Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 30225 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[USCG–2008–1141, formerly CGD11–03– 

005] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Connection Slough, Bacon Island, CA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the drawbridge operation regulation 

governing the operation of the 

Connection Slough Drawbridge. This 

final rule ensures a drawbridge operator 

can be contacted, is present at the 

drawbridge during identified increased 

navigation periods, and reduces the 

hours a drawbridge operator is required 

to be at the drawbridge and not 

gainfully employed. These changes will 

continue to provide for the reasonable 

needs of navigation. 

DATES: This rule is effective July 27, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and related 

materials received from the public, as 

well as documents mentioned in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket, are part of docket USCG- USCG– 

2008–1141 and are available online by 

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

selecting the Advanced Docket Search 

option on the right side of the screen, 

inserting USCG–2008–1141 in the 

Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then 

clicking on the item in the Docket ID 

column. This material is 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 rule, call or 

e-mail Mr. David H. Sulouff, Bridge 

Administrator, Eleventh Coast Guard 

District; telephone (510) 437–3516, email David.H.Sulouff@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing the 

electronic docket, call Ms. Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

On September 22, 2003, the Coast 

Guard published a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Connection Slough, Stockton, CA (68 FR 

55020), to adjust the advance notice 

procedures for mariners to contact the 

drawbridge for an opening. Based on the 

220 comments received, the Coast 

Guard reopened the comment period on 

June 18, 2004, with a Supplemental 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(SNPRM) (69 FR 34100), under the same 

title, to explain and reemphasize the 

continued availability for the 

drawbridge to open, with seasonal 

adjustments to the ‘‘advance notice’’ 

times for mariners to schedule openings 

of the bridge. Two non-substantive 

comments were received from the 

SNPRM; however, due to variances 

between the bridge owner and the 

public, the Coast Guard chose to not 

move forward with the proposed rule 

but left the docket open. 

At the request of the bridge owner to 

reassess the proposed rule, the Coast 

Guard published another SNPRM on 

December 1, 2008, (73 FR 72752) using 

the electronic docket tracking system as 

USCG–2008–1141. The comment period 

concluded on March 2, 2009 with no 

comments. 

Background and Purpose 

The drawbridge owner, Central 

California Redevelopment Company 

(CCRC Farms), requested changing the 

dates and times for advance notice for 

drawspan operation at their 

Reclamation District drawbridge, 

crossing Connection Slough between 

Mandeville and Bacon Islands, near 

Stockton, CA. The reason for the 

proposal was to reduce operating costs 

of the drawbridge while continuing to 

meet the reasonable needs of vessel 

traffic. CCRC Farms provided 

drawbridge operating logs for a two-year 

period (2000 to 2002) that documented 

a significant decrease in calls for 

operation of the drawspan from 

September 16 to May 14, annually, 

between the hours of 5 p.m. and 9 a.m. 

This supported their request to adjust 

the existing advance notice period to 

more closely match the reduced 

navigational activity. On September 22, 

2003, we published an NPRM and the 

information was also published in the 

Coast Guard Local Notice to Mariners 

(LNM), 40/3, dated October 7, 2003. The 

Coast Guard received approximately 220 

letters and observed at least two articles 

in a local publication that objected to a 

reduced availability of the drawbridge 

to open for vessels. The wording in the 

NPRM and the LNM did not clearly 

explain that the drawspan will continue 

to be available for passage of vessels on 

a 24 hour, seven day per week basis. We 

addressed those comments in the June 

18, 2004 SNPRM and provided written 

copies of the SNPRM to the local media 

and to those who commented 

previously, to ensure any replies to our 

office are based upon the official 

proposal. The Coast Guard received two 

non-substantive comments regarding the 

SNPRM. However there remained 

conflicting information between the 

bridge owner and the waterways users. 

At that time the Coast Guard chose not 

to pursue the proposed schedule until 

the differing issues could be resolved 

and chose to leave the docket open. On 

July 24, 2008, Tuscany Research 

Institute and CCRC Farms provided 

additional supporting documentation in 

favor of revised advance notice 

drawbridge operation regulation for the 

bridge and reinitiated the request for the 

Coast Guard to evaluate the proposal. 

On December 1, 2008, the Coast Guard 

published an SNPRM in the Federal 

Register, proposing adjusted advance 

notice times for this drawbridge. The 

Coast Guard also published the 

information in the Local Notice to 

Mariners for 21 weeks, beginning 

October 8, 2008 and ending February 

25, 2009. 

The existing regulation, 33 CFR 

117.150, requires the drawbridge, from 

May 1 through October 31, to open on 

signal between the hours of 6 a.m. and 

10 p.m., and from November 1 through 

April 30, to open on signal between the 

hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. All other 

times the drawbridge must open on 

signal if notice is given at least four 

hours in advance. All drawbridges are 

required to open for emergencies as 

required by 33 CFR 117.31. It is also 

important to note that the existing 

regulation presently allows the 

drawbridge owner to operate the 

drawbridge with advance notice, during 

certain dates and times. It does not 

allow the drawbridge to remain closed 

or to obstruct navigation, when the 

proper signals to open have been given. 

Many comments, received in response 

to the NPRM, indicated a lack of 

understanding of the existing advance 

notice operation. Therefore, the Coast 

Guard will ensure signs are installed, 

maintained and updated by the bridge 

owner, on the upstream and 

downstream sides of the drawbridge, in 

compliance with 33 CFR 117.55, to post 

the advance notice schedules, with 

telephone numbers and point of contact 

to be notified for drawbridge operation. 

Vessel operators are reminded to adhere 

to requirements in 33 CFR 117.11 

regarding unnecessary opening of the 

draw. The Coast Guard periodically 

reminds bridge owners of their 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
30226 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

responsibility to provide drawbridge 

openings for vessels when signals have 

been given, and failure to comply may 

result in significant civil penalties 

against the bridge owner. Waterway 

users are encouraged to promptly notify 

the Eleventh Coast Guard District Bridge 

Office at (510) 437–3516, if vessel 

delays are caused by improper operation 

of the drawbridge. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

This rule amends 33 CFR 117.150 by 

revising the current operating schedule 

for the Reclamation District No. 2027 

bridge across Connection Slough. This 

rule extends both the annual date and 

daily time when the bridge is allowed 

to operate under advanced notice. 

Comments received from the NPRM 

are discussed more fully above and were 

addressed in the SNPRM dated June 18, 

2004. The June 18, 2004 SNPRM 

received two comments and neither was 

substantive in regard to the proposed 

rule and the 2008 SNPRM received no 

comments. No public meeting was 

requested and none was held. 

Regulatory Analysis 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analysis 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. 

This conclusion is based on the fact 

that these changes have only a minimal 

impact on maritime traffic transiting the 

bridge. Mariners can schedule bridge 

openings any time, night or day, any 

day of the year. Mariners may also plan 

their trips to arrive at the drawbridge 

during times when a bridge operator is 

scheduled to be present at the bridge. 

Vessels that can pass under the bridge 

without a bridge opening may do so at 

all times. 

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 would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This conclusion is based on the fact 

that the changes will have only a 

minimal impact on maritime traffic 

transiting the bridge. Mariners can 

schedule bridge openings any time, 

night or day, any day of the year. 

Mariners may also plan their trips to 

arrive at the drawbridge during times 

when a bridge operator is scheduled to 

be present at the bridge. Vessels that can 

pass under the bridge without a bridge 

opening may do so at all times. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

in the SNPRM we offered to assist small 

entities in understanding the rule so 

that they could 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 or more in any one year. 

Though this rule will not result in such 

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of 

this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This 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 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 

would not create an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that might 

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 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 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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 30227 

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 that this action is one 

of a category of actions which does not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. Therefore this rule is 

categorically excluded, under section 

2.B.2. figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of 

the Instruction. 

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

the Instruction, neither an 

environmental analysis checklist nor a 

categorical exclusion determination are 

not required for this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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 33 CFR 117.150 to read as 

follows: 

§ 117.150 Connection Slough. 

The draw of the Reclamation District 

No. 2027 bridge between Mandeville 

and Bacon Islands, mile 2.5 near 

Stockton, from May 15 through 

September 15, shall open on signal 

between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

and it shall open upon 12 hours 

advance notice between the hours of 5 

p.m. and 9 a.m.; and from September 16 

through May 14 the draw shall open 

upon 12 hours advance notice between 

the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., and it 

shall open upon 24 hours advance 

notice between the hours of 5 p.m. and 

9 a.m. Advance notice shall be given to 

the drawbridge operator by telephone at 

(209) 464–2959 or (209) 464–7928 

weekdays between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

and at (209) 993–8878 all other times. 

Dated: June 8, 2009. 

P.F. Zukunft, 

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

Eleventh Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E9–14946 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 17 

RIN 2900–AN07 

Foreign Medical Program of the 

Department of Veterans Affairs— 

Hospital Care and Medical Services in 

Foreign Countries 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This document amends 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

medical regulations applicable to VA’s 

Foreign Medical Program, Hospital Care 

and Medical Services in Foreign 

Countries. This rule is intended to 

change provisions concerning the 

location for filing Foreign Medical 

Program claims and delegations of 

authority for adjudicating those claims. 

It also corrects an obsolete regulatory 

citation. These changes are made for 

accuracy. 

DATES: Effective Date: July 27, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard M. Trabert, Policy Management 

Division (741/PMD), VA Health 

Administration Center, P.O. Box 65020, 

Denver, CO 80206–9020; (303) 331– 

7549. (This is not a toll-free number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document amends certain provisions 

concerning VA’s Foreign Medical 

Program (FMP) in VA’s medical 

regulations in 38 CFR part 17. The FMP 

is a VA health benefits program 

designed for a veteran who is residing 

or traveling outside of the United States, 

if the veteran requires treatment for a 

VA-rated service-connected disability or 

any disability associated with and 

aggravating a service-connected 

disability; or if the veteran requires care 

for certain reasons during participation 

in a rehabilitation program under 38 

U.S.C. chapter 31. 

This rule amends 38 CFR 17.35, 

17.125, and 17.141. 

We are amending § 17.35, ‘‘Hospital 

care and medical services in foreign 

countries,’’ to correct an obsolete 

reference in § 17.35(b) to 38 CFR 

17.48(j)(2). The reference is corrected to 

§ 17.47(i)(2) to reflect the redesignation 

of that paragraph pursuant to two earlier 

final rules (see 61 FR 21964, 21965 (May 

13, 1996); 65 FR 54207, 54218 (Oct. 6, 

1999)). 

This rule amends § 17.125, ‘‘Where to 

file claims,’’ to reflect a change in the 

mailing address for FMP claims sent to 

the Health Administration Center in 

Denver, Colorado. It also amends 

§ 17.125, as well as § 17.141, ‘‘Authority 

to adjudicate foreign reimbursement 

claims,’’ to remove provisions that 

distinguish the filing and adjudication 

of FMP claims for services rendered in 

Canada from those claims for services 

rendered in other foreign countries. 

Currently, these provisions instruct 

claimants to file claims for services 

rendered in Canada with the VA 

Medical Center in White River Junction, 

Vermont, and reflect a delegation of 

authority to that office for adjudication 

of those claims. Current § 17.125 

provides that claims for services 

rendered in other foreign countries 

(except the Philippines) must be mailed 

to the Denver Health Administration 

Center and § 17.141 reflects a delegation 

of authority to that office for 

adjudication of those claims. This rule 

removes the distinction between Canada 

and other foreign countries, thereby 

requiring claims under the FMP for 

services rendered in Canada to be 

mailed to and adjudicated by the Health 

Administration Center. 

Administrative Procedure Act 

This document merely corrects a 

citation to a regulatory paragraph to 

reflect that paragraph’s redesignation 

and makes other changes pertaining to 

agency management, organization, and 

procedure. Accordingly, its publication 

as a final rule is pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553, which exempts such a document 

from the notice-and-comment 

requirements of section 553. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES