1580 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Federal, State, or local government

agencies, or geographic regions. Actions

under this rule will distribute Federal

funds to Indian tribal governments and

tribal organizations for transportation

planning, road and bridge construction,

and road improvements.

This rule does not have significant

adverse effects on competition,

employment, investment, productivity,

innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises. In fact, actions under

this rule will provide a beneficial effect

on employment through funding for

construction jobs.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Under the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), this

temporary rule will not significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, or

the private sector. A Small Government

Agency Plan is not required.

This temporary rule will not produce

a federal mandate that may result in an

expenditure by State, local, or tribal

governments of $100 million or greater

in any year. The effect of this temporary

rule is to immediately provide 75

percent of fiscal year 2001 IRR program

funds to tribal governments for ongoing

IRR activities and construction projects.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

With respect to Executive Order

12630, the rule does not have significant

takings implications since it involves no

transfer of title to any property. A

takings implication assessment is not

required.

Federalism (Exectuive Order 13132)

With respect to Executive Order

13132, the rule does not have significant

Federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

This temporary rule should not affect

the relationship between State and

Federal governments because this rule

concerns administration of a fund

dedicated to IRR projects on or near

Indian reservations that has no effect on

Federal funding of state roads.

Therefore, the rule has no Federalism

effects within the meaning of Executive

Order 13132.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order

12988)

This rule does not unduly burden the

judicial system and meets the

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)

of Executive Order 12988. This rule

contains no drafting errors or ambiguity

and is clearly written to minimize

litigation, provide clear standards,

simplify procedures, and reduce

burden. This rule does not preempt any

statute. We are still pursuing the TEA–

21 mandated negotiated rulemaking

process. The rule is not retroactive with

respect to any funding from any

previous fiscal year (or prospective to

funding from any future fiscal year), but

applies only to 75 percent of fiscal year

2001 IRR program funding.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because this rule does not

impose record keeping or information

collection requirements or the collection

of information from offerors,

contractors, or members of the public

that require the approval of the Office of

Management and Budget under 44

U.S.C. 501 et seq. We already have all

of the necessary information to

implement this rule.

National Environmental Policy Act

This rule is categorically excluded

from the preparation of an

environmental assessment or an

environmental impact statement under

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., because

its environmental effects are too broad,

speculative, or conjectural to lend

themselves to meaningful analysis and

the road projects funded as a result of

this rule will be subject later to the

National Environmental Policy Act

process, either collectively or case-bycase. Further, no extraordinary

circumstances exist to require

preparation of an environmental

assessment or environmental impact

statement.

Government-to-Government

Relationship With Tribes

In accordance with the President’s

memorandum of May 14, 1998,

Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR

27655) and 512 DM 2, we have

evaluated any potential effects upon

federally recognized Indian tribes and

have determined that this rule preserves

the integrity and consistency of the

relative need formula process we have

used since 1993. The only changes we

are making from previous years (which

we also made for fiscal year 2000 IRR

program funds (see Federal Register

Notice 65 FR 7431)) are to modify the

FHWA Price Trends Report indices for

non-reporting states which do not have

current price trends data reports. The

yearly FHWA Report is used as part of

the process to determine the cost-toimprove portion of the relative need

formula. Consultation with tribal

governments and tribal organizations is

ongoing as part of the TEA–21

negotiated rulemaking process and this

distribution uses the TEA–21 Negotiated

Rulemaking Committee’s tribal caucus

recommendation.

List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 170

Highways and roads, Indians—lands.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, we are temporarily amending

Part 170 in Chapter I of Title 25 of the

Code of Federal Regulations as follows.

PART 170—ROADS OF THE BUREAU

OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

1. The authority citation for part 170

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 36 Stat. 861; 78 Stat. 241, 253,

257; 45 Stat. 750 (25 U.S.C. 47; 42 U.S.C.

2000e(b), 2000e–2(i); 23 U.S.C. 101(a), 202,

204), unless otherwise noted.

2. Effective January 9, 2001 through

September 30, 2001, add § 170.4b to

read as follows:

§ 170.4b What formula will BIA use to

distribute 75 percent of fiscal year 2001

Indian Reservation Roads funds?

On January 9, 2001 we will distribute

75 percent of fiscal year 2001 IRR

program funds authorized under Section

1115 of the Transportation Equity Act

for the 21st Century, Public Law 105–

178, 112 Stat. 154. We will distribute

the funds to Indian Reservation Roads

projects on or near Indian reservations

using the relative need formula

established and approved in January

1993. The formula has been modified to

account for non-reporting states by

inserting the latest data reported for

those states for use in the relative need

formula process. In addition, we are

reserving $19.53 million of this

distribution to allow federally

recognized tribes to apply for $35,000

for administrative capacity building for

fiscal year 2001.

Dated: December 29, 2000.

Kevin Gover,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–376 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[CGD 95–054]

RIN 2115–AF17

Regattas and Marine Parades

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule and withdrawal of

interim rule.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 1581

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard withdraws

its interim rule on regattas and marine

parades, which never went into effect.

Instead, it intends to issue new

proposals that would better

accommodate environmental concerns,

while still eliminating overly

burdensome requirements for sponsors

of marine events. Also, the Coast Guard

issues a final rule amending its existing

regulation that specifies the minimum

time before a marine event takes place

for submitting an application to hold the

event. This amendment increases the

amount of time for the Coast Guard to

consider the numerous, additional

statutory requirements, enacted since

the existing regulation was issued,

before it approves an application.

DATES: The interim rule published at 61

FR 33027 on June 26, 1996, is

withdrawn as of March 12, 2001. The

amendments to 33 CFR part 100 are

effective on March 12, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material

received from the public, as well as

documents mentioned in this preamble

as being available in the docket, are part

of docket CGD 95–054. They are

available for inspection or copying at

the Office of the Executive Secretary,

Marine Safety Council (G–LRA/3406),

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100

Second Street SW., room 3406,

Washington, DC 20593–0001, between

9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. The

telephone number is 202–267–1477.

You may obtain a copy of this

document by telephone at the U.S. Coast

Guard Infoline, 1–800–368–5647; by email at uscginfoline@tiscom.uscg.mil; or

by Internet at the Web Site for the Office

of Boating Safety, http://

www.uscgboating.org.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If

you have questions on this rule, contact

Carlton Perry, Project Manager, Office of

Boating Safety, by telephone at 202–

267–0979 or by e-mail at

cperry@comdt.uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On December 26, 1995, we published

an advance notice of proposed

rulemaking (ANPRM) entitled ‘‘Regattas

and Marine Parades; Permit Application

Procedures’’ in the Federal Register (60

FR 66773). On April 17, 1996, we

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Regattas

and Marine Parades’’ (61 FR 16732). On

June 26, 1996, we published an interim

rule with notice of availability of

environmental assessment entitled

‘‘Regattas and Marine Parades’’ (61 FR

33027). As a result of a series of notices

of delay of effective date, the interim

rule never went into effect (61 FR

60027, November 26, 1996; 62 FR

67570, December 29, 1997; 63 FR 71753,

December 30, 1998; and 64 FR 70184,

December 16, 1999). No public hearing

was requested, and none was held.

Withdrawal of Interim Rule

The original purpose for this

rulemaking was to explore ways to

better carry out our statutory

responsibility, under 33 U.S.C. 1233, to

promote safety of life on navigable

waters during regattas and marine

parades. In keeping with the President’s

Regulatory Reinvention Initiative, we

reviewed the regulations on marine

events in 33 CFR part 100 and

determined that the regulations needed

revising to eliminate overly

burdensome, unnecessary, and obsolete

requirements. To that end, this

rulemaking intended to eliminate the

need for Coast Guard marine event

permits, unless a permit was necessary

to advance the statutory purpose of

promoting safety of life during marine

events. The rule would have established

various categories of marine events:

those that did not require either a

written notice to the Coast Guard or a

Coast Guard permit because they clearly

posed no extra or unusual hazard to the

safety of life; those that required written

notice to the Coast Guard because they

may have posed such a hazard; and

those that required an individual Coast

Guard permit because they clearly

posed such a hazard. For a detailed

discussion of this project and our

statutory authority, see the ANPRM,

NPRM, and interim rule mentioned

under ‘‘Regulatory History’’ in this

preamble.

During the course of this project, we

consulted with, and continue to consult

with, other governmental agencies on

the likely environmental effects of our

proposals. As a result of the concerns of

environmental agencies on the possible

adverse effects of our proposals on the

environment and, in particular, on

endangered species, we have decided to

withdraw this interim rule and close

CGD 95–054. In its place, we plan to

develop new alternatives through a new

rulemaking project. In this new project,

we will again address our original

concerns of eliminating overly

burdensome requirements on the

sponsors of events, while being

responsive to environmental issues.

Final Rule Amending the Lead Time for

Applications for Marine Events

This final rule amends 33 CFR 100.15

entitled ‘‘Submission of application.’’

Before this amendment, paragraph (c) of

§ 100.15 stated that an application to

hold a proposed marine event must be

submitted to the Coast Guard no less

than 30 days before the start of the

event. In § 100.17(c) of the interim rule,

the 30-day period was increased to 135

days before the event or, if all of the

following apply, to 60 days before the

event:

(1) If the sponsor submitted an

application for the event in the year

immediately preceding.

(2) If the particulars of the event, such

as its nature, location, and scheduling,

are essentially the same as for the

previous event.

(3) If the Coast Guard did not require

a permit for the previous event.

In the final rule, we revised the 60-

day criteria to reflect the current

regulations on issuing permits for

recurring events. To avoid potential

burdens of an abrupt transition to the

new regulation in paragraph (c), new

paragraphs (d) and (e) of § 100.15

provide special lead times for events to

be held within 196 days after the

effective date of the final rule.

Discussion of Comments to § 100.17(c)

in the Interim Rule on the Lead Time

for Applications for Marine Events

1. One comment to the interim rule

stated that an extension of the existing

30-day deadline for submitting

applications to 135 days is

unnecessarily burdensome.

Since 1963, when the existing

regulations were issued, the number of

factors that are required to be

considered in the permitting process

have greatly increased. Additional

statutes enacted since 1963 must now be

considered before a permit is issued. For

example, compliance with the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42

U.S.C. 4321–4347) alone can delay

approval of a permit for 120 days or

more. Furthermore, while marine events

have become larger, faster, and more

frequent and have a greater impact on

navigation, the Coast Guard’s resources

for processing permits have been

reduced. The 135-day period is based on

the minimum time needed for the Coast

Guard to review the application and

verify its contents; to consult with other

agencies and allow time for their

responses; to determine whether a

special local regulation under 33 CFR

100.35 is needed and, if so, issue that

regulation; to determine if changes to

the application are needed; and to

prepare the required environmental

documentation.

For annually recurring events that

meet certain specified criteria, the

interim rule in § 100.17(c) and this final

rule in § 100.15(c) provide for

1582 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

submitting an application a minimum of

60 days before the event.

2. One comment asked us to clarify

when an event would be subject to the

new rules. For example, what if the

sponsor has met the 30-day minimum

for requesting a permit under paragraph

(c) of previous § 100.15 and, in the

meantime, this final rule goes into

effect, with its 135-day requirement in

new § 100.15(c)? The new requirement

could force the sponsor to cancel the

event.

We agree that a transition period is

needed. See new paragraphs (d) and (e)

of § 100.15 in this final rule.

Regulatory Evaluation

This final 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 Transportation (DOT)

(44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979).

We expect the economic impact of the

final rule to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10e of the regulatory policies and

procedures of DOT is unnecessary. The

final rule increases the minimum

amount of time necessary for the Coast

Guard to process marine-event

applications. This means that some

sponsors of events may have to plan

their events earlier. Though this

increase may impose a burden on those

sponsors, it is necessary to meet new

statutory considerations affecting

approval of applications and to allow

agencies that must be consulted to have

a reasonable amount of time to respond.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered

whether this final 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.

As discussed in the ‘‘Regulatory

Evaluation’’ section of this preamble,

the need for this rule is due to the

increased review time needed to comply

with statutes enacted after the previous

regulation was issued, as well as to the

increasing number of events held. The

final rule applies to all marine-event

sponsors, both large and small. Some

sponsors may now find the need to plan

events farther into the future than they

have in the past, though having to plan

farther into the future does not

necessarily create an economic impact.

However, to keep the lead-time to the

minimum necessary, the final rule

provides for a shorter lead-time for

events that repeat annually and that

meet the criteria listed in § 100.15(c).

Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies

under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–

121), we offered, under the NPRM and

interim rule, to assist small entities in

understanding this rulemaking so that

they could better evaluate its effects on

them and participate in the rulemaking.

Small businesses may send comments

on the actions of Federal employees

who enforce, or otherwise determine

compliance with, Federal regulations to

the Small Business and Agriculture

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman

and the Regional Small Business

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The

Ombudsman evaluates these actions

annually and rates each agency’s

responsiveness to small business. If you

wish to comment on actions by

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).

Collection of Information

This final rule calls for no new

collection of information under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501–3520). This rule does not

affect the content of, or burden of

collecting information for, marine event

application.

Federalism

We have analyzed this rule under

Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and

have determined that it does not have

implications for federalism under that

Order.

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 regulatory actions not specifically

required by law. 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 final 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 final rule

under Executive Order 13045,

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks. This rule is not an economically

significant rule and does not concern an

environmental risk to health or risk to

safety that may disproportionately affect

children.

Environment

We have considered the

environmental impact of this final rule

and concluded that, under figure 2–1,

paragraph (34)(a), of Commandant

Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. This rule

is administrative in nature and concerns

the timeframe for submitting an

application. It will have no direct affect

on the environment. A ‘‘Categorical

Exclusion Determination’’ is available in

the docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

Marine safety, Navigation (water),

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33

CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100—MARINE EVENTS

1. Revise the authority citation for

part 100 to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. The interim rule published at 61 FR

33027 on June 26, 1996, is withdrawn.

3. In § 100.15, revise paragraph (c),

redesignate paragraph (d) as paragraph

(f), and add new paragraphs (d) and (e)

to read as follows:

§ 100.15 Submission of application.

* * * * *

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 1583

(c) Except as in paragraphs (d) and (e)

of this section, the application must be

submitted no less than 135 days before

the start of the proposed event.

However, if all of the following criteria

are met, the application must be

submitted no less than 60 days before

the start of the proposed event:

(1) The sponsor submitted an

application for the event in the year

immediately preceding.

(2) The nature, location, scheduling,

and other relevant information

contained in the previous application

are essentially the same.

(3) The Coast Guard received no

objection to the previous application.

(4) The Coast Guard did not

promulgate special local regulations for

the previous event.

(5) The Coast Guard approved the

previous event.

(d) For marine events to be held on or

before July 10, 2001, the application

must be submitted no less than 30 days

before the start of the proposed event.

(e) For marine events to be held after

July 10, 2001 but before September 24,

2001, the application must be submitted

no less than 60 days before the start of

the proposed event.

* * * * *

Dated: December 29, 2000.

Terry M. Cross,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Operations.

[FR Doc. 01–546 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08–00–033]

RIN 2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operating Regulation;

Mississippi River, Iowa and Illinois

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary deviation.

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth

Coast Guard District has authorized a

temporary deviation from the regulation

governing the Rock Island Railroad and

Highway Drawbridge, Mile 482.9, Upper

Mississippi River at Davenport, Iowa.

This deviation allows the drawbridge to

remain closed to navigation for 57 days

from 7 a.m., January 1, 2001, until 7

a.m., February 26, 2001. This action is

required to allow the bridge owner time

for preventive maintenance in the

winter, before Lock 12 opens March 1,

2001, and when there is less impact on

navigation; instead of scheduling

maintenance in the summer, when river

traffic increases.

DATES: This temporary deviation is

effective from 7 a.m., January 1, 2001,

until 7 a.m., February 26, 2001.

FOR FUTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger

K. Wiebusch, Bridge Administrator,

Commander (obr), Eighth Coast Guard

District, 1222 Spruce Street, St. Louis,

MO 63103–2832, (314) 539–3900,

extension 378.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Rock

Island Railroad and Highway

Drawbridge provides a vertical

clearance of 23.8 feet above normal pool

in the closed-to-navigation position.

Navigation on the waterway consists

primarily of commercial tows and

recreational watercraft. This deviation

has been coordinated with waterway

users who do not object.

This deviation allows the bridge to

remain closed-to-navigation from 7 a.m.,

January 1, 2001, to 7 a.m., February 26,

2001. The drawbridge normally opens

on signal.

Dated: December 20, 2000.

Paul J. Pluta,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

Eighth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 01–548 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07–00–135]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations;

Memorial Bridge, Across the

Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 830.6,

Volusia County, Daytona Beach, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation

from regulations.

SUMMARY: The Commander, Seventh

Coast Guard District, has approved a

temporary deviation from the

regulations governing the operation of

the Memorial bridge across the

Intracoastal Waterway, mile 830.6,

Volusia County, Daytona Beach, Florida.

This deviation allows the drawbridge

owner or operator to only open a single

leaf, from January 8, 2001, to January 19,

2001. This temporary deviation is

required to allow the bridge owner to

safely complete repairs of the bridge.

DATES: This deviation is effective from

January 8, 2001, to January 19, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Barry Dragon, Chief, Operations Section,

Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge

Section at (305) 415–6743.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Memorial bridge across the Gulf

Intracoastal Waterway at Volusia

County, Daytona Beach, is a double leaf

bridge with a vertical clearance of 21

feet above mean high water (MHW)

measured at the fenders in the closed

position with a horizontal clearance of

90 feet. On November 28, 2000, Sieg and

Ambachtsheer, Inc., contractors

representing the drawbridge owner,

requested a deviation from the current

operating regulation in 33 CFR 117.5

which requires drawbridges to open

promptly and fully when a request to

open is given. This temporary deviation

was requested to allow necessary repairs

to the drawbridge in a critical, timesensitive manner.

The District Commander has granted

a temporary deviation from the

operating requirements listed in 33 CFR

117.5 for the purpose of repair

completion of the drawbridge. Under

this deviation, the Memorial Bridge

need only open one leaf from January 8,

2001 until January 19, 2001. The

deviation is effective beginning January

8, 2001, to January 19, 2001.

Dated: December 21, 2000.

Greg E. Shapley,

Chief, Bridge Administration, Seventh Coast

Guard District.

[FR Doc. 01–547 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07–00–132]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations;

Cortez Bridge (SR 684), Across the

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 87.4,

Sarasota County, Cortez, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation

from regulations.

SUMMARY: The Commander, Seventh

Coast Guard District, has approved a

temporary deviation from the

regulations governing the operation of

the Cortez bridge across the Gulf

Intracoastal Waterway, mile 87.4,

Sarasota County, Cortez, Florida. This

deviation allows the drawbridge owner

or operator to only open one leaf of the

drawbridge, from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m., on

January 10, 2001. This temporary

deviation is required to allow the bridge

owner to safely complete repairs of the

bridge.