalism); Executive 

Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation); and 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy 

Impacts). IHS has determined that this 

rule does not trigger any of the 

procedural requirements of those 

statutes and Executive Orders, since this 

rule merely changes the street address 

for the CBCA. 

List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 900 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Buildings and facilities, 

Claims, Government contracts, 

Government property management, 

Grant programs—Indians, Health care, 

Indians, Indians—business and finance. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

IHS amends its regulations in 25 CFR 

Part 900 as follows: 

PART 900—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 900 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 25 U.S.C. 450f et seq. 

■ 2. Section 900.222, paragraph (e) is 

amended by removing ‘‘Interior Board of 

Contract Appeals (IBCA)’’ and adding in 

its place ‘‘Civilian Board of Contract 

Appeals (CBCA)’’ and by removing ‘‘801 

North Quincy Street, Arlington, VA 

22203’’ and adding in its place ‘‘1800 M 

Street, NW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 

20036’’. 

■ 3. Section 900.229, paragraphs (a) and 

(b)(4) are amended by removing ‘‘IBCA’’

and adding in its place ‘‘CBCA’’. 

Dated: December 14, 2006. 

Robert G. McSwain, 

Deputy Director, Indian Health Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–9810 Filed 12–20–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4165–16–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[CGD08–06–028; CGD08–06–034] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Bayou Lafourche, LA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the regulations governing six bridges 

across Bayou Lafourche, south of the 

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW), 

and one bridge across Bayou Lafourche, 

north of the GIWW, in Lafourche Parish, 

Louisiana. The Lafourche Parish 

Council has requested that the six 

bridges below the GIWW remain closed 

to navigation at various times on 

weekdays during the school year and 

the one bridge north of the GIWW open 

on four hours advanced notification at 

night. These closures will facilitate the 

safe, efficient movement of staff, 

students and other residents within the 

parish. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 22, 

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 

dockets [CGD08–06–034] and [CGD08–

06–034] and are available for inspection 

or copying at the office of the Eighth 

Coast Guard District, Bridge 

Administration Branch, 500 Poydras 

Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130–

3310, between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The Bridge Administration 

Branch maintains the public docket for 

this rulemaking. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Frank, Bridge Administration 

Branch, telephone 504–671–2128. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory History 

On September 20, 2006, we published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) entitled, ‘‘Drawbridge 

Operation Regulation; Bayou Lafourche, 

LA,’’ in the Federal Register (71 FR 

54944) under docket number [CGD08–

06–028] for the modification of the 

operation regulations for six bridges 

across Bayou Lafourche below the Gulf 

Intracoastal Canal. We received no 

letters commenting on the proposed 

rule. No public meeting was requested, 

and none was held. 

Additionally, on September 20, 2006, 

we published another notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled, 

‘‘Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Bayou Lafourche, LA,’’ in the Federal 

Register (71 FR 54946) under docket 

number [CGD08–06–034] to establish an 

advanced notification requirement for a 

bridge across Bayou Lafourche above 

the Gulf Intracoastal Canal. We received 

no letters commenting on the proposed 

rule. No public meeting was requested, 

and none was held. 

Background and Purpose 

The U.S. Coast Guard, at the request 

of the Lafourche Parish Council, is 

modifying the existing operating 

schedules of six bridges across Bayou 

Lafourche south of the Gulf Intracoastal 

Waterway in Lafourche Parish, 

Louisiana. The six bridges include: 

Golden Meadow Vertical Lift Bridge, 

mile 23.9; the Galliano Pontoon Bridge, 

mile 27.8; the South Lafourche (Tarpon) 

Vertical Lift Bridge, mile 30.6; the Cote 

Blanche Pontoon Bridge, mile 33.9; the 

Cutoff Vertical Lift Bridge, mile 36.3; 

and the Larose Pontoon Bridge, mile 

39.1. The modification of the existing 

regulations allows these bridges to 

remain closed to navigation from 7 a.m. 

to 8:30 a.m.; from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.; and 

from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday from August 15 through 

May 31. At all other times, the bridges 

shall open on signal for the passage of 

vessels. 

Presently, the draws of these bridges 

shall open on signal; except that, from 

August 15 through May 31, the draw 

need not open for the passage of vessels 

Monday through Friday except Federal 

holidays from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m.; from 2 

p.m. to 4 p.m.; and from 4:30 p.m. to 

5:30 p.m. 

The existing regulations for the 

bridges went into effect on January 27, 

2006. The original request by the 

petitioner was that the bridges be closed 

to navigation from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.; 

however, due to a clerical error, the rule 

was codified with the morning hours of 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES