41106 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 CFR part 39) as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. Section 39.13 is amended by 

adding a new airworthiness directive to 

read as follows: 

Robinson Helicopter Company: Docket No. 

FAA–2010–0711; Directorate Identifier 

2008–SW–25–AD. 

Applicability: Model R22, R22 Alpha, R22 

Beta, and R22 Mariner helicopters, serial 

numbers (S/N) 0002 through 3325, that have 

more than 2,200 hours total time-in-service 

(TIS); and Model R44 and R44 II helicopters, 

S/N 0001 through 1200, that have more than 

2,200 hours total TIS, certificated in any 

category. 

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 

accomplished previously. 

To prevent the tail rotor (T/R) control 

pedal bearing block support (support) from 

breaking, which can bind the T/R control 

pedals, resulting in a reduction of yaw 

control and subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter, accomplish the following: 

(a) Within 100 hours TIS, visually inspect 

each A359–1 (left) and A359–2 (right) pedal 

support for a crack by referring to the figure 

in Robinson Helicopter Company (Robinson) 

Service Bulletin SB–97, dated February 22, 

2008 (SB–97) for all Model R22 helicopters, 

and Robinson Service Bulletin SB–63, dated 

February 22, 2008 (SB–63) for all Model R44 

helicopters. 

(1) If you find a crack in a support, before 

further flight, replace the cracked support 

with an airworthy support that is at least 

0.050-inch thick. 

(2) For each uncracked support, measure 

the thickness of the support. If the support 

is less than 0.050-inch thick, before further 

flight, install a safety tab on the support in 

accordance with steps 4 and 5 of the 

Compliance Procedures section in SB–97 or 

SB–63, as appropriate for your model 

helicopter. 

(b) At the next 2,200 hours TIS overhaul, 

replace any support that is less than 0.050- 

inch thick, with an airworthy support that is 

at least 0.050-inch thick. 

(c) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Contact the Manager, Los Angeles 

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, ATTN: 

Eric D. Schrieber, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 

90712, telephone (562) 627–5348, fax (562) 

627–5210 (regarding Model R22 helicopters); 

or ATTN: Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, telephone (562) 627–5232, fax 

(562) 627–5210 (regarding Model R44 

helicopters) for information about previously 

approved alternative methods of compliance. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 6, 

2010. 

Mark R. Schilling, 

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17283 Filed 7–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DELAWARE RIVER BASIN 

COMMISSION 

18 CFR Part 410 

Amendments to the Water Quality 

Regulations, Water Code and 

Comprehensive Plan to Update Water 

Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants in 

the Delaware Estuary and Extend 

These Criteria to Delaware Bay 

AGENCY: Delaware River Basin 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Delaware River Basin 

Commission (DRBC or ‘‘Commission’’) 

will hold a public hearing to receive 

comments on proposed amendments to 

the Commission’s Water Quality 

Regulations, Water Code and 

Comprehensive Plan to update many of 

the Commission’s stream quality 

objectives (also called water quality 

criteria) for human health and aquatic 

life for toxic pollutants in the Delaware 

Estuary (DRBC Water Quality Zones 2 

through 5) and to extend application of 

the criteria to Delaware Bay (DRBC 

Water Quality Zone 6). The proposed 

changes will bring the Commission’s 

criteria for toxic pollutants into 

conformity with current guidance 

published by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and provide a 

more consistent regulatory framework 

for managing the tidal portion of the 

main stem Delaware River. 

DATES: The public hearing will take 

place on Thursday, September 23, 2010 

at 2:30 p.m. and will continue on that 

day until all those who wish to testify 

are afforded an opportunity to do so. 

Written comments will be accepted 

through 5 p.m. on Friday, October 1, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will take 

place in the Goddard Room at the 

Commission’s office building, located at 

25 State Police Drive, West Trenton, 

New Jersey. Driving directions are 

available on the Commission’s Web site, 

http://www.drbc.net. Please do not rely 

on Internet mapping services as they 

may not provide accurate directions to 

this location. 

Written comments may be submitted 

by e-mail to regs@drbc.state.nj.us by fax 

to Regulations at 609–883–9522; by U.S. 

Mail to Regulations c/o Commission 

Secretary, DRBC, P.O. Box 7360, West 

Trenton, NJ 08628–0360; or by private 

mail carrier to Regulations c/o 

Commission Secretary, DRBC, 25 State 

Police Drive, West Trenton, NJ 08628– 

0360. In all cases, please include the 

commenter’s name, address and 

affiliation if any in the comment and 

include ‘‘Water Quality Criteria’’ in the 

subject line. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

current rule and the full text of the 

proposed amendments are posted on the 

Commission’s Web site, http:// 

www.drbc.net, along with the report 

entitled ‘‘Water Quality Criteria for 

Toxic Pollutants for Zones 2–6 of the 

Delaware Estuary: Basis and 

Background Document’’ (DRBC, June 

2010) and a set of PowerPoint slides 

presented to the Commission at the 

latter’s public meeting on December 9, 

2009 by the chair of the Commission’s 

Toxics Advisory Committee. Hard 

copies of these materials may be 

obtained for the price of postage by 

contacting Ms. Paula Schmitt at 609– 

883–9500, ext. 224. For questions about 

the technical basis for the rule, please 

contact Dr. Ronald MacGillivray at 609– 

477–7252. For queries about the 

rulemaking process, please contact 

Pamela Bush at 609–477–7203. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background. At the request of the 

states of Delaware, New Jersey and 

Pennsylvania, which border the 

Delaware Estuary (hereinafter, ‘‘the 

Estuary States’’), the Commission in 

1996 adopted water quality criteria for 

human health and aquatic life for Water 

Quality Zones 2 through 5 (Trenton, 

New Jersey to Delaware Bay) of the main 

stem Delaware River and the tidal 

portions of its tributaries for a set of 

pollutants that included the list of 

Priority Pollutants published by the 

EPA in accordance with section 307 of 

the federal Clean Water Act (CWA); 

other pollutants for which EPA had 

published national recommended 

criteria in accordance with section 

304(a) of the CWA; and additional 

pollutants for which one or more of the 

Estuary States had adopted criteria. See 

40 CFR 401.15 (consisting of a list of 65 

toxic pollutants, including categories of 

pollutants, for which effluent 

limitations are required in accordance 

with section 307(a)(1) of the Clean 

Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1317(a)(1)); 

Appendix A of 40 CFR Part 423 

(consisting of a list of 129 ‘‘Priority 

Pollutants,’’ individual chemicals and 

forms of chemicals for which EPA has 

established national criteria); and 33 

U.S.C. 1314(a) (providing for criteria 

development and publication by EPA). 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41107 

Managing an interstate waterway that 

is simultaneously an industrial and 

commercial hub, a source of drinking 

water for urban and suburban 

populations in three states and a fragile 

tidal ecosystem is a complex task. After 

nearly fifteen years of applying uniform 

human health and aquatic life criteria in 

the Delaware Estuary, the Commission 

has determined that maintaining a 

uniform set of criteria in a single 

regulatory code is an essential predicate 

to measuring and managing the 

ecological health of this vital interstate 

resource. 

Since 1996, EPA has updated its 

guidance for the development of human 

health water quality criteria and its list 

of national recommended water quality 

criteria for many toxic pollutants to 

reflect advances in scientific knowledge. 

Although the states have independently 

amended some of their criteria to 

conform to the current guidance and 

national recommended criteria, the 

Commission has not yet done so. The 

result is that many of DRBC’s estuary 

toxics criteria are not currently 

consistent with state criteria, best 

available science, or current EPA 

guidance. Moreover, because the Bay 

and Estuary comprise a single tidal 

system in which each water quality 

zone is at times downstream and at 

times upstream of the adjacent zone or 

zones, regulators, dischargers and other 

stakeholders have determined that they 

are ill-served by excluding the Bay from 

application of uniform criteria in the 

Estuary. Amending the criteria at this 

time is necessary to restore consistency 

and fairness in the regulation of 

discharges, to facilitate coordination 

among state and federal programs and to 

continue to ensure that regulation of 

water quality in the shared interstate 

waters of the Estuary and Bay is based 

on the best science available. 

The proposed amendments to the 

Commission’s human health and 

aquatic life criteria for the Estuary and 

Bay were developed by the 

Commission’s standing Toxics Advisory 

Committee (TAC), comprised of 

representatives of the four basin states— 

Delaware, New Jersey, New York and 

Pennsylvania—and members of the 

academic, agricultural, public health, 

industrial and municipal sectors and 

non-governmental environmental 

community. The TAC in 2007 adopted 

as its objectives (a) evaluating recent 

data and current methodologies for 

establishing water quality criteria for 

toxic pollutants and (b) developing 

recommendations for revising the 

Commission’s 1996 criteria to reflect 

current science and risk assessment 

procedures and provide for consistency 

across interstate waters. The TAC’s 

recommendations were formally 

presented to the Commissioners at a 

public meeting on December 9, 2009 by 

then TAC chair, Christopher S. Crocket 

of the Philadelphia Water Department. 

Dr. Crockett’s PowerPoint presentation 

is available on the Commission’s Web 

site. 

No Change Proposed to Criteria for 

PCBs and Taste and Odor. The 

amendments proposed by the 

Commission in this rulemaking do not 

include changes to the Commission’s 

criteria for polychlorinated biphenyls 

(PCBs), currently listed in Table 6 

(criteria for carcinogens) and Table 7 

(criteria for systemic toxicants) of 

Article 3 of the Commission’s Water 

Quality Regulations and Water Code, or 

to the criteria to protect the taste and 

odor of ingested water and fish, set forth 

in Table 4 of the same Article. The 

Commission initiated a separate 

rulemaking in August of 2009 to update 

its human health criteria for 

carcinogenic effects for PCBs in the 

Delaware Estuary (see 74 FR 41100). 

The comment period for that proposal 

ended on October 19, 2009 and the 

Commission has not yet approved a 

final rule. The current PCB criteria will 

continue in effect pending completion 

of the Commission’s separate 

rulemaking for PCBs. The Commission’s 

Toxics Advisory Committee has not yet 

taken up the matter of revisions to the 

criteria to protect taste and odor. 

Proposed Changes. The Commission’s 

criteria for human health and aquatic 

life in the Delaware Estuary are listed in 

tables 3, 5, 6 and 7 of section 3.30 

‘‘Interstate Streams—Tidal’’ of the Water 

Quality Regulations and Water Code. In 

addition to extending these criteria to 

Water Quality Zone 6, two major types 

of changes to the criteria are proposed: 

(1) Compounds are proposed to be 

added to or deleted from the four tables 

and (2) numeric criteria for many of the 

compounds currently listed in the tables 

are proposed to be revised. In addition, 

to assist users sub-headings have been 

added for categories of pollutants 

(metals, pesticides, etc.) and the 

sequence of the parameters has been 

modified to arrange them within these 

categories. Minor changes for 

consistency in spelling and 

capitalization are also proposed. The 

additions, deletions and criteria changes 

are proposed in order to make the list 

of regulated compounds consistent with 

current EPA guidance and to ensure the 

criteria are uniform throughout the 

shared waters. The Basis and 

Background Document cited above sets 

forth in detail the policies and technical 

assumptions on which the TAC relied in 

developing the revised criteria. 

The proposed changes to tables 3, 5, 

6 and 7 are described briefly below: 

For Table 3, ‘‘Maximum Contaminant 

Levels [‘‘MCLs’’] to be Applied as 

Human Health Stream Quality 

Objectives in Zones 2 and 3’’: 

• Antimony, Cadmium, 1,2- 

Dichloropropane, Ethylbenzene and 

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene are proposed to 

be removed because the proposed 

updates to Table 7 (criteria for systemic 

toxicants) would establish DRBC criteria 

for these compounds more stringent 

than the MCLs. 

• Nickel is proposed to be removed 

because the MCL for nickel was 

withdrawn by the EPA. 

• Chromium (total) is proposed to be 

replaced by Chromium III for 

consistency with current EPA guidance. 

• Current MCL values for Beryllium, 

Copper, Lead, alpha-BHC, beta-BHC, 

2,4-Dichloro-phenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), 

Methoxychlor, Toxaphene, Dioxin 

(2,3,7,8-TCDD), 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic acid (2,4,5-TPSilvex), Benzene, Carbon Tetrachloride, 

1,2-Dichloroethane, 1,1- 

Dichloroethylene, Dichloromethane 

(methylene chloride), 

Tetrachloroethylene (PCE), Toluene, 

1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 1,1,2- 

Trichloroethane, Trichloroethylene, 

Vinyl Chloride, Benzo(a)pyrene, 

Asbestos, Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate, 

Fluoride, Nitrate, and 

Pentachlorophenol are proposed to be 

added because these MCL values were 

developed by EPA after 1996 in 

accordance with the Safe Drinking 

Water Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1412g–1(b). 

As to Table 5, ‘‘Stream Quality 

Objectives for Toxic Pollutants for the 

Protection of Aquatic Life’’, Table 6, 

‘‘Stream Quality Objectives for 

Carcinogens’’ and Table 7, ‘‘Stream 

Quality Objectives for Systemic 

Toxicants,’’ nearly all of the freshwater 

and marine criteria are proposed to be 

updated to conform to current EPA 

guidance, resulting in minor changes in 

most instances and substantial changes 

in some. Most but not all of the 

proposed criteria are more stringent 

than the existing criteria. 

Proposed changes to Table 6 (criteria 

for carcinogens) also include the 

following: 

• Beryllium and 1,1-Dichloroethene 

are proposed to be removed because 

EPA no longer lists these compounds as 

carcinogens. 

• 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane is 

proposed to be removed because it is no 

longer recommended by the EPA for 

water quality criteria development. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
41108 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

• Arsenic, beta-BHC, N-Nitrosodi-Nbutylamine, N-Nitrosodiethylamine, and 

N-Nitrosopyrrolidine are proposed to be 

added because EPA and an Estuary State 

have adopted criteria for them. 

• Dinitrotoluene mixture (2, 4 & 2, 6) 

is proposed to be replaced by 2, 4- 

Dinitrotoluene to be consistent with 

current EPA guidance. 

• Hexachlorobutadiene is proposed to 

be moved to Table 6 (criteria for 

carcinogens) from Table 7 because its 

toxicity is based on carcinogenicity. 

Proposed changes to Table 7 (criteria 

for systemic toxicants) also include the 

following: 

• 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane is 

proposed to be removed because it is no 

longer recommended by the EPA for 

water quality criteria development. 

• Chromium (Total), Methylmercury, 

alpha-Endosulfan, beta-Endosulfan, 

Endosulfan Sulfate, Endrin Aldehyde, 

Benzene, 2-Chloronaphthalene, 

Cyanide, 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol, 

Pentachlorobenzene, 1,2,4,5- 

Tetrachloro-benzene, 2,4,5- 

Trichlorophenol, and Vinyl Chloride are 

proposed to be added to Table 7 because 

EPA and an Estuary State adopted 

criteria for them. 

• DDT is proposed to be replaced 

with ‘‘DDT and Metabolites (DDD and 

DDE)’’ to conform to current EPA 

guidance relating to the systemic 

toxicity of DDT and its degradation 

products, DDD and DDE. DDT, DDD and 

DDE, which are also deemed to be 

carcinogens, continue to be listed 

individually in Table 6. 

• Hexachlorobutadiene has been 

moved from Table 7 to Table 6 because 

its toxicity is based on carcinogenicity. 

• The column identifying EPA 

classifications is proposed to be 

removed from Table 7 because this 

information is not needed for 

application of the criteria for systemic 

toxicants. Detailed information on 

derivation of the criteria, including EPA 

classifications, is presented in the Basis 

and Background Document posted on 

DRBC’s Web site. 

Extension of Criteria to Delaware Bay 

(Zone 6). A new section 3.10.6C.11. is 

proposed to be added to make tables 3 

through 7 of Article 3 of the Water 

Quality Regulations and Water Code 

applicable to Water Quality Zone 6, 

Delaware Bay. 

It is proposed to amend the Water 

Quality Regulations and Water Code as 

follows: 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41109 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.020</GPH>
41110 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.021</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41111 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.022</GPH>
41112 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.023</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41113 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.024</GPH>
41114 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.025</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41115 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.026</GPH>
41116 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.027</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41117 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.028</GPH>
41118 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15JY10.029</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 135 / Thursday, July 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 41119 

Dated: July 8, 2010. 

Pamela M. Bush, 

Commission Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17118 Filed 7–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6360–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0518] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulations; Sabine 

River, Orange, TX 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish a temporary Special Local 

Regulation in the Port Arthur Captain of 

the Port Zone on the Sabine River, 

Orange, Texas. This Special Local 

Regulation is intended to restrict vessels 

from portions of the Sabine River during 

the Thunder on the Sabine boat races. 

This Special Local Regulation is 

necessary to protect spectators and 

vessels from the hazards associated with 

powerboat races. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before August 16, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2010–0518 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail Mr. Scott Whalen, 

Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur, TX, 

Coast Guard; telephone 409–719–5086, 

e-mail scott.k.whalen@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2010–0518), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online (via http:// 

www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or 

mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a telephone number in the 

body of your document so that we can 

contact you if we have questions 

regarding your submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu 

select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert 

‘‘USCG–2010–0518’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the 

balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. 

If you submit your comments by mail or 

hand delivery, submit them in an 

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 

11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit 

comments by mail and would like to 

know that they reached the Facility, 

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period and may 

change the rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010– 

0518’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. You may also visit the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation to use 

the Docket Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting 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 

This temporary special local 

regulation is necessary to ensure the 

safety of vessels and spectators from 

hazards associated with a powerboat 

race. The Captain of the Port has 

determined that powerboat races in 

close proximity to watercraft and 

infrastructure pose significant risk to 

public safety and property. The likely 

combination of large numbers of 

recreation vessels, powerboats traveling 

at high speeds, and large numbers of 

spectators in close proximity to the 

water could easily result in serious 

injuries or fatalities. Establishing a 

special local regulation around the 

location of the race course will help 

ensure the safety of persons and 

property at these events and help 

minimize the associated risks. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with PROPOSALS