49900 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

regulations are published as final 

regulations in the Federal Register.

Mark E. Matthews, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 05–16715 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08–05–041] 

RIN 1625–AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Tennessee River, Chattanooga, TN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the regulation governing the 

Chief John Ross Drawbridge, mile 464.1, 

across the Tennessee River at 

Chattanooga, Tennessee. Under the 

proposed rule, the drawbridge need not 

open for river traffic and may remain in 

the closed-to-navigation position from 8 

a.m., December 1, 2005 until 8 a.m., July 

1, 2006. This proposed rule would allow 

the drawbridge to be maintained in the 

closed-to-navigation position to allow 

major repair work to be performed on 

the bridge.

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

September 26, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander, 

Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge 

Branch, Robert A. Young Federal 

Building, 1222 Spruce Street, St. Louis, 

MO 63103–2832. Commander (obr) 

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 

room 2.107f in the Robert A. Young 

Federal Building, Eighth Coast Guard 

District, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge 

Administrator, (314) 539–3900, 

extension 2378.

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 (CGD08–05–041), 

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 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 Eighth 

Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at 

the address under ADDRESSES explaining 

why one would be beneficial. If we 

determine that a meeting 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 

On February 11, 2005, the State of 

Tennessee Department of 

Transportation requested a temporary 

change to the operation of the Chief 

John Ross Drawbridge, across the 

Tennessee River, mile 464.1, at 

Chattanooga, Tennessee to allow the 

drawbridge to remain in the closed-tonavigation position for seven months to 

perform major repairs to the bridge. The 

drawbridge has a vertical clearance of 

58.7 feet above normal pool in the 

closed-to-navigation position. 

Navigation on the waterway consists 

primarily of commercial tows and 

recreational watercraft that will be 

minimally impacted by the closure 

period. Presently, the draw opens on 

signal for the passage of river traffic 

when the vertical clearance beneath the 

draw is 50 feet or less. When the vertical 

clearance beneath the draw is more than 

50 feet, at least eight hours notice is 

required. The Tennessee Department of 

Transportation requested the 

drawbridge be permitted to remain in 

the closed-to-navigation position from 8 

a.m., December 1, 2005 until 8 a.m. July 

1, 2006. This temporary change to the 

drawbridge’s operation has been 

coordinated with the commercial 

waterway operators. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This 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. 

The Coast Guard expects that this 

temporary change to operation of the 

Chief John Ross Drawbridge will have 

minimal economic impact on 

commercial traffic operating on the 

Tennessee River. This temporary change 

has been written in such a manner as to 

allow for minimal interruption of the 

drawbridges regular operation. 

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 will be in 

effect for seven months and the Coast 

Guard expects the impact of this action 

to be minimal because the existing 

vertical clearance of 58.7 feet above 

normal pool in the closed-to-navigation 

position will still allow vessels to transit 

beneath the bridge. 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules 49901

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact Mr. Roger K. 

Wiebusch, Bridge Administrator, Eighth 

Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at 

(314) 539–3900, extension 2378. 

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 will not affect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Government 

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 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 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 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 environmental 

documentation.

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. From 8 a.m., December 1, 2005 

until 8 a.m., July 1, 2006, suspend 

section 117.949 and add a new section 

117.T948 to read as follows:

§ 117.T948 Tennessee River. 

(a) The Chief John Ross Drawbridge, 

Mile 464.1, at Chattanooga, Tennessee 

need not open for river traffic and may 

be maintained in the closed-tonavigation position from 8 a.m., 

December 1, 2005 until 8 a.m., July 1, 

2006. 

(b) The draw of the Southern Railway 

Bridge over the Tennessee River, mile 

470.7, at Hixon, Tennessee, shall open 

on signal when the vertical clearance 

beneath the draw is 50 feet or less. 

When the vertical clearance beneath the 

draw is more than 50 feet, at least eight 

hours notice is required. When the 

operator of a vessel returning through 

the draw within four hours informs the 

drawtender of the probable time of 

return, the drawtender shall return one 

half hour before the time specified and 

promptly open the draw on signal for 

the vessel without further notice. If the 

vessel giving notice fails to arrive within 

one hour after the arrival time specified, 

whether upbound or downbound, a 

second eight hours notice is required. 

Clearance gages of a type acceptable to 

the Coast Guard shall be installed on 

both sides of each bridge.

Dated: August 5, 2005. 

Kevin L. Marshall, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 8th 

Coast Guard Dist. Acting.

[FR Doc. 05–16859 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P