This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

61455

Vol. 69, No. 201

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01–04–106] 

RIN 1625–AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Connecticut River, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to temporarily change the drawbridge 

operation regulations for the operation 

of the Route 82 Bridge, at mile 16.8, 

across the Connecticut River at East 

Haddam, Connecticut. This proposed 

rule would allow the bridge to operate 

on fixed opening schedule and permit 

several bridge closures from December 

1, 2004 through March 31, 2006, to 

facilitate rehabilitation construction at 

the bridge. This work was previously 

scheduled last year to be in effect from 

November 1, 2002 through October 31, 

2003. This work was postponed for over 

one year due to project funding issues. 

This action is necessary to facilitate 

major rehabilitation of the bridge.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast 

Guard on or before November 18, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to 

Commander (obr), First Coast Guard 

District, Bridge Branch, One South 

Street, Battery Park Building, New York, 

New York, 10004, or deliver them to the 

same address between 7 a.m. and 3 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is (212) 668–7165. The First Coast 

Guard District, Bridge Branch, 

maintains the public docket for this 

rulemaking. Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents indicated in this preamble as 

being available in the docket, will 

become part of this docket and will be 

available for inspection or copying at 

the First Coast Guard District, Bridge 

Branch, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First 

Coast Guard District, (212) 668–7195.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard finds that good 

reason exists for publishing an NPRM 

with a shortened comment period of 30 

days. The shortened comment period 

will allow time to publish a final rule 

that will comply with notice 

requirements under 5 U.S.C. (d)(3) in 

time for work beginning on December 1, 

2004, for bridge rehabilitation work. 

The Coast Guard also believes this 

shortened comment period is reasonable 

because a notice of proposed 

rulemaking was previously published 

on September 10, 2002, for this same 

project with a similar opening schedule 

and no comments were received in 

response to that proposed rule. 

Request for Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments or related material. If you do 

so, please include your name and 

address, identify the docket number for 

this rulemaking (CGD01–04–106), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. Please submit all comments 

and related material in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying. If you would like 

to know if they reached us, please 

enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period. We may 

change this proposed rule in view of 

them. 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for a meeting by writing to the First 

Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at 

the address under ADDRESSES explaining 

why one 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 

The Route 82 Bridge has a vertical 

clearance of 22 feet at mean high water, 

and 25 feet at mean low water in the 

closed position. The existing 

drawbridge operating regulations listed 

at 33 CFR 117.205(c), require the bridge 

to open on signal at all times; except 

that, from May 15 to October 31, 9 a.m. 

to 9 p.m., the bridge is required to open 

for recreational vessels on the hour and 

half hour only. The bridge is required to 

open on signal at all times for 

commercial vessels. 

The Route 82 Bridge was scheduled 

for major repairs in the summer of 2001, 

and again in 2002, but due to project 

funding shortfalls the work was 

delayed. Subsequent to that, the bridge 

has continued to deteriorate. Funding 

has now been made available and the 

necessary repairs need to be performed 

with all due speed to assure safe reliable 

continued operation of the bridge. 

The bridge owner, Connecticut 

Department of Transportation, has 

requested a temporary rule to allow the 

bridge to open at specific times. 

Commercial vessels may obtain bridge 

openings at any time provided they 

provide a two-hour advance notice to 

the bridge tender. 

The bridge owner has also requested 

additional closures which would restrict 

both recreational and commercial 

traffic. The requested dates include: one 

seven day bridge closure from March 21 

through March 28, 2005; three 8-hour 

closures on October 18, 19 and 20, 2005; 

and one 24-hour closure on December 

14, 2005. 

The exact dates and times for the 

above closures may change slightly due 

to unforeseen issues. The Coast Guard 

will publish the exact times and dates 

in the Local Notice to Mariners at least 

thirty days in advance of the anticipated 

occurrence to assist mariners in their 

planning should the above dates and 

times change. 

Under this proposed rule, in effect 

from December 1, 2004 through March 

31, 2006, the Route 82 Bridge would 

operate as follows: 

From November 1 through July 6, the 

draw shall open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 

1:30 p.m., and 8 p.m., daily. 

From July 7 through October 31, the 

draw shall open on signal Monday 

through Thursday at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 

p.m., and 8 p.m. On Friday the draw 

shall open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 

p.m., 8 p.m., and 11:30 p.m. On 

Saturday and Sunday the draw shall 

open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 8:30 a.m., 

1:30 p.m., 4 p.m., 8 p.m., and 11:30 p.m. 

61456 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

At all times, other than during the 

closure periods identified above, the 

draw shall open on signal for 

commercial vessels provided at least a 

two-hour advance notice is given. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

This proposed change would amend 

33 CFR § 117.205 by suspending 

paragraph (c) and adding a new 

temporary paragraph (d) that would list 

the temporary fixed bridge opening 

schedule for the Route 82 Bridge. 

Additionally, the bridge owner has 

also requested closures which would 

restrict both recreational and 

commercial traffic. The requested dates 

include: one 7-day bridge closure from 

March 21 through March 28, 2005; three 

8-hour closures on October 18, 19 and 

20, 2005; and one 24-hour closure on 

December 14, 2005. 

At all other times other than during 

the specified closure periods, the draw 

would open on signal at any time for 

commercial vessels provided at least a 

two-hour advance notice is given.

Regulatory Evaluation 

This proposed 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 

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 Homeland Security. 

We expect the economic impact of 

this proposed rule to be so minimal that 

a full Regulatory Evaluation, under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS, is unnecessary. 

This conclusion is based on the fact 

that vessel traffic will still be able to 

transit through the Route 82 Bridge 

under a fixed opening schedule that is 

expected to meet the reasonable needs 

of navigation. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered 

whether this proposed 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 

section 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This conclusion is based on the fact 

that vessel traffic will still be able to 

transit through the Route 82 Bridge 

under a fixed opening schedule that is 

expected to meet the reasonable needs 

of navigation. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–

121), we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact us in writing 

at, Commander (obr), First Coast Guard 

District, Bridge Branch, 408 Atlantic 

Avenue, Boston, MA. 02110–3350. The 

telephone number is (617) 223–8364. 

The Coast Guard will not retaliate 

against small entities that question or 

complain about this rule or any policy 

or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not 

result in such an expenditure, we do 

discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 

in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not effect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under E.O. 

12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed 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 proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would 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 would 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 19, 2004 / Proposed Rules 61457

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 proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Commandant Instruction 

M16475.1D, which guides 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 (32)(e), of the 

Instruction, from further environment 

documentation because it has been 

determined that the promulgation of 

operating regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges are categorically excluded.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued 

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 

Stat. 5039. 

2. From December 1, 2004 through 

March 31, 2006, § 117.205 is 

temporarily amended by suspending 

paragraph (c) and adding a new 

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 117.205 Connecticut River

* * * * *

(d) The draw of the Route 82 Bridge, 

mile 16.8, at East Haddam shall operate 

as follows: 

(1) From November 1 through July 6 

the draw shall open on signal at 5:30 

a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8 p.m., daily. 

(2) From July 7 through October 31, 

Monday through Thursday, the draw 

shall open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 

p.m., and 8 p.m. On Friday the draw 

shall open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 

p.m., 8 p.m., and 11:30 p.m. On 

Saturday and Sunday the draw shall 

open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 8:30 a.m., 

1:30 p.m., 4 p.m., 8 p.m., and 11:30 p.m. 

(3) The draw need not open for the 

passage of vessel traffic on the following 

dates: March 21, 2005 through March 

28, 2005; October 18, 19 and 20, 2005; 

and December 14, 2005. 

(4) At all times, other than the dates 

identified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, the draw shall open on signal 

for commercial vessels provided at least 

a two-hour advance notice is given.

Dated: October 6, 2004. 

David P. Pekoske, 

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

First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–23372 Filed 10–18–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket No. FEMA–P–7661] 

Proposed Flood Elevation 

Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Emergency 

Preparedness and Response Directorate, 

Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: Technical information or 

comments are requested on the 

proposed Base (1% annual-chance) 

Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed 

BFE modifications for the communities 

listed below. The BFEs and modified 

BFEs are the basis for the floodplain 

management measures that the 

community is required either to adopt 

or to show evidence of being already in 

effect in order to qualify or remain 

qualified for participation in the 

National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP).

DATES: The comment period is ninety 

(90) days following the second 

publication of this proposed rule in a 

newspaper of local circulation in each 

community.

ADDRESSES: The proposed BFEs for each 

community are available for inspection 

at the office of the Chief Executive 

Officer of each community. The 

respective addresses are listed in the 

table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Doug Bellomo, P.E., Hazard 

Identification Section, Emergency 

Preparedness and Response Directorate, 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20472, (202) 646–2903.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

makes the final determinations listed 

below for the modified BFEs for each 

community listed. These modified 

elevations have been published in 

newspapers of local circulation and 

ninety (90) days have elapsed since that 

publication. The Mitigation Division 

Director of the Emergency Preparedness 

and Response Directorate has resolved 

any appeals resulting from this 

notification. 

These proposed BFEs and modified 

BFEs, together with the floodplain 

management criteria required by 44 CFR 

60.3, are the minimum that are required. 

They should not be construed to mean 

that the community must change any 

existing ordinances that are more 

stringent in their floodplain 

management requirements. The 

community may at any time enact 

stricter requirements of its own, or 

pursuant to policies established by other 

Federal, State, or regional entities. 

These proposed elevations are used to 

meet the floodplain management 

requirements of the NFIP and are also 

used to calculate the appropriate flood 

insurance premium rates for new 

buildings built after these elevations are 

made final, and for the contents in these 

buildings. 

National Environmental Policy Act.

This proposed rule is categorically 

excluded from the requirements of 44 

CFR Part 10, Environmental 

Consideration. No environmental 

impact assessment has been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 

Mitigation Division Director of the 

Emergency Preparedness and Response 

Directorate certifies that this rule is 

exempt from the requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act because 

modified base flood elevations are 

required by the Flood Disaster 

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, 

and are required to maintain community 

eligibility in the NFIP. No regulatory 

flexibility analysis has been prepared. 

Regulatory Classification. This 

proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under the criteria of 

Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of 

September 30, 1993, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.