Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 231 / Thursday, December 2, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 70059

Environment 

We have considered the 

environmental impact of this rule and 

concluded that under figure 2–1, 

paragraph (32)(e), of Commandant 

Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is 

categorically excluded from further 

environmental documentation. The final 

rule only involves the operation of an 

existing drawbridge and will not have 

any impact on the environment. A 

‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’

is available in the docket where 

indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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. In § 117.997, redesignate paragraphs 

(e) through (i) as paragraphs (f) through 

(j) respectively, and add a new paragraph 

(e) to read as follows:

§ 117.997 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, 

Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River to 

Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal.

* * * * *

(e) The draw of the Norfolk Southern 

#7 Railroad Bridge, mile 5.8 in 

Chesapeake, shall operate as follows: 

(1) The draw shall be remotely 

controlled by the operator at the Norfolk 

Southern #5 Railroad Bridge office over 

the Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth 

River, at mile 1.1, in Norfolk. 

(2) The draw shall be left in the open 

position to vessels and will only be 

closed for the passage of trains and to 

perform periodic maintenance 

authorized in accordance with subpart 

A of this part. 

(3) Trains shall be controlled so that 

any delay in opening of the draw shall 

not exceed ten minutes except as 

provided in § 117.31(b). 

(4) Before the bridge closes for any 

reason, the off-site remote operator will 

monitor waterway traffic in the area 

with closed circuit cameras and motion 

sensors mounted on the bridge. The 

bridge will only be closed if the off-site 

remote operator’s visual inspection 

shows that the channel is clear and 

there are no vessels transiting in the 

area. 

(5) While the bridge is moving from 

the full open position to the full closed 

position, the off-site remote operator 

will maintain constant surveillance of 

the navigation channel to ensure that no 

conflict with maritime traffic exists. In 

the event of failure or obstruction, the 

off-site remote operator will stop and 

return the bridge to the full open 

position to vessels. In the event of a 

failure or obstruction, a bridge tender 

must be called by the off-site remote 

operator and must be on-site within 30 

minutes of the call to operate the bridge. 

(6) During closing of the span, the 

channel traffic lights will change from 

flashing green to flashing red, the horn 

will sound twice, and an audio voice 

warning device will announce bridge 

movement, then two repeat blasts of the 

horn will sound until the bridge is 

seated and locked down. When the 

bridge is seated and locked down to 

vessels, the channel traffic lights will 

flash red. 

(7) During the open span movement, 

the channel traffic lights will flash red, 

the horn will sound twice, followed by 

a pause, and then five repeat blasts of 

the horn will sound until the bridge is 

in the full open position to vessels. In 

the full open position to vessels, the 

bridge channel traffic lights will turn 

from flashing red to flashing green then 

an audio warning device will announce 

bridge movement by stating ‘‘Security, 

security, security, the Norfolk Southern 

#7 Railroad Bridge at mile 5.8 is open 

for river traffic’’. 

(8) Operational information will be 

provided 24 hours a day on marine 

channel 13 and via telephone (757) 924–

5320.

* * * * *

Dated: November 22, 2004. 

Ben R. Thomason, III, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–26522 Filed 12–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD05–04–120] 

RIN 1625–AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Northeast Cape Fear River, 

Wilmington, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the regulations that govern the operation 

of the CSX Transportation (CSX) Hilton 

Railroad Bridge across the Northeast 

Cape Fear River, at mile 1.5, in 

Wilmington, NC. The final rule will 

eliminate the need for a bridge tender by 

allowing the bridge to be operated from 

a remote location. This rule change will 

maintain the bridge’s current level of 

operational capabilities and continue 

providing for the reasonable needs of 

rail transportation and vessel 

navigation.

DATES: This rule is effective January 3, 

2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents indicated in this preamble as 

being available in the docket, are part of 

docket CGD05–04–120 and are available 

at Commander (obr), Fifth Coast Guard 

District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 

Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia 

23704–5004, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Terrance Knowles, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard 

District, at (757) 398–6587.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory History 

On August 4, 2004, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation 

Regulations: Northeast Cape Fear River, 

Wilmington, NC’’ in the Federal 

Register (69 FR 47045). We received one 

comment on the proposed rule. No 

public hearing was requested nor held. 

Background and Purpose 

CSX, who owns and operates this 

movable (bascule type) bridge, 

requested changes to the operating 

procedures for the drawbridge located at 

mile 1.5 across the Northeast Cape Fear 

River, in Wilmington, NC. The vertical 

clearance under CSX Hilton Railroad 

Bridge in the closed position to vessels 

is 9 feet at mean low water and 6 feet 

at mean high water. The existing 

regulation listed at 33 CFR 117.5 

requires the bridge to open on signal. 

Under this rule, CSX will remotely 

operate the opening and closing of the 

CSX Hilton Railroad Bridge across 

Northeast Cape Fear River in 

Wilmington, NC, from the nearby CSX 

Navassa Railroad Bridge located on the 

Cape Fear River. CSX has installed 

motion sensors, laser scanners and highresolution video cameras on the bridge 

to enhance the remote operator’s ability 

70060 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 231 / Thursday, December 2, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

to monitor and control the equipment. 

The CSX Navassa Railroad Bridge is also 

equipped with an amplified open-mike 

from the bridge to enable the remote 

operator to hear boat horns that may 

signal for an opening. CSX has also 

installed additional safety warning 

lights to the bridge for the remote 

operation. This rule proposes to allow 

the bridge to be unmanned and operated 

from a remote location at the CSX 

Navassa Railroad Bridge. The CSX 

Hilton Railroad Bridge will normally be 

left in the fully open position displaying 

flashing green channel lights indicating 

that vessels may pass through. 

This change is being requested to 

make the closure process of the Hilton 

Railroad Bridge more efficient. It will 

save operational costs by eliminating 

bridge tenders, and is expected to 

decrease maintenance costs. In addition, 

the draw being left in the open position 

most of the time will provide for greater 

flow of vessel traffic than the current 

regulation.

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The Coast Guard received one 

comment on the NPRM. The comment 

from the Wilmington Superintendent of 

Water Treatment, expressed concerns on 

the potential for radio frequency 

interference between the surveillance 

systems at Sweeney Water Treatment 

Plant and the Hilton Bridge. CSX 

explained that the two facilities were 

operating on different frequencies and 

that there should be no problem. 

Therefore, no changes are being made to 

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 Homeland Security 

(DHS). We reached this conclusion 

based on the fact that this final rule will 

have minimal impact on maritime traffic 

transiting the bridge. Although the CSX 

Hilton Railroad Bridge will be operated 

from a remote location, mariners can 

continue their transits because all 

aspects of the current operating 

regulations remain essentially the same. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this 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 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities for the 

following reasons. The final rule will 

allow the CSX Hilton Railroad Bridge to 

operate remotely and requires the bridge 

to remain in open position to vessels the 

majority of the time, only closing for a 

train crossing or periodic maintenance. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding the rule so that they can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. In 

our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we 

provided a point of contact to small 

entities who could answer questions 

concerning proposed provisions or 

options for compliance. 

Collection of Information 

This rule calls 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 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 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 affect 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 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 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 security that might 

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 does 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 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 231 / Thursday, December 2, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 70061

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 rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have considered the 

environmental impact of this rule and 

concluded that under figure 2–1, 

paragraph (32)(e) of Commandant 

Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is 

categorically excluded from further 

environmental documentation. The final 

rule only involves the operation of an 

existing drawbridge and will not have 

any impact on the environment. A 

‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’

is available in the docket where 

indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations

■ For the reasons discussed 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. In §117.829, redesignate paragraph 

(b) as paragraph (c), revise newly 

redesignated paragrph (c), and add a new 

paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 117.829 Northeast Cape Fear River. 

(a) * * *

(b) The CSX Hilton Railroad Bridge, 

mile 1.5 in Wilmington, NC shall 

operate as follows: 

(1) The draw of the bridge to be 

remotely operated by the controller at 

the Navassa Railroad Bridge mile 34.0 

across the Cape Fear River. 

(2) The draw shall be left in the open 

position to vessels and will only be 

closed for the passage of trains and to 

perform periodic maintenance 

authorized in accordance with Subpart 

A of this part. 

(3) Trains shall be controlled so that 

any delay in opening of the draw shall 

not exceed ten minutes except as 

provided in 117.31(b). 

(4) The CSX Hilton Railroad Bridge 

shall not be operated by the controller 

at the CSX Navassa Railroad in the 

event of failure or obstruction of the 

motion sensors, laser scanners, video 

cameras or marine-radio 

communications. In these situations, a 

bridge tender must be called to operate 

the bridge on-site. 

(5) When rail traffic has cleared, the 

horn will automatically sound one 

prolonged blast followed by one short 

blast to indicate that the CSX Hilton 

Railroad Bridge is moving to the full 

open position to vessels. During open 

span movement, the channel traffic 

lights will flash red, until the bridge is 

in the full open position to vessels. In 

the full open position to vessels, the 

bridge channel traffic lights will flash 

green, allowing vessels to pass safely. 

(6) During closing span movement, 

the channel traffic lights will flash red, 

the horn will sound five short blasts, 

and an audio voice-warning device will 

announce bridge movement. Five short 

blasts of the horn will continue until the 

bridge is seated and locked down. When 

the bridge is seated and in the locked 

down position to vessels, the channel 

traffic lights will continue to flash red. 

(c) The draw of the Seaboard System 

Railroad Bridge across the Northeast 

Cape Fear River, mile 27.0, at Castle 

Hayne, North Carolina shall open on 

signal if at least four hours notice is 

given.

Dated: November 22, 2004. 

Ben R. Thomason, III, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–26521 Filed 12–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service 

36 CFR Part 13

RIN 1024–AD13

National Park System Units in Alaska

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule revises the special 

regulations for the NPS-administered 

areas in Alaska. These regulations were 

first adopted in 1981 as ‘‘interim 

guidance’’ and the minimum necessary 

to administer the new park areas 

established by the Alaska National 

Interest Lands Conservation Act. While 

we have made some changes to the rule 

since 1981, there has been no 

comprehensive review. This revision is 

the start of an ongoing review process 

for the purpose of maintaining up-todate regulations that are responsive to 

changing public and resource needs.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 

3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Mail inquiries to the 

National Park Service, Regional 

Director, Alaska Regional Office, 240 

West 5th Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501 or 

by e-mail to akro_regulations@nps.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

National Park Service, Victor Knox, 

Deputy Regional Director, Alaska 

Regional Office, 240 West 5th Ave., 

Anchorage, AK 99501. Telephone: (907) 

644–3501. E-mail: 

akro_regulations@nps.gov. Fax: (907) 

644–3816.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Each park area in Alaska has a 

compendium consisting of the compiled 

designations, closures, openings, permit 

requirements, and other provisions 

established by the Superintendent 

under the discretionary authority 

granted in 36 CFR 1.5 and elsewhere in 

regulations. As a result of our review of 

part 13 and the associated park 

compendiums the following changes are 

being made. These changes, discussed 

below under Summary of Comments, 

and as noted above, represent the first 

phase of an ongoing rulemaking process 

to be conducted in conjunction with an 

annual review of individual park 

compendiums. Most of the revised rules 

replace existing provisions in park 

compendiums. Also included are four 

rules that had been under separate 

consideration apart from the 

compendium review process and are 

included with this rulemaking for 

administrative convenience and 

efficiency. Each of these rules is 

identified in the Summary of Comments 

paragraphs that follow. As used within 

this document, the terms ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘our,’’

and ‘‘us’’ refer to the National Park 

Service. 

Summary of Comments 

The proposed rule was published for 

public comment on April 2, 2004 (69 FR 

17355), with the initial comment period 

lasting until June 1, 2004. The comment 

period was extended to June 16, 2004 

(69 FR 31778). The National Park 

Service received 17 timely written 

responses regarding various sections of 

the proposed rule. All of the responses 

were either separate letters or email 

messages. Of the 17 responses two were 

from governmental agencies (one state 

and one local), eight were from nongovernmental organizations (including