Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Wabash River, IL; Permanent Change to Operating Schedule, 24510-24513 [E8-9813]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
24510
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 87 / Monday, May 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules
by the private sector, of $100 million or
more in any one year.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
requires each Federal agency prepare,
and make available for public comment,
a regulatory flexibility analysis when
the agency issues a regulation which
would have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will not significantly affect a
substantial number of small entities.
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
This rule will not impose any
additional information collection
requirements on the public under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3511). Existing information
collection requirements of the TRICARE
and Medicare programs will be utilized.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
This proposed rule has been
examined for its impact under E.O.
13132. It does not contain policies that
have federalism implications that would
have substantial direct effects 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; therefore,
consultation with State and local
officials is not required.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 199
Claims, dental health, health care,
health insurance, individuals with
disabilities, Military personnel.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 199 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 199—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 199
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 U.S.C. Chapter
55.
2. Paragraph 199.2(b) is amended by
adding a definition for CAHs and
placing it in alphabetical order to read
as follows:
§ 199.2
Definitions.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
CAHs. A small facility that provides
limited inpatient and outpatient
hospital services primarily in rural areas
and meets the applicable requirements
established by § 199.6(b)(4)(xvi).
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 199.6 is amended by
adding new paragraph (b)(4)(xvi).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:40 May 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
§ 199.6
TRICARE-authorized providers.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(xvi) CAHs. CAHs must meet all
conditions of participation under 42
CFR part 485.601–485.645 in relation to
TRICARE beneficiaries in order to
receive payment under the TRICARE
program. If CAH provides inpatient
psychiatric services or inpatient
rehabilitation services in a distinct part
unit, these distinct part units must meet
the conditions of participation in 42
CFR part 485.647, with the exception of
being paid under the inpatient
prospective payment system for
psychiatric facilities as specified in 42
CFR part 412.1(a)(2) or the inpatient
prospective payment system for
rehabilitation hospitals or rehabilitation
units as specified in 42 CFR part section
412(a)(3).
*
*
*
*
*
4. Section 199.14 is amended by
redesignating paragraphs (a)(3) through
(a)(5) as (a)(4) through (a)(6); revising
newly redesignated paragraph (a)(4)
introductory text, paragraphs (a)(6)(xi)
and (xii), and the first sentence of
paragraph (d)(1); and adding new
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(D)(10), (a)(3), and
(a)(6)(xiii) to read as follows:
§ 199.14 Provider reimbursement
methods.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(D) * * *
(10) CAHs. Any facility which has
been designated and certified as CAH as
contained in 42 CFR part 485.606.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Reimbursement for inpatient
services provided by CAH. Inpatient
services provided by CAH, other than
services provided in psychiatric and
rehabilitation distinct part units, shall
be reimbursed at the lesser of the billed
charge or 101 percent of reasonable
costs. This does not include any costs of
physician services or other professional
services provided to CAH inpatients.
Inpatient services provided in
psychiatric distinct part units would be
subject to the CHAMPUS mental health
per diem payment system. Inpatient
services provided in rehabilitation
distinct part units would be subject to
billed charges or set rates.
(4) Billed charges and set rates. The
allowable costs for authorized care in all
hospitals not subject to the CHAMPUS
Diagnosis Related Group-based payment
system, the CHAMPUS mental health
per diem system, or the reasonable cost
method for critical access hospitals,
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
shall be determined on the basis of
billed charges or set rates. Under this
procedure the allowable costs may not
exceed the lower of:
*
*
*
*
*
(6) * * *
(xi) Facility charges. TRICARE
payments for hospital outpatient facility
charges that would include the
overhead costs of providing the
outpatient service, with the exception of
critical access hospitals, would be paid
as billed. For the definition of facility
charge, see § 199.2(b).
(xii) Ambulatory surgery services.
Hospital outpatient ambulatory surgery
services, with the exception of CAHs,
shall be paid in accordance with
§ 199.14(d).
(xiii) Outpatient services provided by
CAH. Outpatient services provided by
CAH, to include ambulatory surgery
services, shall be reimbursed at the
lesser of the billed charge or 101 percent
of reasonable costs. This does not
include any costs of physician services
or other professional services provided
to CAH outpatients.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) In general. CHAMPUS pays
institutional facility costs for
ambulatory surgery on the basis of
prospectively determined amounts, as
provided in this paragraph, with the
exception of ambulatory surgery
procedures performed in CAHs, which
are to be reimbursed in accordance with
the provisions of paragraph (a)(6)(xiii) of
this section. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 28, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E8–9800 Filed 5–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0100]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Wabash River, IL; Permanent Change
to Operating Schedule
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
amending the regulation for the
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 87 / Monday, May 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules
operation of drawbridges across the
Wabash River in Illinois, in order to
reflect the needs of navigation.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 4, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2008–0100 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: http://
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
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 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 http://
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.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–0100),
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:40 May 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
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.
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 at any time.
Enter the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–0100) in the
search box, and click ‘‘Go>>.’’ You may
also visit either 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 or the Robert A.
Young Federal Building, Room 2.107F,
1222 Spruce Street, St. Louis, MO
63103–2832, between 8 a.m. and 4 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 http://
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 Wabash River is a 475 mile long
river in the eastern United States that
flows generally southwest from Ohio,
through Indiana, to Kentucky. The
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24511
System rises in the vicinity of St. Henry,
Ohio and flows across northern Indiana
to Illinois where it forms the southern
Illinois-Indiana border before draining
into the Ohio River. The Wabash River
flows into the Ohio River near
Uniontown, Kentucky. The Wabash
River drawbridge operation regulation
contained in 33 CFR 117.397 states that
all drawbridges shall open on signal if
given 72 hours advance notice. The
Coast Guard has determined that this
regulation is no longer necessary due to
the lack of navigation on the river. We
propose amending 33 CFR 117.397 so
that drawbridges on the Wabash River,
in Illinois, will no longer have to open
for the passage of vessels. We have
consulted with the local marine
industry, which has raised no objections
or concerns regarding this proposed
action.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed changes to 33 CFR
117.397 will reflect the current needs of
navigation on the Wabash River. The
last request for opening of a drawspan
on the Wabash River was in 1991. The
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers does not
maintain any project depth or navigable
channel on the river. Commercial use of
the waterway is only possible during
periods of high water. During these
periods ‘‘snag and debris removal’’
operations are carried out by small
commercial vessels that can safely pass
beneath all closed drawspans on the
waterway.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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 to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary.
The drawbridges of the Wabash River
do not presently open for the passage of
vessels due to the lack of navigation on
the river. The last recorded opening of
a Wabash River drawspan was in 1991.
Consultation with bridge owners
indicated that currently no bridge on the
Wabash River has a bridge tender
position assigned to it. Therefore, no
jobs will be lost, nor will any forms of
commerce be disrupted by the proposed
rule.
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
24512
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 87 / Monday, May 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules
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 bridges are operated.
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.
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).
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:40 May 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 affect 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 might 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
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 because it simply
promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. 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 § 117.397 to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 87 / Monday, May 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules
§ 117.397
Wabash River.
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking [USCG–2008–0327],
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know they reached us, 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.
The draws of the bridges across the
Wabash River need not be opened for
the passage of vessels.
Dated: April 17, 2008.
J.H. Korn,
Captain U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Commander, 8th Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8–9813 Filed 5–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0327]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Swim the Bay Event,
Presque Isle Bay, Erie, PA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
establishment of a safety zone for a
Swimming Race in the Captain of the
Port Buffalo zone. This proposed rule is
intended to restrict vessels from
portions of water during events that
pose a hazard to public safety. The
safety zone established by this proposed
rule is necessary to protect spectators,
participants, and vessels from the
hazards associated with a Swimming
Race.
Comments and related materials
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
June 4, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann
Boulevard, Buffalo, NY 14203. Sector
Buffalo Prevention Department
maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and will be
available for inspection or copying at
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo between 8
a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have further questions on this rule,
contact Lieutenant Tracy Wirth, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo, at (716)
843–9573.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
DATES:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:40 May 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo 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
Temporary safety zones are necessary
to ensure the safety of vessels and
spectators from the hazards associated
with Swimming Races. Based on recent
accidents that have occurred in other
Captain of the Port zones, the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, has determined
Swimming races pose significant risks
to public safety and property. The likely
combination of large numbers of
recreational vessels, congested
waterways, and alcohol use, could
easily result in serious injuries or
fatalities.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule and associated
safety zones are necessary to ensure the
safety of vessels and people during
events in the Captain of the Port Buffalo
area of responsibility that may pose a
hazard to the public. The proposed
safety zone is described in
subparagraphs (a) of this regulation. The
proposed safety zone will be enforced
only immediately before and during the
event which poses hazard to the public
and only upon notice by the Captain of
the Port. The Captain of the Port Buffalo
will cause notice of enforcement of the
safety zone established by this section to
be made by all appropriate means to the
affected segments of the public
including publication in the Federal
Register in accordance with 33 CFR
165.7(a). Such means of notification
may also include, but are not limited to,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24513
Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the
Port will issue a Broadcast Notice to
Mariners notifying the public when
enforcement of the safety zone
established by this section is suspended.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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 to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary.
The Coast Guard’s use of this safety
zone will be periodic in nature, of short
duration, and designed to minimize the
impact on navigable waters. This safety
zone will only be enforced immediately
before and during the time the event
occurs. Furthermore, this safety zone
has been designed to allow vessels to
transit unrestricted to portions of the
waterway not affected by the safety
zone. The Coast Guard expects
insignificant adverse impact to mariners
from the activation of this safety zone.
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 would affect the
following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in the area designated as the
safety zone in subparagraph (a) during
the date and time the safety zone is
being enforced. This safety zone would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reasons. The safety
zone in this proposed rule would be in
effect for short periods of time and only
once per year. The safety zone has been
designed to allow traffic to pass safely
around the zone whenever possible and
vessels will be allowed to pass through
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 87 (Monday, May 5, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24510-24513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9813]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2008-0100]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Wabash River, IL; Permanent
Change to Operating Schedule
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes amending the regulation for the
[[Page 24511]]
operation of drawbridges across the Wabash River in Illinois, in order
to reflect the needs of navigation.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 4, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2008-0100 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: http://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 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 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 http://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-2008-0100), 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 http://www.regulations.gov at
any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0100)
in the search box, and click ``Go>>.'' You may also visit either 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 or the Robert A. Young Federal Building, Room 2.107F, 1222
Spruce Street, St. Louis, MO 63103-2832, between 8 a.m. and 4 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 http://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 Wabash River is a 475 mile long river in the eastern United
States that flows generally southwest from Ohio, through Indiana, to
Kentucky. The System rises in the vicinity of St. Henry, Ohio and flows
across northern Indiana to Illinois where it forms the southern
Illinois-Indiana border before draining into the Ohio River. The Wabash
River flows into the Ohio River near Uniontown, Kentucky. The Wabash
River drawbridge operation regulation contained in 33 CFR 117.397
states that all drawbridges shall open on signal if given 72 hours
advance notice. The Coast Guard has determined that this regulation is
no longer necessary due to the lack of navigation on the river. We
propose amending 33 CFR 117.397 so that drawbridges on the Wabash
River, in Illinois, will no longer have to open for the passage of
vessels. We have consulted with the local marine industry, which has
raised no objections or concerns regarding this proposed action.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed changes to 33 CFR 117.397 will reflect the current
needs of navigation on the Wabash River. The last request for opening
of a drawspan on the Wabash River was in 1991. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers does not maintain any project depth or navigable channel on
the river. Commercial use of the waterway is only possible during
periods of high water. During these periods ``snag and debris removal''
operations are carried out by small commercial vessels that can safely
pass beneath all closed drawspans on the waterway.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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 to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
The drawbridges of the Wabash River do not presently open for the
passage of vessels due to the lack of navigation on the river. The last
recorded opening of a Wabash River drawspan was in 1991. Consultation
with bridge owners indicated that currently no bridge on the Wabash
River has a bridge tender position assigned to it. Therefore, no jobs
will be lost, nor will any forms of commerce be disrupted by the
proposed rule.
[[Page 24512]]
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 bridges are operated.
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.
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 affect 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 might
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 because it simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. 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. 117.397 to read as follows:
[[Page 24513]]
Sec. 117.397 Wabash River.
The draws of the bridges across the Wabash River need not be opened
for the passage of vessels.
Dated: April 17, 2008.
J.H. Korn,
Captain U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, 8th Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8-9813 Filed 5-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
