Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules 30747 

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant 

preparation of a regulatory evaluation as 

the anticipated impact is so minimal. 

Because this is a routine matter that will 

only affect air traffic procedures and air 

navigation, it is certified that this rule, 

when promulgated, will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle 1, section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in subtitle 

VII, part A, subpart 1, section 40103, 

Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under 

that section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to ensure the 

safe and efficient use of the navigable 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority because it 

proposes to revoke Class E airspace in 

Northeast Alaska, and establish Class E 

airspace to allow access at Eagle 

Airport, Eagle, AK, and represents the 

FAA’s continuing effort to safely and 

efficiently use the navigable airspace. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 

CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

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

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

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, 

signed August 27, 2009, and effective 

September 15, 2009, is to be amended 

as follows: 

* * * * * 

Paragraph 6006 En Route Domestic 

Airspace Areas. 

* * * * * 

AAL AK E6 Northeast, AK [New] 

That airspace extending upward from 1,200 

feet above the surface within an area 

beginning at lat. 63°55′00′′ N. long. 

141°00′00′′ W., then westward along a line of 

latitude to 63°55′00′′ N. long 144°00′00′′ W., 

to 65°30′00′′ N. long 144°00′00′′ W., then 

eastward along a line of latitude to 65°30′00′′ 

N. 144°00′00′′ W., to the point of beginning. 

* * * * * 

AAL AK E6 Barter Island, AK [Removed] 

* * * * * 

AAL AK E6 Mentasta Lake/Mountains 

Area, AK [Removed] 

Issued in Anchorage, AK, on May 7, 2010. 

Anthony M. Wylie, 

Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information 

Area Group. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13138 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0265] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Curtis Creek, Baltimore, MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the regulations that govern the 

operation of the Pennington Avenue 

Bridge across Curtis Creek, at mile 0.9, 

in Baltimore, MD. The proposed rule 

would eliminate the need for a bridge 

tender by allowing the bridge to be 

operated from a remote location at the 

City of Baltimore Transportation 

Management Center. This proposed 

change would maintain the bridge’s 

current level of operational capabilities 

and continue providing for the 

reasonable needs of vehicular 

transportation and vessel navigation. 

This proposed rule will also correct the 

statute mile marker of the I695 Bridge 

which is also across Curtis Creek in 

Baltimore, MD. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

August 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2010–0265 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. 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 Coast Guard; 

telephone 757–398–6629, e-mail 

Lindsey.R.Middleton@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–2010–0265), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, 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. 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 a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a phone number in the body 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
30748 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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–2010–0265’’ 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–2010– 

0265’’ 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 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 

The City of Baltimore has requested a 

change to the operating procedures for 

the Pennington Avenue Bridge across 

Curtis Creek, mile 0.9 in Baltimore, MD. 

The change in the operating procedure 

would allow the bridge to be operated 

from a remote location at the City of 

Baltimore Transportation Management 

Center. This proposed rule follows the 

general regulations set out at 33 CFR 

117.5 that states: Drawbridges shall 

open promptly and fully for the passage 

of vessels when a request to open is 

given. 

The Pennington Avenue Bridge, a lifttype drawbridge, has a vertical 

clearance in the closed position to 

vessels of 38 feet, above mean high 

water. 

The City of Baltimore is installing six 

video cameras on the bridge to enhance 

the remote operator’s ability to monitor 

and control the equipment. The remote 

office and the bridge site will be 

equipped with audio devices to enable 

the remote operator to hear boat horns 

that may signal for an opening as well 

as two-way communication. There will 

be posted signs placed on both sides of 

the navigational channel providing a 

phone number for vessels to call to 

request an opening. Warning lights will 

be installed on the bridge to signal when 

the bridge is in operation. All aspects of 

the current drawbridge operating 

regulations will remain the same. 

The City of Baltimore has requested 

this change to utilize new technology to 

maintain the bridge’s current level of 

operating capabilities and continue 

providing for the reasonable needs of 

vehicular transportation and vessel 

navigation. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 

CFR 117.557. The current paragraph 

would be divided into paragraphs (a) 

and (b). 

Paragraph (a) would contain the 

proposed rule for the Pennington 

Avenue Bridge at mile 0.9 in Baltimore, 

MD. The rule would allow the draw of 

the bridge to be operated by the 

controller at the Transportation 

Management Center. 

In the event of failure or obstruction 

of the video cameras, audio system, or 

phone communications, the Pennington 

Avenue Bridge would not be operated 

from the remote office. In these 

situations, a bridge tender must be 

called and be on-site within 30 minutes 

to operate the bridge. 

When vehicular and pedestrian traffic 

has cleared, a horn will sound one 

prolonged blast followed by one short 

blast to warn of bridge movement. The 

channel traffic lights will flash red 

continually to indicate that the bridge is 

moving to the full open position for 

vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully 

open position, the bridge channel traffic 

lights will turn and remain green. The 

draw of the bridge must begin opening 

within 5 minutes of vehicular and 

pedestrian traffic clearing the bridge 

except as provided in 33 CFR 117.31(b). 

Before the span begins to close, the 

horn will sound five short blasts and an 

audio voice-warning device will 

announce bridge movement. The 

channel traffic lights will then 

continually flash red until the bridge is 

seated and locked down to vessels. 

Paragraph (b) would contain the 

existing regulations for the I695 Bridge; 

however, the statute mile marker of 0.9 

is incorrect and will be changed to mile 

1.0 which is the accurate mile mark. 

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 under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS 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. Although the Pennington 

Avenue Bridge will be operated from a 

remote office, 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 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 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules 30749 

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. 

The proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons. The rule allows 

the Pennington Avenue Bridge to 

operate remotely and mariners will 

continue to plan their transits in 

accordance with the existing bridge 

operating regulations. 

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 Lindsey 

Middleton, Bridge Specialist, Fifth 

Coast Guard District, at (757) 368–6629 

or e-mail at 

Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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 cause 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 

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 § 117.557 to read as follows: 

§ 117.557 Curtis Creek. 

(a) The Pennington Avenue Bridge, 

mile 0.9 at Baltimore. 

(1) The draw of the bridge to be 

operated by the controller at the City of 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
30750 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Baltimore Transportation Management 

Center shall open on signal for the 

passage of vessels when a request to 

open is given. 

(2) The draw of the bridge shall not 

be operated by the controller at the 

Transportation Management Center 

office in the event of failure or 

obstruction of the video cameras, audio 

system, or phone lines. In these 

situations, a bridge tender must be 

called and be on-site within 30 minutes 

to operate the bridge on-site. 

(3) The draw of the bridge must begin 

opening within 5 minutes of the 

vehicular and pedestrian traffic clearing 

the bridge, except as provided in 33 CFR 

117.31(b). 

(4) When vehicular and pedestrian 

traffic has cleared, a horn will sound 

one prolonged blast followed by one 

short blast to warn of bridge movement. 

The channel traffic lights will flash red 

continually to indicate that the Bridge is 

moving to the full open position for 

vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully 

open position, the bridge channel traffic 

lights will turn and remain green. 

(5) Before the span begins to close, the 

horn will sound five short blasts and an 

audio voice-warning device will 

announce bridge movement. The 

channel traffic lights will then 

continually flash red until the bridge is 

seated and locked down to vessels. 

(6) The owners of the bridge shall 

provide and keep in good legible 

condition two board gauges painted 

white with black figures not less than 

six inches high to indicate the vertical 

clearance under the closed draw at all 

stages of the tide. The gauges shall be 

placed on the bridge so that they are 

plainly visible to the operator of any 

vessel approaching the bridge from 

either upstream or downstream. 

(b) The draw of the I695 Bridge, mile 

1.0 at Baltimore, shall open on signal if 

at least a one-hour notice is given to the 

Maryland Transportation Authority in 

Baltimore. 

Dated: May 14, 2010. 

Wayne E. Justice, 

Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13119 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0228] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Arkansas Waterway, Little Rock, AR 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

revise the operating procedures on the 

Baring Cross Railroad Drawbridge across 

the Arkansas Waterway at mile 119.6 at 

Little Rock, AR, so that vessel operators 

will contact the remote drawbridge 

operator via microphone keying four 

times within five seconds on VHF–FM 

Channel 13 when requesting a draw 

opening. This keying will activate an 

indicator on the remote drawbridge 

operator’s console and send an 

acknowledgement tone back to the 

vessel. The remote drawbridge operator 

would then establish normal verbal 

radio communications. The intent is to 

isolate and differentiate the vessel 

operator radio communications from the 

railroad communications that the 

remote drawbridge operator receives, 

thus ensuring that vessel calls receive 

immediate attention. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

August 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2010–0228 using any one of the 

following four 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. 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. Eric Washburn, 

Bridge Management Specialist, Eighth 

Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch; 

telephone 314–269–2378, e-mail 

Eric.Washburn@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–2010–0228), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, 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. 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 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–2010–0228’’ 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 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS