Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Proposed Rules 66865

(b) You must submit a report annually

on November 1 to the Regional

Supervisor that must include :

(1) A list of fixed or floating platforms

inspected in the preceding 12 months;

(2) The extent and area of inspection;

(3) The type of inspection employed,

i.e., visual, magnetic particle, ultrasonic

testing; and

(4) A summary of the testing results

indicating what repairs, if any, were

needed and the overall structural

condition of the fixed or floating

platform.

§ 250.917 What are the requirements for

fixed or floating platform removal and

location clearance?

You must remove all structures

according to §§ 250.1725 through

250.1730 of Subpart Q—

Decommissioning Activities—of this

part.

§ 250.918 What records must I keep?

You must compile, retain, and make

available to MMS representatives for the

functional life of all fixed or floating

platforms:

(a) The as-built drawings;

(b) The design assumptions and

analyses;

(c) A summary of the fabrication and

installation nondestructive examination

records; and

(d) The inspection results from the

inspections required by § 250.916.

8. In § 250.1002 paragraphs (b)(4) and

(b)(5) are added to read as follows:

§ 250.1002 Design requirements for DOI

pipelines.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) If you are installing pipelines

constructed of unbonded flexible pipe,

they must be built according to the

standards and the third-party review

standards for an independent

verification agent (IVA) in API Spec 17J.

(5) You must construct pipeline risers

for tension leg platforms and other

floating platforms according to the

design standards of API RP 2RD.

* * * * *

9. In § 250.1007, a new sentence is

added at the end of paragraph (a)(4) to

read as follows:

§ 250.1007 What to include in applications.

(a) * * *

(4) * * * If your application involves

using unbonded flexible pipe, you must

include a review by a third-party IVA

according to API Spec 17J.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01–31723 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD09–01–148]

RIN–2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operation Regulations;

Chicago River, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to

revise the operating regulation

governing drawbridges over Chicago

River waterways. The proposed rule

would add Division Street bridge, mile

3.30, over the North Branch of Chicago

River, to the current list of bridges not

required to open for navigation; remove

the requirement for Kinzie Street bridge,

mile 1.81 over North Branch of Chicago

River, and Cermak Road bridge, mile

4.05 over South Branch of Chicago

River, to open on signal for commercial

vessels due to the recently

accomplished increases in vertical

clearances; require a 12-hour advance

notice requirement from commercial

vessels year-round for City of Chicago

moveable bridges; update ownership of

certain railroad bridges; specify rush

hour times (7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.

to 6:30 p.m.—Monday through Friday,

with the exception of Federal holidays)

that City of Chicago bridges would not

be required to open for any vessels; and

generally make the regulation easier to

read and understand.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before February 25, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed

or delivered to: Commander (obr), Ninth

Coast Guard District, 1240 East Ninth

Street, Room 2019, Cleveland, OH,

44199–2060 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. The telephone number is (216)

902–6084.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Scot M. Striffler, Project Manager, Ninth

Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, at

(216) 902–6084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views or arguments for or against this

rule. Persons submitting comments

should include names and addresses,

identify the rulemaking [CGD09–01–

148] and the specific section of this

proposal to which each comment

applies, and give the reason(s) for each

comment. Please submit all comments

and attachments in an unbound format,

no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable

for copying and electronic filing.

Persons wanting acknowledgement of

receipt of comments should enclose a

stamped, self-addressed postcard or

envelope.

The Coast Guard plans no public

hearing. Individuals may request a

public hearing by writing to the address

under ADDRESSES. The request should

include the reasons why a hearing

would be beneficial. If the Coast Guard

determines that the opportunity for oral

presentation will aid this rulemaking,

we will hold a public hearing at a time

and place announced by a subsequent

notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

The City of Chicago has requested that

Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District,

revise the operating regulations for

Chicago City operated drawbridges over

Chicago River waterways. The primary

changes are: (1) Remove the

requirements for Kinzie Street bridge

over the North Branch and Cermak Road

bridge over the South Branch to open on

signal for commercial vessels due to

restrictive clearances. Both bridges have

been raised to provide vertical

clearances consistent with other fixed

and moveable bridges on the Chicago

River system. (2) Add Division Street

bridge over the North Branch of Chicago

River to the current list of drawbridges

not required to open for vessels. (3)

Require a 12-hour advance notice

requirement for bridge openings from

commercial vessels for City of Chicago

moveable bridges throughout the year.

(4) Clarify rush hour times (7 a.m. to 10

a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.—Monday

through Friday, with the exception of

Federal holidays) that City of Chicago

bridges would not be required to open

for any vessels.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

The current operating regulations for

Chicago River bridges are contained in

33 CFR 117.391. This section was last

changed on October 6, 1995 (60 FR

52311) to establish opening schedules

for recreational vessels. This proposed

rule only alters the sections pertaining

to recreational vessels by specifying

rush hour times (7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and

4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.—Monday through

Friday, with the exception of Federal

holidays) that bridges would not be

required to open.

The City of Chicago requested that

both Kinzie Street bridge over North

Branch and Cermak Road bridge over

South Branch be granted the same status

as all other City of Chicago bridges and

66866 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Proposed Rules

only be required to open for commercial

vessels if at least 12-hours advance

notice is provided. The bridges have

been raised to provide vertical

clearances consistent with other fixed

and moveable bridges on the Chicago

River system.

The City has also requested that

Division Street bridge over North

Branch not be required to open for

vessels. This would place the bridge in

the same status as all other City bridges

for a vessel proceeding northbound on

North Branch above Division Street.

There is adequate clearance for

commercial vessels equipped with

retractable pilothouses to pass under

each of these bridges. There are

currently no recreational vessel facilities

from Division Street northward that

require the opening of drawbridges for

masted vessels. A marina south of

Division Street services masted vessels,

therefore, all bridges southward are still

required to open in accordance with the

articles pertaining to recreational

vessels. Bridge opening logs provided

by the City indicate that the last request

for a bridge opening at Division Street

occurred in 1982.

This proposed rule would also update

the current ownership of railroad

bridges on Chicago River and remove

the emergency provisions specifically

listed in paragraph (e). These provisions

apply to all drawbridges, as noted in 33

CFR 117.31, and need not be re-stated

in this regulation.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposed rule is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866 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 Transportation (DOT)

(44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979). The

Coast Guard expects the economic

impact of this rule to be so minimal that

a full Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

This determination is based on the

current and prospective facilities and

needs of all navigation on the Chicago

River system.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this proposed

rule will have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

‘‘Small entities’’ may include small

businesses and 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 people.

The identified small entities operating

on Chicago River would not be

significantly affected by the proposed

rule. Marinas located on the North

Branch and South Branch of Chicago

River would still have bridge openings

during designated times. However, rush

hour times, where no openings would

be required, have been expanded. These

entities do not require openings of

bridges from Division Street northward

on North Branch. In addition, the three

identified commercial tug companies

operating on Chicago River do not

require openings of Chicago City

bridges.

Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies

under 5 U.S.C 605(b) that this proposed

rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

If you think that your business,

organization, or governmental

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity

and that this proposed 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 proposed rule would economically

affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 proposed rule would affect your

small business, organization, or

governmental jurisdiction and you have

questions concerning its provisions or

options for compliance, please contact

the Bridge Administration Branch,

Ninth Coast Guard District, at the

address above.

Collection of Information

This proposed rule would call for no

new collection of information

requirement under the Paperwork

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

proposed rule under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

13132, and determined that this rule

does not have federalism implications

under that Order.

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 proposed rule will 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 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 does not concern an

environmental risk to health or risk to

safety that may 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 responsibility 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 it is

not likely to have a significant adverse

effect on the supply, distribution, or use

of energy. It has not been designated by

the Administrator of the Office of

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Proposed Rules 66867

Information and Regulatory Affairs as a

significant energy action. Therefore, it

does not require a Statement of Energy

Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this proposed

rule and concluded that, under figure 2–

1, paragraph 32(e) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.lD, this proposed

rule is categorically excluded from

further environmental documentation.

A ‘‘Categorical Exclusion

Determination’’ is available in the

docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

For reasons set out in the preamble,

the Coast Guard proposes to amend Part

117 of Title 33, Code of Federal

Regulations, 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; 49 CFR 1.46; 33

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106

Stat. 5039.

2. In § 117.391, revise the

introductory text, paragraphs (a)(1),

(b)(1)(iv), (b)(2), and (c); and remove

paragraphs (d) and (e), to read as

follows:

§ 117.391 Chicago River.

The draws of the bridges operated by

the City of Chicago over the Main

Branch of Chicago River, the bridges on

the North Branch of Chicago River from

the Main Branch to North Halsted

Street, mile 2.65, and bridges on the

South Branch of Chicago River from the

Main Branch to South Ashland Avenue,

mile 4.47, shall operate as follows:

(a) For commercial vessels:

(1) All bridges shall open on signal if

at least 12-hours advance notice is

provided to the Chicago City Bridge

Desk prior to the intended time of

passage; except that, from Monday

through Friday between the hours of 7

a.m. and 10 a.m., and between the hours

of 4 p.m. and 6:30 p.m., except for

Federal holidays, the draws need not

open for the passage of vessels.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) * * *

(i) * * *

(iv) That draws shall open at times in

addition to those listed in paragraphs

(b)(1)(i) through (b)(1)(iii) of this

section, after notice has been given at

least 20 hours in advance requesting

passage for a flotilla of at least five

vessels. However, the bridges need not

open Monday through Friday from 7

a.m. to 10 a.m., and 4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.,

except for Federal holidays.

(2) From December 1 through March

31, the draws shall open on signal if at

least 48 hours notice is given. However,

the bridges need not open Monday

through Friday from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m.,

and 4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., except for

Federal holidays.

* * * * *

(c) The following bridges need not be

opened for the passage of vessels: The

draws of South Damen Avenue, mile

6.14, over South Branch of Chicago

River; all highway drawbridges between

South Western Avenue, mile 6.7, and

Willow Springs Road, mile 19.4, over

Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal; North

Halsted Street, mile 2.85, and Division

Street, mile 2.99, over North Branch

Canal of Chicago River; and Division

Street, mile 3.30, North Avenue, mile

3.81, Cortland Avenue, mile 4.48,

Webster Avenue, mile 4.85, North

Ashland Avenue, mile 4.90, and Union

Pacific Railroad, mile 5.01, over North

Branch of Chicago River.

Dated: November 27, 2001.

James D. Hull,

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

Ninth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 01–31842 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL–7122–1]

RIN 2060–AJ76

Prohibition on Gasoline Containing

Lead or Lead Additives for Highway

Use: Fuel Inlet Restrictor Exemption

for Motorcycles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA published a direct final

rule on October 31, 2001 that exempts

motorcycles with emission control

devices that could be affected by the use

of leaded gasoline from having to be

equipped with gasoline tank filler inlet

restrictors. However, we received an

adverse comment during the 30 day

comment period and are now

withdrawing that direct final rule.

DATES: As of December 27, 2001, EPA

withdraws the direct final rule

published at 66 FR 54955, on October

31, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Babst at (202) 564–9473.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Because

EPA received adverse comment, we are

withdrawing the direct final rule for

‘‘Prohibition on Gasoline Containing

Lead or Lead Additives for Highway

Use: Fuel Inlet Restrictor Exemption For

Motorcycles.’’ We published the direct

final rule on October 31, 2001 (66 FR

54955), that exempts motorcycles with

emission control devices that could be

affected by the use of leaded gasoline

from having to be equipped with

gasoline tank filler inlet restrictors. We

stated in that Federal Register

document that if we received adverse

comment by November 30, 2001, we

would publish a timely notice of

withdrawal in the Federal Register. We

subsequently received adverse comment

on that direct final rule. We will address

the comment in a subsequent final

action based on the parallel proposal

also published on October 31, 2001 (66

FR 54965). As stated in the parallel

proposal, we will not institute a second

comment period on this action.

Dated: December 19, 2001.

Jeffrey R. Holmstead,

Assistant Administrator for Office of Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 01–31797 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01–2868, MM Docket No. 01–334, RM–

10343]

Digital Television Broadcast Service;

Green Bay, WI

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by CBS

Broadcasting Inc., licensee of station

WFRV–TV, NTSC channel 5, Green Bay,

Wisconsin, requesting the substitution

of DTV channel 39 for DTV channel 56

at Green Bay. DTV Channel 39 can be

allotted to Green Bay, Wisconsin, in

compliance with the principle

community coverage requirements of

Section 73.625(a) at reference

coordinates 44–20–01 N. and 87–58–56

W. However, since Green Bay is located

within 400 kilometers of the U.S.-

Canadian border, concurrence from the

Canadian government must be obtained