63106 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) action by 

December 28, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2004–13–03, 

Amendment 39–13684. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce (1971) 

Limited, Bristol Engine Division (RR) Model 

Viper Mk.601–22 turbojet engines. These 

engines are installed on, but not limited to, 

Raytheon HS.125 Series 600 and BH.125 

Series 600 airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from comments 

received on AD 2004–13–03, that the AD is 

unnecessarily more restrictive than the 

requirements in the associated RR Alert 

Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 72-A184. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent multiple 

failures of 1st stage turbine rotor blades that 

could result in a dual-engine shutdown. The 

actions specified in this AD are intended to 

prevent multiple failures of 1st stage turbine 

rotor blades that could result in a dual-engine 

shutdown.

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified unless the 

actions have already been done. 

New Reduced Life Limit 

(f) Change the RR Time Limits Manual life 

limit for the 1st stage turbine rotor blades, P/

Ns V926000, V926293, and V926319, from 

7,000 hours time-in-service (TIS) to 4,600 

hours TIS. 

(g) Limit the number of installed engines 

with 1st stage turbine rotor blades that 

exceed 4,600 hours TIS on the effective date 

of this AD as specified in the following Table 

1:

TABLE 1.—INSTALLED ENGINES

On the effective date of this AD, if Then: 

(1) Both engines installed on the airplane have 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed 5,800 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage turbine rotor blades in the engine that has the 

higher blade life within 50 hours TIS or 6 weeks after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(2) One engine installed on the airplane has 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed turbine 5,800 hours TIS, and the other engine 

has 1st stage turbine rotor blades that exceed 4,600 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage turbine rotor blades in the engine that has the 

higher blade life within 100 hours TIS or 4 months after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(3) One engine installed on the airplane has 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed 5,800 hours TIS, and the other engine has 1st 

stage turbine rotor blades with fewer than 4,600 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage turbine rotor blades in the engine that has the 

higher blade life within 200 hours TIS or 6 months after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(4) One engine installed on the airplane has 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed 4,600 hours TIS, but have fewer than 5,800 

hours TIS, and the other engine has 1st turbine stage turbine rotor 

blades with fewer than 4,600 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage rotor blades in the engine that has the higher 

blade life at 5,800 hours TIS or 6 months after the effective date of 

this AD, whichever occurs later. 

(h) No engine may operate with a blade life 

exceeding 5,800 hours TIS, applicable 

beginning 6 months from the effective date of 

this AD. 

(i) No engine may operate with a blade life 

exceeding 4,600 hours TIS, applicable 

beginning 3 years from the effective date of 

this AD. 

Installation of Engines After the Effective 

Date of This AD 

(j) After the effective date of this AD, do 

not install any engine that has 1st stage 

turbine rotor blades, P/Ns V926000, 

V926293, and V926319, that exceed 4,600 

hours TIS, except as allowed in Table 1 of 

this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(k) The Manager, Engine Certification 

Office, has the authority to approve 

alternative methods of compliance for this 

AD if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(l) None. 

Related Information 

(m) Civil Aviation Authority airworthiness 

directive AD 004–01–2001, dated January 

2001, also addresses the subject of this AD.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 25, 2004. 

Francis A. Favara, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24230 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19470; Directorate 

Identifier 2003–NM–268–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747–100B SUD, –300, –400, and 

–400D Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 

–300, –400, and –400D series airplanes. 

This proposed AD would require a onetime inspection for discrepancies of the 

fuselage frame to tension tie joints at 

body stations (BS) 1120 through 1220 

and to determine if steel splice plates 

are installed on the fuselage frames, and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions. This proposed AD is prompted 

by reports indicating that severed 

tension ties were found at the fuselage 

frame joints at BS 1120 and 1140. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue 

cracking of the fuselage frame to tension 

tie joints, which could result in severing 

of the tension ties and consequent rapid 

decompression of the airplane fuselage.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 13, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• By fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Proposed Rules 63107

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. 

You can examine the contents of this 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov, or at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of 

the Nassif Building, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Technical Information: Ivan Li, 

Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, 

ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, 

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; 

telephone (425) 917–6437; fax (425) 

917–6590. 

Plain language information: Marcia 

Walters, marcia.walters@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Docket Management System (DMS) 

The FAA has implemented new 

procedures for maintaining AD dockets 

electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new 

AD actions are posted on DMS and 

assigned a docket number. We track 

each action and assign a corresponding 

directorate identifier. The DMS AD 

docket number is in the form ‘‘Docket 

No. FAA–2004–99999.’’ The Transport 

Airplane Directorate identifier is in the 

form ‘‘Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–

999–AD.’’ Each DMS AD docket also 

lists the directorate identifier (‘‘Old 

Docket Number’’) as a cross-reference 

for searching purposes. 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2004–19470; Directorate Identifier 

2003–NM–268–AD’’ in the subject line 

of your comments. We specifically 

invite comments on the overall 

regulatory, economic, environmental, 

and energy aspects of the proposed AD. 

We will consider all comments 

submitted by the closing date and may 

amend the proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of that Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You can 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you can visit http://

dms.dot.gov.

We are reviewing the writing style we 

currently use in regulatory documents. 

We are interested in your comments on 

whether the style of this document is 

clear, and your suggestions to improve 

the clarity of our communications that 

affect you. You can get more 

information about plain language at 

http://www.faa.gov/language and http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

Examining the Docket

You can examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

Discussion 

We have received a report indicating 

that severed tension ties at the fuselage 

frame joints at body stations (BS) 1120 

and 1140 were found on a Model 747–

400 series airplane. The cause of the 

severed ties was fatigue cracking due to 

incorrect splice plate installation during 

the manufacturing process. The splice 

plates that were installed were made of 

aluminum instead of steel. When the 

severed tension ties were found, the 

airplane had accumulated 

approximately 6,505 total flight cycles 

and 52,334 total flight hours. Inspection 

of another Model 747–400 series 

airplane revealed loose fasteners at the 

frame to tension tie joints. Loose 

fasteners in the joints increase the 

potential for fatigue cracking. That 

airplane had accumulated 

approximately 5,875 total flight cycles 

and 49,426 total flight hours. Inadequate 

installation procedures have been 

determined as the root cause of these 

incidents. Fatigue cracking of the 

fuselage frame to tension tie joints, if 

not found and fixed, could result in 

severing of the tension ties and 

consequent rapid decompression of the 

airplane fuselage. 

The fuselage frame to tension tie 

joints on certain Model 747–100B SUD, 

–300, and –400D series airplanes are 

identical to those on the affected Model 

747–400 series airplanes. Therefore, all 

of these models may be subject to the 

same unsafe condition. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 747–53–

2483, Revision 1, dated August 28, 

2003. The service bulletin describes 

procedures for a one-time detailed 

visual inspection for discrepancies 

(cracks; loose, missing, or damaged 

fasteners or collars) of the fuselage 

frame to tension tie joints at BS 1120 

through 1220, and to determine if steel 

splice plates are installed on the 

fuselage frame, and related investigative 

and corrective actions. The investigative 

and corrective actions include 

performing an open-hole eddy current 

inspection of the fastener holes if loose, 

missing, or damaged fasteners or collars 

are found, and installing new fasteners 

if necessary. 

The service bulletin also specifies that 

operators may contact the manufacturer 

for disposition of certain repair 

instructions, and recommends that the 

manufacturer be contacted if an 

aluminum splice plate is installed. 

Accomplishing the actions specified 

in the service information is intended to 

adequately address the unsafe 

condition. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

We have evaluated all pertinent 

information and identified an unsafe 

condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on other airplanes of this same 

type design. Therefore, we are 

proposing this AD, which would require 

you to use the service information 

described previously to perform the 

actions, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and Service Bulletin.’’

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and Service Bulletin 

The service bulletin provides the 

following information in Note 5 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions: ‘‘For the 

purposes of this service bulletin, do not 

count flight-cycles with a cabin pressure 

differential of 2.0 [pounds per square 

inch (psi)] or less. However, any flightcycle with momentary spikes in cabin 

pressure differential above 2.0 psi must 

be included as a full-pressure flightcycle. Cabin pressure records must be 

maintained for each airplane. Fleet 

averaging of cabin pressure is not 

allowed.’’ We have determined that an 

adjustment of flight cycles due to a 

lower cabin differential pressure is not 

substantiated and will not be allowed

63108 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

for use in determining the flight cycle 

threshold for this proposed AD. 

The service bulletin also specifies 

that, if repair requirements exceed 

allowable repair criteria, operators may 

contact the manufacturer for disposition 

of repair instructions. This proposed AD 

would require operators to repair these 

conditions in accordance with a method 

approved by the FAA or in accordance 

with data meeting the type certification 

basis of the airplane approved by a 

Boeing Company Designated 

Engineering Representative who has 

been authorized by the FAA to make 

such findings. 

The service bulletin also recommends 

that the manufacturer be contacted for 

repair instructions if an aluminum 

splice plate is installed, but this 

proposed AD would require 

replacement of the plate with a new 

plate in accordance with a method 

approved by the FAA, or in accordance 

with data meeting the type certification 

basis of the airplane approved by a 

Boeing Company Designated 

Engineering Representative who has 

been authorized by the FAA to make 

those findings. 

The service bulletin specifies to 

submit certain information to the 

manufacturer, but this proposed AD 

does not include that requirement. 

Although the service bulletin defines 

a ‘‘detailed visual’’ inspection for 

discrepancies, we have determined that 

the procedures in the service bulletin 

should be described as a ‘‘detailed 

inspection.’’ A note has been added to 

define that type of inspection. 

Costs of Compliance 

This proposed AD would affect about 

67 airplanes of U.S. registry and 537 

airplanes worldwide. The proposed 

inspection would take about 2 work 

hours per airplane, at an average labor 

rate of $65 per work hour. Based on 

these figures, the estimated cost of the 

proposed AD for U.S. operators is 

$8,710, or $130 per airplane. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2004–19470; 

Directorate Identifier 2003–NM–268–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this AD 

action by December 13, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Model 747–100B 

SUD, –300, –400, and –400D series airplanes; 

certificated in any category; as listed in 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

747–53–2483, Revision 1, dated August 28, 

2003. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by reports 

indicating that severed tension ties were 

found at the fuselage frame joints at body 

stations (BS) 1120 and 1140. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the 

fuselage frame to tension tie joints, which 

could result in severing of the tension ties 

and consequent rapid decompression of the 

airplane fuselage. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

One-Time Inspection/Investigative and 

Corrective Actions 

(f) Before the accumulation of 4,000 total 

flight cycles or within 1,000 flight cycles 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

is later: Perform a detailed inspection for 

discrepancies of the fuselage frame to tension 

tie joints at BS 1120 through BS 1220, and 

to determine if steel splice plates are 

installed on the fuselage frames. Do the 

inspection in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 747–53–

2483, Revision 1, dated August 28, 2003. Do 

any applicable investigative and corrective 

actions before further flight in accordance 

with the service bulletin, except as provided 

by paragraph (h) of this AD.

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive visual 

examination of a specific structural area, 

system, installation, or assembly to detect 

damage, failure, or irregularity. Available 

lighting is normally supplemented with a 

direct source of good lighting at intensity 

deemed appropriate by the inspector. 

Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying 

lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning 

and elaborate access procedures may be 

required.’’

Determining Number of Flight Cycles for 

Compliance Time 

(g) For the purposes of calculating the 

compliance threshold for the actions required 

by paragraph (f) of this AD, all pressurized 

flight cycles, including the number of flight 

cycles in which cabin differential pressure is 

at 2.0 pounds per square inch (psi) or less, 

must be counted when determining the 

number of flight cycles that have occurred on 

the airplane. Where the service bulletin and 

this AD differ, the AD prevails.. 

Repair Requirements 

(h) For any repairs outside the limits of 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

747–53–2483, Revision 1, dated August 28, 

2003, or if any aluminum splice plate is 

installed on the fuselage frames: Repair or 

replace, as applicable, in accordance with a 

method approved by the Manager, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or 

in accordance with data meeting the type 

certification basis of the airplane approved 

by a Boeing Company Designated 

Engineering Representative (DER) who has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 

ACO, to make such findings. For a repair or 

replacement method to be approved, as 

required by this paragraph, the approval 

must specifically reference this AD. 

Actions Accomplished Per Previous Issue of 

Service Bulletin 

(i) Inspections and corrective actions 

accomplished before the effective date of this 

AD in accordance with Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 747–53–2483, 

dated October 24, 2002, are considered 

acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding actions specified in this AD. 

No Reporting Requirements 

(j) Although the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Special Attention

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Proposed Rules 63109

Service Bulletin 747–53–2483, Revision 1, 

dated August 28, 2003; describe procedures 

for submitting certain information to the 

manufacturer, this AD does not require that 

action. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(k)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by a 

Boeing Company Designated Engineering 

Representative who has been authorized by 

the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those 

findings. For a repair method to be approved, 

the approval must specifically refer to this 

AD.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

21, 2004. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24220 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA–2002–13247; Airspace 

Docket No. 02–AAL–5] 

RIN 2120–AA66

Proposed Modification and Revocation 

of Federal Airways; AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM); withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: This action withdraws the 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 7, 2002. In that action, the 

FAA proposed to modify one jet route 

(J–133); and revoke one jet route 711 (J–

711) in Alaska. The FAA has decided to 

withdraw the proposed rule since the 

Hinchinbrook Nondirectional Radio 

Beacon (NDB) is being decommissioned. 

The replacement of the Hinchinbrook 

NDB and the revision of several airways 

in Alaska will be reflected in a 

subsequent NPRM.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken 

McElroy, Office of System Operations 

and Safety, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 7, 2002, an NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register

proposing to amend 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) part 73 (part 73) to 

revise J–133 between the Sitka, AK, 

NDB, and the Hinchinbrook, AK, NDB 

(67 FR 67800). The Hinchinbrook NDB 

will be decommissioned and replaced 

with the Orca Bay NDB. The 

replacement of the Hinchinbrook NDB 

and the revision of several airways in 

Alaska will be reflected in a subsequent 

NPRM.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air).

The Withdrawal 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

NPRM for FAA Docket No. FAA–2002–

13247 and Airspace Docket No. 02–

AAL–5, as published in the Federal 

Register on November 7, 2002 (67 FR 

67800), is hereby withdrawn.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854; 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389.

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 21, 

2004. 

Reginald C. Matthews, 

Manager, Airspace and Rules.

[FR Doc. 04–24145 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD05–04–169] 

RIN 1625–AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations: 

New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway, 

Point Pleasant Canal, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the regulations that govern the 

operation of the Route 13/Lovelandtown 

Bridge across Point Pleasant Canal, at 

New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway 

(NJICW) mile 3.9, in Point Pleasant, NJ. 

The bridge will be closed to navigation 

beginning 8 a.m. on January 3, 2005, 

through 5 p.m. on March 31, 2005. This 

closure is necessary to facilitate 

extensive mechanical rehabilitation and 

to maintain the bridge’s operational 

integrity.

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

December 28, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander 

(obr), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal 

Building, 4th Floor, 431 Crawford 

Street, Portsmouth, Virginia 23704–

5004, or they may be hand delivered to 

the same address between 8 a.m. and 4 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Commander (obr), 

Fifth Coast Guard District 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 above 

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge 

Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard 

District, at (757) 398–6222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related material. If you 

do so, please include your name and 

address, identify the docket number for 

this rulemaking CGD05–04–169, 

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 

confirmation to know if they were 

received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope. We will 

consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period. 

We may change this proposed rule in 

view of those comments. 

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 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District 

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 at a place announced by 

a later notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

The New Jersey Department of 

Transportation (NJDOT) owns and 

operates the vertical-lift span of the 

Route 13/Lovelandtown Bridge across 

Point Pleasant Canal, in Point Pleasant, 

New Jersey. The bridge has a vertical 

clearance in the closed and full open 

position of 30 feet and 65 feet, at mean 

high water, respectively. The current 

regulations are outlined under the 

general regulations at 33 CFR 117.5,