Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Arkansas Waterway, Little Rock, AR, 1565-1568 [E8-160]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules
2. Revise § 210.2(d) to read as follows:
§ 210.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Applicable ACH Rules means the
ACH Rules with an effective date on or
before September 21, 2007, as published
in Parts II, III and VI of the ‘‘2007 ACH
Rules: A Complete Guide to Rules &
Regulations Governing the ACH
Network’’ except:
(1) ACH Rule 1.1 (limiting the
applicability of the ACH Rules to
members of an ACH association);
(2) ACH Rule 1.2.2 (governing claims
for compensation);
(3) ACH Rules 1.2.4 and 2.2.1.12;
Appendix Eight; and Appendix Eleven
(governing the enforcement of the ACH
Rules, including self-audit
requirements);
(4) ACH Rules 2.2.1.10; 2.6; and 4.8
(governing the reclamation of benefit
payments);
(5) ACH Rule 9.3 and Appendix Two
(requiring that a credit entry be
originated no more than two banking
days before the settlement date of the
entry—see definition ‘‘Effective Entry
Date’’ in Appendix Two);
(6) ACH Rule 2.11.2.3 (requiring that
originating depository financial
institutions (ODFIs) establish exposure
limits for Originators of Internetinitiated debit entries); and
(7) ACH Rule 2.13.3 (requiring
reporting regarding unauthorized
Telephone-initiated entries).
*
*
*
*
*
3. Revise § 210.3(b) to read as follows:
§ 210.3
Governing law.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Incorporation by reference—
applicable ACH Rules.
(1) This part incorporates by reference
the applicable ACH Rules, including
rule changes with an effective date on
or before September 21, 2007, as
published in parts II, III, and VI of the
‘‘2007 ACH Rules: A Complete Guide to
Rules & Regulations Governing the ACH
Network.’’ The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by
reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the
‘‘2007 ACH Rules’’ are available from
NACHA—The Electronic Payments
Association, 13450 Sunrise Valley
Drive, Suite 100, Herndon, Virginia
20171. Copies also are available for
public inspection at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capital
Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC
20002; and the Financial Management
Service, 401 14th Street, SW., Room
400A, Washington, DC 20227.
(2) Any amendment to the applicable
ACH Rules that is approved by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:20 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
1565
NACHA—The Electronic Payments
Association after January 1, 2007 shall
not apply to Government entries unless
the Service expressly accepts such
amendment by publishing notice of
acceptance of the amendment to this
part in the Federal Register. An
amendment to the ACH Rules that is
accepted by the Service shall apply to
Government entries on the effective date
of the rulemaking specified by the
Service in the Federal Register notice
expressly accepting such amendment.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Redesignate paragraph § 210.5(b)(3)
as § 210.5(b)(5) and add new paragraphs
(b)(3) and (b)(4) to read as follows:
a one-time service fee in connection
with an ARC, POP or BOC entry that is
returned due to insufficient funds. An
entry originated pursuant to this
paragraph shall meet the requirements
of ACH Rules 2.1.2 and 3.5 if the agency
includes the following statement in the
required notice(s) to the Receiver: ‘‘If
the electronic fund transfer cannot be
completed because there are insufficient
funds in your account, we may impose
a one-time fee of $[llll] against
your account, which we will also collect
by electronic fund transfer.’’
§ 210.5 Account requirements for Federal
payments.
Dated: December 27, 2007.
Kenneth R. Papaj,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 08–22 Filed 1–8–08; 8:45 am]
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) Where an agency is issuing part or
all of an employee’s travel
reimbursement payment to the official
travel card issuing bank, as authorized
or required by Office of Management
and Budget guidance or the Federal
Travel Regulation, the ACH credit entry
representing the payment may be
deposited to the account of the travel
card issuing bank for credit to the
employee’s travel card account at the
bank.
(4) Where a Federal payment is to be
disbursed through a debit card, stored
value card, prepaid card or similar
payment card program established by
the Service, the Federal payment may be
deposited to an account at a financial
institution designated by the Service as
a financial or fiscal agent. The account
title, access terms and other account
provisions may be specified by the
Service.
6. In § 210.6, revise paragraphs (g) and
(h) to read as follows, and remove
paragraph (i):
§ 210.6
Agencies.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Point-of-purchase debit entries. An
agency may originate a Point-ofPurchase (POP) entry using a check
drawn on a consumer or business
account and presented at a point-ofpurchase unless the Receiver opts out in
accordance with the ACH Rules. The
requirements of ACH Rules 2.1.2 and
3.12 shall be met for such an entry if the
Receiver presents the check at a location
where the agency has posted the notice
required by the ACH Rules and has
provided the Receiver with a copy of the
notice.
(h) Returned item service fee. An
agency that has authority to collect
returned item service fees may do so by
originating an ACH debit entry to collect
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Appendices A, B and C [Removed]
7. Remove Appendices A, B and C
from this part.
BILLING CODE 4810–35–M
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[USCG–2007–0043]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Arkansas Waterway, Little Rock, AR
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes an
amendment to the regulation for the
operation of the Baring Cross Railroad
Drawbridge across the Arkansas
Waterway at Mile 119.6 at Little Rock,
Arkansas. The revised regulation would
accurately depict where the drawbridge
operator is located and that the bridge,
which is remotely operated, is equipped
with a Photoelectric Boat Detection
System.
Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
March 10, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2007–0043 to the Docket
Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of the
following methods:
(1) Online: https://
www.regulations.gov.
(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM
09JAP1
1566
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on
the Ground Floor of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202–366–9329.
(4) Fax: 202–493–2251.
If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Mr. Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge
Administrator, (314) 269–2378. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation (DOT)
to use the Docket Management Facility.
Please see DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’
paragraph below.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2007–0043),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. 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.
You may submit your comments and
material by electronic means, mail, fax,
or delivery to the Docket Management
Facility at the address under ADDRESSES;
but please submit your comments and
material by only one means. If you
submit them by mail or 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. We may
change this proposed rule in view of
them.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:20 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov at any time,
click on ‘‘Search for Dockets,’’ and enter
the docket number for this rulemaking
(USCG–2007–0043) in the Docket ID
box, and click enter. You may also visit
the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12–140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
will be added to 33 CFR 117.123(b)(1)
to clarify this issue.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of all 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 the
Department of Transportation’s Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477), or you may visit https://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Regulatory Evaluation
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.
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule on commercial traffic
operating on the Arkansas Waterway to
be so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation is unnecessary. The
operating procedures are already in
place at the Baring Cross Railroad
Drawbridge, Mile 119.6, and the
proposed changes to the CFR documents
the procedures.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one to the Docket Management
Facility at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining 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 Arkansas Waterway is a part of
the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River
Navigation System. The System rises in
the vicinity of Catoosa, Oklahoma, and
embraces improved natural waterways
and a canal to empty into the
Mississippi River in southeast Arkansas.
The Arkansas Waterway drawbridge
operation regulation contained in 33
CFR 117.123(b)(1) states that any vessel
requiring an opening of the draw of the
Baring Cross Railroad Drawbridge, Mile
119.6, shall contact the remote
drawbridge operator in North Little
Rock, Arkansas. The Coast Guard has
determined that the remote operation is,
in fact, conducted from Union Pacific’s
Harriman Dispatch Center in Omaha,
Nebraska and a regulation change is
needed to accurately reflect the location.
In addition, as indicated in the Coast
Guard bridge permit, the bridge is
required to have audio and visual aids
to permit remote operation. A sentence
stating that the bridge is equipped with
a Photoelectric Boat Detection System
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed changes to 33 CFR
117.123(b)(1) will correct inaccuracies
and will more properly reflect how the
Baring Cross Railroad Drawbridge, Mile
119.6, on the Arkansas Waterway is
operated as follows: (a) Indicate Omaha,
Nebraska, as the actual location of the
remote drawbridge operator; and (b)
Indicate that the bridge is equipped
with a Photoelectric Boat Detection
System, a requirement of the Coast
Guard bridge permit.
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
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 proposed rule is neutral to
all business entities since it only
clarifies how the bridge is operated and
the bridge is still required to open on
demand for vessels.
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.
E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM
09JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules
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 Mr. Roger K.
Wiebusch, Bridge Administrator, Eighth
Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at
(314) 269–2378. 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 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 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.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Taking of Private Property
This proposed 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 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:20 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
1567
Protection of Children
Environment
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 may disproportionately affect
children.
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D 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 not likely to have a
significant effect on the human
environment. There are no factors in
this case that would limit the use of a
categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. We seek any
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Words of Issuance and Proposed
Regulatory Text
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 § 117.123(b)(1) to read as
follows:
§ 117.123
Arkansas Waterway
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) Normal flow procedures. Any
vessel which requires an opening of the
draw of this bridge shall establish
contact by radiotelephone with the
remote drawbridge operator on VHF–
FM Channel 13 in Omaha, Nebraska.
The remote drawbridge operator will
advise the vessel whether the requested
span can be immediately opened and
maintain constant contact with the
vessel until the requested span has
opened and the vessel passage has been
completed. The bridge is equipped with
a Photoelectric Boat Detection System to
prevent the span from lowering if there
is an obstruction under the span. If the
drawbridge cannot be opened
immediately, the remote drawbridge
operator will notify the calling vessel
and provide an estimated time for a
drawbridge opening.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM
09JAP1
1568
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Dated: December 19, 2007.
J.R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8–160 Filed 1–8–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
an area was attaining the NAAQS. The
EPA is proposing to correct this error.
The proposed correction involves the
replacement of the currently used
statistical formula and instructions with
a simpler look-up table approach which
is easier for readers to understand and
which retains the originally intended
numerical consistency with EPA’s
historical practice.
Written comments must be
received by February 8, 2008.
DATES:
40 CFR Part 50
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2001–0017; FRL–8502–4]
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2001–0017, by mail to: Review of
the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for Particulate
Matter (PM), Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
total of two copies. Comments may also
be submitted electronically or through
hand delivery/courier by following the
detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES
section of the direct final rule located in
the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of
this Federal Register.
ADDRESSES:
RIN 2060–AO59
Interpretation of the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for PM2.5—
Correcting and Simplifying
Amendment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA recently finalized
changes to the data handling
conventions and computations
necessary for determining when the
annual and 24-hour national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for fine
particles (generally referring to particles
less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers
(µm) in diameter, PM2.5) are met. These
changes were made in support of
revisions to the NAAQS for particulate
matter (PM) that were finalized in the
same rulemaking. Following the
publication of this rule, an omission
was discovered in the rule text
explaining the procedures for
calculating the key statistic (98th
percentile) involved with determining
compliance with the 24-hour PM2.5
standard in locations where extra
samples of PM2.5 in ambient air were
taken above the intended sampling
frequency. If the error in the regulatory
text is left unchanged, the resulting
statistic for calculating compliance with
the 24-hour PM2.5 standard would be
biased low at some samplers, leading to
potentially incorrect determinations that
For
general questions, please contact Mr.
Lewis Weinstock, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality
Assessment Division, Ambient Air
Monitoring Group (C304–06), Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number: (919) 541–3661; fax
number: (919) 541–1903; e-mail address:
weinstock.lewis@epa.gov. For technical
questions, please contact Mr. Mark
Schmidt, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Air Quality Assessment
Division, Air Quality Analysis Group
(C304–04), Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711; telephone
number: (919) 541–2416; fax number:
(919) 541–1903; e-mail address:
schmidt.mark@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
NAICS
code 1
Category
924110
State/territorial/local/tribal government ...........................................
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Federal government .......................................................................
924110
1 North
I. Why Is EPA Issuing This Proposed
Rule?
This document proposes to take
corrective action on 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix N, Interpretation of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for PM2.5. We have published a direct
final rule identical to this proposal in
the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of
this Federal Register. This direct final
rule will correct and simplify parts of a
recent final rule published on October
17, 2006 that finalized changes to the
data handling conventions and
computations necessary for determining
when the annual and 24-hour national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
for fine particles (generally referring to
particles less than or equal to 2.5
micrometers (µm) in diameter, PM2.5),
are met. We view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no
adverse comment. We have explained
our reasons for this action in the
preamble to the direct final rule.
If we receive no adverse comment, we
will not take further action on this
proposed rule. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comment on the amendments
included in this proposal, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register. We will address these
public comments in a subsequent final
rule based on this proposal. We will not
institute a second comment period on
this action. Any persons interested in
commenting must do so at this time.
The regulatory text for the proposal is
identical to that for the direct final rule
published in the ‘‘Rules and
Regulations’’ section of this Federal
Register. For further supplementary
information, the detailed rationale for
the proposal and the regulatory
revisions, see the direct final rule
published in a separate part of this
Federal Register.
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Categories and entities potentially
regulated by this action include:
Examples of regulated entities
Federal agencies that conduct ambient air monitoring similar to
that conducted by States under 40 CFR part 58 and that wish
EPA to use their monitoring data in the same manner as State
data.
State, territorial, and local, air quality management programs that
are responsible for ambient air monitoring under 40 CFR part
58. The proposal also may affect Tribes that conduct ambient
air monitoring similar to that conducted by States and that
wish EPA to use their monitoring data in the same manner as
State monitoring data.
American Industry Classification System.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:20 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM
09JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1565-1568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-160]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[USCG-2007-0043]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Arkansas Waterway, Little Rock,
AR
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes an amendment to the regulation for
the operation of the Baring Cross Railroad Drawbridge across the
Arkansas Waterway at Mile 119.6 at Little Rock, Arkansas. The revised
regulation would accurately depict where the drawbridge operator is
located and that the bridge, which is remotely operated, is equipped
with a Photoelectric Boat Detection System.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before March 10, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2007-0043 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
(1) Online: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey
[[Page 1566]]
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
(4) Fax: 202-493-2251.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Mr. Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge Administrator, (314) 269-2378.
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 https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2007-0043), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
comment. 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.
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail,
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ 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. We may change this
proposed rule in view of them.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and enter the docket number
for this rulemaking (USCG-2007-0043) in the Docket ID box, and click
enter. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all 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 the Department of
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit https://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining 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 Arkansas Waterway is a part of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas
River Navigation System. The System rises in the vicinity of Catoosa,
Oklahoma, and embraces improved natural waterways and a canal to empty
into the Mississippi River in southeast Arkansas. The Arkansas Waterway
drawbridge operation regulation contained in 33 CFR 117.123(b)(1)
states that any vessel requiring an opening of the draw of the Baring
Cross Railroad Drawbridge, Mile 119.6, shall contact the remote
drawbridge operator in North Little Rock, Arkansas. The Coast Guard has
determined that the remote operation is, in fact, conducted from Union
Pacific's Harriman Dispatch Center in Omaha, Nebraska and a regulation
change is needed to accurately reflect the location. In addition, as
indicated in the Coast Guard bridge permit, the bridge is required to
have audio and visual aids to permit remote operation. A sentence
stating that the bridge is equipped with a Photoelectric Boat Detection
System will be added to 33 CFR 117.123(b)(1) to clarify this issue.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed changes to 33 CFR 117.123(b)(1) will correct
inaccuracies and will more properly reflect how the Baring Cross
Railroad Drawbridge, Mile 119.6, on the Arkansas Waterway is operated
as follows: (a) Indicate Omaha, Nebraska, as the actual location of the
remote drawbridge operator; and (b) Indicate that the bridge is
equipped with a Photoelectric Boat Detection System, a requirement of
the Coast Guard bridge permit.
Regulatory Evaluation
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.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule on commercial
traffic operating on the Arkansas Waterway to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The operating procedures are
already in place at the Baring Cross Railroad Drawbridge, Mile 119.6,
and the proposed changes to the CFR documents the procedures.
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 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 proposed rule is neutral to all business
entities since it only clarifies how the bridge is operated and the
bridge is still required to open on demand for vessels.
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.
[[Page 1567]]
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 Mr. Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge
Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (314)
269-2378. 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 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 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 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 would not
create 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
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 Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D 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 not likely to
have a significant effect on the human environment. There are no
factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical
exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. 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.
Words of Issuance and Proposed Regulatory Text
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 Sec. 117.123(b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.123 Arkansas Waterway
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Normal flow procedures. Any vessel which requires an opening of
the draw of this bridge shall establish contact by radiotelephone with
the remote drawbridge operator on VHF-FM Channel 13 in Omaha, Nebraska.
The remote drawbridge operator will advise the vessel whether the
requested span can be immediately opened and maintain constant contact
with the vessel until the requested span has opened and the vessel
passage has been completed. The bridge is equipped with a Photoelectric
Boat Detection System to prevent the span from lowering if there is an
obstruction under the span. If the drawbridge cannot be opened
immediately, the remote drawbridge operator will notify the calling
vessel and provide an estimated time for a drawbridge opening.
* * * * *
[[Page 1568]]
Dated: December 19, 2007.
J.R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8-160 Filed 1-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
