Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Port of Coos Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, North Bend, OR, 58931-58933 [E9-27354]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 219 / Monday, November 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
entity, or organization named in a
request from FinCEN in accordance
with the requirements of such section.
However, such sharing shall not
disclose the fact that FinCEN has
requested information concerning such
individual, entity, or organization.
(C) Each financial institution shall
maintain adequate procedures to protect
the security and confidentiality of
requests from FinCEN for information
under this section. The requirements of
this paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C) shall be
deemed satisfied to the extent that a
financial institution applies to such
information procedures that the
institution has established to satisfy the
requirements of section 501 of the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C.
6801), and applicable regulations issued
thereunder, with regard to the
protection of its customers’ nonpublic
personal information.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Relation to the Right to Financial
Privacy Act and the Gramm-LeachBliley Act. The information that a
financial institution is required to report
pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this
section is information required to be
reported in accordance with a federal
statute or rule promulgated thereunder,
for purposes of subsection 3413(d) of
the Right to Financial Privacy Act (12
U.S.C. 3413(d)) and subsection 502(e)(8)
of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15
U.S.C. 6802(e)(8)).
(5) No effect on law enforcement or
regulatory investigations. Nothing in
this subpart affects the authority of a
Federal, State or local law enforcement
agency or officer, or FinCEN or another
component of the Department of the
Treasury, to obtain information directly
from a financial institution.
Dated: November 9, 2009.
James H. Freis, Jr.,
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network.
[FR Doc. E9–27447 Filed 11–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2009–0840]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Port
of Coos Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos
Bay, North Bend, OR
AGENCY:
Coast Guard, DHS.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:16 Nov 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
modify the drawbridge operation
regulation for the Port of Coos Bay
Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, mile 9.0, at
North Bend, Oregon by deleting the
requirement for special sound signals
used in foggy weather and to change the
name of the owner. This rule is
necessary to make the sound signals
used at the bridge consistent with other
bridges in the area and to eliminate the
unnecessary special sound signals.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
January 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by the Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2009–0840 using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) 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.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these methods. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge
Section, Waterways Management
Branch, Thirteenth Coast Guard District,
telephone 206–220–7282, e-mail
address william.a.pratt@uscg.mil. 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:
58931
rulemaking USCG–2009–0840, indicate
the specific section of this document to
which each comment applies, and
provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your
comments and material online (https://
www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If submit a comment
online via https://www.regulations.gov, it
will be considered received by the Coast
Guard when you successfully transmit
the comment. If you fax, hand deliver or
mail your comment, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend
that you include your name and a
mailing address, an 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.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu
select ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ and insert
‘‘USCG–2009–0840’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the
balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column.
If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit them by
mail and would like to know that they
reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period and may change
the proposed rule in view of them.
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.
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, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2009–
0840’’ and click ‘‘Search’’. Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. 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.
We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation to use the
Docket Management Facility.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of all comments received into any
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
58932
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 219 / Monday, November 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting, but you may submit a request
using one of the four methods under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why one
would be beneficial. If we determine
that one would aid this rulemaking, we
will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
Background and Purpose
The proposed rule would remove the
requirement at the Port of Coos Bay
Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, mile 9.0, at
North Bend, Oregon for a bell to be rung
continuously in foggy weather and for a
siren to be sounded in foggy weather
when the swingspan is closed. The
movable span is normally kept in the
open position except for the passage of
trains or maintenance work. The
proposed rule would also change the
regulation to reflect the bridge’s current
owner as the Port of Coos Bay.
The bell and siren at this drawbridge
are not standard requirements at
drawbridges and there is nothing
specific to the bridge that warrants the
continued use of these special sound
signals. Vessel traffic through the
swingspan includes tugs and tows and
a variety of recreational craft.
Oceangoing ship traffic has diminished
greatly in recent decades.
The operating regulations currently in
effect for the bridge are found at 33 CFR
117.871. These state that the bridge be
maintained normally in the open
position except for the passage of trains
or maintenance. The aforementioned
sound signals are also prescribed.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend
33 CFR 117.871 by deleting the
requirements for the Coos Bay Railroad
Bridge to use the special sound signals
noted above. The rule will also change
the regulation to reflect that the bridge’s
new owner is the Port of Coos Bay. The
requirement that the bridge be normally
maintained in the open position would
not be changed.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:16 Nov 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, 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. The Coast
Guard has made this finding based on
the fact that that the rule will have no
known impact on the maritime public.
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 because it will have no known
impact on any vessel traffic.
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 Austin Pratt,
Chief, Bridge Section, Waterways
Management Branch, Thirteenth Coast
Guard District, at (206) 220–7282. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 219 / Monday, November 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
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
Information and Regulatory Affairs has
not designated this 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.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Amend § 117.871 to read as
follows:
§ 117.871
Coos Bay.
The draw of the Port of Coos Bay
railroad bridge, mile 9.0 at North Bend,
shall be maintained in the fully open
position, except for the crossing of
trains or maintenance.
Dated: October 15, 2009.
G.T. Blore,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9–27354 Filed 11–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2009–0838]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Snohomish River, Steamboat Slough,
and Ebey Slough; Everett and
Marysville, WA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS
Environment
ACTION:
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01,
and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment 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.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
modify the drawbridge operation
regulation for the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad drawbridge across
Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, in Marysville,
Washington so that two-hour notice
would be required to open the bridge
from 3:30 p.m. to 7 a.m. every day. The
bridge will be opened on signal at all
other times. The modification is
necessary to allow Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad to reduce staffing of
the bridge during periods requiring
infrequent openings. The Coast Guard is
also proposing additional minor
changes to the drawbridge operation
regulations covering the Snohomish
River system to delete obsolete
requirements.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:16 Nov 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58933
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
January 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by the Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2009–0838 using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) 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.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these methods. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge
Section, Waterways Management
Branch, 13th Coast Guard District,
telephone 206–220–7282, e-mail
william.a.pratt@uscg.mil. 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.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking USCG–2009–0838, indicate
the specific section of this document to
which each comment applies, and
provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your
comments and material online (https://
www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If submit a comment
online via https://www.regulations.gov, it
will be considered received by the Coast
Guard when you successfully transmit
the comment. If you fax, hand deliver or
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 219 (Monday, November 16, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58931-58933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27354]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2009-0840]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Port of Coos Bay Railroad
Bridge, Coos Bay, North Bend, OR
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the drawbridge operation
regulation for the Port of Coos Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, mile
9.0, at North Bend, Oregon by deleting the requirement for special
sound signals used in foggy weather and to change the name of the
owner. This rule is necessary to make the sound signals used at the
bridge consistent with other bridges in the area and to eliminate the
unnecessary special sound signals.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before January 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2009-0840 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) 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.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge Section, Waterways Management
Branch, Thirteenth Coast Guard District, telephone 206-220-7282, e-mail
address william.a.pratt@uscg.mil. 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.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking USCG-2009-0840, indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (https://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. If submit a comment online via
https://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast
Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand
deliver or mail your comment, it will be considered received by the
Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an 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.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2009-0840'' in the ``Keyword''
box. Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the
``Actions'' column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand
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
and may change the 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,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2009-0840'' and click
``Search''. Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
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. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any
[[Page 58932]]
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a
request using one of the four methods under ADDRESSES. Please explain
why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The proposed rule would remove the requirement at the Port of Coos
Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, mile 9.0, at North Bend, Oregon for a
bell to be rung continuously in foggy weather and for a siren to be
sounded in foggy weather when the swingspan is closed. The movable span
is normally kept in the open position except for the passage of trains
or maintenance work. The proposed rule would also change the regulation
to reflect the bridge's current owner as the Port of Coos Bay.
The bell and siren at this drawbridge are not standard requirements
at drawbridges and there is nothing specific to the bridge that
warrants the continued use of these special sound signals. Vessel
traffic through the swingspan includes tugs and tows and a variety of
recreational craft. Oceangoing ship traffic has diminished greatly in
recent decades.
The operating regulations currently in effect for the bridge are
found at 33 CFR 117.871. These state that the bridge be maintained
normally in the open position except for the passage of trains or
maintenance. The aforementioned sound signals are also prescribed.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.871 by deleting the
requirements for the Coos Bay Railroad Bridge to use the special sound
signals noted above. The rule will also change the regulation to
reflect that the bridge's new owner is the Port of Coos Bay. The
requirement that the bridge be normally maintained in the open position
would not be changed.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
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. The Coast Guard has made
this finding based on the fact that that the rule will have no known
impact on the maritime public.
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 because it will have no known impact on any
vessel traffic.
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 Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge
Section, Waterways Management Branch, Thirteenth Coast Guard District,
at (206) 220-7282. 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
[[Page 58933]]
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 Information and Regulatory Affairs has
not designated this 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 Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment 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.
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. Amend Sec. 117.871 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.871 Coos Bay.
The draw of the Port of Coos Bay railroad bridge, mile 9.0 at North
Bend, shall be maintained in the fully open position, except for the
crossing of trains or maintenance.
Dated: October 15, 2009.
G.T. Blore,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E9-27354 Filed 11-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
