40802 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

SMCRA requires that State laws 

regulating surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations be ‘‘in 

accordance with’’ the requirements of 

SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that 

State programs contain rules and 

regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ 

regulations issued by the Secretary 

pursuant to SMCRA. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated the potential 

effects of this rule on Federally 

recognized Indian Tribes and have 

determined that the rule does not have 

substantial direct effects 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. 

The rule does not involve or affect 

Indian Tribes in any way. 

Executive Order 13211—Regulations 

That Significantly Affect the Supply, 

Distribution, or Use of Energy 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 which requires 

agencies to prepare a Statement of 

Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) 

considered significant under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Because 

this rule is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866 and is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This rule does not require an 

environmental impact statement 

because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 

U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency 

decisions on proposed State regulatory 

program provisions do not constitute 

major Federal actions within the 

meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not contain 

information collection requirements that 

require approval by OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, 

which is the subject of this rule, is based 

upon counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an economic analysis was 

prepared and certification made that 

such regulations would not have a 

significant economic effect upon a 

substantial number of small entities. In 

making the determination as to whether 

this rule would have a significant 

economic impact, the Department relied 

upon the data and assumptions for the 

counterpart Federal regulations. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2) of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: 

a. Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million. 

b. Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

c. Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S. based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

This determination is based upon the 

fact that the State submittal which is the 

subject of this rule is based upon 

counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation was not considered a major 

rule. 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule will not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of $100 million or more in any given 

year. This determination is based upon 

the fact that the State submittal, which 

is the subject of this rule, is based upon 

counterpart Federal regulations for 

which an analysis was prepared and a 

determination made that the Federal 

regulation did not impose an unfunded 

mandate. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: June 12, 2009. 

Allen D. Klein, 

Regional Director, Western Region. 

[FR Doc. E9–19365 Filed 8–12–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0348] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

East River, New York City, NY 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

temporarily change the drawbridge 

operating regulations governing the 

operation of the Roosevelt Island Bridge, 

mile 6.4, across the East River at New 

York City, New York. This proposed 

rule would allow the Roosevelt Island 

Bridge to remain in the closed position 

for eleven months to facilitate a major 

rehabilitation of the bridge. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before September 14, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number USCG–2009–0348 using any 

one of the following methods: 

(1) Federal Rulemaking 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 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 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. Joe Arca, Project 

Officer, First Coast Guard District, 

telephone 212–668–7165, 

joe.arca@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: 


sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules 40803 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related material. 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–2009–0348), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. You may submit your 

comments and material on line (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 

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

content. 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 mailing 

address, an e-mail address, or a phone 

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 Rules’’ and insert 

‘‘USCG–2009–0348’’ 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 them 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–2009– 

0348’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

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

column. You may also visit either 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 all 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, system of records 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 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 Roosevelt Island Bridge has a 

vertical clearance of 40 feet at mean 

high water, and 47 feet at mean low 

water in the closed position. The 

existing drawbridge operating 

regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.781, 

require the bridge to open on signal if 

at least a two hour advance notice is 

given. 

The bridge owner, New York City 

Department of Transportation, has 

requested a temporary rule to facilitate 

electrical and mechanical rehabilitation 

at the Roosevelt Island Bridge. 

Under this temporary rule the 

Roosevelt Island Bridge would remain 

in the closed position from October 1, 

2009 through August 31, 2010. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

This proposed change would amend 

33 CFR 117.781 by suspending 

paragraph (c) and adding a new 

temporary paragraph (d) that would list 

the drawbridge operation regulations for 

the Roosevelt Island Bridge. 

This proposed change would allow 

the Roosevelt Island Bridge to need not 

open for the passage of vessel traffic 

from October 1, 2009 through August 

31, 2010. Vessels that can pass under 

the draw in the closed position may do 

so at all times. This temporary rule is 

necessary to facilitate the rehabilitation 

construction at the Roosevelt Island 

Bridge. Vessel traffic should not be 

adversely affected since they may transit 

around the other side of Roosevelt 

Island as an alternate traffic route. 

Regulatory Analysis 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analysis based 

on 13 of these statutes or executive 

orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

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 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office 

of Management and Budget has not 

reviewed it under that Order. 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action. This conclusion is 

based upon the fact that vessel traffic 

will still be able to transit the East River 

using the alternate route around the 

island. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have 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 the East River using the alternate 

route round the island. 

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 


sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
40804 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 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, Commander 

(dpb), First Coast Guard District, Bridge 

Branch, One South Street, New York, 

NY, 10004. The telephone number is 

(212) 668–7165. The Coast Guard will 

not retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this 

proposed 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 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 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 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 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 proposed 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 

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 Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 0023.1, 

and 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 made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment because it 

simply promulgates the operating 

regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

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; 33 CFR 1.05– 

1(g); Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. From, October 1, 2009 through 

August 31, 2010, § 117.781 is amended 

by suspending paragraph (c) and adding 

a temporary paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 117.781 East River. 

* * * * * 

(d) The draw of the Roosevelt Island 

Bridge at mile 6.4, at New York City, 

need not open for the passage of vessel 

traffic from October 1, 2009 through 

August 31, 2010. 

Dated: July 6, 2009. 

Dale G. Gabel, 

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

First Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E9–19435 Filed 8–12–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1129; FRL–8942–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Consumer Products Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS