Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 46 / Friday, March 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 10605 

Approved: February 6, 2007. 

Gregg A. Cervi, 

Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy Deputy 

Assistant Judge Advocate General (Admiralty 

and Maritime Law). 

[FR Doc. E7–4254 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[CGD05–07–018] 

RIN 1625–AA–09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Susquehanna River, at Havre de Grace, 

MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation 

from regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast 

Guard District, has approved a 

temporary deviation from the 

regulations governing the operation of 

the National Railroad Passenger 

Corporation (AMTRAK) Bridge, at mile 

1.0, across Susquehanna River at Havre 

de Grace, Maryland. This deviation 

allows the drawbridge to remain closedto-navigation beginning at 6 p.m. on 

March 30, 2007, until and including 6 

p.m. on June 8, 2007, to facilitate 

structural repairs. 

DATES: This deviation is effective from 

6 p.m. on March 30, 2007, until 6 p.m. 

on June 8, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this 

document are available for inspection or 

copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth 

Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 

1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, 

Portsmouth, VA 23704–5004 between 8 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

telephone number is (757) 398–6222. 

Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard 

District maintains the public docket for 

this temporary deviation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill 

H. Brazier, Bridge Management 

Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at 

(757) 398–6422. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

AMTRAK Bridge, a swing-type 

drawbridge, has a vertical clearance in 

the closed position to vessels of 52 feet, 

above mean high water. 

AMTRAK, the bridge owner, has 

requested a temporary deviation from 

the current operating regulation set out 

in 33 CFR 117.575 and to close the 

drawbridge to navigation to perform 

needed structural repairs. 

The repairs will include the renewal 

of 3,184 bridge timbers as well as the 

installation of new rail and expansion 

joints. To facilitate this work, the 

AMTRAK Bridge will be maintained in 

the closed-to-navigation position 

beginning at 6 p.m. on March 30, 2007, 

until and including 6 p.m. on June 8, 

2007. 

The Coast Guard has informed the 

known users of the waterway of the 

closure periods for the bridge so that 

these vessels can arrange their transits 

to minimize any impact caused by the 

temporary deviation. 

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), 

the drawbridge must return to its regular 

operating schedule immediately at the 

end of the designated time period. 

This deviation from the operating 

regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 

117.35. 

Dated: February 28, 2007. 

Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., 

Chief, Bridge Administration Branch, Fifth 

Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E7–4215 Filed 3–8–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Part 280 

Magnet Schools Assistance Program 

AGENCY: Office of Innovation and 

Improvement, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Final regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the 

regulations governing the Magnet 

Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) in 

34 CFR part 280. These amendments 

allow the MSAP to use an approach 

similar to that in § 75.200 for 

establishing selection criteria in grant 

competitions. Under this approach the 

MSAP has the flexibility to use selection 

criteria from its program regulations, 

from the menu of general selection 

criteria in the Education Department 

General Administrative Regulations 

(EDGAR) in § 75.210, based on statutory 

provisions in accordance with § 75.209, 

or from any combination of these. 

DATES: These regulations are effective 

April 9, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven L. Brockhouse, U.S. Department 

of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

SW., room 4W229, Washington, DC 

20202–5970. Telephone: (202) 260–2476 

or via Internet: 

steve.brockhouse@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 

the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–

800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities may 

obtain this document in an alternative 

format (e.g., Braille, large print, 

audiotape, or computer diskette) on 

request to the contact person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

22, 2006 the Secretary published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

for these amendments in the Federal 

Register (71 FR 48866). 

In the preamble to the NPRM, the 

Secretary discussed on pages 48866 and 

48867 the major changes proposed in 

that document to provide the MSAP 

with the flexibility to use different types 

of selection criteria when evaluating 

grant applications in a specific grant 

competition. These included the 

following: 

• Amending § 280.30 to give the 

Secretary the flexibility to use selection 

criteria from § 280.31, from the 

approved menu of general selection 

criteria in § 75.210 or from selection 

criteria based on statutory provisions 

governing the MSAP, established in 

accordance with § 75.209. 

• Amending § 280.31 to remove the 

mandatory point values from the 

selection criteria in this section of the 

MSAP regulations. 

There are no differences between the 

NPRM and these final regulations. 

Analysis of Comments 

In response to the Secretary’s 

invitation in the NPRM, nine parties 

submitted comments on the proposed 

regulations. An analysis of the 

comments follows. 

We discuss substantive issues under 

the sections of the regulations to which 

they pertain. Generally, we do not 

address technical and other minor 

changes—and suggested changes the 

law does not authorize the Secretary to 

make. 

Section 280.30 How Does the Secretary 

Evaluate an Application? 

Comment: Two commenters 

expressed the opinion that the current 

selection criteria work effectively to 

address the MSAP’s statutory purpose 

and requirements, and consequently 

that a change in approach to permit the 

use of other selection criteria is not 

needed at this time. 

Discussion: The Department proposed 

these changes because we have been 

constrained in past MSAP competitions 

to using only the program selection 

criteria in § 280.31, whether or not their 

use continues to work well in the 


erjones on PRODPC74 with RULES