Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), at Wrightsville Beach, NC; Cape Fear and Northeast Cape Fear River, at Wilmington, NC, 8663-8666 [2011-3355]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 31 / Tuesday, February 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 8663 TABLE 1—ENGINE MODELS AFFECTED—Continued Engine Model IO–540 ...................................................................................... –A1A5, –AA1A5, –AA1B5, –AB1A5, –AC1A5, –AE1A5, –B1A5, –B1C5, –C1B5, –C4B5, –C4D5D, –D4A5, –E1A5, –E1B5, –G1A5, –G1B5, –G1C5, –G1D5, –G1E5, –G1F5, –J4A5, –V4A5D, –K1A5, –K1A5D, –K1B5, –K1C5, –K1D5, –K1E5, –K1E5D, –K1F5, –K1H5, –K1J5, –K1F5D, –K1G5, –K1G5D, –K1H5, –K1J5D, –K1K5, –K1E5, –K1E5D, –K1F5, –K1J5, –L1C5, –M1A5, –M1B5D, –M1C5, –N1A5, –P1A5, –R1A5, –S1A5, –T4A5D, –T4B5, –T4B5D, –T4C5D, –V4A5, –V4A5D, –W1A5, –W1A5D, –W3A5D. –A1A. –F2BD, –J2B, –J2BD, –N2BD, –R2AD, –U2A, –V2AD, –W2A. –A1A, –A1B, –A2A, –A2B, –A2C, –AE2A, –AH1A, –AA1AD, –AF1A, –AF1B, –AG1A, –AB1AD, –AB1BD, –AH1A, –AJ1A, –AK1A, –C1A, –E1A, –G1A, –F2BD, –J2B, –J2BD, –N2BD, –R2AD, –S1AD, –U2A, –V2AD, –W2A. –A2A. –A1A, –A1B, –D1B, –D1BD, –D1C, –D1CD, –B1B, –B1BD, –C1B. IVO–540 ................................................................................... LTIO–540 .................................................................................. TIO–540 .................................................................................... TIVO–540 ................................................................................. IO–720 ...................................................................................... Engine models in Table 1 of this AD are installed on, but not limited to, Piper PA–24 Comanche, PA–30 and PA–39 Twin Comanche, PA–28 Arrow, and PA–23 Aztec; Beech 23 Musketeer; Mooney 20, and Cessna 177 Cardinal airplanes. (d) This AD is not applicable to engines having internally mounted fuel injection lines, which are not accessible. Those engine models are not included in Table 1 of this AD. (e) This AD is not applicable to engines that have a Maintenance and Overhaul Manual with an Airworthiness Limitations Section that requires inspection of externally mounted fuel injector lines. Those engine models are not included in Table 1 of this AD. Unsafe Condition (f) This AD was prompted by Lycoming Engines revising their Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) to add engine models requiring inspection. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the fuel injector fuel lines that would allow fuel to spray into the engine compartment, resulting in an engine fire. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS Compliance (g) Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. Engines That Have Had Initial Inspections (h) For engines that have had initial inspections in accordance with Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342, dated March 24, 1972; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342A, dated May 26, 1992; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342B, dated October 22, 1993; Supplement No. 1 to MSB No. 342B, dated April 27, 1999; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342C, dated April 28, 2000; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342D, dated July 10, 2001; Lycoming Engines MSB No. 342E, dated May 18, 2004, or Lycoming Engines MSB 342F, dated June 4, 2010, inspect in accordance with paragraph (j) of this AD. Engines That Have Not Had Initial Inspections (i) For engines that have not had initial inspections previously done in accordance with Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342, dated March 24, 1972; Textron Lycoming MSB No. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:26 Feb 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 342A, dated May 26, 1992; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342B, dated October 22, 1993; Supplement No. 1 to MSB No. 342B, dated April 27, 1999; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342C, dated April 28, 2000; Textron Lycoming MSB No. 342D, dated July 10, 2001; Lycoming Engines MSB No. 342E, dated May 18, 2004, or Lycoming Engines MSB 342F, dated June 4, 2010, inspect as follows: (1) For engines that have not yet had any fuel line maintenance done, or have not had any fuel line maintenance done since new or since the last overhaul, inspect in accordance with paragraph (k) of this AD within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date of this AD. (2) For all other engines, inspect in accordance with paragraph (k) of this AD within 10 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD. (n) FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin No. NE–07–49, dated September 20, 2007, is not mandatory, but has additional information on this subject. (o) For service information identified in this AD, contact Lycoming Engines, 652 Oliver Street, Williamsport, PA 17701, or go to http://www.lycoming.textron.com. Repetitive Inspections (j) Thereafter, inspect at intervals of 100 hours TIS (not to exceed 110 hours), at each engine overhaul, and after any maintenance has been done on the engine where any clamp (or clamps) on a fuel injector line (or lines) has been disconnected, moved, or loosened, in accordance with paragraph (k) of this AD. Coast Guard Inspection Criteria (k) Inspect the fuel injector fuel lines and clamps between the fuel manifold and the fuel injector nozzles, and replace as necessary any fuel injector fuel line and clamp that does not meet all conditions specified in Lycoming Engines MSB No. 342F, dated June 4, 2010. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (l) The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information (m) For more information about this AD, contact Norm Perenson, Aerospace Engineer, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; e-mail: phone: 516–228–7337; fax: 516–794– 5531; Norman.perenson@faa.gov. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 8, 2011. Peter A. White, Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2011–3349 Filed 2–14–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2010–1139] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW), at Wrightsville Beach, NC; Cape Fear and Northeast Cape Fear River, at Wilmington, NC Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern the operations of three North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) bridges: The S.R. 74 Bridge, across the AIWW, mile 283.1 at Wrightsville Beach, NC; the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge across the Cape Fear River, mile 26.8; and the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge across the Northeast Cape Fear River, mile 1.0; both at Wilmington, NC. The proposed change will alter the dates these bridges are allowed to remain in the closed position to accommodate the annual Beach2Battleship Iron and 1⁄2 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\15FEP1.SGM 15FEP1 8664 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 31 / Tuesday, February 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules Iron Triathlon and the Battleship North Carolina Half Marathon and 5K. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before April 18, 2011. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2010–1139 using any one of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://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. If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or e-mail Ms. Lindsey Middleton, Fifth District Bridge Administration Division, 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: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 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. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2010–1139), 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 (http:// 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 http:// VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:26 Feb 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 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 http://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–2010–1139’’ 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 http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010– 1139’’ 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). PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. Basis and Purpose The Beach2Battleship Iron and 1⁄2 Iron distance Triathlon competition is an annual event that is held in the Wrightsville Beach and Wilmington, NC area. The swimming portion of this triathlon is tide dependent and so is difficult to determine the exact date to best hold the event. The Coast Guard proposes to allow the S.R. 74 (Wrightsville Beach) Bridge to remain closed to navigation between 7 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. and the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge to remain closed to navigation between 12 p.m. and 11:59 p.m. on the last Saturday in October or the first or second Saturday in November depending on the tides and the date the event will be held. The exact date of the closure will be published locally in the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Also, the sponsoring group of the Battleship North Carolina Half Marathon & 5K, has requested a change to the current operating regulation of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge and the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge. The request is to modify the existing annual November closure from just the second Sunday in November to the first or second Sunday in November. The Battleship Race group has agreed to schedule their race on the opposing weekend of the Iron Man competition. As with the Iron Man race, the exact date of the closure will be published locally in the Local Notice to Mariners and the Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The S.R. 74 Bridge is a double leaf bascule drawbridge with a vertical clearance of 20 feet at mean high water in the closed position. The Cape Fear Memorial Bridge is a vertical lift drawbridge with a vertical clearance of 65 feet at mean high water in the closed position. The Isabel S. Holmes Bridge is a double leaf bascule drawbridge with a vertical clearance of 40 feet at mean high water in the closed position. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 CFR 117.821 (a)(4)for the S.R. 74 Bridge, at mile 283.1 at Wrightsville Beach, NC, 33 CFR 117.823 for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge at mile 26.8, and 33 E:\FR\FM\15FEP1.SGM 15FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 31 / Tuesday, February 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules CFR 117.829(a)(4) for the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge at mile 1.0, both at Wilmington, NC. The proposed amendment would allow the S.R. 74 and Isabel S. Holmes bridges to remain in the closed position on the last Saturday of October or the first or second Saturday of November and allow the Cape Fear Memorial and Isabel S. Holmes Bridges to remain in the closed position during the morning hours on the first or second Sunday of November. Once the dates of the races have been determined, the Coast Guard will issue Local Notice to Mariners’ and Broadcast Notice to Mariners’ for mariners to plan their schedules accordingly. There are no alternative routes available to vessels transiting these waterways. Vessels that can transit under the bridges without an opening may do so at any time. The bridges will be able to open for emergencies. 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. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS 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 proposed changes are expected to have minimal impact on mariners due to the short duration that the drawbridges will be maintained in the closed position. Both events have been observed in past years with little to no impact to marine or vehicular traffic. It is also a necessary measure to facilitate public safety that allows for the orderly movement of participants and vehicular traffic before, during, and after the races. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:26 Feb 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 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 needing to transit any of the bridges between the hours of closure on either race day. This action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the rule only adds minimal restrictions to the movement of navigation, and mariners who plan their transits in accordance with the scheduled bridge closures can minimize delay. Vessels that can safely transit under the bridges may do so at any time. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (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 Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District at (757) 398–6629 or 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. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 8665 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 proposed 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 E:\FR\FM\15FEP1.SGM 15FEP1 8666 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 31 / Tuesday, February 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules § 117.821 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Albermarle Sound to Sunset Beach. 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. Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 16:26 Feb 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 Cape Fear River. The draw of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge, mile 26.8, at Wilmington need not open for the passage of vessels from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the second Saturday of July of every year, and from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on the first or second Sunday of November of every year to accommodate annual marathon races. 4. Revise § 117.829(a)(4) to read as follows: § 117.829 Northeast Cape Fear River. (a)* * * (4) From 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the second Saturday of July of every year, from 12 p.m. to 11:59 p.m. on the last Saturday of October or the first or second Saturday of November of every year, and from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on the first or second Sunday of November of every year, the draw need not open for vessels to accommodate annual marathon and triathlon races. * * * * * Dated: February 1, 2011. William D. Lee, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2011–3355 Filed 2–14–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 38 CFR Parts 3, 14, 20 RIN 2900–AN91 Substitution in Case of Death of Claimant Department of Veterans Affairs. Proposed rule. AGENCY: 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: VerDate Mar<15>2010 § 117.823 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 2. Revise § 117.821(a)(4) to read as follows: (a) * * * (4) S.R. 74 Bridge, mile 283.1, at Wrightsville Beach, NC, between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., the draw need only open on the hour; except that from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on the third and fourth Saturday in September of every year, the draw need not open for vessels and between 7 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. on the last Saturday of October each year or the first or second Saturday of November of every year the draw need not open for vessels due to annual triathlon events. 3. Revise § 117.823 to read as follows: ACTION: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its regulations concerning adjudication of claims, representation of claimants, and Board of Veterans’ Appeals rules of practice. These amendments would SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 implement section 212 of the Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2008, which allows an eligible survivor to substitute for a deceased claimant in order to complete the processing of the deceased claimant’s claim. The intended effect of these amendments is to clarify the rules and procedures for those situations in which substitution is authorized. Under section 212, if a claimant dies while his or her claim or appeal is pending before VA, a survivor who would be eligible for accrued benefits under existing statutory authority may, not later than one year after the death of the claimant, request to be substituted for the claimant for the purposes of processing the claim or appeal to completion. Accordingly, after substitution, VA will continue to process the claim or appeal as if the claimant had not died. These amendments clarify the following matters: Eligibility for substitution, how an eligible survivor makes a request to substitute, how VA responds to requests to substitute, a substitute’s rights in adjudication, limitations related to substitution, order of preference among eligible survivors, representation of substitutes, and procedures for substitution when a claim is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. DATES: Comments must be received by VA on or before April 18, 2011. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through www.Regulations.gov; by mail or handdelivery to Director, Regulations Management (02REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273–9026. (This is not a toll free number.) Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900– AN91—Substitution in Case of Death of Claimant.’’ Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll free number.) In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at http:// www.Regulations.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Watkins, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration, Compensation and Pension Service, Regulation Staff (211D), 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, 202–461–9214. (This is not a toll-free number.) E:\FR\FM\15FEP1.SGM 15FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8663-8666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3355]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-1139]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway 
(AIWW), at Wrightsville Beach, NC; Cape Fear and Northeast Cape Fear 
River, at Wilmington, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern 
the operations of three North Carolina Department of Transportation 
(NCDOT) bridges: The S.R. 74 Bridge, across the AIWW, mile 283.1 at 
Wrightsville Beach, NC; the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge across the Cape 
Fear River, mile 26.8; and the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge across the 
Northeast Cape Fear River, mile 1.0; both at Wilmington, NC. The 
proposed change will alter the dates these bridges are allowed to 
remain in the closed position to accommodate the annual 
Beach2Battleship Iron and \1/2\

[[Page 8664]]

Iron Triathlon and the Battleship North Carolina Half Marathon and 5K.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before April 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-1139 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://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 Ms. Lindsey Middleton, Fifth District Bridge 
Administration Division, 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 http://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-2010-1139), 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 (http://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 http://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 http://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-2010-1139'' 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 http://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted 
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-1139'' 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.

Basis and Purpose

    The Beach2Battleship Iron and \1/2\ Iron distance Triathlon 
competition is an annual event that is held in the Wrightsville Beach 
and Wilmington, NC area. The swimming portion of this triathlon is tide 
dependent and so is difficult to determine the exact date to best hold 
the event. The Coast Guard proposes to allow the S.R. 74 (Wrightsville 
Beach) Bridge to remain closed to navigation between 7 a.m. and 10:30 
a.m. and the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge to remain closed to navigation 
between 12 p.m. and 11:59 p.m. on the last Saturday in October or the 
first or second Saturday in November depending on the tides and the 
date the event will be held. The exact date of the closure will be 
published locally in the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice 
to Mariners.
    Also, the sponsoring group of the Battleship North Carolina Half 
Marathon & 5K, has requested a change to the current operating 
regulation of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge and the Isabel S. Holmes 
Bridge. The request is to modify the existing annual November closure 
from just the second Sunday in November to the first or second Sunday 
in November. The Battleship Race group has agreed to schedule their 
race on the opposing weekend of the Iron Man competition. As with the 
Iron Man race, the exact date of the closure will be published locally 
in the Local Notice to Mariners and the Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    The S.R. 74 Bridge is a double leaf bascule drawbridge with a 
vertical clearance of 20 feet at mean high water in the closed 
position. The Cape Fear Memorial Bridge is a vertical lift drawbridge 
with a vertical clearance of 65 feet at mean high water in the closed 
position. The Isabel S. Holmes Bridge is a double leaf bascule 
drawbridge with a vertical clearance of 40 feet at mean high water in 
the closed position.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 CFR 117.821 (a)(4)for the 
S.R. 74 Bridge, at mile 283.1 at Wrightsville Beach, NC, 33 CFR 117.823 
for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge at mile 26.8, and 33

[[Page 8665]]

CFR 117.829(a)(4) for the Isabel S. Holmes Bridge at mile 1.0, both at 
Wilmington, NC. The proposed amendment would allow the S.R. 74 and 
Isabel S. Holmes bridges to remain in the closed position on the last 
Saturday of October or the first or second Saturday of November and 
allow the Cape Fear Memorial and Isabel S. Holmes Bridges to remain in 
the closed position during the morning hours on the first or second 
Sunday of November. Once the dates of the races have been determined, 
the Coast Guard will issue Local Notice to Mariners' and Broadcast 
Notice to Mariners' for mariners to plan their schedules accordingly.
    There are no alternative routes available to vessels transiting 
these waterways. Vessels that can transit under the bridges without an 
opening may do so at any time. The bridges will be able to open for 
emergencies.

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 proposed changes are expected to have minimal impact on 
mariners due to the short duration that the drawbridges will be 
maintained in the closed position. Both events have been observed in 
past years with little to no impact to marine or vehicular traffic. It 
is also a necessary measure to facilitate public safety that allows for 
the orderly movement of participants and vehicular traffic before, 
during, and after the races.

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 needing to transit any of the bridges between the 
hours of closure on either race day.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because the rule only adds minimal 
restrictions to the movement of navigation, and mariners who plan their 
transits in accordance with the scheduled bridge closures can minimize 
delay. Vessels that can safely transit under the bridges may do so at 
any time.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule 
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment 
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to 
what degree this proposed rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (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 
Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District at (757) 398-6629 or 
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 proposed 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

[[Page 8666]]

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.  117.821(a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.821  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Albermarle Sound to 
Sunset Beach.

    (a) * * *
    (4) S.R. 74 Bridge, mile 283.1, at Wrightsville Beach, NC, between 
7 a.m. and 7 p.m., the draw need only open on the hour; except that 
from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on the third and fourth Saturday in September of 
every year, the draw need not open for vessels and between 7 a.m. and 
10:30 a.m. on the last Saturday of October each year or the first or 
second Saturday of November of every year the draw need not open for 
vessels due to annual triathlon events.
    3. Revise Sec.  117.823 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.823  Cape Fear River.

    The draw of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge, mile 26.8, at Wilmington 
need not open for the passage of vessels from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the 
second Saturday of July of every year, and from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on 
the first or second Sunday of November of every year to accommodate 
annual marathon races.
    4. Revise Sec.  117.829(a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.829  Northeast Cape Fear River.

    (a)* * *
    (4) From 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the second Saturday of July of every 
year, from 12 p.m. to 11:59 p.m. on the last Saturday of October or the 
first or second Saturday of November of every year, and from 7 a.m. to 
11 a.m. on the first or second Sunday of November of every year, the 
draw need not open for vessels to accommodate annual marathon and 
triathlon races.
* * * * *

    Dated: February 1, 2011.
William D. Lee,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-3355 Filed 2-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P