Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 185 / Friday, September 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 48889 

rulemaking and notice of public hearing 

instructed those interested in testifying 

at the public hearing to submit a request 

to speak, and an outline of the topics to 

be addressed. As of Monday, September 

21, 2009, no one has requested to speak. 

Therefore, the public hearing scheduled 

for November 20, 2009, is cancelled. 

LaNita VanDyke, 

Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations 

Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate 

Chief Counsel, (Procedure and 

Administration). 

[FR Doc. E9–23159 Filed 9–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0796] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Chester River, Chestertown, MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the drawbridge operation 

regulations of the S213 Bridge, at mile 

26.8, across Chester River at 

Chestertown MD. This proposal would 

allow the bridge to open on signal if at 

least six hours notice is given and 

would provide for the reasonable needs 

of navigation, due to the anticipated 

infrequency of requests for vessel 

openings of the drawbridge. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

November 9, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number USCG–2009–0796 to the Docket 

Management Facility at the U.S. 

Department of Transportation. To avoid 

duplication, please use only one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulation.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 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 Waverly W. Gregory, 

Bridge Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard 

District, at (757) 398–6222, 

Waverly.W.Gregory@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–2009–0796), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment and 

provide a reason for each suggestion or 

recommendation. You may submit your 

comments and material online (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, 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 

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–2009–0796’’ in the ‘‘keyword’’ 

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

balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. 

If you submit them by mail or 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. We may 

change this proposed rule in view of 

them. 

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– 

0796’’ 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 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 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 

Maryland Department of 

Transportation-State Highway 

Administration (MDOT) is responsible 

for the operation of the S213 Bridge, at 

mile 26.8, across Chester River at 

Chestertown MD. MDOT requested 

advance notification for vessel openings 

year-round due to the anticipated 

infrequency of requests for vessel 

openings of the drawbridge. 

The S213 Bridge has a vertical 

clearance in the closed position to 

vessels of 12 feet, above mean high 

water. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
48890 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 185 / Friday, September 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

The existing operating regulations set 

out in 33 CFR 117.551 require the draw 

to open on signal from April 1 through 

September 30 from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. At 

all other times, the draw shall open on 

signal if at least six hours notice is 

given. 

Bridge opening data, supplied by 

MDOT, revealed a small amount of 

yearly openings of the draw span. In the 

past five years from 2004 to 2008, the 

bridge opened for vessels 42, 38, 54, 34 

and 34 times, respectively. Due to the 

anticipated infrequency of requests for 

vessel openings of the drawbridge, 

MDOT requested to change the current 

operating regulation by requiring the 

draw of the bridge to open on signal if 

at least six hours notice is given yearround. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to amend 

33 CFR 117.551, by revising the 

paragraph to read that the draw of the 

S213 Bridge mile 26.8 located in 

Chestertown MD, shall open on signal if 

at least six hours notice is given at all 

times. 

These changes are proposed due to 

the anticipated infrequency of requests 

for vessel openings of the drawbridge. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

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. 

We expect the economic impact of 

this proposed rule to be so minimal that 

a full Regulatory Evaluation is 

unnecessary. 

We reached this conclusion based on 

the fact that the proposed changes have 

only a minimal impact on maritime 

traffic transiting the bridge. Mariners 

can plan their trips in accordance with 

the proposed scheduled bridge 

openings, to minimize delays. 

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 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 proposed rule would affect the 

following entities, some of which might 

be small entities: the owners and 

operators of vessels needing to transit 

the bridge who cannot clear the bridge 

at its closed position. 

This proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

because any operator of an affected 

vessel may still transit the bridge if that 

operator provides the necessary notice 

six hours or more in advance of the 

scheduled transit. 

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 (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 Waverly W. 

Gregory, Jr., Bridge Administrator, Fifth 

Coast Guard District, (757) 398–6222. 

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 will 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 

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 proposed 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 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 185 / Friday, September 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 48891 

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 023–01, 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD 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; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

2. Revise § 117.551 to read as follows: 

§ 117.551 Chester River. 

The draw of the S213 Bridge, mile 

26.8, at Chestertown MD shall open on 

signal if at least six hours notice is 

given. 

Dated: September 3, 2009. 

Wayne E. Justice, 

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

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E9–23135 Filed 9–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Parts 151, 155, and 160 

[USCG–2008–1070] 

RIN 1625–AB27 

Nontank Vessel Response Plans and 

Other Vessel Response Plan 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of public meetings; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces 

three public meetings to receive 

comments on a notice of proposed 

rulemaking that would require owners 

or operators of nontank vessels to 

prepare and submit oil spill response 

plans. The meetings will be held to 

allow for greater public involvement. 

DATES: The public meetings will be held 

at the following locations: 

• Washington, DC, October 28, 2009, 

from 1 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. 

• Oakland, CA, November 3, 2009, 

from 1 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. 

• New Orleans, LA, November 19, 

2009, from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. 

Written comments and related 

material may also be submitted to Coast 

Guard personnel specified at that 

meeting. The comment period for the 

proposed rule closes November 30, 

2009. All comments and related 

material submitted after the meeting 

must either be submitted to our online 

docket via http://www.regulations.gov 

on or before November 30, 2009, or 

reach the Docket Management Facility 

by that date. 

ADDRESSES: The public meetings will be 

held at the following locations: 

• Washington, DC—United States 

Coast Guard Headquarters Building, 

Room 4202, 2100 Second St, SW., 

Washington, DC 20593. 

• Oakland, CA—Ronald V. Dellums 

Federal Building, Auditorium, 3rd Floor 

North Tower, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, 

CA 94612. 

• New Orleans, LA—Ernest N. Morial 

Convention Center, Room 208, Exhibit 

Hall A, 900 Convention Center Blvd, 

New Orleans, LA 70130. 

You may submit written comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2008–1070 before or after the meeting 

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. Our online 

docket for this rulemaking is available 

on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov under docket 

number USCG–2008–1070. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this proposed 

rulemaking, contact Lieutenant Jarrod 

DeWitz, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of 

Vessel Activities, Vessel Response Plan 

Review Team, telephone (202) 372– 

1219. You may also e-mail questions to 

Jarrod.M.DeWitz@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Ms. Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background and Purpose 

We published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 

Register on August 31, 2009 (74 FR 

44970), entitled ‘‘Nontank Vessel 

Response Plans and Other Vessel 

Response Plan Requirements.’’ In it, we 

stated our intention to hold one or more 

public meetings, and to publish a notice 

to announce the location and date of the 

public meetings. In this notice, we 

announce those public meetings to 

receive comments on this proposed rule. 

In the NPRM, we proposed requiring 

owners or operators of nontank vessels 

to prepare and submit oil spill response 

plans. The Federal Water Pollution 

Control Act defines nontank vessels as 

self-propelled vessels of 400 gross tons 

or greater that operate on the navigable 

waters of the United States, carry oil of 

any kind as fuel for main propulsion, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS