Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 76249 

provide comments specifically on the 

ACs posted in the docket (FAA–2013– 

0933), the FAA is opening a 30-day 

comment period to allow for comments 

on the referenced ACs only. The FAA 

will not accept or address comments on 

the NPRM because the comment period 

for the NPRM closed on May 28, 2014. 

Additional Information 

A. Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this request for comment 

by submitting written comments, data, 

or views. The most helpful comments 

should reference a specific portion of 

the AC, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should send only one copy 

of written comments, or if comments are 

filed electronically, commenters should 

submit them only one time. All 

comments received on or before the 

closing date for comments will be 

considered by the FAA before we issue 

the final ACs. 

Proprietary or Confidential Business 

Information: Do not file proprietary or 

confidential business information in the 

docket. Such information must be sent 

or delivered directly to the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document, and marked as proprietary or 

confidential. If submitting information 

on a disk or CD–ROM, mark the outside 

of the disk or CD–ROM, and identify 

electronically within the disk or CD– 

ROM the specific information that is 

proprietary or confidential. 

Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is 

aware of proprietary information filed 

with a comment, the agency does not 

place it in the docket. It is held in a 

separate file to which the public does 

not have access, and the FAA places a 

note in the docket that it has received 

it. If the FAA receives a request to 

examine or copy this information, it 

treats it as any other request under the 

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 

552). The FAA processes such a request 

under the DOT procedures found in 49 

CFR part 7. 

B. Availability of Rulemaking 

Documents 

An electronic copy of rulemaking 

documents may be obtained from the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http://

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. 

Copies may also be obtained by 

sending a request to the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Office of 

Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or 

by calling (202) 267–9680. Commenters 

must identify the docket or notice 

number when submitting a request. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and 44703 in 

Washington, DC, on December 12, 2015. 

Frank P. Paskiewicz, 

Deputy Director, Aircraft Certification 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–29799 Filed 12–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2014–0213] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Coquille River, Coos Bay, OR 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the operating schedule that 

governs the U.S. 101 highway 

drawbridge also known as Bullard’s 

Drawbridge, near Coos Bay, Oregon. The 

proposed change would allow the 

drawbridge to permanently remain in 

the closed position, no longer opening 

for vessel traffic. While there is vessel 

traffic on this waterway, no one has 

requested a drawbridge opening since 

1998. Oregon Department of 

Transportation (ODOT) owns the bridge 

and requested to update the operating 

schedule accordingly. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

February 20, 2015. Requests for public 

meetings must be received by the Coast 

Guard on or before January 21, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2014–0213 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries 

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

Monday through Friday, except federal 

holidays. The telephone number is 202– 

366–9329. 

See the ‘‘Public Participation and 

Request for Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. To avoid duplication, please 

use only one of these methods. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, 

Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast 

Guard District; telephone 206–220– 

7282, email d13-pf-d13bridges@

uscg.mil. If you have questions on 

viewing or submitting material to the 

docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program 

Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 

202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

§ Section Symbol 

U.S.C. United States Code 

A. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this proposed 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. 

1. Submitting comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

proposed rulemaking (USCG–2014– 

0213), 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 email address, 

or a phone number in the body of your 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
76250 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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, type the 

docket number [USCG–2014–0213] in 

the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click 

‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on ‘‘Submit a 

Comment’’ on the line associated with 

this rulemaking. 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. 

2. 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, type the 

docket number (USCG–2014–0213) in 

the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click 

‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket 

Folder on the line associated with this 

rulemaking. 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. 

3. 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). 

4. Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one by January 21, 2015 using one 

of the 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. 

B. Basis and Purpose 

The Oregon Department of 

Transportation (ODOT) owns the U.S. 

101 Highway Bridge also known as 

Bullard’s Drawbridge, Coquille River, 

mile 3.5, Coos Bay, OR, and has 

requested that the drawbridge regulation 

be amended to allow the bridge to 

remain in the permanently closed 

position. ODOT provided the Coast 

Guard with bridge logs which indicated 

no request for bridge openings have 

been received since 1998. The U.S. 101 

Highway Bridge also known as Bullard’s 

Drawbridge, Coquille River, in the 

closed position, provides 28.1 feet of 

vertical clearance at mean high water 

and 35 feet at low water. In the open 

position the span provides 74.3 feet of 

vertical clearance at mean high water. 

Coquille River is transited by 

commercial fishing and recreational 

vessel traffic. 

The Coast Guard believes this 

proposed rule is reasonable, and if 

implemented, should continue to meet 

the present and future needs of 

navigation. Based on the records 

provided by ODOT to the Coast Guard, 

it is expected that the proposed change 

will have no known impact to 

navigation or other waterway users. 

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to amend 

33 CFR 117.875 which requires the U.S. 

101 highway bridge also known as 

Bullard’s Drawbridge to open on signal 

if at least two hours notice is given to 

the drawtender at the Coos Bay South 

Slough bridge. The amendment allows 

the bridge to remain closed to the 

passage of vessels. However, pursuant to 

117.39, the draws must be able to 

operate within six months of being 

required to do so by the District 

Commander. The Coast Guard believes 

this proposed rule change will meet the 

current and future reasonable needs of 

navigation since the drawbridge has not 

received a request to open for marine 

traffic since 1998. 

D. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on these statutes or executive 

orders. 

1. 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, as 

supplemented by Executive Order 

13563, Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review, and does not require 

an assessment of potential costs and 

benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 

12866 or under section 1 of Executive 

Order 13563. The Office of Management 

and Budget has not reviewed it under 

those Orders. The Coast Guard basis of 

this finding is on the fact that the bridge 

has received no requests for openings 

and has remained in the closed position 

for the last 16 years without any impacts 

to waterway users. 

2. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 

requires federal agencies to consider the 

potential impact of regulations on small 

entities during rulemaking. 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 action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities for the 

following reasons. Vessels that can 

safely transit under the bridge may do 

so at any time. Furthermore, no known 

waterway users have requested a bridge 

opening within the last 16 years. 

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. 

3. 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. 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 the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT, above. 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. 

4. 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.). 

5. Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 2014 / Proposed Rules 76251 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. We have 

analyzed this proposed rule under that 

Order and have determined that it does 

not have implications for federalism. 

6. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places or vessels. 

7. 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 proposed rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

8. 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. 

9. 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. 

10. 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. 

11. 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. 

12. Energy Effects 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

14. 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. This proposed 

rule simply promulgates the operating 

regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(32)(e), of the Instruction. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of 

the Instruction, an environmental 

analysis checklist and a categorical 

exclusion determination are not 

required for this rule. 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 § 117.875 to read as follows: 

§ 117.875 Coquille River. 

The draws of the US 101 highway 

bridge, mile 3.5 at Bandon, Oregon, 

need not be opened for the passage of 

vessels; however, the draws shall be 

restored to operable condition within 6 

months after notification by the District 

Commander to do so. 

Dated: December 5, 2014. 

R.T. Gromlich, 

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

Thirteenth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2014–29851 Filed 12–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0147; FRL–9920–70– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request 

and Associated Maintenance Plan for 

the Reading, Pennsylvania 

Nonattainment Area for the 1997 

Annual Fine Particulate Matter 

Standard, and 2007 Base Year 

Inventory 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

(Commonwealth or Pennsylvania) 

request to redesignate to attainment the 

Reading, Pennsylvania nonattainment 

area (Reading Area or the Area) for the 

1997 annual fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). In addition, EPA is 

proposing to approve, as a revision to 

the Pennsylvania State Implementation 

Plan (SIP), the Reading Area 

maintenance plan to show maintenance 

of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

through 2025 for the Area. The 

maintenance plan includes the 2017 and 

2025 PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

mobile vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs) for the Reading Area for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, which EPA 

is proposing to approve for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

EPA is also proposing to find adequate 

the MVEBs for Berks County. Finally, 

EPA is proposing to approve, as a 

revision to the Pennsylvania SIP, the 

2007 base year emissions inventory for 

the Area for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS