Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Curtis Creek, Baltimore, MD, 30747-30750 [2010-13119]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as
the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Because this is a routine matter that will
only affect air traffic procedures and air
navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle 1, section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in subtitle
VII, part A, subpart 1, section 40103,
Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under
that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to ensure the
safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority because it
proposes to revoke Class E airspace in
Northeast Alaska, and establish Class E
airspace to allow access at Eagle
Airport, Eagle, AK, and represents the
FAA’s continuing effort to safely and
efficiently use the navigable airspace.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
Paragraph 6006
Airspace Areas.
En Route Domestic
*
*
*
*
AAL AK E6
*
Northeast, AK [New]
That airspace extending upward from 1,200
feet above the surface within an area
beginning at lat. 63°55′00″ N. long.
141°00′00″ W., then westward along a line of
latitude to 63°55′00″ N. long 144°00′00″ W.,
to 65°30′00″ N. long 144°00′00″ W., then
eastward along a line of latitude to 65°30′00″
N. 144°00′00″ W., to the point of beginning.
*
*
*
AAL AK E6
*
*
*
*
Barter Island, AK [Removed]
*
*
*
AAL AK E6 Mentasta Lake/Mountains
Area, AK [Removed]
Issued in Anchorage, AK, on May 7, 2010.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information
Area Group.
[FR Doc. 2010–13138 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
[Docket No. USCG–2010–0265]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Curtis Creek, Baltimore, MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
change the regulations that govern the
operation of the Pennington Avenue
Bridge across Curtis Creek, at mile 0.9,
in Baltimore, MD. The proposed rule
would eliminate the need for a bridge
tender by allowing the bridge to be
operated from a remote location at the
City of Baltimore Transportation
Management Center. This proposed
change would maintain the bridge’s
current level of operational capabilities
and continue providing for the
reasonable needs of vehicular
transportation and vessel navigation.
This proposed rule will also correct the
statute mile marker of the I695 Bridge
which is also across Curtis Creek in
Baltimore, MD.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
August 2, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2010–0265 using any one of the
following methods:
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
signed August 27, 2009, and effective
September 15, 2009, is to be amended
as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jun 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(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 four 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 or e-mail Coast Guard;
telephone 757–398–6629, e-mail
Lindsey.R.Middleton@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
33 CFR Part 117
The Proposed Amendment
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
30747
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–2010–0265),
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 you 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 as having been 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
E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM
02JNP1
30748
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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–2010–0265’’ 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 rule based on your comments.
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–2010–
0265’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation 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 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 a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one using one of the four methods
specified 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jun 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
Background and Purpose
The City of Baltimore has requested a
change to the operating procedures for
the Pennington Avenue Bridge across
Curtis Creek, mile 0.9 in Baltimore, MD.
The change in the operating procedure
would allow the bridge to be operated
from a remote location at the City of
Baltimore Transportation Management
Center. This proposed rule follows the
general regulations set out at 33 CFR
117.5 that states: Drawbridges shall
open promptly and fully for the passage
of vessels when a request to open is
given.
The Pennington Avenue Bridge, a lifttype drawbridge, has a vertical
clearance in the closed position to
vessels of 38 feet, above mean high
water.
The City of Baltimore is installing six
video cameras on the bridge to enhance
the remote operator’s ability to monitor
and control the equipment. The remote
office and the bridge site will be
equipped with audio devices to enable
the remote operator to hear boat horns
that may signal for an opening as well
as two-way communication. There will
be posted signs placed on both sides of
the navigational channel providing a
phone number for vessels to call to
request an opening. Warning lights will
be installed on the bridge to signal when
the bridge is in operation. All aspects of
the current drawbridge operating
regulations will remain the same.
The City of Baltimore has requested
this change to utilize new technology to
maintain the bridge’s current level of
operating capabilities and continue
providing for the reasonable needs of
vehicular transportation and vessel
navigation.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33
CFR 117.557. The current paragraph
would be divided into paragraphs (a)
and (b).
Paragraph (a) would contain the
proposed rule for the Pennington
Avenue Bridge at mile 0.9 in Baltimore,
MD. The rule would allow the draw of
the bridge to be operated by the
controller at the Transportation
Management Center.
In the event of failure or obstruction
of the video cameras, audio system, or
phone communications, the Pennington
Avenue Bridge would not be operated
from the remote office. In these
situations, a bridge tender must be
called and be on-site within 30 minutes
to operate the bridge.
When vehicular and pedestrian traffic
has cleared, a horn will sound one
prolonged blast followed by one short
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
blast to warn of bridge movement. The
channel traffic lights will flash red
continually to indicate that the bridge is
moving to the full open position for
vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully
open position, the bridge channel traffic
lights will turn and remain green. The
draw of the bridge must begin opening
within 5 minutes of vehicular and
pedestrian traffic clearing the bridge
except as provided in 33 CFR 117.31(b).
Before the span begins to close, the
horn will sound five short blasts and an
audio voice-warning device will
announce bridge movement. The
channel traffic lights will then
continually flash red until the bridge is
seated and locked down to vessels.
Paragraph (b) would contain the
existing regulations for the I695 Bridge;
however, the statute mile marker of 0.9
is incorrect and will be changed to mile
1.0 which is the accurate mile mark.
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.
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. We reached this
conclusion based on the fact that the
proposed changes have only a minimal
impact on maritime traffic transiting the
bridge. Although the Pennington
Avenue Bridge will be operated from a
remote office, mariners can continue
their transits because all aspects of the
current operating regulations remain
essentially the same.
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
E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM
02JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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.
The proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons. The rule allows
the Pennington Avenue Bridge to
operate remotely and mariners will
continue to plan their transits in
accordance with the existing bridge
operating regulations.
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 Lindsey
Middleton, Bridge Specialist, Fifth
Coast Guard District, at (757) 368–6629
or e-mail at
Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this proposed rule or any policy
or action of the Coast Guard.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Jun 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
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 (adjusted for inflation) 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 cause 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
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30749
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. Revise § 117.557 to read as follows:
§ 117.557
Curtis Creek.
(a) The Pennington Avenue Bridge,
mile 0.9 at Baltimore.
(1) The draw of the bridge to be
operated by the controller at the City of
E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM
02JNP1
30750
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Baltimore Transportation Management
Center shall open on signal for the
passage of vessels when a request to
open is given.
(2) The draw of the bridge shall not
be operated by the controller at the
Transportation Management Center
office in the event of failure or
obstruction of the video cameras, audio
system, or phone lines. In these
situations, a bridge tender must be
called and be on-site within 30 minutes
to operate the bridge on-site.
(3) The draw of the bridge must begin
opening within 5 minutes of the
vehicular and pedestrian traffic clearing
the bridge, except as provided in 33 CFR
117.31(b).
(4) When vehicular and pedestrian
traffic has cleared, a horn will sound
one prolonged blast followed by one
short blast to warn of bridge movement.
The channel traffic lights will flash red
continually to indicate that the Bridge is
moving to the full open position for
vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully
open position, the bridge channel traffic
lights will turn and remain green.
(5) Before the span begins to close, the
horn will sound five short blasts and an
audio voice-warning device will
announce bridge movement. The
channel traffic lights will then
continually flash red until the bridge is
seated and locked down to vessels.
(6) The owners of the bridge shall
provide and keep in good legible
condition two board gauges painted
white with black figures not less than
six inches high to indicate the vertical
clearance under the closed draw at all
stages of the tide. The gauges shall be
placed on the bridge so that they are
plainly visible to the operator of any
vessel approaching the bridge from
either upstream or downstream.
(b) The draw of the I695 Bridge, mile
1.0 at Baltimore, shall open on signal if
at least a one-hour notice is given to the
Maryland Transportation Authority in
Baltimore.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Dated: May 14, 2010.
Wayne E. Justice,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard,
Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010–13119 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2010–0228]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Arkansas Waterway, Little Rock, AR
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
revise the operating procedures on the
Baring Cross Railroad Drawbridge across
the Arkansas Waterway at mile 119.6 at
Little Rock, AR, so that vessel operators
will contact the remote drawbridge
operator via microphone keying four
times within five seconds on VHF–FM
Channel 13 when requesting a draw
opening. This keying will activate an
indicator on the remote drawbridge
operator’s console and send an
acknowledgement tone back to the
vessel. The remote drawbridge operator
would then establish normal verbal
radio communications. The intent is to
isolate and differentiate the vessel
operator radio communications from the
railroad communications that the
remote drawbridge operator receives,
thus ensuring that vessel calls receive
immediate attention.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
August 2, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2010–0228 using any one of the
following four 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 four 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:31 Jun 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Eric Washburn,
Bridge Management Specialist, Eighth
Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch;
telephone 314–269–2378, e-mail
Eric.Washburn@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–2010–0228),
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 you 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 as having been 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–2010–0228’’ 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
E:\FR\FM\02JNP1.SGM
02JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 2, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30747-30750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13119]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2010-0265]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Curtis Creek, Baltimore, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern
the operation of the Pennington Avenue Bridge across Curtis Creek, at
mile 0.9, in Baltimore, MD. The proposed rule would eliminate the need
for a bridge tender by allowing the bridge to be operated from a remote
location at the City of Baltimore Transportation Management Center.
This proposed change would maintain the bridge's current level of
operational capabilities and continue providing for the reasonable
needs of vehicular transportation and vessel navigation. This proposed
rule will also correct the statute mile marker of the I695 Bridge which
is also across Curtis Creek in Baltimore, MD.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before August 2, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-0265 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 four 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 or e-mail Coast Guard; telephone 757-398-6629, e-mail
Lindsey.R.Middleton@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-2010-0265), 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 you 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 as having
been 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
[[Page 30748]]
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-2010-0265'' 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 rule based on your comments.
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-2010-0265'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation 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 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 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 for one using one of the four methods specified 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 City of Baltimore has requested a change to the operating
procedures for the Pennington Avenue Bridge across Curtis Creek, mile
0.9 in Baltimore, MD. The change in the operating procedure would allow
the bridge to be operated from a remote location at the City of
Baltimore Transportation Management Center. This proposed rule follows
the general regulations set out at 33 CFR 117.5 that states:
Drawbridges shall open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels
when a request to open is given.
The Pennington Avenue Bridge, a lift-type drawbridge, has a
vertical clearance in the closed position to vessels of 38 feet, above
mean high water.
The City of Baltimore is installing six video cameras on the bridge
to enhance the remote operator's ability to monitor and control the
equipment. The remote office and the bridge site will be equipped with
audio devices to enable the remote operator to hear boat horns that may
signal for an opening as well as two-way communication. There will be
posted signs placed on both sides of the navigational channel providing
a phone number for vessels to call to request an opening. Warning
lights will be installed on the bridge to signal when the bridge is in
operation. All aspects of the current drawbridge operating regulations
will remain the same.
The City of Baltimore has requested this change to utilize new
technology to maintain the bridge's current level of operating
capabilities and continue providing for the reasonable needs of
vehicular transportation and vessel navigation.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 CFR 117.557. The current
paragraph would be divided into paragraphs (a) and (b).
Paragraph (a) would contain the proposed rule for the Pennington
Avenue Bridge at mile 0.9 in Baltimore, MD. The rule would allow the
draw of the bridge to be operated by the controller at the
Transportation Management Center.
In the event of failure or obstruction of the video cameras, audio
system, or phone communications, the Pennington Avenue Bridge would not
be operated from the remote office. In these situations, a bridge
tender must be called and be on-site within 30 minutes to operate the
bridge.
When vehicular and pedestrian traffic has cleared, a horn will
sound one prolonged blast followed by one short blast to warn of bridge
movement. The channel traffic lights will flash red continually to
indicate that the bridge is moving to the full open position for
vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully open position, the bridge
channel traffic lights will turn and remain green. The draw of the
bridge must begin opening within 5 minutes of vehicular and pedestrian
traffic clearing the bridge except as provided in 33 CFR 117.31(b).
Before the span begins to close, the horn will sound five short
blasts and an audio voice-warning device will announce bridge movement.
The channel traffic lights will then continually flash red until the
bridge is seated and locked down to vessels.
Paragraph (b) would contain the existing regulations for the I695
Bridge; however, the statute mile marker of 0.9 is incorrect and will
be changed to mile 1.0 which is the accurate mile mark.
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.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. We reached this conclusion based
on the fact that the proposed changes have only a minimal impact on
maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Although the Pennington Avenue
Bridge will be operated from a remote office, mariners can continue
their transits because all aspects of the current operating regulations
remain essentially the same.
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
[[Page 30749]]
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.
The proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The
rule allows the Pennington Avenue Bridge to operate remotely and
mariners will continue to plan their transits in accordance with the
existing bridge operating regulations.
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 Lindsey Middleton, Bridge
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 368-6629 or e-mail at
Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or complain about this proposed
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 (adjusted for
inflation) 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 cause 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 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. Revise Sec. 117.557 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.557 Curtis Creek.
(a) The Pennington Avenue Bridge, mile 0.9 at Baltimore.
(1) The draw of the bridge to be operated by the controller at the
City of
[[Page 30750]]
Baltimore Transportation Management Center shall open on signal for the
passage of vessels when a request to open is given.
(2) The draw of the bridge shall not be operated by the controller
at the Transportation Management Center office in the event of failure
or obstruction of the video cameras, audio system, or phone lines. In
these situations, a bridge tender must be called and be on-site within
30 minutes to operate the bridge on-site.
(3) The draw of the bridge must begin opening within 5 minutes of
the vehicular and pedestrian traffic clearing the bridge, except as
provided in 33 CFR 117.31(b).
(4) When vehicular and pedestrian traffic has cleared, a horn will
sound one prolonged blast followed by one short blast to warn of bridge
movement. The channel traffic lights will flash red continually to
indicate that the Bridge is moving to the full open position for
vessels. Once the bridge is in the fully open position, the bridge
channel traffic lights will turn and remain green.
(5) Before the span begins to close, the horn will sound five short
blasts and an audio voice-warning device will announce bridge movement.
The channel traffic lights will then continually flash red until the
bridge is seated and locked down to vessels.
(6) The owners of the bridge shall provide and keep in good legible
condition two board gauges painted white with black figures not less
than six inches high to indicate the vertical clearance under the
closed draw at all stages of the tide. The gauges shall be placed on
the bridge so that they are plainly visible to the operator of any
vessel approaching the bridge from either upstream or downstream.
(b) The draw of the I695 Bridge, mile 1.0 at Baltimore, shall open
on signal if at least a one-hour notice is given to the Maryland
Transportation Authority in Baltimore.
Dated: May 14, 2010.
Wayne E. Justice,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2010-13119 Filed 6-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P