61354 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

Related Information 

(j) For more information about this AD, 

contact Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 

90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5262; fax 

(562) 627–5210. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(k) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 

DC10–28–244, dated February 25, 2010, to do 

the actions required by this AD, unless the 

AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

the service information specified in this AD 

under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC 

D800–0019, Long Beach, California 90846– 

0001; telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; 

fax 206–766–5683; e-mail 

dse.boecom@boeing.com; Internet https:// 

www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at an NARA facility, call 202–741– 

6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 16, 2010. 

Robert D. Breneman, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24171 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0895] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Interstate 5 Bridge 

Repairs, Columbia River, Portland, OR 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone on 

the waters of the Columbia River due to 

repairs being made to the Interstate 5 

Bridge. The safety zone is necessary to 

ensure the safety of the workers 

involved as well as the maritime public 

and will do so by prohibiting all persons 

and vessels from entering or remaining 

in the safety zone unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port or his designated 

representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR 

on October 5, 2010 through 5 p.m. on 

October 13, 2010. This rule is effective 

with actual notice for purposes of 

enforcement starting at 6 a.m. on 

October 4, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2010– 

0895 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2010–0895 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They 

are also available for inspection or 

copying at the 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, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or e-mail BM2 Silvestre Suga, 

Waterways Management Division, Coast 

Guard Marine Safety Unit Portland; 

telephone 503–247–4015, e-mail D13- 

SG-M-MSUPortlandWWM@uscg.mil. If 

you have questions on viewing the 

docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 

Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 

202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because to do 

so would be contrary to public interest 

since the repairs to the Interstate 5 

Bridge would be completed by the time 

notice could be published and 

comments taken. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register because to do otherwise would 

be contrary to the public interest since 

the repairs to the Interstate 5 Bridge 

would be completed by the time the 30 

day period will have passed. 

Basis and Purpose 

The Oregon Department of 

Transportation will be conducting 

inspections and repairs to the Interstate 

5 Bridge over the Columbia River on 

October 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, and 13, 2010. A 

tug and barge equipped with a man lift 

will be in position under the bridge to 

conduct the work. Due to the inherent 

dangers associated with such work, a 

safety zone is necessary to help ensure 

the safety of the workers involved as 

well as the maritime public. 

Discussion of Rule 

The safety zone created by this rule 

encompasses all waters of the Columbia 

River within the area created by 

connecting the following four piers of 

the Interstate 5 Bridge: East Pier 3 across 

the wide span channel to East Pier 5 

then downstream under the bridge to 

West Pier 5, across the wide span 

channel to West Pier 3, then back 

upstream under the bridge to East Pier 

3. The piers are numbered from the 

North bank to the South bank. 

Geographically this location is a 

rectangle enclosing the wide span 

channel of the Interstate 5 Bridge 

starting at the draw span reaching across 

to the first pier of the high span and 

then back to the draw span. 

The safety zone will be in effect from 

6 a.m. through 5 p.m. on October 4, 5, 

8, 11, 12, and 13, 2010. 

All persons and vessels are prohibited 

from entering or remaining in the safety 

zone unless authorized by the Captain 

of the Port or designated representative. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this 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 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. The Coast Guard has made this 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 61355 

determination based on the fact that the 

safety zone is limited in size and 

duration and maritime traffic will be 

able to transit around the safety zone. 

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 may affect the following 

entities some of which may be small 

entities: The owners and operators of 

vessels intending to operate in the area 

covered by the safety zone created in 

this rule. The safety zone will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

however, because the safety zone is 

limited in size and duration and 

maritime traffic will be able to transit 

around the safety zone. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

we offer to assist small entities in 

understanding the rule so that they can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 

1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 

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 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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 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 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 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

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 

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 analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule 

involves the establishment of a safety 

zone. An environmental analysis 

checklist and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
61356 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T13–164 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T13–164 Safety Zone; Interstate 5 

Bridge Repairs, Columbia River, Portland, 

OR. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: All waters of the Columbia 

River within the area created by 

connecting the following four piers of 

the Interstate 5 Bridge: East Pier 3 across 

the wide span channel to East Pier 5 

then downstream under the bridge to 

West Pier 5, across the wide span 

channel to West Pier 3, then back 

upstream under the bridge to East Pier 

3. The piers are numbered from the 

North bank to the South bank. 

Geographically this location is a 

rectangle enclosing the wide span 

channel of the Interstate 5 Bridge 

starting at the draw span reaching across 

to the first pier of the high span and 

then back to the draw span. 

(b) Regulations. In accordance with 

the general regulations in 33 CFR Part 

165, Subpart C, no person may enter or 

remain in the safety zone created in this 

section or bring, cause to be brought, or 

allow to remain in the safety zone 

created in this section any vehicle, 

vessel, or object unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port or his designated 

representative. Designated 

representatives are Coast Guard 

personnel authorized by the Captain of 

the Port to grant persons or vessels 

permission to enter or remain in the 

safety zone created by this section. See 

33 CFR Part 165, Subpart C, for 

additional information and 

requirements. 

(c) Enforcement Period. The safety 

zone created by this section will be 

enforced from 6 a.m. through 5 p.m. on 

October 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, and 13, 2010. 

Dated: September 20, 2010. 

D.E. Kaup, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Columbia River. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24878 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 3 

RIN 2900–AN24 

Presumptions of Service Connection 

for Persian Gulf Service; Correction 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Correcting amendment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) published in the Federal 

Register of September 29, 2010, a 

document amending its adjudication 

regulations concerning presumptive 

service connection for certain diseases. 

In the regulatory text of that document, 

VA inadvertently omitted a comma 

following the word ‘‘etiology’’ in the first 

sentence of § 3.317(a)(2)(ii). This 

document corrects that omission. 

DATES: Effective Date: This correction is 

effective October 5, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William F. Russo, Director of 

Regulations Management (02REG), 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 

Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 

20420, or call (202) 273–9515 (not a tollfree number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

September 29, 2010, VA published in 

the Federal Register (75 FR 59968), an 

amendment to 38 CFR 3.317 to 

implement a decision of the Secretary of 

Veterans Affairs that there is a positive 

association between service in 

Southwest Asia during certain periods 

and the subsequent development of 

certain infectious diseases. In the first 

sentence of § 3.317(a)(2)(ii), we 

inadvertently omitted a comma 

following the word ‘‘etiology.’’ This 

correction document adds the comma 

immediately following the word 

‘‘etiology’’ in that sentence. 

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Claims, Disability benefits, 

Health care, Pensions, Radioactive 

materials, Veterans, Vietnam. 

Approved: September 30, 2010. 

William F. Russo, 

Director, Regulations Management, Office of 

the General Counsel, Department of Veterans 

Affairs. 

■ For the reason set out in the preamble, 

VA is correcting 38 CFR part 3 as 

follows: 

PART 3—ADJUDICATION 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 3, 

subpart A continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless 

otherwise noted. 

§ 3.317 [Corrected] 

■ 2. In § 3.317, paragraph (a)(2)(ii), first 

sentence, add a comma immediately 

after the word ‘‘etiology.’’ 

[FR Doc. 2010–24898 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0418; SW–FRL– 

9209–8] 

Hazardous Waste Management 

System; Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste; Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Correcting amendments. 

SUMMARY: On July 31, 2009, EPA 

published a direct final action granting 

a petition submitted by WRB Refining, 

LLC Company to exclude (or delist) the 

thermal desorber residual solids with 

Hazardous Waste Numbers: F037, F038, 

K048, K049, K050, and K051. In the July 

31, 2009 rule, EPA inadvertently 

recorded the arsenic delisting level as 

0.0129 mg/l. The arsenic delisting limit 

should be 1.29 mg/l. We are making this 

correction in this document. 

DATES: This action is effective October 

5, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle Peace (214) 665–7430, or email her at peace.michelle@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA 

published an approval for 5,000 cubic 

yards of thermal desorber residual 

solids. The arsenic delisting exclusion 

limit in the direct final rule is incorrect. 

Therefore, in this correction notice we 

are correcting the arsenic value limit 

and correcting it in Table 1 of appendix 

IX to part 261—Waste Excluded Under 

§§ 260.20 and 260.22. Section 553 of the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), provides that, when an 

agency for good cause finds that notice 

and public procedures are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest, the agency may 

issue a rule without providing notice 

and an opportunity for public comment. 

We have determined that there is such 

good cause for making today’s rule final 

without prior proposal and opportunity 

for comment because we are merely 

correcting the error which was included 

in a previous action. Thus, notice and 

public procedure are unnecessary. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES